Training Facilities

[The Large One]

You just did get stroppy ..... again !

Hold on here, I cannot for the life of me see how anyone could feel a sense of superiority over knowing a figure that the club might be paying on their training pitches, you might but I dont.

It is interesting to see just how much any organisation might pay for certain things but beyond that I do not share your view that I wish to gleen some kinda kudos from that, its childish !

Your second point is that of course they can at anytime, but usually at a time of major construction, investment and planning it is a likely time for such an issue to be considered rather than at any other times.

The Stadium is inextricably linked to the success of the team and therefore a major factor would be training facilities.

I just pondered the thought that not only could they have full control of a better training facility, but it would in the medium term might eleviate the ongoing monthly liability.

You call that stroppy? Oh dear. You ARE easily peturbed.

Once again, you've avoided the first question, and it is getting tedious. How are you in possession of the details of a private transaction between Brighton & Hove Albion and the University of Sussex? Really, it's not that difficult a question.

Regarding the second point - it COULD be considered at the same time at the new stadium, and - who knows? - there may be plans afoot. However, it by no means automatically follows that a new stadium means new training facilities, especially when there are none in the stadium plans. You're confusing apples with oranges here.

Having full control of a training facility means the full-blown acquisition, planning and construction of a site - a fairly hefty capital investment almost certainly in the hundreds of thousands of pounds. So how would that alleviate a ongoing monthly liability - unless you KNOW that the fees paid to UoS exceed, in a very short space of time, the cost of the setting up and maintenance of the club's own facilities?

 

[BigGully]

You call that stroppy? Oh dear. You ARE easily peturbed.

Once again, you've avoided the first question, and it is getting tedious. How are you in possession of the details of a private transaction between Brighton & Hove Albion and the University of Sussex? Really, it's not that difficult a question.

Regarding the second point - it COULD be considered at the same time at the new stadium, and - who knows? - there may be plans afoot. However, it by no means automatically follows that a new stadium means new training facilities, especially when there are none in the stadium plans. You're confusing apples with oranges here.

Having full control of a training facility means the full-blown acquisition, planning and construction of a site - a fairly hefty capital investment almost certainly in the hundreds of thousands of pounds. So how would that alleviate a ongoing monthly liability - unless you KNOW that the fees paid to UoS exceed, in a very short space of time, the cost of the setting up and maintenance of the club's own facilities?

Look we are going down a different path here, but I shall respond.

Firstly I am sure many people know the amount BHA pay each month, I am not too sure why this might be anything too delicate that would unduly worry the club.

I am surprised that again the bug bear is that a poster purports to know something you dont, stop being so worried, it doesnt make you a bad fan for not knowing or me a good one or an egotistical one for happening to know, ok so relax.

I am still surprised why you havent asked the amount rather than droning on about how I came to be given this information !!

Without knowing the amount how can you actually comment on whether it might be feasible and/or beneficial to contemplate investing in a new training venue.

I just comment that if the club was not at present spending buckets loads of money on the Falmer training ground, then fine, nows not the time to try and fund a shiny new one.

But if buckets loads of money is being spent, there might be a point in which finding a solution to acquire there very own site might be benefitial.

At present I would suggest that either way there is not an avenue to raise the funds needed, so a monthly cheque will continue to be written to UoS and still the club doesnt have the control it would like on certain aspects of their training schedule.

 

[Horsham Gull]

they wouldnt just use them as training facilities though they would probably also use it for footy courses for the youngsters

 

[The Large One]

That is a quality lesson in contradiction.

First you say, you're party to the figures, then you're saying many people are party to them, then you say 'if the club was not spending...' Hang on, you said you knew.

Secondly, why should I ask you what the figures are? Until such time as you have satisfied me that your information is solid, there is no point asking you.

Thirdly, I haven't commented what might or might not be feasible - I asked you how you think it's feasible. Another question you've dodged.

I don't have a bugbear about you saying you know X, Y and Z - far from it. You are, and it has been established beyond doubt by many on here to the point that you've become a by-word for it, extremely and constantly unreliable in the accuracy of your claims. Not only is your information often mis-guided and agenda-driven, when challenged, you can never back it up, often doing the politician's trick of dodging the question. So, no, I don't have a bugbear about that.

I don't simply because it's just not possible to take you seriously.

 

[BigGully]

That is a quality lesson in contradiction.

First you say, you're party to the figures, then you're saying many people are party to them, then you say 'if the club was not spending...' Hang on, you said you knew.

