Which other clubs DON'T own their stadium ? (2 Viewers)

[Alan Dugdales Moustache]

Surely there must be quite a few, and they must manage to survive. If it's a case of gate revenue and merchandise sales then we are in trouble.

Are Leeds one ?

 

---

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Leeds don't own Elland Road, they sold it 10 years ago. In that 10 years they struggled and had 3 years in league 1. I guess the fact that they have a significantly stronger fan base helps them compared to us as they averaged between 23-27k in there 3 years in L1.

The current owners have been trying to buy it back for the last 1-2 years

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/foot...back-Elland-Road-Massimo-Cellino-board-return

http://www1.skysports.com/football/...land-road-repurchase-despite-disqualification

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/aug/03/leeds-united-massimo-cellino-elland-road

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/spor...s-will-buy-back-elland-road-for-15m-1-6322034

 

[westofrayne]

I believe Ipswich don't own their ground, but pay approach 110k pa lease. They are liable for maintaining pitch and buildings, but take F&B income

 

[westofrayne]

Forgot the obvious one for me, less than k10 miles away, Colchester, don't know what arrangement they have but done own ground

 

[Grendel]

I believe Ipswich don't own their ground, but pay approach 110k pa lease. They are liable for maintaining pitch and buildings, but take F&B income

They have access to all revenues the ground generates all year round.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

I believe Ipswich don't own their ground, but pay approach 110k pa lease. They are liable for maintaining pitch and buildings, but take F&B income

Had a quick look at Portman road situation, it is owned by the local council. Up to 2010 Ipswich payed £15k a year, this was then hiked up to £115k per year, the council also tried to claim backdated rent to 2004 of the new rent price of £115k. The club refused to pay the backdated and were involved in a rent dispute which could have seen them go into administration (don't know how this was resolved). A few years ago the club made a £1 million bid for Portman Road which was rejected.

Interestingly Portman Road is officially listed as a community asset which means it can not be sold without consulting the local community first and giving the community first option to buy it and at least 6 months to raise the cash.

I don't know what revenues they get but this articles would suggest they get the naming rights of the stadium and othersso I would assume they get most if not all
http://www.greenun24.co.uk/ipswich-...ad_after_a_sponsor_says_simon_clegg_1_1441262
http://www.twtd.co.uk/ipswich-town-news/25218/manilow-at-portman-road

 

[stupot07]

There's a lot of clubs that down own their own ground, but they tend to lease the whole ground for 365 days per annum.

Isn't a better question - what other clubs only rent on a matchday only basis and get as little as 50% profit on f&b's and no other income from the stadium outside matchdays?


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

 

[ccfcway]

They have access to all revenues the ground generates all year round.

Here are the Ipswich accounts

Turnover Analysis

£000s	2013-14	2012-13
Gate receipts	4,981	5,084
Commercial income	3,892	4,153
Football League including TV & radio fees	4,677	4,606
Turnover	13,550	13,843

Any ideas how that would compare to CCFC ?

 

[AJB1983]

Man City don't own theirs do they? I know there's probsbly a revenue deal in place even though they probably wouldn't miss it, but it's a high profile club non the less

 

[italiahorse]

Here are the Ipswich accounts

Turnover Analysis

£000s	2013-14	2012-13
Gate receipts	4,981	5,084
Commercial income	3,892	4,153
Football League including TV & radio fees	4,677	4,606
Turnover	13,550	13,843

Any ideas how that would compare to CCFC ?

The commercial income is out of our control at the Ricoh but I would say the club make minimal effortss to close that gap.
Surely we could make £5M in the Championship with a bit of effort based around an 'achieving' product on the pitch.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

The commercial income is out of our control at the Ricoh but I would say the club make minimal effortss to close that gap.
Surely we could make £5M in the Championship with a bit of effort based around an 'achieving' product on the pitch.

Only need to sell 125,000 shirts to do that, easy!

 

[ccfcway]

The commercial income is out of our control at the Ricoh

is it ?.

