ACL £1m profit? (11 Viewers)

[Mucca Mad Boys]

That's why there is a huge shortage of social housing now.

Exactly, that's why they've said it's a failure.

 

---

[torchomatic]

So, do I. Worked for 31 years, paid my taxes. Struggle to meet the mortgage and feed my family because I earn the same as I did 7 years ago. However, I don't begrudge help for those that are less fortunate, because even though it's a personal struggle I still think I'm fortunate and thankful for what I do have.

I gues iff someone else says it then it must be right and I must change my opinion? As someone who has always worked and never claimed and who struggles to meet all of my commitments but do so and legally, I begrudge people being given hand-outs and houses - often because they simply don't want to work for it themselves or have a family they can't afford and expect it to be everyone elses problem. I was brought up that if I wanted something I had to work for it and it's a pity many don't share those values.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Oh great a generalist who assumes someone that has a particular opinion fits into a particular categoryt. Tired lazy criticism often repeated (dare I say at risk of being a hypocrite even more of the Daily Mail reader trait that you try to highlight?)

Hi!

With what you just said, it's hard to imagine you don't read The Sun or Daily Mail. The vast majority who use the benefits system need it. Furthermore, the Welfare State is only merely buying Capitalism time.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

SBT - as I have pointed out previously ACL have offered CCFC their share of the profits of the match day f&b profits from the joint venture IEC for free. Their share is 80% and is valued at around £100k. They have also offered to cross invoice the revenue to CCFC to help their FFP calculations. Fail to see how much extra the club wants. Also under the proposed deal the club would receive 900 car park spaces for free - revenue worth around £150k. So thats £250k for free and help with FFP - hardly the actions of an organisation that doesn't care about the football club.

But that isn't what others were proposing though was it? CCFC should have 100% f+b revenues (your post appears to have it at 80%?) for free.

 

[lordsummerisle]

I gues iff someone else says it then it must be right and I must change my opinion? As someone who has always worked and never claimed and who struggles to meet all of my commitments but do so and legally, I begrudge people being given hand-outs and houses - often because they simply don't want to work for it themselves or have a family they can't afford and expect it to be everyone elses problem. I was brought up that if I wanted something I had to work for it and it's a pity many don't share those values.

It's certainly worked well the social engineering over the last 30 years or so, blame the poor for being poor as there must be something wrong with them, and if fairly poor yourself despite working hard all your life, blame the people below you, never look to your masters above.

It's never been about White v Black, Muslim v Christian, English v European, or any of the obvious suspects.

It's rich v poor, nothing else, always has been, and always will, across all ethnicities, nationalities and religions, and as usual the rich are winning.

 

[ashbyjan]

So you see the survival of the club hinging on £20k of pie sales? If we are in such a parlous state, which I doubt, then we really are in trouble. That 20% is not ACL's to give away - it belongs to a third party.

 

[rob9872]

It's certainly worked well the social engineering over the last 30 years or so, blame the poor for being poor as there must be something wrong with them, and if fairly poor yourself despite working hard all your life, blame the people below you, never look to your masters above.

It's never been about White v Black, Muslim v Christian, English v European, or any of the obvious suspects.

It's rich v poor, nothing else, always has been, and always will, across all ethnicities, nationalities and religions, and as usual the rich are winning.

I don't have any masters - I am everybody's equal (not in the George Orwell sense)

 

[rupert_bear]

Haven't read all these threads but so what if ACL made a million proffit, thats what business strives to do isn't it. Just say ACL give in and let sisu rent for whatever they see is the correct figure. What does that give the football club ? How much of the ACL proffit comes from attendences and catering a fortnight. Other incomes come from conferences, exhibitions, rent from the casino, concerts etc,etc. and all that plus the footie side only comes to a million (is that before or after tax?}SISU are telling us they are putting in 6million to sustain the football club so the Ricoh figures hardly dent that.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

So you see the survival of the club hinging on £20k of pie sales? If we are in such a parlous state, which I doubt, then we really are in trouble. That 20% is not ACL's to give away - it belongs to a third party.

I never said that did I.

Also, it isn't just 20k is it, if attendances are high next season that figure could be doubled as with the other 100%.

If it's such a small figure, why do ACL need it?

