ACL & Council reactions to Brody and Board (3 Viewers)

[oldskyblue58]

I sat and listened to CWR this morning airing interviews with Daniel Gidney from ACL and councillor Mutton. Here is what i took from it

- the attitude to CCFC/Board/SISU appears to have hardened. Perhaps from frustration but more likely due to the unprofessional underhand almost bullying tactics adopted towards ACL by KD etc. I think the arrogance in attitude based on "we are CCFC of course you will do what we want - what do you know" has hit home hard with ACL and Council. These people should not be treated so dismissively by KD etc

- Gidney is quite right to point out that the Ricoh can survive without CCFC - football derived revenue accounts for 19% of ACL turnover (strangely Gidney had seemingly accurate facts and figures ready to discuss unlike our shower). ACL have not sat still and waited for CCFC to get their act together - quite rightly they have successfully pressed on and developed a diversified & viable business away from football. He said yes they wanted the club there, everyone does but ACL & the Ricoh are not dependent on it. The facts say they are not

- Councillor Mutton took an even firmer line. He was scathing of the CCFC Board and management. There in lies my only disagreement i have with him, it wasnt just the current board that got us into the mess but i am sure he knows that. The rents are set by ACL at market value not by the council but those rents are very similar to the ones paid when CCFC rented Highfield Rd for three years - (lets face the facilities comparison HR to Ricoh are chalk and cheese) He is a passionate supporter of CCFC had season ticket over 25 years, he sees it from both sides but is tasked to protect the interests of the council not bail out a club that has brought the problems on itself with successive boards mismanagement. As he said the problems revolve around fans turning backs on CCFC because of the poor set up, sale of players, dire results..... not because of a rent set at market value & comparable to any other similar stadium. The council do not run ACL, they own it and from that have some input, but the ACL Board manage the company. He firmly believes that the owners of CCFC made their own problems and he has no sympathy for them. He also stated clubs going into administration can come back better and stronger. The guy is playing hardball with CCFC Board & SISU

So what does this mean
- dont expect CCFC to own any part of ACL any time soon (certainly unlikely with current set up)
- dont expect ACL to drop the rent - there is no reasonable arguement to do so
- dont carry on thinking that CCFC is essential to ACL survival it isnt but ACL value having the club there - however financially the club is not essential for ACL to survive
- dont expect ACL to sit back waiting for an offer - they have a business to run and are getting on with it successfully
- dont expect the relationship between the current CCFC Board and the Council or ACL to get less frosty - it wont
- dont expect the council roll over in any negotiations because we are CCFC or because some fans misguidedly believe somehow ACL/council should be beholden to the great CCFC - it isnt going to happen

It all leaves us no further forward, maybe even further back. Events at CCFC continue to get worse !

 

---

[kg82]

It doesn't seem like a very clever thing to say that the Arena can survive without the football club? I understand their reluctance to sell any part to SISU as well and hope they keep this tactic up, but saying that about the club comes across as "we don't care about the club that has run in this city for over 125 years". Just seems a bit disrespectfull to all the fans.

 

[Sky Blue Sheepy]

Unfortunately, as you say, it's hard to disagree with ACL or Cllr Mutton on the issues - the new boards attitude to the council when they first took over still beggars belief. They continue to talk down to parties they're meant to work with, then wonder why no-one will do business with them.

It doesn't seem like a very clever thing to say that the Arena can survive without the football club? I understand their reluctance to sell any part to SISU as well and hope they keep this tactic up, but saying that about the club comes across as "we don't care about the club that has run in this city for over 125 years". Just seems a bit disrespectfull to all the fans.

Maybe it doesn't read as too pleasant towards the fans, but it's still true, they're position is that they've invested money and want it back - they're in no position where SISU can blackmail them into selling their share in the Ricoh.

 

[stupot07]

It doesn't seem like a very clever thing to say that the Arena can survive without the football club? I understand their reluctance to sell any part to SISU as well and hope they keep this tactic up, but saying that about the club comes across as "we don't care about the club that has run in this city for over 125 years". Just seems a bit disrespectfull to all the fans.

I agree - That is the only sentiment of their statements i don't agree with. Financially they may not be reliant on the club, but the country's 6th largest city needs it's football club.

 

[Sub]

the only way forward for CCFC is for SISU to leave thats what it boils down to !! the council the fans the higgs and ACL know what SISU are up to, and its all about making money and to hell with everyone else. They have well and truly made there bed and have to lie in it now unfortunatly like the board and SISU its full of shit !!!

