Yeah, it's the rent (10 Viewers)
- Thread starter WillenhallSkyBlues
- Start date
rob9872
Well-Known Member
Are we past the point of no return now, whereby if we go into admin, that we start next season on -10? That would be a real blow - probably intentional. In fact they probably refused to pay last time because we looked like escaping the drop and wanted to remove all the buoyant mood in the days following an anticipated victory over Bristol 
sky_blue_up_north
Well-Known Member
The Ricoh is and has been a noose round our necks since day one. I was build with the promise of premiership football. SISU came in with this promise of investment just at the wrong time with the stock market crash, so we were stuffed. Furthermore a club that does not own its own ground is always going to be in trouble. We have cut back as far as we can on the field and back room staff to the point were we can barely raise a subs bench, no fitness coaches etc. We have nothing else to give. I see another mass sales of players, trouble is most of those that will go are at the end of their current contacts, so no new funds. The problems still go back to Richardson and Robinson, selling Highfield Road and not ring fencing the money. That has cost us dearly, and could cost the club its status in the football league long term. Can the council boot us out, yes, they can. The Ricoh now makes 80% of profits from none football related activities, pretty sure they are not to bothered if we stay or go. Hold on the ride is about the get a whole lot harder.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
As OSB has pointed out on here many times its not just the ground but the revenue streams that we need.
The rent is a huge burden but it was taken on and we can't expect the council to reduce it because we have been mismanaged and exceeded our budgets. If you were skint woudl you expect them to reduce your council tax because you went and got trashed at the weekend?
The councils commitment is to the people of Coventry and not just CCFC (and I live in Warwick so I'm not biased here).
Its unfortanate and it stems from Richardson and his cronies, not just this lot on our current lying, cheating board but all of the others in between who have mismanaged and misrepresented the fans for as long as I can remmeber.
The rent is a huge burden but it was taken on and we can't expect the council to reduce it because we have been mismanaged and exceeded our budgets. If you were skint woudl you expect them to reduce your council tax because you went and got trashed at the weekend?
The councils commitment is to the people of Coventry and not just CCFC (and I live in Warwick so I'm not biased here).
Its unfortanate and it stems from Richardson and his cronies, not just this lot on our current lying, cheating board but all of the others in between who have mismanaged and misrepresented the fans for as long as I can remmeber.
albatross
Well-Known Member
This is a very clever move by SISU. Getting the local authority to tip us over the edge. there are not many organisations that could be more unpopular than SISU but the council could be a contender.
This is a tactic that was advocated by Richard Keyes in his interview a while back. The sky Blues are the only anchor tennant at the Ricoh, other than that it is a white elephant.
The Council will have to negotiate with either SISU or any new owners as the rent is considered too high and there are few alternatives, so a rent cut is going to happen , its just a question of when and with who. However I do not think the council could countenence any agreement with SISU in the current environment. This would be seen (in the press regardless of any accounting truth) as a diversion of taxpayers money when they are making cuts in areas that deliver social services to the most disadvantaged in the area. Coventry city council promore footballers over Homehelp etc.... Much easier to negotiate quietly with new owners and a new business model.
Propping up a Hedge fund and a host of well paid professional footballers in a club that cannot break even should not even be considered dispite how much it means to many supporters.
SISU have been very clever here they have found their fall guy.
This is a tactic that was advocated by Richard Keyes in his interview a while back. The sky Blues are the only anchor tennant at the Ricoh, other than that it is a white elephant.
The Council will have to negotiate with either SISU or any new owners as the rent is considered too high and there are few alternatives, so a rent cut is going to happen , its just a question of when and with who. However I do not think the council could countenence any agreement with SISU in the current environment. This would be seen (in the press regardless of any accounting truth) as a diversion of taxpayers money when they are making cuts in areas that deliver social services to the most disadvantaged in the area. Coventry city council promore footballers over Homehelp etc.... Much easier to negotiate quietly with new owners and a new business model.
Propping up a Hedge fund and a host of well paid professional footballers in a club that cannot break even should not even be considered dispite how much it means to many supporters.
SISU have been very clever here they have found their fall guy.
sky_blue_up_north
Well-Known Member
The Ricoh is certainly not a while elephant. The fact is only 20% of the revenue is from the football club.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Dont have the 2011 ACL accounts with me but in the 2010 ACL accounts it says that there is a rental deposit account at Yorkshire Bank that ACL can draw against in the event of a default. So what happened to that deposit?
