Back to being the biggest club in Coventry? (32 Viewers)
- Thread starter Grendel
- Start date
stupot07
Well-Known Member
You mean between CCFC group accounts...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
That point is pretty irrelevant, it can't be paid the company is barely 'washing its face'
, the bottom line is that CCFC owes North of £40M to SISU & ARVO and unpaid interest charges accrue at well above £1.3M pa.How can CCFC ever pay that money back? I'd hazard a guess 10p in the £ is the best anyone could expect at present.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
That point is pretty irrelevant, it can't be paid the company is barely 'washing its face'
How can CCFC ever pay that money back? I'd hazard a guess 10p in the £ is the best anyone could expect at present.
They can't so if and when someone takes over they will make a pence in the pound offer as you say.
That's why its a bit stupid when a big fuss is made over a £1 offer. The key is not the sale price but what happens to the debt. How much is wiped out, how much is paid off during the takeover and how much will remain to be serviced post takeover.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Or turn it around the level of debt and preference shares are a big disincentive to anyone being interested in a takeover. The preference shares are also presently accruing rights to income/dividend at something like £9m pa whilst interest on loans is increasing the liabilities & losses
That means no un- necessary interest in ownership from third parties whilst other things are sorted out doesn't it :thinking about: ?
That means no un- necessary interest in ownership from third parties whilst other things are sorted out doesn't it :thinking about: ?
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Why the hell don't they cut their future losses and give the club to someone ?
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Oh yea ....... waiting for JR completion !!
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
If, as has been suggested, the club is currently self sufficient then what do they have to gain by giving it away? They can keep hold of the club as long as they like, not put another penny in, and hope something happens that leads to a situation where they can get some of their money back.
Can easily see them sitting back and waiting, say, 10 years to see how Wasps situation plays out rather than just packing it all in and walking away.
Moff
Well-Known Member
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
I think your right (cough). They are getting a good return on their debt higher than they they could elsewhere.
At an interest rate upwards of 10% in 10 years they get their money back and maybe some of their investment if Sisu sell.
Look forward to that !!!
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
It is worthless script, a number in a ledger, worth only a fraction of the sum in the accounts. It will never be worth the headline figure (unless TM can fluke a promotion to the Prem on a low budget). Still I suppose TM & MV are the right men for the job.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Personally I wouldn't be at all surprised if it turned out that SISU/ARVO were investors in the Wasps bonds and in ten years time they find themselves in a situation where they can use litigation to wrestle control of ACL. That wouldn't be so dissimilar from what happened with welcome break. Might explain why there's no longer term commitment to the Ricoh despite the obvious need for it.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
But as OSB says the interest is accumulating and not being paid out.
Also getting 10% interest is only a good return if a) it's being paid out (and it's not) and crucially b) they get their original investment back.
And as we've all agreed that's never going to happen, so no it's not a good return on their investment.
I think OSB is right, they have done it to deter a take over.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
They do have past form in investing in useless causes where they will never get their money back, so you could be right!
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
That would actually be quite a clever strategy, however I doubt they could do it unless allied with a 3rd party cooperating in secret.
Cue some paranoia from Mr Eastwood.
Nick
Administrator
Step up Mr Hoffman, the fall out was an actThat would actually be quite a clever strategy, however I doubt they could do it unless allied with a 3rd party cooperating in secret.
Cue some paranoia from Mr Eastwood.
Moff
Well-Known Member
I think I mentioned in an earlier post G, about how their attendances could have dropped right off by the end of the season. Apart from the two high profile games against local teams, the Tigers and Saints, where the gates will be enhanced by fans of those clubs, the remaining fixtures are against less attractive opposition.
I can honestly see attendances close to Wycombe level by season end the way Wasps are going, and it would certainly be deserved.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Permanently or for one game? Not much point dropping them for one game when there's free tickets being passed out like confetti!
They made a big play when they moved here of tickets being cheaper than at Wycombe, if they're putting them down more how long until ticket revenue is lower than it was before they moved, even if the crowd is sllightly bigger?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It says all match tickets currently on sale.
Also buy a season ticket now and get a full refund on the Worcester game.
Shoddy marketing - e-mail bombardment at the minute.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
They're creating their own problem here by devaluing the brand. People aren't buying tickets as there have been so many freebies, knocking the price down now isn't going to encourage anyone to pay full price in the future.
People can bang on about how successful the move is all they want but attendances are dropping and revenue along with it.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Ticket sales only part of it though.
One of the advantages of getting all the match day incomes.
Rugby has the advantage of having the outlets open all the time as well.
One of the advantages of getting all the match day incomes.
Rugby has the advantage of having the outlets open all the time as well.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Are those different match day incomes to the ones we don't need?
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Who said we don't need them ?
Mind you if you have to finance a new stadium to get them it might not be worth it.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
And yet you, Tony, etc constantly say CCFC don't need extra revenue and amusingly call it "pie money". So which is it? Do CCFC need extra income or not?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
The end
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Where have I said we don't need it ?
I'm saying that I don't believe financing a new stadium to get those incomes is cost effective.
I'm saying I want Sisu to show me that doing that is better than staying where we are and getting some of the incomes.
I'm saying that neither will get us to the PL but want to know which is best and why.
A lot of people on here are just saying we need a new stadium because Ssu say we need too, but in reality it is just something they need to play with while they go through the JR and maybe negotiate with wasps.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
I think you are a genius but you will never know!!
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I've never once said that we don't need extra revenue.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Apparently it is essential for the survival of the richest rugby club in Europe. Yet the bellends dismiss it as 'pie money' when it comes to our football club.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
You certainly like to debase it though by labelling it 'pie money' like it is insignificant.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
The only thing I've ever labeled pie money is F & B and in comparison to ticket revenue it is insignificant. Something you clearly struggle to comprehend.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So it isn't significant then?