 

[oldskyblue58]

It doesn't seem like a very clever thing to say that the Arena can survive without the football club? I understand their reluctance to sell any part to SISU as well and hope they keep this tactic up, but saying that about the club comes across as "we don't care about the club that has run in this city for over 125 years". Just seems a bit disrespectfull to all the fans.

not what they were saying. ACL & Council want CCFC there, they want a successful team both Mutton and Gidney said so but they have other responsibilities. They are not part of CCFC they have to ensure that the Council money is protected and that ACL is successful. Both made it very clear that they want CCFC at the Ricoh. But they cant put ACL at risk just to have the club play its games there, if CCFC goes bust then ACL still needs to survive and they have planned for that nothing more. It is good management.

Clearly Mutton cares about the club he spends good money there personally each season. Neither were disrespecting the fans, but why should they be held to ransom by CCFC. Mutton even said if CCFC went into admin then the new club could use the stadium. CCFC wont go into admin because of ACL though or because of the rent it pays

 

[olderskyblue]

Didn't somebody on here show the figures for the Ricoh recently? I seem to recall that the last set of figures showed they would have made a loss without the CCFC income, or is that me dreaming it?

 

[derbyskyblue]

This is one hardball game sisu will never win.

 

[kg82]

not what they were saying. ACL & Council want CCFC there, they want a successful team both Mutton and Gidney said so but they have other responsibilities. They are not part of CCFC they have to ensure that the Council money is protected and that ACL is successful. Both made it very clear that they want CCFC at the Ricoh. But they cant put ACL at risk just to have the club play its games there, if CCFC goes bust then ACL still needs to survive and they have planned for that nothing more. It is good management.

Clearly Mutton cares about the club he spends good money there personally each season. Neither were disrespecting the fans, but why should they be held to ransom by CCFC. Mutton even said if CCFC went into admin then the new club could use the stadium. CCFC wont go into admin because of ACL though or because of the rent it pays

Fair enough. May have been just the way you put it on here!

Seems you have a rival by the way ^^^^

 

[ashbyjan]

The council represents 300,000 citizens of Coventry - they have to do what is right by all those people not just the 3-4% that go to the Ricoh. If the Council held a referendum to the people of Coventry and said we will add £65 per person to your Council Tax bill and we will buy out SISU do you think the vote would be carried? Of course not - the vast majority of the people the Council represent don't give a toss about the club, if they did more than 10,000 would turn up at the Ricoh. I am assuming the rest of the average 12000 gate comes from outside the City.

 

[kingharvest]

I think his comment about the arena surviving without the club doesn't really tell the full story.

Its not just the direct commercial income they get from the club, but the publicity of the fact that whenever we are in the press/public eye the ground is often mentioned. If we get back to the Prem then that attracts even more publicity.

It also a pretty stupid thing to say to be honest - it could be implied as "so what if the club goes under - it won't bother us, we're fine without them".

 

[oldskyblue58]

ACL in 2010 made a profit of £546K so taking out £1.2m of rent would create a loss. However that takes no account of expenses that may be saved or income from alternative use of the stadium. So to break even ACL would need to save £650k in expenses or get income of £26k per cancelled fixture (assuming 25 days usage for football). Put like that then losing the CCFC income isnt so disastrous.

 

[oldskyblue58]

I think his comment about the arena surviving without the club doesn't really tell the full story.

Its not just the direct commercial income they get from the club, but the publicity of the fact that whenever we are in the press/public eye the ground is often mentioned. If we get back to the Prem then that attracts even more publicity.

It also a pretty stupid thing to say to be honest - it could be implied as "so what if the club goes under - it won't bother us, we're fine without them".

First off both made the comments to set out firmly their bargaining position - they aint for budging. Secondly they have to plan for things that are likely to happen. It is far more likely that the club goes into administration than the Premiership and ACL cannot be sitting there with a great white elephant of a stadium and no income. Of course it bothers them but look at it from their perspective, they have other responsibilities and quite rightly they are protecting their interests. It isnt the councils nor ACL's fault that our club has been badly managed for decades and cant pay its bills

 

[olderskyblue]

ACL in 2010 made a profit of £546K so taking out £1.2m of rent would create a loss. However that takes no account of expenses that may be saved or income from alternative use of the stadium. So to break even ACL would need to save £650k in expenses or get income of £26k per cancelled fixture (assuming 25 days usage for football). Put like that then losing the CCFC income isnt so disastrous.

