Swansea seals new lease deal on the Liberty Stadium (8 Viewers)

[italiahorse]

No actually as usual nothing like you said. The Loan wasn’t paid off until after the purchase of both Higgs and the council share was it? In May?

Are you suggesting that there was collusion and this was part of an initial agreement? That explains the low purchase price but contradicts council statements at the time of purchase.

Are you saying the council collided with wasps behind taxpayers and lied to them?

You say you are in the know so it must be true.

Who is the source for this?

No the loan was ACL's and hence the responsibility of Wasps.
They then released the bonds and used that to buy out the loan from CCC.

Your a fool saying it was a low purchase price after continually saying it was worthless.
You need to make your mind up.

Your getting confused and need to read up the details.

 

---

[italiahorse]

£24m was for F&B courtesy of Mr Gidney....

Keep up

I understand that. But surely thats part of negotiation of any long term deal and may be reduced in a full deal.
Is £24M a fair price particularly if it's for the full term of the lease ?
Certainly the club can't expect it for nothing ?

For Info....................

20: Has the club ever tried to repurchase the additional income sources from ACL?

ACL: No – its policy to date is to demand these for nothing.

CCFC: Last year Daniel Gidney, the then CEO of ACL offered CCFC the full match day revenue streams for a one off payment of £24 million, this was dismissed out of hand

 

[Nick]

Are you really asking if £24m is a fair price for matchday revenues?

The desperation is quite funny though.

 

[italiahorse]

Are you really asking if £24m is a fair price for matchday revenues?

The desperation is quite funny though.

Tim Fisher said that figure. I have no idea if it's correct or not.
I have no idea if £24M is a fair price as I don't know how long it's for and what it includes.
I would sooner reserve judgement rather than take his word for it like yourself. That is desperate but not unexpected.

Eventually a deal will be made (Post Sisu) and that will include revenues and certainly CCFC will need to buy into them if they want a reasonable income.

 

[Nick]

Tim Fisher said that figure. I have no idea if it's correct or not.
I have no idea if £24M is a fair price as I don't know how long it's for and what it includes.
I would sooner reserve judgement rather than take his word for it like yourself. That is desperate but not unexpected.

Eventually a deal will be made (Post Sisu) and that will include revenues and certainly CCFC will need to buy into them if they want a reasonable income.

The irony is you come on here repeating propaganda word for word constantly.

We keep hearing what is eventually going to happen, that is where people have been in your ear feeding you shite constantly.

It's pretty easy to work out £24m for our matchday revenue is a bit excessive.

 

[italiahorse]

The irony is you come on here repeating propaganda word for word constantly.

We keep hearing what is eventually going to happen, that is where people have been in your ear feeding you shite constantly.

It's pretty easy to work out £24m for our matchday revenue is a bit excessive.

I'm quoting info available and showing it. (Above)
If its easy to work out, whats the details ?
You hear a figure on here and run with it forever.

 

[Grendel]

No the loan was ACL's and hence the responsibility of Wasps.
They then released the bonds and used that to buy out the loan from CCC.

Your a fool saying it was a low purchase price after continually saying it was worthless.
You need to make your mind up.

Your getting confused and need to read up the details.

Er no the loan was the councils at the time of purchase and the loan was a cost to the ACL business. The shareholder value of purchase was £5.4 m

That was the agreement at the time of purchase. Your prior post implies you have a source in wasps heirarchy and they told you that there was an agreement in place they would take the loan after purchase

This contradicts the councils stated position at the time

So for clarity can you confirm is this what you were told?

 

[italiahorse]

Er no the loan was the councils at the time of purchase and the loan was a cost to the ACL business. The shareholder value of purchase was £5.4 m

That was the agreement at the time of purchase. Your prior post implies you have a source in wasps heirarchy and they told you that there was an agreement in place they would take the loan after purchase

This contradicts the councils stated position at the time

So for clarity can you confirm is this what you were told?

You need to show the source if you quote them.
Pointless discussing figures you pluck out of mid air.

Where have I implied there was an agreement ?

