if the Ricoh generates £5m a year profit.... (2 Viewers)

[Paxman II]

....is it a no brainer for an investment group to buy it up freehold with the football club as part of the deal?
The stadium cost £110m or there about's. some of that has since been written off by various groups involved previously so how much do the council want for it freehold exactly?
Would it survive with out the profile of a football club in such a large city?
in other words do they need each other?

This nonsense of ACL and the Higgs trust - is it not time for that to end?
Investors want the freehold with all the rights that go with it.
further hotels, restaurants and even a Shopping Mall can be built there.

If the council play their part well then an investment group should be easy for this particular venue....it's the liability of the football club that presents a problem but with the revenue streams generated as owners of the stadium and all that surround it from caino's to hotels and the like then the football club can feed off that easily.

Am I dreaming?

 

---

[We'll_live_and_die]

Am I dreaming?

Quite frankly YES

 

[oldskyblue58]

From the reports that are given the Ricoh venue is a success but doesnt generate the £5m profits suggested. I am not sure having new investors owning it will change the current profitability. To increase significantly may well require substantial investment in additional facilities and infra structure and it is currently a struggle to buy the stadium let alone spend millions developing it.

Certainly SISU controlling the ownership of the stadium is not a prospect that fills me with any great entusiasm or confidence. It is highly likely the Trust and council (who to date have done a more than adequate job with the stadium) will feel similarly about SISU owning it. Yes the club and stadium would seem to go hand in hand but the council cannot risk letting a figurehead facility go either cheaply or to the wrong owner. Not sure why the trust/council ownership is a nonsense.... without them there would be no ground to play at..... Highfield Rd was sold to pay debts and CCFC ran out of money (eerily familiar over the years!).... clearly past management has not been up to the task and I fear present ones arent either

Think the stadium is held on a long leasehold but i could be wrong..... what is for sale potentially is the shares in ACL which would have to reflect not only the current value of the facility but also its successful trading or goodwill (Ricoh stadium is a national brand and will not come cheap)

Not sure what we should expect of the council or how they should play their part. Why should they sell the rate payers of Coventry short just because a group of investors might want to buy the Ricoh. Quite clearly most ratepayers are not CCFC supporters. Not sure how the club would feed off new hotels etc..... most trade will be business and during week days..... there will during the season be limited other use of the stadium arena due to football usage but I suppose better use could be made in the short summer break (regular pitch laying is costly and overuse will affect the pitch).

The purchase will need to be financed which probably means interest on loans and the like. Yes I would like the club to own the Ricoh but I am wary about thinking it will provide CCFC with significant additional funds after finance& other costs. Do they need each other yes but clubs are a little more mobile than they used to be (especially for 1st class stadia already built) so it isnt entirely an arguement for SISU to use of council needs more than they do.

Just wish they would sort it one way or another. Clearly we are not a lot further forward financially as the accounts are still not filed. That i think is important because I believe (might be wrong) what is holding the accounts up is that the auditors have yet to be convinced CCFC is a going concern for at least 12 months from now. Unless that plan/investors is/are in place then it will be hard to sanction a bid for the stadium.

Sorry to be negative in tone but we are way off having the stadium at the moment

PUSB

 

[rob9872]

Can SISU not hold the council to ransom over this? As has been pointed out many times to those who say we should get SISU out and pay for our own stadium, it costs millions to build something suitable that fans don't have. However, what is to stop SISU from finding another site and building their own ground for a fraction of the cost that fits in with a sustainable business plan? We are only tennants.

A franchise can be moved like Wimbledon was to MK Dons, I would hate that to happen to us but if the council/ACL are greedy I have no doubt that SISU would happily leave them with egg on their faces and leave us supporters in no mans land.

I'm sure other councils would jump at the opportunity to regenerate a rundown area and have an influx of visitors spending in their borough every other weekend so permission would be no problem - in fact on that basis they may acquire the land for nothing and build a 15,000 seat stadium for less than £10m. It may not show massive ambition, but would create a platform to make the club a saleable going concern.

 

[TheRoyalScam]

oldskyblue58 = you are a voice of reason in a sea of uncertainty = long may your posts grace this forum!

 

[rob9872]

oldskyblue58 = you are a voice of reason in a sea of uncertainty = long may your posts grace this forum!

Yep totally agree. Almost always something informative in there.

