: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:12 am  

Gazemous wrote:

:roll:

What's your point? Wakey clearly aren't as progressed as Cas, they won't be until they least have outlined planning permission.

that is debatable when you consider the funding issue. And Cas still havn't released the books from last year, so tbf this isn't a point you or any of us can really debate. We (wakie) are as transparent as a puddle of mud but even old Teddy knows he has to release his books.

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:18 am  

Sandal Wild Cat wrote:

that is debatable when you consider the funding issue. And Cas still havn't released the books from last year, so tbf this isn't a point you or any of us can really debate. We (wakie) are as transparent as a puddle of mud but even old Teddy knows he has to release his books.

WHAT funding issue? FFS you know nothing, I know nothing, let's just see how it turns out and stop trying to score cheap points for no particular reason than to brighten a very sad life.

And what are you on about about 'releasing the books'? Accounts have to be filed at companies house by a particular deadline, this deadline has only just passed for my 2007/8 accounts, so Cas can submit theirs whenever their deadline falls.

Jesus wept

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:42 am  

Sandal Wild Cat wrote:

funding issue.

Not anymore from what ive heard

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:24 am  

tigersteve wrote:

Not anymore from what ive heard

Care to share what you've heard?

It's getting to the point where I'm giving up hope and I'll only start to be encouraged again when a see cement being mixed.

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:52 am  

Ive just heard that funding is not a problem now, he is a good source that is very rarely wrong,

I said to him and il say on here i will not be happy until im stood in the new stadium.

I just feel it might happen now rather than it wont happen.

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:06 am  

At reading the cr@p from a fellow supporter I thought I would add my two penneth to the stadia argument since it appears that there is some useful discussion.

It seems to make economic sense to share the stadium. There is no doubt about that. If the stadium could be double fronted so from one entrance would be Wakefield and would be the home stand for Wakie and the the other Castleford it would allow each club to maintain it's identity and to have separate facilities, shops and branding with the possibility of shared resources reducing operating costs (groundsmen / stewards / hot dog vendors. etc). Cas fans can approach from one way and see their stadium and Wakie fans the other and see their stadium. How often do you walk around the stadium to see the other stands?

Each separate stand could have it's own season tickets which wouldn't cause a problem on Derby day and it would get more use as a game would be there pretty much weekly. planning for overlapping fixtures would be easy with a 24hour turnaround.

Brand identity would be the key though as other shared stadia (Galpharm as an example) are often sanitised of their club identity and become a faceless feature.

You thoughts?

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:07 am  

Wadski wrote:

At reading the cr@p from a fellow supporter I thought I would add my two penneth to the stadia argument since it appears that there is some useful discussion.

It seems to make economic sense to share the stadium. There is no doubt about that. If the stadium could be double fronted so from one entrance would be Wakefield and would be the home stand for Wakie and the the other Castleford it would allow each club to maintain it's identity and to have separate facilities, shops and branding with the possibility of shared resources reducing operating costs (groundsmen / stewards / hot dog vendors. etc). Cas fans can approach from one way and see their stadium and Wakie fans the other and see their stadium. How often do you walk around the stadium to see the other stands?

Each separate stand could have it's own season tickets which wouldn't cause a problem on Derby day and it would get more use as a game would be there pretty much weekly. planning for overlapping fixtures would be easy with a 24hour turnaround.

Brand identity would be the key though as other shared stadia (Galpharm as an example) are often sanitised of their club identity and become a faceless feature.

You thoughts?

I think wakey should share with you

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:14 am  

Wadski wrote:

At reading the cr@p ...
You thoughts?

I think you, like every other non Cas or Wakey fan, has glossed over the one key issue that is preventing a groundshare - that is location.

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:16 am  

I'm not to worried about us sharing, but the thing is our stadium is a good distance along so I don't see the point of scrapping it just to start again somewhere else.
Now if Wakey were willing to play at the Glasshoughton site then fine.

: Mon Aug 10, 2009 11:21 am  

If anyone wants to back up there claim with cold hard cash i know a bookie who will take the bet, who's ground will be built and opened first Wakie or Cas.

50 squid anyone?