ACL £1m profit? (10 Viewers)

[Grendel]

a couple of days ago in another thread I wrote:

Someone asked how the rental was arrived at: in the final years at HR the lease plus costs was c£900,000. The cost of lease and licence at the Rioch followed that model. It was signed off by Robinson and Brannigan for the Club and Fletcher and McGuigan on behalf of ACL. It had been agreed by the Boards of both ACL and CCFC.

and it is BT who disrupt my internet connection without the need for anybody else's help.

Nice to see the connection is live and well.

So do you think our rental arrangement is the most punitive in the entire football league. You are of a charitable disposition so I would appreciate your view FROM the football clubs perspective.

Also is the contract without exclusion? It never was under the prior interested party. So do I apologise or not?

 

---

[torchomatic]

There you go, Hugh.

The rent is fair. Can you argue against that by any means other than the misleading "league one average" delusion?

Not against accepting the lower, offer.

 

[torchomatic]

And what about fans like you who'd rather see the club go under?

To listen to Torch, you would think ACL are ripping the club off and screwing us over by insisting on prompt payment of a contractually agreed rent.

If we allow fans like this, we are letting SISU off the hook from the criticism they deserve.

 

[CJparker]

Yes, he's said that too. He has an unbelievable attitude towards the club he supports.

So you think I am obliged to support anything that pupports to help the club, regardless of who else is affected? I am a human being first and a fan second.

Sorry. I support Coventry City the team, i.e. Murphy, Baker etc - I do not support CCFC Ltd, SISU Capital, or whatever their bullshit tax-avoiding umbrella is called this week. Get it? I do not support their actions and I do not trust them, I want them out, and if that means taking the club to the brink of destruction then so fucking be it.

 

[Sick Boy]

I'm not unhappy with a rent reduction - it is a very generous offer that clearly the club should accept.

What I am unhappy with, is our supporters living in delusion land by blaming other people/organisations for our own failings.

There is only one entity responsible for our current situation - SISU. Get them out now.

And I'm not in a world of my own, how the fuck dare you write that.

So the previous regimes have no responsibility for the club's current problems? You think that before sisu came along we were in a good state, with better owners?

 

[CJparker]

And what about fans like you who'd rather see the club go under?

Please post when I ever said I would like to see us go under.

I don't.

But I would be happy to run it close if that would get rid of SISU.

 

[CJparker]

So the previous regimes have no responsibility for the club's current problems? You think that before sisu came along we were in a good state, with better owners?

I said "current situation" on purpose Sick Boy.

Our previous regimes were shite too - but SISU have had 5 years to turn things around and have just made things so much worse

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I'm not unhappy with a rent reduction - it is a very generous offer that clearly the club should accept.

What I am unhappy with, is our supporters living in delusion land by blaming other people/organisations for our own failings.

There is only one entity responsible for our current situation - SISU. Get them out now.

And I'm not in a world of my own, how the fuck dare you write that.

Nobody else on here defends Thorn so vociferously, wants the club to be wound up, thinks Jamaican internationals should play for England, or compares Thorn to Hill (a statement so ludicrous it's insulting to the latter). Those are just a few examples and I am not wrong in stating that you're the only person who carries such views.

You're also wrong to state that SISU are solely to blame for this mess-that mantle belongs to Richardson and McGinnity for a) racking up enormous debt only to get relegated, and b) selling our stake in ACL (which would have avoided all of this), to pay off said debt. It is they who ruined this club long before SISU even got close.

 

[CJparker]

Should we at least make the revenue streams our fans generate at CCFC games?

Yes, 100-200k would make a difference, with the 808k reduction.

In any commercial negoation between 2 parties, when one side agrees a concession, the other side normally matches it in another way. There is normally a trade-off.

In this case, it seems to be ACL who are expected to make concessions, but SISU are not willing to make any. SISU are just demanding free money essenially, by asking for a big slice of a pie they do not own, for nothing in return.

Surely, on that basis, you can see why ACL are reluctant? What's in it for them?