The rent isnt paid to the council its paid to ACL. All businesses will complain about costs when times are tough but lets be clear it wasnt ACL, the Council, The Higgs Charity or the fans that got us into this mess. So what if Peterborough pay £500k - look at their ground look at their attendances. We get £110K per game more income on the gate than Posh on current average gates, not saying thats justification for paying more rent but look at the facilities, look at what CCFC actually use at the Ricoh. Then ask why CCFC havent bought into the income streams years ago - they do not have to own the stadium to do it ! It is easy to give throw away lines in newspapers I think you have to look behind that.
The main problem is not the rent it is the value for money we get on the pitch the lack of ambition and any success. Deflects a bit of criticism at a time when we are close to relegation i suppose though - hard not to be cynical isnt it.
Bit damn late to be going on about transparency, discussions about costs and new income streams TF - what have you and previous boards being playing at this is not a sudden or new situation. Lack of income streams has been a problem from day one yet to my knowledge no meaningful talks have taken place to try and secure any of those income streams.
Wrong time to be playing hard ball with ACL i would guess considering the CCFC accounts for less than 17% of ACL income. Yes there is a moral & social side to consider that the Council, ACL & charity must consider but do you not think that over the years all three have not supported that in hard cash already?, do you not think building a modern stadium for a financially useless club did that?, do you not think there is more to Coventry than an under achieving football club with less than transparent owners?
Think I am very close to giving up totally on this club - couldnt manage a piss up in a brewery (on or off the pitch!)
The rent isnt paid to the council its paid to ACL. All businesses will complain about costs when times are tough but lets be clear it wasnt ACL, the Council, The Higgs Charity or the fans that got us into this mess. So what if Peterborough pay £500k - look at their ground look at their attendances. We get £110K per game more income on the gate than Posh on current average gates, not saying thats justification for paying more rent but look at the facilities, look at what CCFC actually use at the Ricoh. Then ask why CCFC havent bought into the income streams years ago - they do not have to own the stadium to do it ! It is easy to give throw away lines in newspapers I think you have to look behind that.
The main problem is not the rent it is the value for money we get on the pitch the lack of ambition and any success. Deflects a bit of criticism at a time when we are close to relegation i suppose though - hard not to be cynical isnt it.
Bit damn late to be going on about transparency, discussions about costs and new income streams TF - what have you and previous boards being playing at this is not a sudden or new situation. Lack of income streams has been a problem from day one yet to my knowledge no meaningful talks have taken place to try and secure any of those income streams.
Wrong time to be playing hard ball with ACL i would guess considering the CCFC accounts for less than 17% of ACL income. Yes there is a moral & social side to consider that the Council, ACL & charity must consider but do you not think that over the years all three have not supported that in hard cash already?, do you not think building a modern stadium for a financially useless club did that?, do you not think there is more to Coventry than an under achieving football club with less than transparent owners?
Think I am very close to giving up totally on this club - couldnt manage a piss up in a brewery (on or off the pitch!)
sky_blue_up_north
Well-Known Member
As SB up north said! Looks like we were both having a pop at Richardson et al
We all keep going on about SISU but who put us in the mess RICHARDSON AND ROBINSON.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
Even if that were true (and I don't believe it is) then they woudl still be bothered. Losing 20% of your income if you can't easily replace it would hurt any company.
With regards to the 80% well yes the ground rent probably does only equate to 20% (or 17% as I think was reported before), but there are so many other streams that are CCFC associated which go into the pot. There are the ground naming rights, the catering and car parking. Also a good chunk of the income would be constant with or without us for the gym, the people who rent the offices, the hotel and the casino and the exhibition hall. Therefore, the market share of what would be lost might represent a small portion of the total, but is significant in terms of what could replace it. I suspect that the 17% was used to demonstrate that ACL could survive without us and they probably could, but given the choice I'm sure they woudl prefer not to.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
I am still waiting to understand how this is Thorn's fault?
I thought his evil hand was on the tiller whenever we're visited by misfortune.....
