Million dollar question (2 Viewers)

[Godiva]

Thing is Godiva that every club pays matchday expenses so it's unreasonable to say that the club should be commended for this. The escrow money was not placed there by the club (and indeed was done to stop it going down a black hole as Jan says), and they are legally obliged to top it back up. If there have been attempts by SISU to negotiate a rental reduction I will gladly eat one of MMM's humble pies, but I somehow doubt it.

Paying matchday expenses is not unreasonable at all - the club is expected tp pay this and have apparantly done so.

The Escrow money is a different matter because if they were in ccfc balance sheet as an asset, then surely the money belonged to the club. I don't know if it was indeed a ccfc asset, and I don't know if rent was usualy paid through the escrow or directly from ccfc to ACL. If rent was never paid through the escrow, then I am not really sure ACL could just take them without the accept from the club.

I hope PWKH will reveal if the cub tried to get a negotiation going over the rent before they stopped paying.

 

---

[torchomatic]

Ditto. "....anyone else's for for them".

So why the feck do you constantly side with our owners. you are never willing to see anyone elses view if it is against them.

 

[torchomatic]

I asked him a few questions too. Hope he answers.

I hope PWKH will reveal if the cub tried to get a negotiation going over the rent before they stopped paying.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Paying matchday expenses is not unreasonable at all - the club is expected tp pay this and have apparantly done so.

The Escrow money is a different matter because if they were in ccfc balance sheet as an asset, then surely the money belonged to the club. I don't know if it was indeed a ccfc asset, and I don't know if rent was usualy paid through the escrow or directly from ccfc to ACL. If rent was never paid through the escrow, then I am not really sure ACL could just take them without the accept from the club.

I hope PWKH will reveal if the cub tried to get a negotiation going over the rent before they stopped paying.

Where did I say matchday expenses are unreasonable? Re-read and stand corrected.

 

[Godiva]

I asked him a few questions too. Hope he answers.

If he don't it will look like he only came on to cast more doubt over TF's statement. I am sure he is more fairminded and balanced than that.

 

[Godiva]

I agreed with you BSB.

'Where did I say matchday expenses are unreasonable? Re-read and stand corrected.'

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I agreed with you BSB.

'Where did I say matchday expenses are unreasonable? Re-read and stand corrected.'

Easily misunderstood. MMM pie on its way.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Easily misunderstood. MMM pie on its way.

I'm all out!

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I'm all out!

Sod it I'm heading to Greggs then!

 

[SkyBlueSwiss]

Crystal. ACL have received £800K.

Pathetic. You and your twin from the forest have a never-ending ability to totally ignore anything posted that does not support your riduculous position while picking little pieces out of context and saying "There - see, we're correct".

Never answer the question, ignore truths you don't want to accept, twist the words of others out of context, offer up diversionary tactics instead of debating sensibly, attack as a last resort etc. etc.

Answer me this Torch and Grendel. Would the world really come to an end for you if the club was liquidated or put into administration? Is your world so small that the thought that the club might be reduced to non-league status fills you with such terror that you will attack any opinion that might seem to lead in that direction?
Please do not think that I am taking YOUR comments out of context, because you both really come accross as a pair of supporters that are absolutely terrified at the prospects facing our club and will support anything, legal or illegal, imoral or wrong that the current owners do provided that the club survives.
Why are you so terrified? It's sport FFS, not life or death. There is life beyong football.

 

[Grendel]

Pathetic. You and your twin from the forest have a never-ending ability to totally ignore anything posted that does not support your riduculous position while picking little pieces out of context and saying "There - see, we're correct".

Never answer the question, ignore truths you don't want to accept, twist the words of others out of context, offer up diversionary tactics instead of debating sensibly, attack as a last resort etc. etc.