 

[coundonskyblue]

In any commercial negoation between 2 parties, when one side agrees a concession, the other side normally matches it in another way. There is normally a trade-off.

In this case, it seems to be ACL who are expected to make concessions, but SISU are not willing to make any. SISU are just demanding free money essenially, by asking for a big slice of a pie they do not own, for nothing in return.

Surely, on that basis, you can see why ACL are reluctant? What's in it for them?

Hard to disagree with that really.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

The rent is fair. Can you argue against that by any means other than the misleading "league one average" delusion?

Not against accepting the lower, offer.

Your argument was flawed from the second ACL offered a 50% reduction, yet you still defend your untenable position.

Since you compare SISU to the Nazis, how about I make this comparison:

You're like a holocaust denier defending their position when it is quite clear the holocaust happened. Then, you, like David Irwin who'll say no one challenges him as his defence, yet is all to obvious to have happened! Face it pal, ACL even think the rent is too high and your 'defending' a position that doesn't exist.

 

[CJparker]

Nobody else on here defends Thorn so vociferously, wants the club to be wound up, thinks Jamaican internationals should play for England, or compares Thorn to Hill (a statement so ludicrous it's insulting to the latter). Those are just a few examples and I am not wrong in stating that you're the only person who carries such views.

You're also wrong to state that SISU are solely to blame for this mess-that mantle belongs to Richardson and McGinnity for a) racking up enormous debt only to get relegated, and b) selling our stake in ACL (which would have avoided all of this), to pay off said debt. It is they who ruined this club long before SISU even got close.

AT did a good job with no support from the board, and didn't deserve the sack - he was the most popular CCFC manager I have ever known, for good reason (also see your Jimmy Hill reference)

I don't want the club to go under - I never said that. I just want SISU out and if the council have to get tough to do that, then so be it.

I hadn't realised that Englishman, English-born, English-raised Marlon King would be eligible for a foriegn nation, let alone play for them. Excuse my fucking ignorance

I didn't state that SISU are the only bad owners we have had - just that they are solely responsible, after 5 years of ownership, for the current situation.

 

[CJparker]

Your argument was flawed from the second ACL offered a 50% reduction, yet you still defend your untenable position.

Since you compare SISU to the Nazis, how about I make this comparison:

You're like a holocaust denier defending their position when it is quite clear the holocaust happened. Then, you, like David Irwin who'll say no one challenges him as his defence, yet is all to obvious to have happened! Face it pal, ACL even think the rent is too high and your 'defending' a position that doesn't exist.

ACL offered the reduction to try to keep their tenant and to help CCFC - it is not evidence that "the rent was too high" - it patently is not.

Please can you tell me which private sector organisation would let me rent a specifically built facility which cost £20m-£30m for £100k p/a? Go on, the silence is defeaning...nobody has a clue.

You can attack me all you like, call me insults like here, but it doesn't alter the fact you have no argument other than "we want what is good for CCFC"

 

[torchomatic]

Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!

Please post when I ever said I would like to see us go under.

I don't.

But I would be happy to run it close if that would get rid of SISU.

 

[CJparker]

Your argument was flawed from the second ACL offered a 50% reduction, yet you still defend your untenable position.

Since you compare SISU to the Nazis, how about I make this comparison:

You're like a holocaust denier defending their position when it is quite clear the holocaust happened. Then, you, like David Irwin who'll say no one challenges him as his defence, yet is all to obvious to have happened! Face it pal, ACL even think the rent is too high and your 'defending' a position that doesn't exist.

If anyone is denying anything, it is you sunshine. CCFC seems to have fans who think that we are owed special terms as a club just by the very fact of our existence. Why shouldn't ACL make a profit, they don't owe us anything.

Why shouldn't ACL charge £1.2m p/a? It's their stadium and we agreed the terms (perfectly normal terms in the private sector BTW). It's all just pathetic bleating and name calling because you can't get your way, it reminds me of a load of primary school children.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

AT did a good job with no support from the board, and didn't deserve the sack - he was the most popular CCFC manager I have ever known, for good reason (also see your Jimmy Hill reference)

I don't want the club to go under - I never said that. I just want SISU out and if the council have to get tough to do that, then so be it.