 

[Nick]

I'm quoting info available and showing it. (Above)
If its easy to work out, whats the details ?
You hear a figure on here and run with it forever.

I think that it would be close to 4 times what was paid for the whole thing just for our matchday revenues shows it isn't really the best deal. (Bare in mind we were paying over a million a year in rent too at the time).

I can understand demanding a chunk of money if CCFC wanted access to 365 stuff like concerts they would need to buy in.

 

[italiahorse]

I think that it would be close to 4 times what was paid for the whole thing just for our matchday revenues shows it isn't really the best deal. (Bare in mind we were paying over a million a year in rent too at the time).

I can understand demanding a chunk of money if CCFC wanted access to 365 stuff like concerts they would need to buy in.

Agree it appears steep particularly against the rent at the time.
But for access to incomes (above a share of Wasps cut) they will need to be bought into.

 

[Grendel]

It was a agreed formula price I guess about £8M at the time.
Obviously the £25M? includes the outstanding loan that ACL had and Sisu didn't want, but Wasps took on.

Here - the formula price related to the purchase of the Higgs share of ACL not f and b rights

You said sisu didn’t want the loan and wasps took it on. At the point of purchase of the company they didn’t that is not true and the purchase price had nothing to do with taking on the loan

This quote has nothing to do with the F and B rights at all

 

[oldskyblue58]

Not going to get greatly involved in this thread and go through the same old same old yet again

NW raises some pertinent and valid questions. Cost of an all weather pitch is? 200K? 300K? Suddenly its not so cheap. Taking on the up keep and development will be costly, and I find the term short for what they (SCFC) are trying to do. It is on the face of it is a good deal for the Council who I assume retain the freehold

Couple of other points

The Gidney conversation and quote was a corridor conversation between TF and Gidney I believe. My understanding is that the £24m was never a negotiating position of the ACL board of directors of which Gidney was but one member. Pretty certain Gidney said it but equally I do not think he had the authority to take it forward. Makes a nice headline, indicates a reluctance to sell to CCFC, but I personally don't get hung up on the figure quoted, it had no real substance I believe.

Yes the formula indicated CCFC could buy back at around £10m. That formula was never enacted, in fact once CCFC got in to debt to ACL it couldn't be. Discussions with the charity subsequently agreed a much lower figure before the deal broke down

Wasps bought the company shares from CCC and AEHC. In doing that they had no choice but to take on the loan due to CCC by ACL. There was no special arrangement. The value of the Wasps deal was 5.4m not 19m. The loan formed part of the valuation of the shares that Wasps purchased.

 

[tisza]

Stand to be corrected but the difference also comes from how the 2 stadiums were developed.
Wasn't Swansea's financed by developing land next to the stadium and not taking on a large loan?
Ours was hampered by not having the proper finance in place to start with and the council taking on large loan to complete the project. Rental was then based on meeting loan repayments rather than what was a fair rent for what was on offer.

 

[italiahorse]

Stand to be corrected but the difference also comes from how the 2 stadiums were developed.
Wasn't Swansea's financed by developing land next to the stadium and not taking on a large loan?
Ours was hampered by not having the proper finance in place to start with and the council taking on large loan to complete the project. Rental was then based on meeting loan repayments rather than what was a fair rent for what was on offer.

Yes Liberty stadium was funded from the adjacent retail park.
Ours was also but there was a shortfall.
The Ricoh cost a lot more. £118M. Liberty Stadium £27M.
Both Councils still retain the freehold.

Ricoh for info ....

Council Arena Construction Completion Report £118,677,000 build cost Purchase:

Land purchase £24,000,000

Land related costs £19,074,000 (decontamination cost & infrastructure £17m)

Construction & fitting costs £ 75,603,000

Paid for by:

Sale to Tesco £59,420,000 (land owned by CCC bought from British Gas)

CCC equity £10,000,000

CCC funding of overspend £2,947,000

Prudential borrowing £21,000,000 (repaid by ACL lease premium)

European Regional Dev Fund £4,374,000

Advantage west Midlands £4,800,000

Isle of Capri £5,900,000

Received from CCFC (shares in Football investors ltd) £1,758,000

Other £8,478,000

 

[Captain Dart]

There is certainly no great sign of cooperation, it is more like being f

Stand to be corrected but the difference also comes from how the 2 stadiums were developed.
Wasn't Swansea's financed by developing land next to the stadium and not taking on a large loan?
Ours was hampered by not having the proper finance in place to start with and the council taking on large loan to complete the project. Rental was then based on meeting loan repayments rather than what was a fair rent for what was on offer.