Answer me this Torch and Grendel. Would the world really come to an end for you if the club was liquidated or put into administration? Is your world so small that the thought that the club might be reduced to non-league status fills you with such terror that you will attack any opinion that might seem to lead in that direction?
Please do not think that I am taking YOUR comments out of context, because you both really come accross as a pair of supporters that are absolutely terrified at the prospects facing our club and will support anything, legal or illegal, imoral or wrong that the current owners do provided that the club survives.
Why are you so terrified? It's sport FFS, not life or death. There is life beyong football.

It might have escaped your notice but this is a forum talking about a football club.

Of course there is life beyond football but if it boils down to me still watching football or ACL losing out there is no choice.

Independent observers concur the football club have been well and truly exploited in this matter. ACL and the council have had their pound if flesh. I couldn't care less about them.

Doubt worry though your day is coming. The club looks likely to fold. You can put your nuns outfit on and skip along the mountains celebrating our demise.

I think i stay at home thanks..

 

[SkyBlueSwiss]

It might have escaped your notice but this is a forum talking about a football club.

Of course there is life beyond football but if it boils down to me still watching football or ACL losing out there is no choice.

Independent observers concur the football club have been well and truly exploited in this matter. ACL and the council have had their pound if flesh. I couldn't care less about them.

Doubt worry though your day is coming. The club looks likely to fold. You can put your nuns outfit on and skip along the mountains celebrating our demise.

I think i stay at home thanks..

Your response totally proves my point, does it not Grendel?
My day is coming? Do I want the club to fold? Nuns outfits and mountains? What "independent observers" state that the club has been "well and truly exploited"?
ACL and the council have "had their pound of flesh"?

Not a sensible comment or fact in your entire response - just vague references and attacking the poster.

 

[Grendel]

Your response totally proves my point, does it not Grendel?
My day is coming? Do I want the club to fold? Nuns outfits and mountains? What "independent observers" state that the club has been "well and truly exploited"?
ACL and the council have "had their pound of flesh"?

Not a sensible comment or fact in your entire response - just vague references and attacking the poster.

The only thing that brings emotion in you is when the coync or ACL are questioned. Seems to make you go all emotional. Sorry cant debate got a football match to watch and if more people think like me and not you there may be a few more.

 

[SkyBlueSwiss]

The only thing that brings emotion in you is when the coync or ACL are questioned. Seems to make you go all emotional. Sorry cant debate got a football match to watch and if more people think like me and not you there may be a few more.

attack, attack, attack. deary me!

 

[dongonzalos]

Do you?

Somebody may emerge to bankroll the formation of a new club - but nobody will save the club in it's current form. We will have to do what Rangers did and reform as a new club and apply to play at a much lower level. Who wants that? Perhaps a few romantics who like the idea of rising again through the leagues. The reality of that is Forest Green Rovers at home in front of a few thousand. No thanks. Let's save what we have now, and for now at least, we need SISU.

I think so a population of 400k ( including Warwickshire)

Negotiate a deal with the council learning from SISU.

Consider buying out Higgs as part of the takeover.

There is money to be made there.

I just don't really understand can they come in completely absolved of any payments to SISU.

Can they takeover Coventry City Football club.

Do they have to start in non league, league one or a division below.

I think that could get it for 30 million.

I assume all the players would be gone. So they would need to sign a new 20 plus the kids, as free transfers on affordable wages in line with the FFP. They would have access to income streams.

 

[dongonzalos]

Quality finish btw...

 

[dongonzalos]

There are still a number of potential scenarios and yes, the Sky Blue Trust has put a lot of effort into working through how other Trusts have acted (Swans and Pompey Trust websites are good starting points) and getting people with legal/financial expertise involved who will help with whatever particular situation we end up with at ccfc. For anyone interested in all this, it's easy to get involved with the SBT and the Trust's meeting this Monday 4 March 7.30 @ the squirrel with steve waggott as guest should be good.

Damn I can't make that, work commitments

Fair play to waggot.

Could you record it and put a link in here?

 

[dongonzalos]

In rent no, in total financial contributions yes.