I hadn't realised that Englishman, English-born, English-raised Marlon King would be eligible for a foriegn nation, let alone play for them. Excuse my fucking ignorance

I didn't state that SISU are the only bad owners we have had - just that they are solely responsible, after 5 years of ownership, for the current situation.

The current situation is that we have our bank account frozen because we have refused to pay rent for nigh on a year and have no access to F+B income. We pay rent and have no access to F+B income because we sold our stakeholding in ACL under McGinnity, to pay off debt incurred by 'let's have a punt' Richardson.

Therefore, the current situation is a direct consequence of those actions nearly 10 years ago. Get it?

 

[CJparker]

Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!

Come on Torhch, time to put your money where you mouth is...can you give any substantive responses to anything I have posted, or just poke fun?

 

[CJparker]

The current situation is that we have our bank account frozen because we have refused to pay rent for nigh on a year and have no access to F+B income. We pay rent and have no access to F+B income because we sold our stakeholding in ACL under McGinnity, to pay off debt incurred by 'let's have a punt' Richardson.

Therefore, the current situation is a direct consequence of those actions nearly 10 years ago. Get it?

Agree with all that, but SISU have had 5 years to improve things and just made things worse - that's plenty of time, the fact we are in this situation is now is their fault alone.

 

[thegameaintstraight]

So please enlighten us. What is the truth?

Many religions consider perfect knowledge of all truth about all things to be an attribute of a devine or supernatural being.
Grendel for God?
Heaven forbid.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Agree with all that, but SISU have had 5 years to improve things and just made things worse - that's plenty of time, the fact we are in this situation is now is their fault alone.

I agree that they have contributed significantly to this mess CJ but I don't believe that it is entirely down to them. Richardson fecked this club over so much that even after more than a decade since he left, we are still feeling the effects of his tenure-this did not start with SISU. You are right to say that the way they have managed on and off field matters has been poor (and you'll see plenty of my posts on here in support of that), but to say it is entirely SISU to blame is inaccurate.

 

[CJparker]

I agree that they have contributed significantly to this mess CJ but I don't believe that it is entirely down to them. Richardson fecked this club over so much that even after more than a decade since he left, we are still feeling the effects of his tenure-this did not start with SISU. You are right to say that the way they have managed on and off field matters has been poor (and you'll see plenty of my posts on here in support of that), but to say it is entirely SISU to blame is inaccurate.

We all know about the damage done by BR in particular - but I just think 5 years is enough time to put things right. Remember, when SISU arrived and they had a3 year plan for Premier League football? What happened to that? We all felt it was achievable at the time, so surely SISU must take the blame for the failure?

 

[torchomatic]

Bryan Richardson is more culpable for our current plight than any other owner or person., including SISU. He is the source of it all.

I agree that they have contributed significantly to this mess CJ but I don't believe that it is entirely down to them. Richardson fecked this club over so much that even after more than a decade since he left, we are still feeling the effects of his tenure-this did not start with SISU. You are right to say that the way they have managed on and off field matters has been poor (and you'll see plenty of my posts on here in support of that), but to say it is entirely SISU to blame is inaccurate.

 

[CJparker]

Bryan Richardson is more culpable for our current plight than any other owner or person., including SISU. He is the source of it all.

See post above Torchy - I do agree he fucked us up a lot, but SISU have had 5 years now and should have turned it around.

How are you getting on with providing substantive replies to the actual questions I posed?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

We all know about the damage done by BR in particular - but I just think 5 years is enough time to put things right. Remember, when SISU arrived and they had a3 year plan for Premier League football? What happened to that? We all felt it was achievable at the time, so surely SISU must take the blame for the failure?

You're confusing SISU with Paul Fletcher on that 3 year plan. SISU take the blame for getting us another relegation, and the heavy decline in crowds as a result (which has led directly to a major drop in revenue). They do not, however, take the blame for signing the deal which lumbered us with having to pay rent on the ground with no access to matchday income, and as that is essentially why the current dispute exists, Richardson is the man to be blaming. Fisher has behaved totally unreasonably, and SISU have made huge mistakes on and off the pitch, but they are not the ones who signed away the rights we now crave.