 

[TheRoyalScam]

Can SISU not hold the council to ransom over this? As has been pointed out many times to those who say we should get SISU out and pay for our own stadium, it costs millions to build something suitable that fans don't have. However, what is to stop SISU from finding another site and building their own ground for a fraction of the cost that fits in with a sustainable business plan? We are only tennants.

A franchise can be moved like Wimbledon was to MK Dons, I would hate that to happen to us but if the council/ACL are greedy I have no doubt that SISU would happily leave them with egg on their faces and leave us supporters in no mans land.

I'm sure other councils would jump at the opportunity to regenerate a rundown area and have an influx of visitors spending in their borough every other weekend so permission would be no problem - in fact on that basis they may acquire the land for nothing and build a 15,000 seat stadium for less than £10m. It may not show massive ambition, but would create a platform to make the club a saleable going concern.

I don't think the council are being 'greedy', just sensible.

 

[rob9872]

I don't think the council are being 'greedy', just sensible.

I agree and understand that, but if they price themselves out then SISU are business people with no real interest in us or the club and will only do what is favourable for their investors, so I'm just throwing it out there and raising a genuine concern. I hope they get a fair and market rate but not try to hold out for an unreasonable price because if they do and it back-fires, we all suffer.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Think both can use the arguement Rob, but I think what attracts SISU and certain parties on the board are the non football potential income streams.

I think there is a reasonably tight window of opportunity for SISU to get the deal done. Yes they are tenants, but not sure the length of lease they have for the stadium.... walking away could be expensive. Certainly ACL had a £1m deposit against rent liabilities that they are able to draw against if rents are late.

Isnt just the cost its the time...... a new stadium elsewhere will require planning permissions let alone building, the longer this goes on the more SISU will need to finance or the greater the risk of administration. A 15000 stadium may suit in football terms but is unlikely to be able to produce the other income they seek and should we succeed then will be too small for the Premiership. But I agree moving the franchise is an option

A good level of understanding, commitment and compromise will be needed by all parties for a Ricoh deal to succeed .... not holding my breath over it!

 

[oldskyblue58]

Thanks guys !

 

[sky blue john]

Does anyone think our council would allow planning permission for another stadium which would have a detromental effect on revenue a stadium that the council currently part own ?
I don't know exactly how much income is generated by CCFC for the stadium but I think its 1million a year rent. They obviously benefit from match day parking and food.

 

[Paxman II]

If we owned the stadia and all rights in and around it then new hotels, shops, restaurants etc will be paying us for leasehold premises. That's a major income stream that generates all year round.
ACL are a set up purely by the council to operate the arena. (the council can not do this by law themselves) Clearly ACL will no longer exist if we buy the freehold of the stadia. Equally the Higgs trust would be defunct.
The council have an obligation to sell - it is not council policy or interest to own and operate such facilities. there only interest would be getting back the taxpayers original investment less what others had contributed before they rescued the project and completed it.
It would be in their definitive interest to acquire the cities football club to be there so compromise will be an inevitable part of negotiations too.
peoples think outside the box not just football season and the pitch terms!
Concerts and all other activity have been bring in several million a year. The Ricoh is a resounding success but not one the council should be operating in the longer term.
A deal must be found.
First investors must be found and I'm not talking SISU.
The Ricoh and football club combined would be a seriously interesting proposition for able investors who can even part Finance the stadia from it's income streams and put money into the football club ensuring the success to go with it.

A no brainer.

 

[Disorganised1]

The Higgs Trust is a very large charitable institution and owns much more than just The Ricoh.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Sorry but who is to build all these shops and hotels ? - and just how long would it take to achieve? The area as we all know is not the best placed for access and in reality there isnt a great deal of land available for CCFC to purchase. My understanding is that much of the land surrounding is already allocated to specific developers. Therefore there isnt much available for investors in the ricoh/ccfc to buy. Look at the area do you really think that it would become the entertainment hub for Coventry? Yes Tesco does well but is there room for the quality shops etc I think you have in mind to be viable in the area?.

What is on offer is the shares in ACL - everyone goes on about owning the ground but that is going to be even more expensive than the shares. ACL have a leasehold interest in the land & buildings not the freehold. No the council shouldnt be operating the stadium etc and they dont ACL do, a seperate legal entity into which the council have invested money via other seperate companies. Like any investor they are entitled to a return on that investment. If the council only got back what they invested 7 years ago I would be asking why as a rate payer. They would have done better investing in bonds rather than a successful enterprise they would give away.