I thought his evil hand was on the tiller whenever we're visited by misfortune.....
albatross
Well-Known Member
Sky_blue_up_North. The point you make may well be valid but it is easily lost in the "council puts sky blues into Admin" or the "council owned stadium with no football team" headlines that SISU are driving towards.
Both ways the council will either be portaryed as propping up a hedge fund and well paid footballers, or killing the club.
Either way the SISU will not be the villians.
Both ways the council will either be portaryed as propping up a hedge fund and well paid footballers, or killing the club.
Either way the SISU will not be the villians.
Otis
Well-Known Member
There is a link somewhere. just need to find it. :thinking about::thinking about:
Thorn said the players were all tired on Monday and now the money is exhausted.
There you go!!
Thorn's fault!!
sky_blue_up_north
Well-Known Member
I don't think admin is an option for any of the parties involved, they all lose. Someone mentioned the word compromise, that is what we need.
LeamingtonBootBoy
New Member
Agreed. If the club was fan or council owned, then it would be a different matter....however, by reducing/waiving the rent, all the council are doing is diverting the funds of local taxpayers to the balance sheet of SISU.
As much as I would like the council to help out, I don't see how they can in our present ownership structure....
stupot07
Well-Known Member
ACL are now saying that the £1.2m rent only makes up 5% of the ccfc's outgoings and that wages are the biggest problem (obviously).
However the CT estimated that our wage bill had been reduced to around £5m following the departure of king, Westwood, turner, et al.
So of £1.2m = 5%
Wages must be £5-5.5m = 20.1- 22.3% of our outgoings.
Where's the other 70%+ of our outgoing going?
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/coventry -city-fc/coventry-city-fc-news/2012/04/11 /players-wages-to-blame-for-coventry-city -money-woes-not-rent-say-acl-92746-307337 90/
However the CT estimated that our wage bill had been reduced to around £5m following the departure of king, Westwood, turner, et al.
So of £1.2m = 5%
Wages must be £5-5.5m = 20.1- 22.3% of our outgoings.
Where's the other 70%+ of our outgoing going?
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/coventry -city-fc/coventry-city-fc-news/2012/04/11 /players-wages-to-blame-for-coventry-city -money-woes-not-rent-say-acl-92746-307337 90/
Lord_Nampil
Well-Known Member
another problem, when SISU took over the season before we averaged 20,000 now we average 15,000 that drop has to have an impact and as a result there trying to find different ways to cut costs.
In the end we need investment and we need to own part of the stadium, and that is what our future needs. In doing so the Council the club and ACL need to work together, not aginst each other!!!
In the end we need investment and we need to own part of the stadium, and that is what our future needs. In doing so the Council the club and ACL need to work together, not aginst each other!!!
Lord_Nampil
Well-Known Member
LeamingtonBootBoy
New Member
When mediocre players like Carl Baker have a 4-year deal worth £8k a year, are we really surprised the club is in such a mess?
ThisManHere
New Member
If CCFC were to move from the Ricoh Arena the Council would be left with a massive sports stadium just sat doing nothing for what, 360 days a year? I think that might be key to them negotiating with us...
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
cant see how 5% can be right - it is nearer 15% surely ? that would make turnover 8m
Otis
Well-Known Member
As has already been stated, CCFC only account for 20% of the revenue. Plenty of other stuff going on there. It certainly wouldn't be sat there doing nothing.
LeamingtonBootBoy
New Member
Doesn't it make 'only' £2-3 million a profit according to the accounts?
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
First off this is all about brinksmanship..... ACL do not want to see CCFC fail nor do they want CCFC out of the Ricoh. They do want to see some evidence of a well run business with a structured plan for the future. CCFC are calling their bluff saying the rent is driving them out of business and diverting some of the bad press from themselves.
ACL are not reliant on CCFC - they were once but by good business ethics they diversified to ensure that they could not be dragged down by the basket case that is CCFC finances. It would hurt to lose the CCFC income but it would also reduce some major staffing costs etc and there are alternative uses for the stadium that could soften the blow. (all year concert venue, sports centre, other sports teams, exhibition area etc ). They have looked at their tenant, realised it is a poor/big financial risk and acted prudently to cover themselves.