I know what your point is, that £500,000 of that came from the escrow account - but I don't see where to club have sought the hide that fact, considering that it was THE CLUB that deposited that money in the account in the first instance. Misleading? Perhaps. But so is including that £500,000 in the headline arrears figure that ACL have done repeatedly.

All this is largely irrelevant. The club cannot afford the rent deal on the table, at least not without access to other income streams. Those are the cold hard facts. Something therefore has to give. ACL take a hit, or they literally force the club out of business, and I don't see how anyone benefits from that.

Question, what do you think ACL will seek to charge any phoenix club that starts again as a non-league entity? It won't be 400K, it won't be 100K, so why are we playing this silly game?

I guess there they may trust their business partner and they may get paid?

You could be right and they may think 300grand to have a client they can trust maybe worth it?

 

[dongonzalos]

Mr Ferret - just for clarity the club did not deposit the money into the Escrow account. The money in that account was from an FA/Football Foundation grant whilst the Ricoh complex was being built. It was going to be £1m grant but because by the time it was awarded the stadium was already built and the amount was halved. The stipulation on the money was that it wouldn't be given directly to the football club as the then owners were making such a mess of things fiscally they knew it would simply just disappear down a black hole. The money was then placed into a Debt Guarantee fund which became the Escrow. The actual value of the Escrow is £1m - £500k is from this grant whilst the other £500k is a guarantee from Robinson and McGinnity, although Sir Geoff does tend to forget about his half.

The Escrow was not a piggy bank the club could simply dip into when it felt like it - the money was not technically ever theirs and their legal obligation is to top it back up to £500k. Under the new agreement the Escrow was reduced to £200k.

It would be true to say ACL have received £800k but it is not true to say it is the club have paid £800k rent.

It is all these half truths that the Trust is trying to cut through by putting a set of questions to both sides - ACL have been met and answered with their version, meeting with CCFC (Fisher, Clarke and Labovitch) on Tuesday. Results of questions will be published asap after meeting. We won't be editing or mediating or commenting on answers given simply publishing them and letting people make their own minds up.

Brilliant thank you

 

[rupert_bear]

I have answered this 3 times?

£15 million on existing creditors and the business was also losing £6 million a year. Forest under their current owners would have lost £60 million over the sane period.

If your figures are correct thats about £45million. What has happened to the other
£40+million ?

 

[PWKH]

Way back when, when McGinnity was Chairman, the late Sir Derek Higgs proposed a new rent structure. He was director of CCFC and ACL. His rent proposal was to have a base rent set for each League with increases linked to attendance. McGinnity and Hover, then Chief Executive of CCFC, rejected this outright as although there were reductions for Championship, League One etc, there would have been an increase in the base in the Premiership.
Robinson made some half-hearted attempts to open a discussion on rent but he too would not accept anything like the Higgs proposal. The important thing for ACL was to set up a structure that was sustainable, Robinson just wanted to set part of the rent aside until they could pay it one sunny day in the future.The advantage of the Higgs proposal was that there would have been a direct link to the Club's income.

Someone asked how the rental was arrived at: in the final years at HR the lease plus costs was c£900,000. The cost of lease and licence at the Rioch followed that model. It was signed off by Robinson and Brannigan for the Club and Fletcher and McGuigan on behalf of ACL. It had been agreed by the Boards of both ACL and CCFC.

As a board member of ACL I am not aware of any rent discussions with Fisher et al before the rent stopped being paid.

When the Charity bought the shares in ACL everyone expected CCFC to buy its way straight back into ACL. The Charity actually appointed as Directors of ACL the Chairman of CCFC and Sir Derek who was both shareholder and Director of CCFC.
It has been said that Sisu should have acted faster, when they bought CCFC, to purchase the shares. Perhaps it would have been better for CCFC to have made that purchase instead of following Fletcher's fantasies under Robinson. Everyone will have a view as do I and probably there is a bit right in all of them and a bit wrong as well. It is an odd person who believes that they are always right.