You have to look at present income streams too. From the ACL 2010 accounts it seems there are long term tie ups with a hotel chain, and the various stand sponsors not to mention various sporting events (Olympics, Rugby World cup etc). The investors own something that is worth more than the original investment, plus those sponsors and events will have a serious effect on the ability to fit other events etc in.

I agree that the ideal situation is to have the club based at the stadium and one owner of both. However there seems to be general feel of buy the stadium and it will all be rosey - great if that happens but right now nothing is really on the table and increased income is not guaranteed but greater finance costs are. Reality is that the stadium with a successful team would be interesting to a few investors, but CCFC is actually the fly in the ointment of any deal - we are not successful on or off the pitch and require very serious financial input to be so ...... even with the stadium.

It really isnt that straight forward - if it were that good a proposition I think that suitable investors would have been in place by now. Seperating the stadium finances from the football club finances is absolutely essential given past history. I do agree though, it should not be SISU as the owners - they just dont have the vision to carry it through.

Not saying that your idea of the stadium future is wrong or not to be aimed for (I would love to see it to be honest) but there are serious obstacles in the way and even greater cost than just buying the stadium. It might be very much desired especially by the fans but a no brainer I dont think so

 

[oldskyblue58]

Just as an aside

So who does everyone think are the main sponsors of CCFC other than City Link ?

For some reason I always thought CCFC benefitted from the LLoyds pharmacy, CT, Tesco sponsorship. Isnt a logical thought really though is it as we dont own the ground. All that sponsorship goes to ACL per their accounts as does E-on (7 years agreement), Yorkshire bank (8 years agreement), Mercia, Ibex, Hygiene Solutions, Hotel Digital and Carlsberg.

In a similar vein there is a 9 year agreement with De Vere hotels for them to run and expand hotel activities at the Ricoh.

(source ACL accounts for 2010)

Guess it all goes to highlight exactly what it is the club have missed out on. Plus goes to highlight that there is a lot in place that cannot be changed should ownership of the stadium happen.

 

[Paxman II]

Yes I don't disagree with your view but maybe you are not thinking beyond the box? ACL were indeed set up by the council as the body to operate the stadia. Like any lease if the freehold is sold you have a new landlord.
The new landlord would give legal notice to ACL that the lease was ending. Difficult yes but my understanding is that this was never a 'normal' lease agreement as the law would stand. Normally you have a right to assign the lease unless otherwise specifically stated. In other words only a term lease (more akin to a business let) may be in place. How otherwise could a council justify the existence of ACL?
That being said ACL could be taken out of the equation by negotiation. (no matter what companies were set up) It's a very tricky legal situation that the council set up in the first place - one which could be challenged legally.

So again the freehold would be available for a large substantial investor that the council could not ignore.
If you like all the shares could be bought in ACL and then the company closed.
Whichever way you chose make no mistake the investors if found could get the stadia freehold.

The problem will be finding those investors.........

If you have more info oldskyblue please share what you know. This is something no one seems to have full understanding of and to try and understand how the club can go forward needs these details to be released so we can truly understand what investors do have as their options?
I'm throwing out curve balls to set people thinking as too many just seem to think it's all about ACL/Higgs. It's not.

 

[oldskyblue58]

I can see what you are saying. You just know there is a but dont you ........

Latest accounts for ACL show the leasehold property as a 50 year lease dated 2003 purchased from Coventry North Regeneration Ltd (CNRL)(not sure if they own freehold or moved a lease on) That company is a wholly owned by the council. Value in accounts at £21m

Is that a fair value of the freehold land and stadium I wouldnt have thought so but am not a valuer. But that looks to me like the council owns the freehold. It also looks like they can say that they do not run the stadium merely rent out the site. Think we would find Birmingham City Council have a similar set up for the NEC and there would appear to be nothing saying they cant do that. But that aside it says that the council are very much in control of what happens.

There is also an image consideration. Coventry as a city will get a lot of positive publicity from the Olympics and Rugby world cup the council are not going to trust that to someone else with it being so near. Those contracts are with ACL and it is not going to be easy or perhaps desirable for anyone else to have them. Past track record at CCFC points to multiple mismanagement .... lets be honest would you trust CCFC to run those events and to run them to bring Coventry the city the kudos it should gain from it. Quite rightly the council will not commit to anything until they know the stadium has a plan forward and would be in safe hands under new owners

We are looking for an investor or group of investors, to buy the freehold or ACL(21m +), to take SISU (50m), to finance the companies properly (2m) and to provide a team fund to buy players (7M). Not asking for much are we ! Probably £80million! Not many of those investors about thats for sure.