What does the rental figure actually include? Expenses could be accounted for by the income from all the food etc sold during the game maybe? So they have to clear £26K profit 25 days a season just to stand still profit wise?

Whatever the figures, if depends which way you want to sell it really, as to how you present it. I didn't hear the CWR interview, but if DG had all the figures to hand, i assume he was selective with them?

 

[kingharvest]

I appreciate that - he's not going to come out and say that the success of the Arena is entirely dependent on the survival of the club because that would be equally as stupid.

You're right about the bargaining, but the reality is that a stadium with no football team playing in it is not in itself as attractive. It would essentially be a shit wembley in the midlands.

I tell what would be interesting if the unlikely happened and at some point in the near future the club weren't tenants - is if they could turn it into some sort of second national stadium and expand its capacity, with National matches being played at both venues. Sounds ridiculous but you know, if you wanted an alternative that would appease a lot of the public up and down (well probably just up) the country...

 

[CUS Wyken]

What time was this on Old boy? Wouldn't mind listening to that on the site at lunch

 

[oldskyblue58]

It was on around 8 20 this morning

 

[CUS Wyken]

It was on around 8 20 this morning

Thank you.

 

[torchomatic]

Disrepectful to the 13000 who bother to turn up nowadays, anyway.

Just seems a bit disrespectfull to all the fans.

 

[stupot07]

ACL in 2010 made a profit of £546K so taking out £1.2m of rent would create a loss. However that takes no account of expenses that may be saved or income from alternative use of the stadium. So to break even ACL would need to save £650k in expenses or get income of £26k per cancelled fixture (assuming 25 days usage for football). Put like that then losing the CCFC income isnt so disastrous.

I'm sure someone said that they reinvested a load of money in remodelling works and improvements to the arena like the entrance so their profit wasn't too high and thus avoiding tax.

 

[bamalamafizzfazz]

I appreciate the arguement that they have developed a business even whilst the club has been badly managed but the other side is that without the club in the first place then surely an arena would never have been built.

 

[oldskyblue58]

ACL results 2010

turnover 6,596,506
bank interest received 22,785


wages costs -969,652
rates etc -320,285
depreciation of assets -1,381,033
interest paid -1,111,569
auditors - 23,250
operating leases -79,162
other expenses -2,259,167 (no details but would include contract staff from agencies, light heat, insurance repairs stationery etc)

any improvements to property or fixed assets are not a straight deduction from profits

net profit 546373 on which there was no tax due capital allowances and losses brought forward. They had spent 2.9m on new assets in the year with 805k committed to for 2011

 

[oldskyblue58]

I appreciate the arguement that they have developed a business even whilst the club has been badly managed but the other side is that without the club in the first place then surely an arena would never have been built.

its the old what came first chicken or the egg situation isnt it. Without the Club then there would have been no Ricoh. Without the Ricoh (Higgs/Council) there would have been no club - they had nowhere to go HR had been sold three years before they moved to Ricoh

 

[speedie87]

random question i know and a bit off topic..........

but who does our head groundsman work for.......i read something in the programme the other day that he's reponsible for about 6 pitches including ryton / alan higgs / rioch. Surely ACL must contribute towards the cost of employeeing him and his team / maintaining the rioch pitch?

If not the club should recharge ACL £1m for his services!

 

[Jack Griffin]

The Arena tenancy is not like a zero sum game, it would cost both parties for CCFC to leave, but I think the council has the upper hand in this issue & it knows it.

All this hard talk is posturing, but I agree with the council, keep ownership of the ground out of SISU's hands, SISU are not interested in Coventry one bit, just the bottom line. If they sort the club finances out as a by product of thier ownership then all well and good (even if it hurts in the short term). Personally I think they will go into admin with many unpaid external bills (not owed to SISU) & that will be quite bad for some local businesses, but I'm sure the local businesses understand that could happen & I hope they've planned for the eventuality.

 

[Paxman II]

A City the size of Coventry would be a poorer place without it's football club. The council have some obligation to assist the cities football club in any way it can and up to a certain point for the people of Coventry. We must look at the bigger picture and the historical aspect to understand that more. It is understandable the current ownership of CCFC would not be the ideal people they would want to assist and with that I stand with Cll.Mutton. However the stadium at some point will need to have the cities football club playing there in order for the longer term serviceability of the stadium to be maintained and profitable. ACL would be the first in line to approach the club if we suddenly get back in the big time of the premier league and all that comes with that. It's a two way street and neither side should be looking at this based on the most recent history and shocking management by the current owners at the helm. National and future international coverage through media outlets will be a huge advantage to the city of Coventry and the income streams from visitors and events that it will attract.
Yes they need each other long term and if we can find the investors for the club that are 'fit and proper' which the council and ACL and others see as worthy owners able to buy a share of the stadium or even buy it wholly we might then see a positive outcome for the long term. The council should not be operating a business even under the umbrella of ACL, it is not a councils remit to do so. At the present there remains an impasse and a but a very understandable one.