On one of the threads it was suggested that we, the directors of ACL, gain personally, or could gain, from the success of ACL's business or negotiations. Neither those appointed by the City Council or by the Charity are paid anything at all. This is stated clearly in the accounts, the most recent of which were lodged at Companies House on either Wednesday or Thursday of this week.

ACL has recently answered a list of questions posed by the Sky Blues Trust. They have asked, or are trying to ask, a similar set of questions of Fisher and CCFC. We have agreed that the Q&A can be published alongside those of Fisher's. I hope that he answers the questions because then people will be able to set one alongside the other and, I hope, be able to begin to see the wood for the trees.

 

[skybluehugh]

Not sure if Admin is messing about with settings and stuff, but the screen has gone all weird for me. I get lines of PHP Notice Debug errors at the top of the page.

Well Grendel and Torch, how are you going to turn this one into Shitsu's favor.
Blows all your blaming of ACL out of the water.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[dongonzalos]

Way back when, when McGinnity was Chairman, the late Sir Derek Higgs proposed a new rent structure. He was director of CCFC and ACL. His rent proposal was to have a base rent set for each League with increases linked to attendance. McGinnity and Hover, then Chief Executive of CCFC, rejected this outright as although there were reductions for Championship, League One etc, there would have been an increase in the base in the Premiership.
Robinson made some half-hearted attempts to open a discussion on rent but he too would not accept anything like the Higgs proposal. The important thing for ACL was to set up a structure that was sustainable, Robinson just wanted to set part of the rent aside until they could pay it one sunny day in the future.The advantage of the Higgs proposal was that there would have been a direct link to the Club's income.

Someone asked how the rental was arrived at: in the final years at HR the lease plus costs was c£900,000. The cost of lease and licence at the Rioch followed that model. It was signed off by Robinson and Brannigan for the Club and Fletcher and McGuigan on behalf of ACL. It had been agreed by the Boards of both ACL and CCFC.

As a board member of ACL I am not aware of any rent discussions with Fisher et al before the rent stopped being paid.

When the Charity bought the shares in ACL everyone expected CCFC to buy its way straight back into ACL. The Charity actually appointed as Directors of ACL the Chairman of CCFC and Sir Derek who was both shareholder and Director of CCFC.
It has been said that Sisu should have acted faster, when they bought CCFC, to purchase the shares. Perhaps it would have been better for CCFC to have made that purchase instead of following Fletcher's fantasies under Robinson. Everyone will have a view as do I and probably there is a bit right in all of them and a bit wrong as well. It is an odd person who believes that they are always right.

On one of the threads it was suggested that we, the directors of ACL, gain personally, or could gain, from the success of ACL's business or negotiations. Neither those appointed by the City Council or by the Charity are paid anything at all. This is stated clearly in the accounts, the most recent of which were lodged at Companies House on either Wednesday or Thursday of this week.

ACL has recently answered a list of questions posed by the Sky Blues Trust. They have asked, or are trying to ask, a similar set of questions of Fisher and CCFC. We have agreed that the Q&A can be published alongside those of Fisher's. I hope that he answers the questions because then people will be able to set one alongside the other and, I hope, be able to begin to see the wood for the trees.

I have to say every time I read something from PWKH and I read something from Tim Fisher. I am surprised when people come on here and attack ACL!

 

[Godiva]

Just to get the facts right, would it be correct to say that:
1) ACL have emptied the escrow for £500k
2) ccfc have spent about £300k in match day expenses

Could you reveal how much ACL have received from ccfc since april last year (if anything)?
And can you reveal if ccfc approached ACL asking for a rent re-negotiation prior to the stop paying?

As a board member of ACL I am not aware of any rent discussions with Fisher et al before the rent stopped being paid.

Thank you for your answer.

If the club made no contact to try to renogotiate the rent before stopping payment, then that is simply stupid and unjustifiable.
I would really like a comment from Fisher on that.

