We don't have a lease we have a license. You believe that to be perfect. This is why I think you are wrong.Bangitintrnet wrote: August 13th, 2022, 12:29 pmExactly, Coventry signed a lease with the 50% Council owned Ricoch for 10 years, but took the piss on paying their rent. The Stadium had control of the income from tickets, and that caused the despute.pembsexile wrote: August 13th, 2022, 11:41 am It’s pretty obvious that if ground sharing is to be the preferred option for a club, then good stadium/pitch management is essential. We had a problem and it got resolved. Coventry now have that problem. Swansea apparently have never had that problem. Sound management and financial capability is required.
Wasps purchased the ground but don't have the income to fund repayment of the purchase, let alone invest in a new pitch.
Thankfully we have a new pitch and no lease, which IMHO is perfect.
There are two main differences between a license and a lease. They being a lease has security of tenure and a lease gives the right of exclusion.
The security of tenure issue has been discussed frequently. The view that you hold, amongst others is that security of tenure doesn't matter because Rodney Parade is not viable without Newport County. My view in contrast is that I don't think that is the case, and even if it is, it might not be the case in the future.
With respect to right of exclusion, if the WRU wanted to let Rodney Parade out for a concert or other sporting event, we can't stop them. Further all the profits go to the WRU. Finally even at our games not only do we pay rent, we have to hand over half the profits from the bar.
We don't have a new pitch. We are, for now, allowed to play on a new pitch which belongs to someone else.