 

[OyJimmy]

Paxman I'm sure the council would by the club if they thought that we may go into liquidation. But they won't buy the club off Sisu with all that debt. The smart thing would be to let the club go into admin and buy it for a quid plus the inevitable CVA that would follow.

The council probably don't even have to do that. The could simply wait for Hoffman or someone to buy the club for a quid. the problem for Sisu is that no mug would buy CCFC for than a quid and they know it!

 

[Ashdown]

I would take issue with the post that inferred that the affairs of CCFC only really mattered to 3-4 % of the City of Coventry, I think it is considerably more than that, more like as many as 50% in different ways. You cannot just look at todays average attendances to look at the impact of the City losing its 127 {?} year old club. The club is a considerable tourist draw to the City in itself with many thousands of away fans visiting the City up to 25 times in a year, when people visit the football, they spend money in various ways on transport, parking, drinking, food, petrol etc etc. Be interesting to see how many fans feature on the CCFC computer database as well, more than 4%. The council should give this whole affair some serious due diligence and do everything they can to support and promote its sports teams in every way they can...............as for the council tax payers? Do we all specify where our contribution is spent.........of course not!!

 

[WillieStanley]

http://www.ricoharena.com/news.php?id=2894

This link tells you all you need to know about how much ACL need CCFC.

If CCFC ever aquire a piece of the Arena... they should still definately leave it to ACL to run.

On a personal note, I had my wedding reception there in the summer and throughout the whole process of booking and preparing, the staff were highly professional, friendly and constantly went above and beyond the call of duty to ensure that we had the best day ever!! This was in July as the pitch was starting to take form and they even let us have our photos on it as well as me and my groomsmen run out of the tunnel.

... If anyone's interested...

http://youtu.be/MoKqCKNgYv8

 

[Jack Griffin]

Paxman I'm sure the council would by the club if they thought that we may go into liquidation. But they won't buy the club off Sisu with all that debt. The smart thing would be to let the club go into admin and buy it for a quid plus the inevitable CVA that would follow.

The council probably don't even have to do that. The could simply wait for Hoffman or someone to buy the club for a quid. the problem for Sisu is that no mug would buy CCFC for than a quid and they know it!

You are not on planet earth man, the council are not prospective football club owners, a City Council owning a stadium within the city, that's not so unusual.

 

[Paxman II]

Some miss understanding here.
Please read my post carefully. Ashdown is eluding to similar values as myself...

 

[LeamingtonBootBoy]

I agree - That is the only sentiment of their statements i don't agree with. Financially they may not be reliant on the club, but the country's 6th largest city needs it's football club.

Shame they don't show this by turning up to watch '..it's football club...'.

Take out those who come from Leamington, warwick, Stratford, Nuneaton & Bedworth, and I wager that there are about 7-8,000 Coventrians who both to turn up to the home games.

 

[rob9872]

I think that's on the high side mate. I'm from Warwick Gates (ok was born in Cov but not relevant) and I know loads from the surrounding areas who are season ticket holders. I would guess there are probably almost as many outside as from inside the City who regularly attend. The walk ups are would probably be much more likely to be local and they are the ones that need to be given a reason to come back and that reason can only be on field success whatever crap goes on behind the scenes.

 

[rob9872]

ACL results 2010

turnover 6,596,506
bank interest received 22,785


wages costs -969,652
rates etc -320,285
depreciation of assets -1,381,033
interest paid -1,111,569
auditors - 23,250
operating leases -79,162
other expenses -2,259,167 (no details but would include contract staff from agencies, light heat, insurance repairs stationery etc)

any improvements to property or fixed assets are not a straight deduction from profits

net profit 546373 on which there was no tax due capital allowances and losses brought forward. They had spent 2.9m on new assets in the year with 805k committed to for 2011

Depreciation on assets £1.4m??? What am I missing? That surely can't be accurate can it?

 

[Nick]

Does that include players as assets? They lose value if so!