|
Post by jdl on Dec 11, 2017 19:44:36 GMT
Profit. And income stream. The Doctor has covered the cost of buying the freehold. Clearing all debts and is paying for the rebuild. There is and will be no debt. The plan is for each stand to generate income stream. Main stand - Corporate and function room. Plough end - Holiday Inn. SWanscombe end NHS lease and Riverside stand social club and bars. The club would consider artificial if it could accurately replicate natural grass and it was permitted in the FL. And the planned capacity has been upped to 8500, with the potential to go up to 10,500. Reasonably future proof, as you would expect the Gallagher to become. Genuinely nice (sorry if that's too twee) to hear of a monied investor in non-league football who, when the time comes to leave, doesn't intend leaving the club saddled with financial issues.
I hope the actions continue to follow the intentions.
Any more of that and you'll need to change your name...
|
|
|
3g update
Dec 11, 2017 19:55:59 GMT
via mobile
Post by HempsteadGaz on Dec 11, 2017 19:55:59 GMT
It is refreshing to have a civilised chat on an opposition forum. Just because we are rivals,it doesnt mean we have to abuse each other. Have had many good chats with away fans during a pre match beer. It turns out most of us have the same ideals.
|
|
|
Post by Ant on Dec 11, 2017 20:44:23 GMT
How can lots of ugly London-style blocks of flats be called a garden city? My favourite thing about that KM article is the similar older stories it brings up on the same page. www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/sport/scally-15164/This one from April Fools Day 2014 made me laugh. Being lectured by Paul Scally that we only have ourselves to blame for failing to be promoted from the Ryman League because of our 3G pitch. We have seen off bigger fools and dinosaurs than Reg Varney and three plastic pitches are still there, now pushing for promotion to the Football League. The future is ours and those dull old men are the past. Have you driven past / through it? It is starting to look green and pleasant, and a nice place to live. Certainly better than Dover or Strood or Chatham. That like saying Emile Heskey was a prolific striker, certainly better than Akinbiyi, Wreh, or Ali Dia.
|
|
|
3g update
Dec 11, 2017 21:30:38 GMT
via mobile
Post by spurstone on Dec 11, 2017 21:30:38 GMT
Have you driven past / through it? It is starting to look green and pleasant, and a nice place to live. Certainly better than Dover or Strood or Chatham. That like saying Emile Heskey was a prolific striker, certainly better than Akinbiyi, Wreh, or Ali Dia. Heskey was a prolific striker, just not a prolific goalscorer.
|
|
|
Post by nws on Dec 12, 2017 0:14:21 GMT
It is refreshing to have a civilised chat on an opposition forum. Just because we are rivals,it doesnt mean we have to abuse each other. Have had many good chats with away fans during a pre match beer. It turns out most of us have the same ideals. Generally we find it an annoyance to have to abuse other fans on here because it takes away vital time that could be used abusing each other (in a language sense of course )
|
|
|
3g update
Dec 12, 2017 19:03:28 GMT
via mobile
Post by Ant on Dec 12, 2017 19:03:28 GMT
That like saying Emile Heskey was a prolific striker, certainly better than Akinbiyi, Wreh, or Ali Dia. Heskey was a prolific striker, just not a prolific goalscorer. Is that you, Pedant? Good point, well made.
|
|
|
Post by jdl on Dec 12, 2017 19:30:37 GMT
That can't have been pedant, because you can't, technically, be a "prolific" striker, as 'prolific' implies the creation/production of something in large quantities, and a striker who scores few goals, despite many 'strikes', is creating very little - far too little to be described as 'prolific'.
'Strikes' in themselves are not a creation/product, but merely a means to an end (goals). If no goals result, nothing has been created/produced.
|
|
|
3g update
Dec 12, 2017 19:56:09 GMT
via mobile
Post by spurstone on Dec 12, 2017 19:56:09 GMT
That can't have been pedant, because you can't, technically, be a "prolific" striker, as 'prolific' implies the creation/production of something in large quantities, and a striker who scores few goals, despite many 'strikes', is creating very little - far too little to be described as 'prolific'. 'Strikes' in themselves are not a creation/product, but merely a means to an end (goals). If no goals result, nothing has been created/produced. But I think you may find Heskey was involved in creating many goals. Just not in directly scoring them. Hence my point he was a prolific striker. He was a regular where ever he played because he could create goals one way or another even if he didn't score that many. He wouldn't have been such a regular front man otherwise!
|
|
|
Post by jdl on Dec 12, 2017 21:33:05 GMT
That can't have been pedant, because you can't, technically, be a "prolific" striker, as 'prolific' implies the creation/production of something in large quantities, and a striker who scores few goals, despite many 'strikes', is creating very little - far too little to be described as 'prolific'. 'Strikes' in themselves are not a creation/product, but merely a means to an end (goals). If no goals result, nothing has been created/produced. But I think you may find Heskey was involved in creating many goals. Just not in directly scoring them. Hence my point he was a prolific striker. He was a regular where ever he played because he could create goals one way or another even if he didn't score that many. He wouldn't have been such a regular front man otherwise! So (stretching a point), he was a prolific assister. That is very different from being a striker. Mills, for instance must have had a few assists in his time, but no one would have called him a striker.
|
|
|
3g update
Dec 12, 2017 22:32:32 GMT
via mobile
Post by spurstone on Dec 12, 2017 22:32:32 GMT
But I think you may find Heskey was involved in creating many goals. Just not in directly scoring them. Hence my point he was a prolific striker. He was a regular where ever he played because he could create goals one way or another even if he didn't score that many. He wouldn't have been such a regular front man otherwise! So (stretching a point), he was a prolific assister. That is very different from being a striker. Mills, for instance must have had a few assists in his time, but no one would have called him a striker. Unfortunately, I don't think even in modern day football there is an "assister" position.
|
|
|
3g update
Dec 13, 2017 7:51:02 GMT
via mobile
Post by swampy on Dec 13, 2017 7:51:02 GMT
Being talked about on Radio Kent this morning. Oliver Ash on before 9am.
|
|
|
Post by nws on Dec 13, 2017 10:40:38 GMT
Dear oh dear. If you play a game, shall we say football, you can strike a ball. If you strike the ball a lot then you are prolific at striking it. You could thus be termed as a prolific striker.
If you play football, you can score goals. If you score lots of them then you are prolific. You could thus be termed a prolific goalscorer.
When striking a ball you may not necessarily score a goal but you may still be prolific at striking.
Hence you can be a prolific striker without being a prolific goalscorer.
Spurstone was 100% correct with his original prolific striker comment.
The prolific striker is producing lots of strikes. The prolific goalscorer is producing lots of goals.
|
|
|
Post by Nick on Dec 13, 2017 10:43:25 GMT
Another gem from nws - as illuminating as ever !
|
|
|
Post by nws on Dec 13, 2017 10:53:03 GMT
Another gem from nws - as illuminating as ever ! Why thank you nick. I'm often termed as prolific although I'm not sure what at...
|
|
|
3g update
Dec 13, 2017 13:33:46 GMT
via mobile
Post by bendubz on Dec 13, 2017 13:33:46 GMT
But I think you may find Heskey was involved in creating many goals. Just not in directly scoring them. Hence my point he was a prolific striker. He was a regular where ever he played because he could create goals one way or another even if he didn't score that many. He wouldn't have been such a regular front man otherwise! So (stretching a point), he was a prolific assister. That is very different from being a striker. Mills, for instance must have had a few assists in his time, but no one would have called him a striker. Heskey was a prolific Centre Forward. There we go, doesn't imply he was scoring the goals now.
|
|