Surely commercial income includes merchandise, sponsorship etc ? Thats why i am curious to see how much "commerical income" ccfc currently generate.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Here are the Ipswich accounts

Turnover Analysis

£000s	2013-14	2012-13
Gate receipts	4,981	5,084
Commercial income	3,892	4,153
Football League including TV & radio fees	4,677	4,606
Turnover	13,550	13,843

Any ideas how that would compare to CCFC ?

Its not really a good comparison because they are in the championship but on the latest set of accounts the difference is about 6 million on commercial/tv and 4 million on ticket sales. Ipswich turnover is fairly low for the championship.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

is it ?.

Surely commercial income includes merchandise, sponsorship etc ? Thats why i am curious to see how much "commerical income" ccfc currently generate.

from the latest accounts for CCFC

 

[italiahorse]

Only need to sell 125,000 shirts to do that, easy!

is it ?.

Surely commercial income includes merchandise, sponsorship etc ? Thats why i am curious to see how much "commerical income" ccfc currently generate.

5,000 shirts would be a start.
Obviously the higher profile we become (Championship/PL) incomes like merchandise, sponsorship etc will increase.
Incomes at the Ricoh are out of our control but although you have to hire the facilities this has to weighed up against not actually providing them, rates, loans etc.
Television incomes and gate receipts would be similar in the Championship.

 

[pusbccfc]

I don't think Stoke owned their stadium originally. Their council did them a good deal to obtain full ownership and since then have been a successful club.

If the council had any sense they would have made sure the football club owned at least part of this stadium.

With the Premier League being as big as it is, CCFC being at the top level would be significantly more important and positive to the city than having a rugby team there. Stoke City aren't a huge club, but manage to sell out every week, with effectively 3000 tourists to the area with the away sides.

The rugby club will never ever reach the potential that CCFC could reach being at the Ricoh.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

so our turnover last year was 3.5 million ?

Our total turnover for 13/14 was £3,755,049 with £1,140,759 from gate receipts and £2,614,290 from commercial activities (includes tv revenues)

 

[skybluetony176]

I don't think Stoke owned their stadium originally. Their council did them a good deal to obtain full ownership and since then have been a successful club.

If the council had any sense they would have made sure the football club owned at least part of this stadium.

With the Premier League being as big as it is, CCFC being at the top level would be significantly more important and positive to the city than having a rugby team there. Stoke City aren't a huge club, but manage to sell out every week, with effectively 3000 tourists to the area with the away sides.

The rugby club will never ever reach the potential that CCFC could reach being at the Ricoh.

They did. CCC gave us half of ACL but some idiots had the bright idea to sell it for a quick buck

 

[bigfatronssba]

I don't think Stoke owned their stadium originally. Their council did them a good deal to obtain full ownership and since then have been a successful club.

If the council had any sense they would have made sure the football club owned at least part of this stadium.

With the Premier League being as big as it is, CCFC being at the top level would be significantly more important and positive to the city than having a rugby team there. Stoke City aren't a huge club, but manage to sell out every week, with effectively 3000 tourists to the area with the away sides.

The rugby club will never ever reach the potential that CCFC could reach being at the Ricoh.

There's no guarantee of promotion from receiving all stadium incomes.

How many times did we challenge for promotion between 2001 & 2005?

 

[pusbccfc]

There's no guarantee of promotion from receiving all stadium incomes.

How many times did we challenge for promotion between 2001 & 2005?

Certainly, but we are 10x more likely to be looking up if we owned the Ricoh earning money, than not.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

There's no guarantee of promotion from receiving all stadium incomes.

How many times did we challenge for promotion between 2001 & 2005?

It makes it more likely though, doesn't it?

 

[chiefdave]

The only other club I can think of in a similar situation to ours is Stockport.

There's a lot of clubs that down own their own ground, but they tend to lease the whole ground for 365 days per annum.

Isn't a better question - what other clubs only rent on a matchday only basis and get as little as 50% profit on f&b's and no other income from the stadium outside matchdays?