 

[CJparker]

Once again Andy, I maintain that if SISU had been canny in 2007 when they were the only show in town to save CCFC then, they could have knocked a big chunk out of the rent back then, and still kept in everyone's good books.

if they had played it better, they could have agreed a better deal on the ground years ago.

If they hadn't alienated the shareholders, they might have been able to buy the Ricoh.

It's no accident that we are in 2013 and still with the 2005 Ricoh settlement - they have had years to change it. Sorry to keep repeating the same point, but it is very important. It's like governments who have been in office for years blaming the previous government for failings - after a while, that excuse stops working.

 

[coundonskyblue]

You're confusing SISU with Paul Fletcher on that 3 year plan. SISU take the blame for getting us another relegation, and the heavy decline in crowds as a result (which has led directly to a major drop in revenue). They do not, however, take the blame for signing the deal which lumbered us with having to pay rent on the ground with no access to matchday income, and as that is essentially why the current dispute exists, Richardson is the man to be blaming. Fisher has behaved totally unreasonably, and SISU have made huge mistakes on and off the pitch, but they are not the ones who signed away the rights we now crave.

Paul Fletcher was the most horrible slippery character going imo.

High flyer in the Ricoh project while it was being built and deals being signed, not a word out of him.

Lands himself a job at CCFC and all of a sudden the council should give away the stadium.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Paul Fletcher was the most horrible slippery character going imo.

High flyer in the Ricoh project while it was being built and deals being signed, not a word out of him.

Lands himself a job at CCFC and all of a sudden the council should give away the stadium.

His 'Operation Premiership' was not only horrendously cringeworthy but its failure cemented our inability to no longer financially compete with most of our Championship peers.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Once again Andy, I maintain that if SISU had been canny in 2007 when they were the only show in town to save CCFC then, they could have knocked a big chunk out of the rent back then, and still kept in everyone's good books.

if they had played it better, they could have agreed a better deal on the ground years ago.

If they hadn't alienated the shareholders, they might have been able to buy the Ricoh.

It's no accident that we are in 2013 and still with the 2005 Ricoh settlement - they have had years to change it. Sorry to keep repeating the same point, but it is very important. It's like governments who have been in office for years blaming the previous government for failings - after a while, that excuse stops working.

Don't disagree with much of that CJ. Let's not forget that the option to buy back the Higgs' share has been there from the get-go and when it's gone, anybody with the finance to do so will get their hands on it. Ranson said that it would not solve all of our problems-which is implicit recognition from him at the time that the rent was not perceived to be a significant issue. If we want to avoid having to pay rent at all, and to ensure access to F+B, then we have to find a way to buy up that option before it expires.

 

[Grendel]

a couple of days ago in another thread I wrote:

Someone asked how the rental was arrived at: in the final years at HR the lease plus costs was c£900,000. The cost of lease and licence at the Rioch followed that model. It was signed off by Robinson and Brannigan for the Club and Fletcher and McGuigan on behalf of ACL. It had been agreed by the Boards of both ACL and CCFC.

and it is BT who disrupt my internet connection without the need for anybody else's help.

Interesting how you are so happy to continue to preach to the deluded and converted.

Still I ask again;

Are the rental arrangements the most punitive for a football club in the English Professional League?
Please advise on the contractual obligation of the main sponsor if the football club exits. Is there an exit clause?
With no football club what in your expert opinion is the likelihood of obtaining a named sponsor post 2015
As a regeneration charity how do you feel your conduct sits with a similar organisation that previously had an interest in a football club

Hope the connection is up now

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

In any commercial negoation between 2 parties, when one side agrees a concession, the other side normally matches it in another way. There is normally a trade-off.

In this case, it seems to be ACL who are expected to make concessions, but SISU are not willing to make any. SISU are just demanding free money essenially, by asking for a big slice of a pie they do not own, for nothing in return.