 

[rob9872]

With what you just said, it's hard to imagine you don't read The Sun or Daily Mail. The vast majority who use the benefits system need it. Furthermore, the Welfare State is only merely buying Capitalism time.

If it's hard for you to believe then that's your lookout as it's wrong!

The vast majority are capable of working for it - and a lot could help themselves by not spewing out kids. We have one daughter. I would like more children but we made a concious decision not to because we can't really afford to and it would potentially mean moving house for more space a tighter squeeze on the purse strings and possibly my daughter missing out on things. Lots of other would be parents choose a different course and they are entitled to but I still fail to see why I should pay for that decision.

Where is the incentive to work for 40 hours to get eg £200 per week if they can get £150 p/w for doing nothing? Make them earn it and all of a sudden that £50 to try and better themselves seems far more appealing.

 

[coundonskyblue]

<p>

Exactly, that's why they've said it's a failure.

You dont agree with working class people being allowed to buy their own homes?

Typical left wing surpression of ordinary people.

 

[lordsummerisle]

Haven't read all these threads but so what if ACL made a million proffit, thats what business strives to do isn't it. Just say ACL give in and let sisu rent for whatever they see is the correct figure. What does that give the football club ? How much of the ACL proffit comes from attendences and catering a fortnight. Other incomes come from conferences, exhibitions, rent from the casino, concerts etc,etc. and all that plus the footie side only comes to a million (is that before or after tax?}SISU are telling us they are putting in 6million to sustain the football club so the Ricoh figures hardly dent that.

Nobody is saying that ACL shouldn't make a profit, just pointing out that the club and ACL are interdependent on each other, that million pound profit would have been a loss for that accounting year without the club's rent.

 

[torchomatic]

It's nothing to do with working class people not being able to buy their own homes. It was selling off the Council House stock ridiculously cheap which has now caused a massive shortage of social housing. It was shortsighted, not left wing.

<p>

You dont agree with working class people being allowed to buy their own homes?

Typical left wing surpression of ordinary people.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

With respect Andy, the two are not the same thing. I do not want us to go under, and I don't believe we will in any case - but the council can force SISU out here if they stick to their guns, so it is to CCFC's benefit that they force the issue.

It still strikes me as a bit off to hope for winding up orders against your own club. Cutting your nose off to spite your face almost.

 

[coundonskyblue]

<p>&lt;p&gt;

It's nothing to do with working class people not being able to buy their own homes. It was selling off the Council House stock ridiculously cheap which has now caused a massive shortage of social housing. It was shortsighted, not left wing.

</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>It was selling them off cheap to people who had already spent thousands in rent over the years. Why didn't your glorious labour government use the boom years to build more social housing?

 

[lordsummerisle]

<p>

You dont agree with working class people being allowed to buy their own homes?

Typical left wing surpression of ordinary people.

Of course they and anybody else should be entitled to buy their own homes.

Just not social housing, unless it is replaced, which it very rarely is.

Merely enriched the BTL crowd and people pay so much in rent for somewhere to live that they can't afford to buy a home unless some huge multiple of income is allowed for a mortgage with little or no deposit.

Which is where the seeds of the financial crash of 2008 were sown.

 

[lordsummerisle]

<p>

It was selling them off cheap to people who had already spent thousands in rent over the years. Why didn't your glorious labour government use the boom years to build my social housing?

Strange, I thought you were against Sisu getting Council accomodation cheaply despite paying millions in pounds of rent for it?

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Just for CCFC revenue rights!? Are you dizzy blue? (Don't worry I don't actually speak like that, but seriously, are you having a laugh!)

We sold our share for 6m! Which gave up revenue rights from other events not just CCFC f+b rights, CCFC should get 100% f+b rights because no CCFC fans, no CCFC games, no revenues.

If they can't give this up, then it's difficult to see how they're not greedy...

Yet you want it back for free, that's quite ridiculous! 6M minimum, surely?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Nobody is saying that ACL shouldn't make a profit, just pointing out that the club and ACL are interdependent on each other, that million pound profit would have been a loss for that sccounting year without the club's rent.

The blunt truth is that if we were successful on the pitch we would not be worrying about matters off it. Higher crowds, higher league status, and the revenue that comes from both would put ACL out of anyone's thoughts.