It was a complete cock up by the board of CCFC embarking on the project without having the necessary investment to guarantee its completion or even pay their contractors on time and subsequently losing their option on the land to them. They (the contractors) quit the project and took the land (at the price agreed with BG) and flipped it to the council for about £20M making a tidy profit, that is where all the problems stem from and why there was a £20M black hole the Council have now passed on to Wasps. SISU never wanted to get involved in that debt unless they could get away with discharging it at a fraction of the full amount.

Deja Vu anyone?

 

[fernandopartridge]

The apparent £113m build cost for the Ricoh is way out of kilter. Appreciate the clean up of the gasworks and excavation for the casino + the exhibition hall were additional features and cost but the numbers do not stack up when compared with similar facilities.

 

[chiefdave]

Not going to get greatly involved in this thread and go through the same old same old yet again

I hope you've got this saved somewhere so you can just cut and paste it every time people conveniently 'forget' some of the details.

 

[tisza]

https://democracy.swansea.gov.uk/documents/s38959/09 1 of 2 - LIBERTY STADIUM-CABINET-NOV17.GLB.pdf

swansea deal

 

[wingy]

The apparent £113m build cost for the Ricoh is way out of kilter. Appreciate the clean up of the gasworks and excavation for the casino + the exhibition hall were additional features and cost but the numbers do not stack up when compared with similar facilities.

I reckon it just about stacks up ,assume the Jaguar hall came in around £18M
Now there is absolutely no way the Club should have ended up funding any of that without a stake.
That should have been CCC/ACL territory.

 

[italiahorse]

The apparent £113m build cost for the Ricoh is way out of kilter. Appreciate the clean up of the gasworks and excavation for the casino + the exhibition hall were additional features and cost but the numbers do not stack up when compared with similar facilities.

With the initial management mess up the club effectively only put in £2M and obtained 50% of ACL. Obviously the club being there was deemed as a value to be given the 50%.

Full complex construction and fit out was £75M
Are there comparable stadiums ?

 

[wingy]

Did any of the Casino infrastructure and the floor beneath that come under the construction cost. I think the bowl on it's own was only a couple of mill more than the Kingpower.

 

[wingy]

In fact the Jaguar hall equates to roughly what the shortfall ended up being.
Why didn't they just mothball it till the time was right?

 

[italiahorse]

Did any of the Casino infrastructure and the floor beneath that come under the construction cost. I think the bowl on it's own was only a couple of mill more than the Kingpower.

As discussed many times, other incomes are essential to compete in the Championship and PL.

 

[tisza]

Yes Liberty stadium was funded from the adjacent retail park.
Ours was also but there was a shortfall.
The Ricoh cost a lot more. £118M. Liberty Stadium £27M.
Both Councils still retain the freehold.

Don't think the Council own the freehold to the Tesco part. Was sold to Tesco for 42m + paying the decontamination costs 17m.
Ricoh cost close to 60m. Relative build costs in terms of capacity & facilities aren't so far apart.
Swansea council had owned the land the Liberty was built on already.
Also their Chairman has said it could cost up to 50m to increase their capacity to around 30k.

 

[SkyBlueZack]

Didn't ccc only put £10 million in? The rest came from Tesco and grants etc? Who received the Ricoh naming rights money?

 

[italiahorse]

Don't think the Council own the freehold to the Tesco part. Was sold to Tesco for 42m + paying the decontamination costs 17m.
Ricoh cost close to 60m. Relative build costs in terms of capacity & facilities aren't so far apart.
Swansea council had owned the land the Liberty was built on already.
Also their Chairman has said it could cost up to 50m to increase their capacity to around 30k.

