Quote ="Mrs Barista"Nope, can't believe that's true. Are you suggesting the consequences of breach of contract, expensive and deliberate damage to a council asset, eviction of community tenants are:
1) Making good the arena damage
2) Waving through planning consent of a new pitch
3) Funding 1) and 2) above, which then yields one of the subtenants, a private limited entity, hundreds of thousands in incremental FA funding?
Simply can't be right. Where are the consequences of the unreasonable actions? Unless the costs are recharged to the SMC who then pass on in part to FC. In which case the consequences are fairly obvious.'"
Apart from the extent of the funding for 1 and 2, if any, and the bill landing on FC's doormat, then yes, that is what I'm suggesting. Whether it is right in the moral sense is another matter.
I understand that the rent for FC is fixed and dependent upon its attendances.