Think the theory is fine, and you dont have to think much out of the box to see it........... practicalities now thats different. That will take shrewd money people who can see the vision, with the drive and where withall to commit, and a passion not only for football but preferably for Coventry (not just the club). A rare breed methinks but anything is possible - but i think something short of all that is what is actually achievable.

If I were Mr Hoffman (were he to try to buy it)and i had some major investors with me, I wouldnt buy CCFC first I would buy the stadium or its leasehold and wait for SISU & co to squeal. It might result in administration heart ache but would result in getting it all much cheaper.

just thinking out loud

 

[Disorganised1]

And thus the big question - why did BR spend millions de-toxifying land he does not own.

 

[oldskyblue58]

dunno cos info i have says that ultimately via three companies or so the council own the land and have title over the lease

 

[oldskyblue58]

Here is what I have found out

ACL is owned by North Coventry Regeneration Ltd and Football investors Ltd (50:50 joint venture)
Football Investors is owned by the Alan Higgs Trust (100%)
North Coventry Regeneration ltd is owned by North Coventry Holdings (100%) (NCR)
North Coventry Holdings and NCR (now)set up to act as landlord for Coventry Council (NCH)
North Coventry Holdings is owned by Cov Council (100%)

ACL runs the stadium and charges CCFC a rent
ACL controls the arena under a 50 year development lease
ACL pays rents to CC Council based on a 10 percentage of profits over £3.75m rising to 50% on profits over £7.75m

NCR has no net assets and no fixed assets
Originally NCR was tasked with finding funding for £113m cost of the stadium project
NCH took over ownership of NCR but still ultimate control is the council

Bottom line the council own the land and stadium and lease it down the line to a management company with a 50 year lease.

Hope SISU have done their research because they did a great job of p***ing off their ultimate landlord. Basically the council control this deal to a great extent.

Have said enough... probably bored many ...... am off for Easter Break.... enjoy the match tomorrow and have a great Easter all!!!

PUSB

 

[TheRoyalScam]

Never boring, olderskyblue58!

 

[SkyBlueScottie]

What makes people think our football club would benefit from Sisu owning the Stadium? PLus it does not make 5 million every year, iirc it struggled to make a million last year.

 

[derbyskyblue]

Here is what I have found out

ACL is owned by North Coventry Regeneration Ltd and Football investors Ltd (50:50 joint venture)
Football Investors is owned by the Alan Higgs Trust (100%)
North Coventry Regeneration ltd is owned by North Coventry Holdings (100%) (NCR)
North Coventry Holdings and NCR (now)set up to act as landlord for Coventry Council (NCH)
North Coventry Holdings is owned by Cov Council (100%)

ACL runs the stadium and charges CCFC a rent
ACL controls the arena under a 50 year development lease
ACL pays rents to CC Council based on a 10 percentage of profits over £3.75m rising to 50% on profits over £7.75m

NCR has no net assets and no fixed assets
Originally NCR was tasked with finding funding for £113m cost of the stadium project
NCH took over ownership of NCR but still ultimate control is the council

Bottom line the council own the land and stadium and lease it down the line to a management company with a 50 year lease.

Hope SISU have done their research because they did a great job of p***ing off their ultimate landlord. Basically the council control this deal to a great extent.

Have said enough... probably bored many ...... am off for Easter Break.... enjoy the match tomorrow and have a great Easter all!!!

PUSB

Not boring at all olderskyblue, very informative.

 

[Paxman II]

That's very interesting oldskyblue. Just about confirms what I say. The council own the place and ultimately must listen to offers if they come their way.

Anything is possible right?
That 50 year lease can be surmounted.

Not sure your figures on SISU are correct though at 50m? More like 35m.

I'm not suggesting the stadia be bought immediately. Controle could be a progressive based deal subject to many clauses and targets being reach. The Olympic stuff and the next year or so could still be under direct (or otherwise indirect!) council control.

Good juicy stuff!

