£20m to buy Acl (1 Viewer)

[AFCCOVENTRY]

Surely better than having to build a brand new stadium on the outskirts of Coventry in Plymouth.

Or shall we play Seppala's game of no offer but you are more than welcome to give is the stadium for free?

 

---

[dongonzalos]

14 million to buy ACL at full price.
So I presume it would actually be about 9-10 million.

Then you would also inherit the 12 million loan

So 22 million to buy ACL

30 million plus for new stadium and huge investment in players to get to the prem so you can sell to cover the loses.

Also 7 million a season lost whilst building it.

20-22 million outlay everyday but can SISU raise that figure?

 

[martcov]

A quick question. I read on here that the Ricoh naming rights have been extended from 2015 to 2025. Have they been paid yet? How much and who gets the money if it has not yet been paid? Could it affect the calculation?

 

[Nick]

So is that like somebody buying my house and taking on my mortgage? Giving me the cash for the house but then having to pay the mortgage too? (assuming my house is worth the same as my mortgage)

 

[covcity4life]

acl have a bunch of silly long term agreements with different parties or something. i think thats why sisu dont wanna go ahead with it.

not sure though.

 

[chiefdave]

So is that like somebody buying my house and taking on my mortgage? Giving me the cash for the house but then having to pay the mortgage too? (assuming my house is worth the same as my mortgage)

Basically yes, the sticking point being your bank would need to be happy with that and have no concerns about the new owner suddenly stopping payments.

 

[chiefdave]

A quick question. I read on here that the Ricoh naming rights have been extended from 2015 to 2025. Have they been paid yet? How much and who gets the money if it has not yet been paid? Could it affect the calculation?

I would imagine if they have been paid up front that would be factored in to any offer.

 

[Jack Griffin]

acl have a bunch of silly long term agreements with different parties or something. i think thats why sisu dont wanna go ahead with it.

not sure though.

Inconvenient to some maybe, but only silly if it wrecks the strategy of the organisation that signed them.

 

[Godiva]

Surely better than having to build a brand new stadium on the outskirts of Coventry in Plymouth.

Or shall we play Seppala's game of no offer but you are more than welcome to give is the stadium for free?

Hmm - isn't it irrelevant if CCC don't want to sell?

 

[dongonzalos]

So is that like somebody buying my house and taking on my mortgage? Giving me the cash for the house but then having to pay the mortgage too? (assuming my house is worth the same as my mortgage)

Is that the same logic that a golden share in league one maybe worth at a guess 5 million.

Would SISU sell CCFC for 5 million and take the 45 million debt away with them?

 

[dongonzalos]

A quick question. I read on here that the Ricoh naming rights have been extended from 2015 to 2025. Have they been paid yet? How much and who gets the money if it has not yet been paid? Could it affect the calculation?

Where did you here that?

 

[Nick]

Basically yes, the sticking point being your bank would need to be happy with that and have no concerns about the new owner suddenly stopping payments.

Ahh, I can't see anybody wanting to do that as they would be paying twice what it is worth wouldn't they?

 

[dongonzalos]

Ahh, I can't see anybody wanting to do that as they would be paying twice what it is worth wouldn't they?

So you don't think ACL is worth shares value plus loan?

 

[Nick]

So you don't think ACL is worth shares value plus loan?

I have no idea to be honest, the council don't seem to think so do they?

 

[Godiva]

So you don't think ACL is worth shares value plus loan?

What is the value of the shares?

If the club bought ACL it would be the shares they bought. That way they would own the company.
What they would do with the loan afterwards is not part of the take over.

 

[skybluetony176]

What is the value of the shares?

If the club bought ACL it would be the shares they bought. That way they would own the company.
What they would do with the loan afterwards is not part of the take over.

Here's a good idea that just came to me. They could buy ACL and pay the loan for a few years and during that period, here's the clever bit, load ACL with debt they owe themselves and then call the debt in on themselves so they can control the administration process, then another sisu company can waltz in and snap it up writing of huge amounts of debt and any unwanted contracts. Can't think how that came to me.

Second thoughts, scrap that, they'll never get away with that.

 

[stupot07]

We have no idea whether it's worth £20m. It's one of those things that looks good on paper, but in reality may not be that great.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[skysblue]

14 million for ACL minus loan Total cost £0.

 

[martcov]

Where did you here that?

Read it here a couple of weeks ago. If that money is still to come it would be a plus point for the value. If the deal had not been done (Extension of naming rights ), CCFC and the Arena could be branded together by a main sponsor. E.g. Bayer Leverkusen - Bayer Arena, RB Leipzig - Red Bull. More atractive than Ricoh Office Photocopier - charity. There was never a well thought out plan of how to sell CCFC as a whole Package - "Corporate Image" even before SISU. Now its all falling apart Tim points out that there are too many contracts tied to different people by ACL. CCFC would be best off with one major Corporate sponsor whose brand is on everything from the stadium roof to the coffee cups and pie wrappings.
But that is now pie in the sky as the parties hate each other and will not work together.