Spot on, not owning the ground is not an issue its what you get in return for the amount you pay that is key.

Obviously the higher profile we become (Championship/PL) incomes like merchandise, sponsorship etc will increase.

But we'd still be at the bottom of the revenue table as all the teams we would be trying to be competitive with would be in the same division with the same bump in revenues from a higher profile.

 

[bigfatronssba]

It makes it more likely though, doesn't it?

Yes of course, once in the Championship. As there our competitors would have access to income streams that we currently have not.

In this division, under our current deal, we should be more than capable of getting promotion (or at least competing for it). Right now the main problem suppressing income is bad management, not the stadium situation.

 

[stupot07]

The only other club I can think of in a similar situation to ours is Stockport.



Spot on, not owning the ground is not an issue its what you get in return for the amount you pay that is key.



But we'd still be at the bottom of the revenue table as all the teams we would be trying to be competitive with would be in the same division with the same bump in revenues from a higher profile.

I think he wants to see the graphs again....




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

 

[lordsummerisle]

Weren't the Trust looking into that for the Ricoh in order to stop grubby hedge funds buying it on the cheap?

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Yes of course, once in the Championship. As there our competitors would have access to income streams that we currently so not.

In this division, under our current deal, we should be more than capable of getting promotion (or at least competing for it). Right now the main problem suppressing income is bad management, not the stadium situation.

Absolutely, no disputing we should be able to get out of this this division with good management. The revenue/stadium debate is a long term problem and looking at where we want the club to be in the next 10, 20, 30 years and many years after SISU have left.

 

[Sick Boy]

They did. CCC gave us half of ACL but some idiots had the bright idea to sell it for a quick buck

Wasn't this to raise money to stop the club from going to the wall?

Are you trying to blame sisu for this too?

 

[Sick Boy]

Weren't the Trust looking into that for the Ricoh in order to stop grubby hedge funds buying it on the cheap?

Would have been a good idea. It seems that now they like to cosy up to hedge funds who own the stadium.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Wasn't this to raise money to stop the club from going to the wall?

Are you trying to blame sisu for this too?

He was blaming SISU the other week for the club being refused permission to expand Highfield Road

 

[skybluericoh]

The problem is SISU, they have hacked of that much of the community that it is no longer viewed as an asset to pay money to associate you company name with the football club. They have a very long way to go before they will attract good sponsorship deals unless they start to put fund names on the shirt. That way they might be able to cross charge something from one account to another But the days of Local building societies, or car manufactures pumping big bucks in are quite some time away.

As for owning part or all of ACL they had their chance and decided to do it their way, now we are in probably the worst position we have ever been no hope of a new ground an no hope of new owners.......

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

The only other club I can think of in a similar situation to ours is Stockport.

How are Stockport doing these days?

 

[chiefdave]

How are Stockport doing these days?

They lost their ground following a period of financial instability. It was sold to a rugby club, Sale. Since then they have dropped out of the league and switched to semi-pro playing in Conference North.

 

[hill83]

They lost their ground following a period of financial instability. It was sold to a rugby club, Sale. Since then they have dropped out of the league and switched to semi-pro playing in Conference North.

 

[skybluericoh]

They lost their ground following a period of financial instability. It was sold to a rugby club, Sale. Since then they have dropped out of the league and switched to semi-pro playing in Conference North.

Local Derby in Nuneaton in a couple of seasons then?

 

[chiefdave]

Local Derby in Nuneaton in a couple of seasons then?

Hopefully not but I think we need to get out of the mindset that there's a quick fix or just get SISU out and everything will be OK. As things stand unless Wasps move or go bust we have little chance in a stake in the Ricoh for the next 250 years. In my opinion we're not talking about doing something to solve the problem in the next 10 years, it could be decades. For example if we build a new stadium it may be 50 years before we have paid for it and see the full benefit but we're running out of options.

Interestingly unlike SISU Stockport's owners were keen to sell (before they dropped out of the league) however they cited the lack of stadium ownership as the biggest issue in attracting buyers. Think we will have a similar issue.