 

[oldskyblue58]

They can listen but they dont have to deal. Thats the point, they dont have to sell...... they own lots of property domestic and commercial this is no different only more prestigious..... they can happily remain as landlord charging a commercial rent. The whole point of the development companies and ACL is to put distance between council and the management of the stadium .... you have to assume thats within the rules for local authorities. You could take out ACL but the best situation the club maybe able to get might be the long lease it would certainly be cheaper than owning the freehold. Simplest way to do that is to buy out the shares in ACL. Still comes back to do the council see that as a good risk ? You cannot force them to sell either their shares in ACL or their freehold

Look at it from the councils view point - They are the landlord of the site they own an asset that forms only a small part of their landbank, that they could gain an income from. If they sell the cash doesnt ease their revenue budget it is allocated to the capital budget. The site reflects well on the City, it has major events coming. It sees a potential purchaser that has been financially inept, likely to be loss making in the coming years, is in turmoil and is not that well supported by the populace of Coventry. They will not be falling over themselves to sell the freehold. They dont have to do CCFC any more favours...... have done enough already.

At present due to the profits not being big enough they dont get their super rent from ACL ....... I would be surprised if that were to be the case dealing direct with CCFC as tenant. Club have had to give ACL a £1m deposit against rents there is nothing that has happened at CCFC that would change the councils view of the risk. That puts the council not an investor in control of this potential deal. Anything other than outright purchase of the site would involve rent from CCFC. But yes anything is possible.

The £50m is a rounding up to what is likely to be the situation on a sale. 2009 was at £24m add a couple of years losses to 31/05/11 say £11 or 12m plus additional funds they claim to be putting in plus losses to disposal. May be on the high side but it wont be a small figure probably £40m plus. Was just a guess. However do you think we would get the freehold of the site for £21m ? I dont

Gradual transfer of control implies a partnership with the partnership with the council - possible yes. Still depends on CCFC and any investors having a proper plan forward and rectifying the club finances. Even Brody says anything on the stadium is 6 to 12 months away, he tends to be over optimistic so i would bet on it being much longer.

Just a thought but say the club get the long lease..... in reality is substantially ownership...... KD said the club used the ground for 93 hours a year but lets say usage is for whole days say 28 days (league, cup and friendlies) for that they pay £1m per year. What does that put the annual rent for 365 days ? £12m ?. Thats important because the rent roll points at the value of the freehold. So say the multiple for any a valuer is a low 6 times of rent roll ..... thats £72m for the freehold! Really not sure freehold is achievable

I agree anything is possible .......... but its the realities and practicalities let alone personalities that will get in the way

However there maybe a potential investor out there that specialises in stadia that has the finance to do the deal but would they invest in CCFC too and be happy for SISU to control the club (SISU keep saying its not for sale). Would need them to buy CCFC otherwise a true commercial rent would have to be charged, something the council/ACL have for the last 7 years taken a view on for the good of CCFC and the City

All we can do is wait and see............. but it isnt going to be quick and that I fear could have serious implications for what CCFC will be able to achieve

Looking forward to the game today ...... football now takes my mind off the mess at the club off the pitch..... soooooooo

PUSB !!!

 

[TheRoyalScam]

Another informative and interesting post, olderskyblue58. Like you I'm just going to enjoy the diamond midfield for the rest of the season and be glad we're not playing hoofball! PUSB.

 

[Paxman II]

They can listen but they dont have to deal. Thats the point, they dont have to sell...... they own lots of property domestic and commercial this is no different only more prestigious..... they can happily remain as landlord charging a commercial rent. The whole point of the development companies and ACL is to put distance between council and the management of the stadium .... you have to assume thats within the rules for local authorities. You could take out ACL but the best situation the club maybe able to get might be the long lease it would certainly be cheaper than owning the freehold. Simplest way to do that is to buy out the shares in ACL. Still comes back to do the council see that as a good risk ? You cannot force them to sell either their shares in ACL or their freehold

Look at it from the councils view point - They are the landlord of the site they own an asset that forms only a small part of their landbank, that they could gain an income from. If they sell the cash doesnt ease their revenue budget it is allocated to the capital budget. The site reflects well on the City, it has major events coming. It sees a potential purchaser that has been financially inept, likely to be loss making in the coming years, is in turmoil and is not that well supported by the populace of Coventry. They will not be falling over themselves to sell the freehold. They dont have to do CCFC any more favours...... have done enough already.

At present due to the profits not being big enough they dont get their super rent from ACL ....... I would be surprised if that were to be the case dealing direct with CCFC as tenant. Club have had to give ACL a £1m deposit against rents there is nothing that has happened at CCFC that would change the councils view of the risk. That puts the council not an investor in control of this potential deal. Anything other than outright purchase of the site would involve rent from CCFC. But yes anything is possible.