 

[torchomatic]

Does it? How?

Well Grendel and Torch, how are you going to turn this one into Shitsu's favor.
Blows all your blaming of ACL out of the water.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[torchomatic]

Thanks. INteresting stuff.

So, let me get this straight. We owned HR. Richardson decided we needed a new stadium. We sold HR to developers for housing. The stadium wasn't going to be finished on time so we we rented our own ground back - desperate times - at £900K per annum. When the Ricoh was finally finished the new rental figure was based on what the developers charged us? And should Higgs have been on the board of CCFC and ACL at the same time if one was negotiating with the other over a sustainable rent right for both the Club and for ACL?

Why hasn't anyone mentioned Robinson's attempt to renegotiate the rent before? I know you say it was half-hearted but he either tried to renegotiate the rent or he didn't. As we seemed to be in a financial hole then why would he have been half-hearted about it.

Finally, "The important thing for ACL was to set up a structure that was sustainable". It hasn't happened that way, surely?

Way back when, when McGinnity was Chairman, the late Sir Derek Higgs proposed a new rent structure. He was director of CCFC and ACL. His rent proposal was to have a base rent set for each League with increases linked to attendance. McGinnity and Hover, then Chief Executive of CCFC, rejected this outright as although there were reductions for Championship, League One etc, there would have been an increase in the base in the Premiership.
Robinson made some half-hearted attempts to open a discussion on rent but he too would not accept anything like the Higgs proposal. The important thing for ACL was to set up a structure that was sustainable, Robinson just wanted to set part of the rent aside until they could pay it one sunny day in the future.The advantage of the Higgs proposal was that there would have been a direct link to the Club's income.

Someone asked how the rental was arrived at: in the final years at HR the lease plus costs was c£900,000. The cost of lease and licence at the Rioch followed that model. It was signed off by Robinson and Brannigan for the Club and Fletcher and McGuigan on behalf of ACL. It had been agreed by the Boards of both ACL and CCFC.

As a board member of ACL I am not aware of any rent discussions with Fisher et al before the rent stopped being paid.

When the Charity bought the shares in ACL everyone expected CCFC to buy its way straight back into ACL. The Charity actually appointed as Directors of ACL the Chairman of CCFC and Sir Derek who was both shareholder and Director of CCFC.
It has been said that Sisu should have acted faster, when they bought CCFC, to purchase the shares. Perhaps it would have been better for CCFC to have made that purchase instead of following Fletcher's fantasies under Robinson. Everyone will have a view as do I and probably there is a bit right in all of them and a bit wrong as well. It is an odd person who believes that they are always right.

On one of the threads it was suggested that we, the directors of ACL, gain personally, or could gain, from the success of ACL's business or negotiations. Neither those appointed by the City Council or by the Charity are paid anything at all. This is stated clearly in the accounts, the most recent of which were lodged at Companies House on either Wednesday or Thursday of this week.

ACL has recently answered a list of questions posed by the Sky Blues Trust. They have asked, or are trying to ask, a similar set of questions of Fisher and CCFC. We have agreed that the Q&A can be published alongside those of Fisher's. I hope that he answers the questions because then people will be able to set one alongside the other and, I hope, be able to begin to see the wood for the trees.

 

[PWKH]

It was a long post and perhaps a couple of things got missed: on the Board of ACL were two CCFC Directors, two from the Council and two independents in case a deciding vote was needed. The intention was to enable CCFC to be fully involved in agreeing their costs.

The £900,000 was not simply rent. I did not say that it was rent. It is important to be specific otherwise threads such as this go off on the wrong track. The £900,000+ was rent PLUS costs, just as the £1m was rent PLUS costs. It was a greater number both because costs increase through inflation and because there would be greater cost at the Ricoh (you only have to remember the last few years at HR and how fast it went downhill without maintenance etc).