Secondly, why should I ask you what the figures are? Until such time as you have satisfied me that your information is solid, there is no point asking you.

Thirdly, I haven't commented what might or might not be feasible - I asked you how you think it's feasible. Another question you've dodged.

I don't have a bugbear about you saying you know X, Y and Z - far from it. You are, and it has been established beyond doubt by many on here to the point that you've become a by-word for it, extremely and constantly unreliable in the accuracy of your claims. Not only is your information often mis-guided and agenda-driven, when challenged, you can never back it up, often doing the politician's trick of dodging the question. So, no, I don't have a bugbear about that.

I don't simply because it's just not possible to take you seriously.

Not sure about that.

You mentioned a few minutes ago:

Having full control of a training facility means the full-blown acquisition, planning and construction of a site - a fairly hefty capital investment almost certainly in the hundreds of thousands of pounds. So how would that alleviate a ongoing monthly liability

That is your comment on the feasability of a new training ground, no doubt.

But you have based it on only one side of the expense and havent taken into account what might be or not be the expense of not moving.

Therefore pointless and flawed.

You need to assess what the cost to staying might be against the costs you have highlited, otherwise what the point.

 

[The Large One]

Not sure about that.

You mentioned a few minutes ago:

Having full control of a training facility means the full-blown acquisition, planning and construction of a site - a fairly hefty capital investment almost certainly in the hundreds of thousands of pounds. So how would that alleviate a ongoing monthly liability

That is your comment on the feasability of a new training ground, no doubt.

But you have based it on only one side of the expense and havent taken into account what might be or not be the expense of not moving.

Therefore pointless and flawed.

You need to assess what the cost to staying might be against the costs you have highlited, otherwise what the point.

I'm talking actual terms. You're banging on about comparative terms.

I have no idea whether it's better to acquire our own facilities. I'm pointing out what it might well involve. I asked whether it was better to do that, and you dodged the question. Whether it's better or not in the 'medium-term' (your phrase) is anyone's guess - except to those who actually know.

And one of them, according to you, is you.

So, are you going to stop dodging my questions?

I suspect you're even going to dodge that one as well.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Why don't you two just get it over with a have an actual FIGHT. That way 1 in 6 threads on here wouldn't degenerate into the exact same boring argument over and over and over again.

 

[The Large One]

Why don't you two just get it over with a have an actual FIGHT. That way 1 in 6 threads on here wouldn't degenerate into the exact same boring argument over and over and over again.

Sorry, Si.


BUT HE STARTED IT.

 

[itszamora]

Sorry, Si.


BUT HE STARTED IT.

Actually, you did. And why do you care how he knows some figures so much? Upset that you're not 'in the loop' here and that your status as a superfan may be revoked unless you find out at once?

 

[The Large One]

Actually, you did. And why do you care how he knows some figures so much? Upset that you're not 'in the loop' here and that your status as a superfan may be revoked unless you find out at once?

Oooh, do I have 'superfan' status? Blimey, who imposed such an honour upon me?

:thud:





















































What is a superfan anyway?

 

[itszamora]

Oooh, do I have 'superfan' status? Blimey, who imposed such an honour upon me?

:thud:





















































What is a superfan anyway?

Ok, perhaps superfan is a bit unfair. You do always come down on the side of the club in any argument though, which is one of the key bahaviours exhibited by the species.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Ok, perhaps superfan is a bit unfair. You do always come down on the side of the club in any argument though, which is one of the key bahaviours exhibited by the species.

I think that would make him an ACOLYTE, rather than a SUPERFAN.

 

[The Large One]

Ok, perhaps superfan is a bit unfair. You do always come down on the side of the club in any argument though, which is one of the key bahaviours exhibited by the species.

I haven't come down on any one side on this debate.

I have many issues with the club at present. As a general rule, I'll put a defence of the club as I see it on here, and a problem with the club as I see it TO the club.

 

[Titanic]

I think that would make him an ACOLYTE...

I think the NSC term, when used in a pejorative sense, is 'LICKER'.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I don't like the term LICKER though. It conjures up some horrible imagery.

 

[Knotty]

What is a superfan anyway?

My definition of a superfan has nothing to do with defending or attacking the chairman/board/club.

For me it's anyone who, every season, attends all or most of the home and away games supporting the Albion. What is said on NSC is irrelevant in that context.

(I do the home games and only one or two away. The atmosphere at away games is fantastic and one can only hope it is repeated at Falmer).

I would have to find another category title for those who have put so much effort in over the years fighting Stanley and Archer and campaigning for Falmer.