The £50m is a rounding up to what is likely to be the situation on a sale. 2009 was at £24m add a couple of years losses to 31/05/11 say £11 or 12m plus additional funds they claim to be putting in plus losses to disposal. May be on the high side but it wont be a small figure probably £40m plus. Was just a guess. However do you think we would get the freehold of the site for £21m ? I dont

Gradual transfer of control implies a partnership with the partnership with the council - possible yes. Still depends on CCFC and any investors having a proper plan forward and rectifying the club finances. Even Brody says anything on the stadium is 6 to 12 months away, he tends to be over optimistic so i would bet on it being much longer.

Just a thought but say the club get the long lease..... in reality is substantially ownership...... KD said the club used the ground for 93 hours a year but lets say usage is for whole days say 28 days (league, cup and friendlies) for that they pay £1m per year. What does that put the annual rent for 365 days ? £12m ?. Thats important because the rent roll points at the value of the freehold. So say the multiple for any a valuer is a low 6 times of rent roll ..... thats £72m for the freehold! Really not sure freehold is achievable

I agree anything is possible .......... but its the realities and practicalities let alone personalities that will get in the way

However there maybe a potential investor out there that specialises in stadia that has the finance to do the deal but would they invest in CCFC too and be happy for SISU to control the club (SISU keep saying its not for sale). Would need them to buy CCFC otherwise a true commercial rent would have to be charged, something the council/ACL have for the last 7 years taken a view on for the good of CCFC and the City

All we can do is wait and see............. but it isnt going to be quick and that I fear could have serious implications for what CCFC will be able to achieve

Looking forward to the game today ...... football now takes my mind off the mess at the club off the pitch..... soooooooo

PUSB !!!

Yep that just about sums things up. Anything with the right group of people and the will to do it is possible. Just don't think it's as one sided though for the council as you may think.
Great debate and very informative for all. :wave:

Perhaps oldskyblue we should debate the managerial position next......you never know the board may be listening!

 

[blend]

Is there still a deal in place for the club to take on the Higgs part of the stadium under certain terms should they wish to?

If so what are the terms and when does the window expire?

 

[oldskyblue58]

as far as i understand blend the option to buy shares of Alan Higgs trust in ACL runs out in 2013 as for how much I dont know. However the info I have is 2 years out of date so it may have changed

 

[oldskyblue58]

Happy to debate anything about CCFC paxman . Very much doubt that KD SISU &co would take a blind bit of notice though!!!!

 

[rob9872]

They would be bonkers not to take up the 50% option if the reported £10m is accurate. Not only will it save £500k per year in rent (since they would be paying themselves) but teh new naming rights in 2015 if at the same level as Ricoh, is £10m so they would effectively get £5m straight back meaning 50% for £5m. That surely has to be massively undervalued in the current market and make good business whatever the club's position.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Isnt quite that easy rob. ACL is still a seperate legal entity and though it seems they are paying themselves the rent and there is a saving, it isnt quite the case. Even owning 50% ACL is a seperate legal entity that has to operate for the benefit of all its shareholders not just some. 50% is not control of ACL in actual fact it is stalemate.

CCFC will still have an obligation to pay £1m to ACL. Owning the shares in ACL would give the right to receive a dividend on those shares (the easiest and probably most tax efficient to take income from ACL) but it does not give the authority to take £500k back out. It could be blocked by the council. Also ACL must legally have £1m in profit reserves to pay the dividend of £500k to CCFC each year even if the council waived their rights to a dividend. Would the council be amenable to CCFC coming in and taking income not reinvesting the stadium - probably not, not sure I would in their position

The naming rights kick in 2015 ..... we dont know what that will be worth or what the economic climate will be like. Certainly the reputation of the Ricoh is greater now than it was (despite CCFC) so there is an arguement for saying the rights are worth more than last time. Also not sure if the funds from that naming would be a one off payment or spread over say the next 10 yrs. With profits above £3.75m the council are entitled to take rent so all the funds will not be available to take back anyway. Also at some point if successful ACL gets to pay corporation tax which will further reduce any funds distributable

Spending £10m on 50% certainly seems like a good idea but with the current state of finances and SISU's lack of enthusiasm to fund properly would the investment of £10m that will probably not earn anything for several years to come be that attractive or even be the thing to do ? It is an option certainly though. Think it only works well in my mind if there is a plan to buy the other 50% soon afterwards