Robinson's invitation to ACL was for them to allow him to pay only a proportion of the rent and costs putting the balance into a debt which would be paid "one day". CCFC already had enormous debts. The chances of ever seeing that debt repaid were exceedingly slim. The CCFC Board including Robinson of course, had already rejected any rent reduction in lower leagues if it meant an increase in the Premiership. Whether that it is half-hearted I will leave to you to form your own opinion. In mine it was. He could have done more to try to reach a sensible way forward than just suggesting building up even more debt. The debt that they already had being one of the main contributors to their not being able to pay the rent and costs...

I agree that a sustainable way forward has still not been agreed even though we did arrive at agreement with the CCFC Board in January we have not managed to do that with the "owner".

 

[Grendel]

Well Grendel and Torch, how are you going to turn this one into Shitsu's favor.
Blows all your blaming of ACL out of the water.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Er no it doesn't.

 

[dongonzalos]

It was a long post and perhaps a couple of things got missed: on the Board of ACL were two CCFC Directors, two from the Council and two independents in case a deciding vote was needed. The intention was to enable CCFC to be fully involved in agreeing their costs.

The £900,000 was not simply rent. I did not say that it was rent. It is important to be specific otherwise threads such as this go off on the wrong track. The £900,000+ was rent PLUS costs, just as the £1m was rent PLUS costs. It was a greater number both because costs increase through inflation and because there would be greater cost at the Ricoh (you only have to remember the last few years at HR and how fast it went downhill without maintenance etc).

Robinson's invitation to ACL was for them to allow him to pay only a proportion of the rent and costs putting the balance into a debt which would be paid "one day". CCFC already had enormous debts. The chances of ever seeing that debt repaid were exceedingly slim. The CCFC Board including Robinson of course, had already rejected any rent reduction in lower leagues if it meant an increase in the Premiership. Whether that it is half-hearted I will leave to you to form your own opinion. In mine it was. He could have done more to try to reach a sensible way forward than just suggesting building up even more debt. The debt that they already had being one of the main contributors to their not being able to pay the rent and costs...

I agree that a sustainable way forward has still not been agreed even though we did arrive at agreement with the CCFC Board in January we have not managed to do that with the "owner".

Last paragraph says it all.

Time for Joy to come out and tell us what she wants and what she is genuinely planning to do if she does not get it.

 

[rupert_bear]

Er no it doesn't.

But what has happened to the other £40odd million ?

 

[Grendel]

But what has happened to the other £40odd million ?

What do your mean? It's the cost of running a football club. Cost exceeds revenue by £6 million a year. We were £60 million in debt when mcginnity took over and £45 million when sisu took over.

I actually do t understand what you are getting at.

 

[Godiva]

But what has happened to the other £40odd million ?

Although slightly out of date, look here: http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/11316-FAQ-2-Money-Talks

 

[thegameaintstraight]

Last paragraph says it all.

Time for Joy to come out and tell us what she wants and what she is genuinely planning to do if she does not get it.

What is the point of having/paying a Board of Directors in the present circumstances. Seems they are told what to do.

 

[dongonzalos]

What is the point of having/paying a Board of Directors in the present circumstances. Seems they are told what to do.

I agree especially when the chief exec
Thinks a deal is pretty much done. Then discovers his boss has a different view.

 

[rupert_bear]

What do your mean? It's the cost of running a football club. Cost exceeds revenue by £6 million a year. We were £60 million in debt when mcginnity took over and £45 million when sisu took over.

I actually do t understand what you are getting at.

We were told when sisu came in it was a blank canvas, no debt. Okay i'll accept the 15 mill they put up to pay some creditors and if they have put £6mill a year into the business that equals the 45mill constantly referred to, but there has been income. Gate receipts, transfer income, TV money my conservatve estimate for that is about £40mill. So if from a blank canvas we now owe 45million added to the income described comes to £80+ million. So over a 5 year period thats approximately 16 million a year to run this football club. After giving ACL their million rent and after wages, insurances, tax what else is there that adds up to 16million+ a year ?