1000% we would be charged rent - how else would the costs of stadium ownership be funded. If Sisu determined that ownership of the stadium and 100% of all the would add 3m a year to revenues then they could afford to double rent payments... that rent could be securitised to provide the funding to purchase.... or maybe we could sell some bonds (too soon!?)
In all seriousness though an Property Company for the stadium is a given, and a rental payment to that company gives that company "value" that can be mortgaged etc. So long as the company belongs to the same group then no concerns...
Isn't that what Richardson thought?