Valencia has a lot less teams but have similar ratios.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Valencia CF Academy vs. FC Barcelona Academy - Pros & Cons
Collapse
X
-
Unregistered
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostHey Keith, I’m guessing you replaced your son as community manager. Since you got some time on your hands in between writing post maybe you can review your company’s upcoming court case.
http://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/iscr...No=650647-2018
This is not a situation where a tenant is not paying and landlord hasn't heard from them (typical non-payment situation where tenant has no money), this is actually a situation where tenant probably had to pay good money to engage lawyers to bring a suit (tenant has money).
Who knows what the truth is, but it certainly feels like anti-barca people (I would make an "antiba" joke, but this site has had to dumb political discussion already) are overstating the situation, and makes me question everything else I am reading that is anti-barca as well.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
I’m pretty sure all the older teams do. Some of the younger teams don’t but I thinks that’s more of a team choice then anything else because some of the Spanish trainers are hard to understand especially when they are mad.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View Postwhy does this matter? who cares? shall we compare richards in the shower?
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostI have been reading about this lawsuit for what feels like months; the implication was always that Barca or Prospect did something wrong and were being sued and "boy were they going to pay". All fantasy. Prospect brings an action against the landlord to protect their rights for either breach of their lease, or at least having been mislead in lease negotiations, and anti-barca people are using that as a basis for trashing them; amazing.
This is not a situation where a tenant is not paying and landlord hasn't heard from them (typical non-payment situation where tenant has no money), this is actually a situation where tenant probably had to pay good money to engage lawyers to bring a suit (tenant has money).
Who knows what the truth is, but it certainly feels like anti-barca people (I would make an "antiba" joke, but this site has had to dumb political discussion already) are overstating the situation, and makes me question everything else I am reading that is anti-barca as well.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostAbsolutely not true. 20 may be a stretch because some did go back, but 15 sounds about right if you include the two directors.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostI’m not sure it’s as simple as that. When a tenant sues a landlord it’s typically to break the lease. According to everything on here we got fields being built so I am not sure if the fields are being built at all. If anyone here know’s Keith D’s track record then they know he made his money suing people. He use to find big companies that utilized relatively small technologies in their operations, quickly file a patent on that technology after the fact and then claim The company owes him money. That’s Keith MO.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostWell there is plenty of evidence from multiple sources that the fields are indeed being built as we speak. So why would Keith be building them if he intended on leaving?
He will sell at the first opportunity. Keith will sell the franchise.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostI’m not sure it’s as simple as that. When a tenant sues a landlord it’s typically to break the lease. According to everything on here we got fields being built so I am not sure if the fields are being built at all. If anyone here know’s Keith D’s track record then they know he made his money suing people. He use to find big companies that utilized relatively small technologies in their operations, quickly file a patent on that technology after the fact and then claim The company owes him money. That’s Keith MO.
What are you trying to communicate with your third sentence? And I totally disagree with your second sentence, just not true.
A tenant that wants to break a lease just vacates. If landlord can't fill space, then landlord sues, noone wants to pay lawyers if party is generally left even or a little in the hole, just not worth it. Tenants sue to make sure that landlord lives up to its obligations in a lease, for whatever services or other obligations that landlord is required to perform; this case seems special to me since a rent adjustment was built into lease with respect to fill to be excavated from site - somebody lied, or somebody wasn't paying attention when they toured the site.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostI have been reading about this lawsuit for what feels like months; the implication was always that Barca or Prospect did something wrong and were being sued and "boy were they going to pay". All fantasy. Prospect brings an action against the landlord to protect their rights for either breach of their lease, or at least having been mislead in lease negotiations, and anti-barca people are using that as a basis for trashing them; amazing.
This is not a situation where a tenant is not paying and landlord hasn't heard from them (typical non-payment situation where tenant has no money), this is actually a situation where tenant probably had to pay good money to engage lawyers to bring a suit (tenant has money).
Who knows what the truth is, but it certainly feels like anti-barca people (I would make an "antiba" joke, but this site has had to dumb political discussion already) are overstating the situation, and makes me question everything else I am reading that is anti-barca as well.
- Quote
Comment
Comment