 

[dongonzalos]

Read it here a couple of weeks ago. If that money is still to come it would be a plus point for the value. If the deal had not been done (Extension of naming rights ), CCFC and the Arena could be branded together by a main sponsor. E.g. Bayer Leverkusen - Bayer Arena, RB Leipzig - Red Bull. More atractive than Ricoh Office Photocopier - charity. There was never a well thought out plan of how to sell CCFC as a whole Package - "Corporate Image" even before SISU. Now its all falling apart Tim points out that there are too many contracts tied to different people by ACL. CCFC would be best off with one major Corporate sponsor whose brand is on everything from the stadium roof to the coffee cups and pie wrappings.
But that is now pie in the sky as the parties hate each other and will not work together.

If I am getting this right

If they are still to get that money it will help keep ACL sustainable

I am sure if it happened, it would be everywhere

 

[martcov]

If I am getting this right

If they are still to get that money it will help keep ACL sustainable

I am sure if it happened, it would be everywhere

Simon Gilbert says they won't disclose the information on another thread..... It is a bit strange as it is probably a lot of money...

 

[Ian1779]

ACL aren't renowned for sharing information about their finances. They never made a point of telling anyone about the exit fee from IoC. It now just appears in the accounts.

When the naming rights were renewed was it around the beginning of the rent dispute or just before?

Would a company like Ricoh put in review points in the deal?

 

[chiefdave]

ACL aren't renowned for sharing information about their finances. They never made a point of telling anyone about the exit fee from IoC. It now just appears in the accounts.

When the naming rights were renewed was it around the beginning of the rent dispute or just before?

Would a company like Ricoh put in review points in the deal?

Would you generally expect a company to release details like that as and when they happen? I would have though it being in the accounts was correct. Do other companies make a big deal of announcing it when a contract ends for any reason?

The naming rights isn't a big secret, Ricoh extended to 2025 and it was reported on at the time. I have a feeling they extended after SISU had stopped paying rent so the whole issue can't bother them that much. If they wanted to tie it to the football club being there they could have put a clause in for that put obviously they didn't as it's still the Ricoh.

 

[wingy]

Would you generally expect a company to release details like that as and when they happen? I would have though it being in the accounts was correct. Do other companies make a big deal of announcing it when a contract ends for any reason?

The naming rights isn't a big secret, Ricoh extended to 2025 and it was reported on at the time. I have a feeling they extended after SISU had stopped paying rent so the whole issue can't bother them that much. If they wanted to tie it to the football club being there they could have put a clause in for that put obviously they didn't as it's still the Ricoh.

Was announced with at least 3 yrs of original deal still to run ,Prior to relegation .

 

[Ian1779]

No as a rule the accounts seem the best place for it. But when I originally raised it previously I was suggesting that ACL wasn't as viable as it was made out to be.

The extension was around Apr 2012 I think from the reports - was that before the rent dispute started?

 

[James Smith]

ACL aren't renowned for sharing information about their finances. They never made a point of telling anyone about the exit fee from IoC. It now just appears in the accounts.

When the naming rights were renewed was it around the beginning of the rent dispute or just before?

Would a company like Ricoh put in review points in the deal?

The IoC put the information out in a statement in the US at the time they sold up to Rank who I discovered today bought the business from IoC directly.

 

[Ian1779]

The IoC put the information out in a statement in the US at the time they sold up to Rank who I discovered today bought the business from IoC directly.

Yes they did, the point I was making is that ACL didn't say - 'guess what we just got £7m from IoC exiting the lease'. Not that they necessarily should, but they are drip feeding it into their accounts every year.

 

[James Smith]

Yes they did, the point I was making is that ACL didn't say - 'guess what we just got £7m from IoC exiting the lease'. Not that they necessarily should, but they are drip feeding it into their accounts every year.

I think OSB58 said that there was some accounting reason for this, to be honest it went way over my head.

 

[Ian1779]

Yeah I saw that, apparently it's a perfectly normal thing. IMO we could analyse the accounts a million times over, but both parties would be better for each others business. They are going to suffer not working together.

 

[James Smith]

Yeah I saw that, apparently it's a perfectly normal thing. IMO we could analyse the accounts a million times over, but both parties would be better for each others business. They are going to suffer not working together.

That's why I pay an accountant to do my taxes

 

[Jack Griffin]

ACL aren't renowned for sharing information about their finances. They never made a point of telling anyone about the exit fee from IoC. It now just appears in the accounts.

When the naming rights were renewed was it around the beginning of the rent dispute or just before?

Would a company like Ricoh put in review points in the deal?

LOL.the irony meter just blew a fuse...