Yes I meant just the stadiums. Tesco own their land.

 

[Covstu]

Pointing the finger at nobody in particular, do we have to do this *again*?

Anyway, the Swansea deal on the surface looks OK, but I have a few questions. Once upon a time I'd have found out the answers, but now I'll just ask them...

Is the headline figure of £300k pa absolutely fixed, or is it linked to inflation / can it be renegotiated?

Is there a break clause in the contract?

Ospreys have the right to play there, but they now appear to be very much tenants on a purely play here and nowt else basis. In multi-use stadia there are winners and losers and it seems Ospreys are the losers here. The ground was built as much for them as Swansea and, just because Swansea have risen recently, it seems a bit harsh to squeeze the rugby team with nowt but a promise that they'll carry on playing there.

37 years is not that much all things considered. It won't be *that* many years before there's a limited time on the lease and as we know, that causes uncertainty. If Swansea fall down the divisions (entirely possible) does it put *them* under threat from property developing carpetbaggers later on, or a revitalised Ospreys who then squeeze Swansea?
agree there is clearly more to this deal that the highlights don't show. Are they in danger of falling down a similar trap to us in terms of relegation and are there any clauses which a renegotiated rate is required?

I think 37 years is fairly short term agreed but I would question the responsibility of upkeep and remodelling of the stadia. Take the Ricoh, its looking very tired and worn after less than half of this term so again does the public pick up this or does the club in line with their commitments?

I work in Swansea a lot and know a few ST holder and they are very positive about their relationship with Ospreys but have similar discussions about pitch and equally branding of stadium.
Does sole control mean they're responsible for repairs / expansion etc?

Swansea have to complete two 3G pitches every five years for how long? What consitutes 'access' for the public?

I wouldn't automatically say it's a fabulous deal.

 

[italiahorse]

Didn't ccc only put £10 million in? The rest came from Tesco and grants etc? Who received the Ricoh naming rights money?

The majority of the money here comes from the land purchase.

CCFC could not afford to purchase it (£20M) and let the option to buy lapse.
The dutch contamination company (HBG) who were owed money by CCFC found out the option had not been taken when they tried to get their money.
They agreed a contract with Brit Gas to buy it and then said to the council you need to buy it or we will build retail and the stadium is gone.
CCC paid £20M and sold half of it to Tescos for £60M that weekend. (How the hell we messed this up is the big question)

 

[tisza]

Yes I meant just the stadiums. Tesco own their land.

ok then people have to keep the 59m out of the 113m price assumptions.
So people should focus on the 54m cost. How a situation arose (even after subsidies & selling further parts to Capri etc) that nearly 40% of that cost was funded by loans?

 

[Captain Dart]

The majority of the money here comes from the land purchase.

CCFC could not afford to purchase it (£20M) and let the option to buy lapse.
The dutch contamination company (HBG) who were owed money by CCFC found out the option had not been taken when they tried to get their money.
They agreed a contract with Brit Gas to buy it and then said to the council you need to buy it or we will build retail and the stadium is gone.
CCC paid £20M and sold half of it to Tescos for £60M that weekend. (How the hell we messed this up is the big question)

I believe the contract completed with BT was the one Richardson had negotiated for CCFC to buy land for about £2M.

 

[Ian1779]

Perhaps if we'd had a bit more support from the council to stay at Highfield Road we wouldn't be in this shitstorm.

 

[SkyBlueScottie]

Shows what you get when you're willing to sign a long term lease.

What does the tax payer get in return for Wasps signing a long term lease?

 

[wingy]

What does the tax payer get in return for Wasps signing a long term lease?

Quite a whack in rates I'd guess?

 

[SkyBlueScottie]

Quite a whack in rates I'd guess?

Nah, they were before Sisu challenged them!

 

[italiahorse]

ok then people have to keep the 59m out of the 113m price assumptions.
So people should focus on the 54m cost. How a situation arose (even after subsidies & selling further parts to Capri etc) that nearly 40% of that cost was funded by loans?

The figures are above.
I believe the £21M loan was the shortfall at the end so can be effectively attributed to kitting out the whole complex.