|
Post by Tony is not to despondent now. on Apr 30, 2010 9:02:05 GMT
What I do not like about the present caterers is, what I witnessed at a game whilst the stalls were being set up.
The person who was preparing the stall had a dog in the van. I would have thought that this was strictly against health and safety laws.
|
|
dragon
First Teamer
Posts: 355
|
Post by dragon on Apr 30, 2010 9:54:33 GMT
.....but the puppyburgers were delightful!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2010 8:16:05 GMT
From the Worcester News!
Warriors look to turnover 6 times as much as WCFC Ltd. from their off field events alone
“Our non-rugby business through Sixways Events is targeted to be about £1.8 million – again, that’s regardless of whether we’re in the Premiership or not.”
Could we seriously compete with that by setting up a new events arena a few hundred yards away?? I very much doubt it.
|
|
|
Post by wcfcwarwick on May 5, 2010 11:32:55 GMT
I remember someone saying on this board that WCFC could not become tenants at Sixways because Premiership Rugby had a rule that forbade ground-sharing. Does that rule apply to the RFU Championship where WRFC now find themselves? If the rule does not apply and City moved in as tenants, would City be kicked out if WRFC got promoted back to the Premiership.......or would the sharing embargo not apply to existing tenants of promoted rugby teams. Although, as jcp reports, the extra-curricular income at Sixways is unlikely to be affected by their relegation I would doubt that the rugby-related income will remain unaffected. I do not know a lot about the Warriors fan-base but would 13,000 turn up to watch a home game against Plymouth Albion or Doncaster? (BTW - this is not a slur against the loyalty of Warriors fans. It follows for any sports team that if the fare on offer is poorer then less people show up.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2010 11:52:35 GMT
Now is the time to at least discuss these matters with the rugby club. The idea of a competing, smaller, unproven set-up just a few blocks away at Nunnery Way was always a nonsense. Especially built, planned and run by Boddy and co. The last plans I heard about for NW had no catering or secondary income facilities there anyway.
|
|
|
Post by JohnInglisIsGod on May 6, 2010 14:58:37 GMT
I thought Saracens shared with Watford FC at Vicarage Road so that doesn't hold weight
|
|
|
Post by warwickwcfc on May 6, 2010 16:03:50 GMT
...and London Irish left SW London to play at Reading FC, Wasps left NW London to play at Wycombe Wanderers FC and Sale left south Manchester to play at Stockport County. It was those sharing agreements that made the RFU introduce this rule. The rule however could not affect exisiting agreements such as those. I think one of the reasons for the rule was to stop rugby clubs leaving their traditional neighbourhoods and losing their identity. The guy that wrote the rule probably did not consider any case of a football club actually going to a rugby club and so did not differentiate and just put a general kibosh on sharing. WRFC are not losing their Worcester identity because they have not gone anywhere. The rule is in place to stop WRFC moving to The Hawthorns or something like that.
|
|
|
Post by canalender on May 6, 2010 18:56:25 GMT
The rugby club has done well due to the dearth of Conference / meeting facilities in Worcester, remember the Nunnery Way presentation at the Star Hotel?, plus it benefits from its location by the M5. I was under the impression there was 2 rugby clubs at Sixways, one being the Warriors and the other the original 'amateur' club. I also believe the secondary pitch at Sixways belongs to the 'amateur' side.
|
|