They may defer some of the rent due in order to help out but will rightly require security or something in return. But why should they drop the rent, why should ACL or the city of Coventry pay the price of rank poor decades of mismanagement. Why should they effectively fund the club when SISU investors are refusing to do so. Where is the club's detailed plan to take it forward with some success? unless that transparency is forthcoming why should there be a deal on a new rent. Reduced rent I would suspect would mean the cost of purchasing other income streams will increase and the prospect of owning part of the venture recede further.
This is as usual smoke and mirrors at the club. A club that has failed to operate successfully in the last decade or more. How can they convince ACL to drop rents when they waste money on players like Eastwood, how can they convince ACL to drop the rent when they wont invest in the assets of the club (the players) themselves. How can they convince ACL to drop the rent when they cant at this time confirm they are a going concern - ACL might be left with no club as tenant anyway!
It is not the fault of ACL that CCFC is in a financial mess, and until CCFC address that mess properly with a sustainable future including investment then they will find it difficult to persuade ACL to help them out.
ACL are not reliant on CCFC - they were once but by good business ethics they diversified to ensure that they could not be dragged down by the basket case that is CCFC finances. It would hurt to lose the CCFC income but it would also reduce some major staffing costs etc and there are alternative uses for the stadium that could soften the blow. (all year concert venue, sports centre, other sports teams, exhibition area etc ). They have looked at their tenant, realised it is a poor/big financial risk and acted prudently to cover themselves.
They may defer some of the rent due in order to help out but will rightly require security or something in return. But why should they drop the rent, why should ACL or the city of Coventry pay the price of rank poor decades of mismanagement. Why should they effectively fund the club when SISU investors are refusing to do so. Where is the club's detailed plan to take it forward with some success? unless that transparency is forthcoming why should there be a deal on a new rent. Reduced rent I would suspect would mean the cost of purchasing other income streams will increase and the prospect of owning part of the venture recede further.
This is as usual smoke and mirrors at the club. A club that has failed to operate successfully in the last decade or more. How can they convince ACL to drop rents when they waste money on players like Eastwood, how can they convince ACL to drop the rent when they wont invest in the assets of the club (the players) themselves. How can they convince ACL to drop the rent when they cant at this time confirm they are a going concern - ACL might be left with no club as tenant anyway!
It is not the fault of ACL that CCFC is in a financial mess, and until CCFC address that mess properly with a sustainable future including investment then they will find it difficult to persuade ACL to help them out.
Last edited:
Sumo the Micky Quinn
Well-Known Member
As per usual OSB another TOP POST.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
It is of 100% importance that these bastards are out of the club as soon as possible.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
There's no way baker is on £8k per week.
SkyBlueScottie
Well-Known Member
What else would the stadium (only the stadium) be used for?
Concerts, only viable in Summer.
Rugby Games, how many would they need to attract to the Ricoh, one off games get around the same as a decent sized City attendance. Could the council attract an existing Premiership rugby to do a franchise move? Unlikely as there is no support for the current Rugby team or any other sports team in our city to sustain costs.
So how much would it cost to put a roof on the stadium?
Is there any need for the West Midlands Area to have another exhibition hall?
What would the neighbouring Birmingham council have to say about Coventry council opening a large exhibition very close to the NEC?
mattylad
Member
I was told a couple of weeks ago that the council had stopped talking to the club in any capacity and had instead advised all contact must go through ACL. The club had asked the council to help pay off a loan which they rightly refused.
The club has done this knowing that ACL must give them 30 days notice and so cannot evict them before the season ends however whether we have a team to start next season is unclear and a MK Dons scenario is not out of the question to fill the stadium.
The club has done this knowing that ACL must give them 30 days notice and so cannot evict them before the season ends however whether we have a team to start next season is unclear and a MK Dons scenario is not out of the question to fill the stadium.
LeamingtonBootBoy
New Member
I spoke to Jon Williams who is an adviser to one or two of the younger players (or something similar, didn't understand what he was saying on that), and we were comparing wide players like him to the present crop, and as Baker was on the stage speaking, I pointed to him and said to Williams '...and we have 1 good game in 10 players like Baker...' to which Williams replied '...and another difference is that I wasn't on £8k a week..'. I questioned this with Williams and he reassured me that Baker was on £8k a week.
Is that true or not? I can only relay what I was told.
coundonskyblue
New Member
Pretty sure the Ricoh won an award a few years ago for best exihbition hall in the UK, so it could easily move in that direction.
As for Birmingham council, they have no authority here so they can piss off!