Surely, on that basis, you can see why ACL are reluctant? What's in it for them?

For starters, how can anyone assume what concessions have been made, since no one here has sat in on these negotiations.

I'll give you an example, 400k agreed rent, Fisher, Joy and co. hinted they wanted the league average (150/213k) and I'm guessing ACL wanted to keep the rent as high as possible, like any tenant, so SISU and ACL have BOTH compromised at 400k.

I don't think their demands have been unreasonable, the club should have the right to earn F+B its fans make at its events, and I think the 400k figure should be backdated from when we stopped playing, or at minimum, from when we got relegated, I do not think it is fair if the club has to pay for rent in the Olympic months because the club weren't able to use it.

SISU aren't in a position to make concessions, what concessions can they actually make!? ACL however, surely cant be oblivious to the fact CCFC have to compete within FFP boundaries so need to save every penny, so I'm guessing our high earners who are out of contract will leave at the end of the season unless they accept big pay cuts.

What's in it for them? Well, since they are half owned by the council, it would be best to give CCFC a rent agreement which would allow the club to more competitive in the transfer market so if we secure promotion and do better in the Championship, more away and home fans will come to the surrounding areas on match day allowing that area to boom, as an employee at the Arena Pizza Hut, I can tell you that our branch benefits massively and there is a correlation to how busy Pizza Hut gets on match day and the attendance at the RICOH. 1st leg in the JPT v Crewe, the restaurant was absolutely pack, Aresley and Morecambe, however, relatively dead compared to a standard Saturday and speaking to a college of mine, who has been there since 2005, said the restaurant used to "rammed" with CCFC shirts.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Why does taking up the option to buy the Charity shares get us immediate access to income streams ? The shares still only buy you the right to dividends - that hasnt changed, nor does it mean only paying half the rent

You would be better off simply buying the rights to income streams. The option is not really relevant

Also no one is going to jump in to acquire the shares come 2015 because the stakeholders will not sell to just anyone and who ever (whenever) they do then those purchasers will need a proven track record relevant to the site together with significant funding to the whole project

 

[psgm1]

Taken from twitter:

KevinReide (Kevin Reide)

#ccfc #pusb Arena Coventry Ltd who operate the Ricoh Arena, has just filed accounts showing profit of over one million pounds: £1,086,886


Can someone verify?

That's got to be a blow to CCFC, I wonder if they have recognised the rent owed or provided against it.

This just shows that the Ricoh is no longer totally reliant on the club paying its rent. Hopefully this will make SiSU see the light and fook orf

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Why does taking up the option to buy the Charity shares get us immediate access to income streams ? The shares still only buy you the right to dividends - that hasnt changed, nor does it mean only paying half the rent

You would be better off simply buying the rights to income streams. The option is not really relevant

Also no one is going to jump in to acquire the shares come 2015 because the stakeholders will not sell to just anyones and who ever (whenever) they do then those purchases will need a proven track record relevant to the site together with significant funding to the whole project

It's a very lucrative opportunity for the right partner though, surely? The Ricoh has established itself as a national success of a venue and I can only assume interest in getting part of it would be high for anyone with the financial backing to do so.

 

[lordsummerisle]

This just shows that the Ricoh is no longer totally reliant on the club paying its rent. Hopefully this will make SiSU see the light and fook orf

No it doesn't, it's from the year when they were paying the rent.

 

[PWKH]

Grendel
I am sorry that I seem to have made you angry.
As I do not know what other Club's arrangements are I cannot pass judgement. I can probably safely leave that to you.
I can assure you that the sponsorships that have been renewed will remain in place, and that includes Ricoh. I am afraid it is true that it is not all about football. Without CCFC the place will surely be emptier and sadder and in need of sport. If it happens it will be an incredibly sad day.
I haven't a clue what you are on about: "a similar organisation that previously had an interest in a football club". If this some kind of clever hint at the Higgs Charity: it will just be another one of your guesses designed to throw some mud in the hope that it sticks.

That's it. I have answered what I can. I will let you get back to your baseless comments as I shut my machine down.