| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today 07:55 - Oct 19 with 4889 views | davblue |
Around plans for the future, I wasn’t aware that we were going to
Be buying the land behind the Cobbold, apologies if I’ve missed it.
‘We’ve agreed to buy the land behind the Cobbold Stand to do it but, like everything, it’s about timing. We would lose 4,000 fans for 18 months during the rebuild.‘ [Post edited 19 Oct 2024 21:29]
|  | | |  |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:01 - Oct 19 with 733 views | Vic |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 11:05 - Oct 19 by PhilTWTD |
Done a bit of digging, gather the land in question stretches some way over the road behind the current Cobbold Stand into the car park but will not impact IBC's plans for an aquatics centre.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Do you know the thinking behind the club buying this land when we don’t own the rest of the land the ground is on? Seems a little odd to me. |  |
| |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:06 - Oct 19 with 716 views | PhilTWTD |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:01 - Oct 19 by Vic |
Do you know the thinking behind the club buying this land when we don’t own the rest of the land the ground is on? Seems a little odd to me. |
They don't but they do own the land behind Sir Alf. Not sure precise nature of the future arrangement re the land behind the Cobbold has been established quite yet but it will be the club's to use for the new stand and environs. |  | | |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:11 - Oct 19 with 688 views | powinswitch |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 11:27 - Oct 19 by HighgateBlue |
I've got no reason to criticise him, but I do agree with the salesman/pinch of salt lines. The error for me was making him Chairman in addition to CEO. I really think that's a bad idea. The role of Chairman can't be performed by a CEO. One might as well just scrap the role of Chairman if one doesn't see it as important. Personally I do see it as important, and thought that O'Leary did a really sound, careful, wise, job. |
It won’t go down well with some in here, but he certainly has an ego and that likes a good stroke. He has done a cracking job, and rightly deserves praise for that. But it is not at all sensible for anybody to be chairman and CEO of any company. |  | | |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:15 - Oct 19 with 663 views | PhilTWTD |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 10:27 - Oct 19 by OldFart71 |
It's an interesting situation with regards to the Cobbold/ development. Not that I in any way see our situation panning out as before with the development of the North and Churchmans which along with Finidi George and Mateo Sereni lead to administration. We are in a much better position given the backing of Gamechanger, Parachute payments and our current policy of buying players in the majority of cases would be able to sell on whilst also keeping a strong core of players. It will still be a balance as to when to go ahead. Do we wait another season if we were to stay up this ? Would it make that much difference if we stay up this and then build ? It's easy to look back at previous mistakes, but nothing is cast iron with regards to whether we stay in the Prem one season or ten. Injuries, a change of Manager should Kieran be poached by a bigger club. Many factors. The need is obviously there currently. We could probably fill a 40,000 seater currently. Of course there no guarantee that it will be that way in five or ten years time. But what in life is. |
The building of the stands wasn't what caused administration, in fact the bond which paid for them remained on the books after admin and was the reason money was so tight prior to the Evans takeover. Was Premier League contracts which we couldn't get off the books which were the issue with the ITV Digital collapse a significant factor. | | | |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:18 - Oct 19 with 648 views | PhilTWTD |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 09:18 - Oct 19 by Zx1988 |
The Sheeran comment is a real disappointment. I thought it was very widely acknowledged that a specific member of the marketing team (Rosie somebody?) had been responsible for for that, so for him to decide to nick the credit must be a slap in the face for her. |
Rosie Richardson. | | | |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:19 - Oct 19 with 642 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:15 - Oct 19 by PhilTWTD |
The building of the stands wasn't what caused administration, in fact the bond which paid for them remained on the books after admin and was the reason money was so tight prior to the Evans takeover. Was Premier League contracts which we couldn't get off the books which were the issue with the ITV Digital collapse a significant factor. |
The repayments and interest on the stands were clearly part of the equation. | | | |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:22 - Oct 19 with 627 views | stonojnr |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 09:45 - Oct 19 by Marshalls_Mullet |
Refurb will be a lot cheaper than a new build. |
youd think so, but no, fundamentally the cost to refurb Crown Pools properly (and note I say properly not patch up abit) is roughly the same as building new.
