Looks like the rent is not sorted... (1 Viewer)

skyblu3sk

Well-Known Member
Rovers chairman John Ryan offers moral support to Sky Blues after own experiences on stadium rent

A new rental contract recently agreed between the local council at Doncaster and Doncaster Rovers, highlights the huge difference between the rental agreements of the two League One clubs and their respective stadium landlords..

Doncaster Rovers Chairman John Ryan was so concerned by the plight of the Sky Blues and their current rent position that he approached the club's Directors in the Boardroom before Coventry's recent away match at the Keepmoat Stadium with an offer of moral support a well as full details of the Rovers' new 99 year lease agreed with Doncaster Council, which is dramatically different from the £1 million a year rent Doncaster Rovers paid in the Championship. (Rates were not charged to the club). Both clubs were relegated from the Championship last season.

The new rental agreement includes:

- 99 year lease agreement - all assets transferred for £1
- £100,000 per year rent
- Annual rent reduced to £10,000 per year for first 9 years to account for existing naming rights agreement
- A wide range of annual Community obligations included as consideration
- Responsibility for all running costs with exception of insurance contribution
- £75,000 per year contribution from Doncaster Council to insurances
- Full operational control
- A cheque to the Club from the Council for £400,000 for refurbishment of the Keepmoat stadium
- Stadium to maintained in a reasonable condition, fair wear and tear expected
- Permission required from Council for significant changes to structure
- Permission required from Council for changes of use
- A £7000 a year lease for the club training ground
- All food and beverage and stadium income for the club's revenues 365 days a year

Tim Fisher Chief Executive of Coventry City FC welcomed the support of the Doncaster Rovers Chairman in highlighting the massive support of Doncaster Council to their local football club.

"We have to say a big thank you to John Ryan who has been Chairman of Doncaster Rovers for the past 15 years. He has clearly demonstrated that a stadium landlord, in his case the local council, and football club can work together in the interests of the community that both organisations serve. It is obviously an incredible partnership in the interests of the people, not just supporters, and serves as an example to all that a football club and its stadium is a unique community asset which should not be shackled by commercial self interest.

"John Ryan commented that Coventry City were the best side Doncaster has played all season, after our superb 4-1 away victory, but little wonder that they are doing so well on the field near the top of the league, after building an excellent partnership with their stadium landlord off the pitch, to create a solid platform for the future of the club.

"This is the type of business model that we are desperate to agree for the Ricoh in order to create a sustainable future for the club.

"Our negotiations continue to find a solution with ACL that is hopefully in the interests of all parties including ,most importantly, our football club which celebrates 130 years in the city next year serving the community of Coventry which is its lifeblood.

"This city without a football club is unthinkable but we have to be clear about recently leaked information such as reducing the rent to £400,000 a year and other related numbers. This reduced rental figure is for a fixed period of three years - unfortunately that wasn't stated. The overall figure we have been paying since the club came to the Ricoh has been nearly £1.5 million a year including rates and other high charges which are now the subject of a detailed review - far in excess of the Doncaster rent agreement and the average of £170,000 paid by clubs who rent their stadiums in League One.

"We simply want a fair rent which is in line with our League One status and which will enable us to invest more money on the pitch to allow Mark Robins to continue his excellent work . The future of the football club is the important issue here and we need to resolve this situation in order to focus on rebuilding the club back to its rightful position in football," he added.
 

coundonskyblue

New Member
The overall figure we have been paying since the club came to the Ricoh has been nearly £1.5 million a year including rates and other high charges which are now the subject of a detailed review - far in excess of the Doncaster rent agreement and the average of £170,000 paid by clubs who rent their stadiums in League One.

So cost on top of the £1.2m rent are now £300k, yet the other day Joy said they were £400k? Which one is it?

Also I am sick of him mixing up matchday costs with the rent. Both are completely unrelated. Matchday costs would still be there if the club played there for free, just like any other club. Just as we all have to pay for food as well as a mortgage/rent.

We simply want a fair rent which is in line with our League One status and which will enable us to invest more money on the pitch to allow Mark Robins to continue his excellent work . The future of the football club is the important issue here and we need to resolve this situation in order to focus on rebuilding the club back to its rightful position in football," he added

The rent could be set at zero and we still couldn't invest more in the team. As TF favorite subject 6 months ago was FFP, he should know this. He seems to like talking about FFP when its a suitable answer and then ignore it when he's on one of his PR speeches.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
The financial fair play rules cover player costs.......the rent has nothing to do with it IIRC
 

crowsnest

Well-Known Member
The financial fair play rules cover player costs.......the rent has nothing to do with it IIRC

the fair play rules are how much you spend on players as part of your total turnover. As the rent agreement includes extra turnover it has a direct link to FFP.
 
What good would it do for ACL to wind up CCFC? They would only receive a small proportion of what they are owed if CCFC had any assets to liquidate and they will be held by SISU or the company they set up to hold all of the debt. In addition ACL would be in more trouble without the football club as whilst the stadium could exist without CCFC it would only get a fraction of the media exposure it currently does meaning they would lose all sponsorship as well as match day incomes.

That said a deal done by another club with another council is an example of how well that club has been treated by their council, but does not automatically mean Cov Council have to follow that lead, as they are in a difficult position of being asked to give away the money that we give them through council tax, at a time when they are being asked to make massive cuts to their budget.

This has to be sorted now as from the day that a winding up order is issued we would be deducted 10 points and have our bank accounts frozen so this is not a gamble SISU can take with our club when the team is starting to do so well.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
the fair play rules are how much you spend on players as part of your total turnover. As the rent agreement includes extra turnover it has a direct link to FFP.

With all these pie and drink sales we will have a much better squad :facepalm:
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
And we definitely will be paying six times the average rent. :facepalm:

With all these pie and drink sales we will have a much better squad :facepalm:
 

mattylad

Member
have been told its likely to be mid jan by the time a court can enforce and we still have the option to pay right up to the last min or the council to set aside! todays "deadline" was always a bit of a red herring
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
How ironic if it does happen as then ACL will be down by £1.2M every year. What will the "poor" Charity and taxpayers of Coventry do then? What will they do with that big green bit in the middle?

have been told its likely to be mid jan by the time a court can enforce and we still have the option to pay right up to the last min or the council to set aside! todays "deadline" was always a bit of a red herring
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
And what will CCFC do on it next time.SISU decide to shaft us again?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top