its biggest cost issue is energy consumption, and maintenance of it, to heat the pools it uses outdated tech and has poor insulation to keep the heat in. and those costs are just going to keep rising in the future
a new pool the up front cost is big, but the longer term cost at running the place would be alot less, so it costs in comparatively speaking. | | | |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:24 - Oct 19 with 622 views | PhilTWTD |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:19 - Oct 19 by redrickstuhaart |
The repayments and interest on the stands were clearly part of the equation. |
If I remember rightly, they weren't part of the ITFC company which went into administration, hence remaining on the books rather than being part of the CVA. If one more sale had been made in the January, I think Marcus Bent turned down a permanent move, although I could be wrong, then administration would have been avoided and the club could have had a go at cutting costs again in the summer. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:26 - Oct 19 with 608 views | LankHenners |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 10:16 - Oct 19 by redrickstuhaart |
Cat 1 comes with PL status. Its pretty much a closed shop outside of that, and not therefore a financial priority until now. |
It wasn't about priority - he completely dismissed it as an idea in its entirety. |  |
| |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:27 - Oct 19 with 601 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:24 - Oct 19 by PhilTWTD |
If I remember rightly, they weren't part of the ITFC company which went into administration, hence remaining on the books rather than being part of the CVA. If one more sale had been made in the January, I think Marcus Bent turned down a permanent move, although I could be wrong, then administration would have been avoided and the club could have had a go at cutting costs again in the summer. |
I suspect they remained on the books because they were secured. They may have been connected through a separate company in some way, but the liability and cost was plainly still there. Sheepy was not being altogether straightforward when he used to claim that the stands would not affect the playing side. | | | |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:28 - Oct 19 with 594 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:24 - Oct 19 by PhilTWTD |
If I remember rightly, they weren't part of the ITFC company which went into administration, hence remaining on the books rather than being part of the CVA. If one more sale had been made in the January, I think Marcus Bent turned down a permanent move, although I could be wrong, then administration would have been avoided and the club could have had a go at cutting costs again in the summer. |
Was it Holland that turned an earlier move down before he went to charlton too? I do remember someone leaving but had they done earlier it would have been for much better money and another which would have saved us financially. |  |
| |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:28 - Oct 19 with 595 views | PhilTWTD |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:27 - Oct 19 by redrickstuhaart |
I suspect they remained on the books because they were secured. They may have been connected through a separate company in some way, but the liability and cost was plainly still there. Sheepy was not being altogether straightforward when he used to claim that the stands would not affect the playing side. |
They were but the issue the club had wasn't the stands, what triggered administration was Premier League contracts they were left with after relegation and with the transfer market having collapsed. | | | |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:29 - Oct 19 with 590 views | PhilTWTD |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:28 - Oct 19 by FrimleyBlue |
Was it Holland that turned an earlier move down before he went to charlton too? I do remember someone leaving but had they done earlier it would have been for much better money and another which would have saved us financially. |
Aston Villa. There were a couple, Hermann could have gone somewhere else earlier, if I remember rightly. | | | |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:31 - Oct 19 with 564 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:28 - Oct 19 by PhilTWTD |
They were but the issue the club had wasn't the stands, what triggered administration was Premier League contracts they were left with after relegation and with the transfer market having collapsed. |
So Sheepy said.
But without the debt of the stands sitting behind it all (and the obligation to make repayments) the overall financial situation would have been very different. That was a £20m liability which we could not demonstrate an ability to pay when it fell due, ITV Digital was 3 million quid or so? | | | |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:45 - Oct 19 with 526 views | Churchman |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:11 - Oct 19 by powinswitch |
It won’t go down well with some in here, but he certainly has an ego and that likes a good stroke. He has done a cracking job, and rightly deserves praise for that. But it is not at all sensible for anybody to be chairman and CEO of any company. |
Mark Ashton is what he is.
He has done a good job overall to date and has an ego the size of the moon. We’ve all met people like that I’m sure. I certainly have - you know, the bullsh£t bingo merchants where you listen intently, understand that their pluses outweigh the minuses but try and stifle the laughter and see through ‘win-win, low hanging fruit, value added, peeling the onion, thinking outside the box’ etc etc.
As for the roles of CEO and Chairman, I agree and do think they should be separate. O’Leary appeared to be a good counter balance to Ashton. However, I’m not sure how the dynamic with the owners works and it maybe that in ITFCs case the role of Chairman is little more than a token one. Somebody far more clued in than me will no doubt know the answer to that. |  | | |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 12:48 - Oct 19 with 510 views | EssexBloo |
| Interesting comment from Ashton in the Athletic today on 11:07 - Oct 19 by PhilTWTD |
As per the above, this is the situation. The footprint of the ground as a whole will grow with the stand and walkways etc around it. |
Phil, I seem to recall Ashton at the fans forum saying they were exploring building behind the Cobbold first but more recent quotes seem to suggest a complete demo and rebuild. Is that the preference now? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