 

[SkyBlueWomble]

The selling off council houses isn't the problem. Not using the proceeds to build new social housing is the problem and moreover the chronic lack of house building in the past couple of decades has caused prices to rise due to a lack of supply.

Selling the houses to the tenants had to be "cheap" as the tenants would still probably be living in them now. The tenancy was for life at a below market rental which is why they were sold at a price below what an equivalent house would sell for free of such a tenancy.

 

[coundonskyblue]

<p>

Strange, I thought you were against Sisu getting Council accomodation cheaply despite paying millions in pounds of rent for it?

Sisu have to earn that right. The British workers earned that right over the last 200 years.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

If it's hard for you to believe then that's your lookout as it's wrong!

The vast majority are capable of working for it - and a lot could help themselves by not spewing out kids. We have one daughter. I would like more children but we made a concious decision not to because we can't really afford to and it would potentially mean moving house for more space a tighter squeeze on the purse strings and possibly my daughter missing out on things. Lots of other would be parents choose a different course and they are entitled to but I still fail to see why I should pay for that decision.

Where is the incentive to work for 40 hours to get eg £200 per week if they can get £150 p/w for doing nothing? Make them earn it and all of a sudden that £50 to try and better themselves seems far more appealing.

I don't believe in a 'Welfare State' because it's a capitalist reaction. There would be no need for it if everyone had a job, which is possible in a planned economy, economies work at their best when they are planned, ironically, the champions of the 'free market', benefitted most (it essentially propelled them to the superpower they are today) from a 'command economy' as opposed to a 'demand economy'.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Yet you want it back for free, that's quite ridiculous! 6M minimum, surely?

Some argue that ACL have had more than there fair share of revenue from CCFC.. But the decision to sell the rights was poor..

 

[lordsummerisle]

<p>

Sisu have to earn that right. The British workers earned that right over the last 200 years.

Good luck with social housing 200 years ago, the British worker earned the right to affordable social housing after the Second World War, which is why they voted for a Labour government, didn't vote to have it all sold off so that property speculators could make money from the lack of it.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

The blunt truth is that if we were successful on the pitch we would not be worrying about matters off it. Higher crowds, higher league status, and the revenue that comes from both would put ACL out of anyone's thoughts.

It's a catch 22 situation unfortunately we don't have owners that can just throw money at us to make us successful, we need the higher crowds and the finances to make us relatively successful..

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Yet you want it back for free, that's quite ridiculous! 6M minimum, surely?

Well as Jan kindly highlighted (which I already knew from past posts) ACL have already offered 80% for free, so am I being ridiculous?

I think you're misunderstanding the point, my point was purely for revenue generated at CCFC games, not other events held organised by ACL, we also sold the rights to that too.

6m or a figure in-line with inflation should be what CCFC should be able to buy back their 50% share in ACL.

 

[coundonskyblue]

<p>

I don't believe in a 'Welfare State' because it's a capitalist reaction. There would be no need for it if everyone had a job, which is possible in a planned economy, economies work at their best when they are planned, ironically, the champions of the 'free market', benefitted most (it essentially propelled them to the superpower they are today) from a 'command economy' as opposed to a 'demand economy'.

Planned economies, reminds me of that joke Ronald Regan told after visiting Ussr. A Russian goes to buy a car, after paying for it the dealer says "Come back in 10 years and your car will be ready", the customer asks "shall I come back in the morning or afternoon?", the dealer asks "does that matter? Its 10 years away", the customer replies "well the plumber is coming that morning!"

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

It's a catch 22 situation unfortunately we don't have owners that can just throw money at us to make us successful, we need the higher crowds and the finances to make us relatively successful..

The owners' finances aren't important when it comes to L1 FFP-it's all about the club's turnover. If we sell 20,000 STs and get a 10k walk up every week we'd be able to outspend every other team.

 

[lordsummerisle]

The blunt truth is that if we were successful on the pitch we would not be worrying about matters off it. Higher crowds, higher league status, and the revenue that comes from both would put ACL out of anyone's thoughts.

Share in revenues would help everybody though, fans, club and ACL.

Would certainly be more incentive to offer very cut-price tickets if shortfall from ticket prices could be offset against increased income from larger crowds.

 

[coundonskyblue]

<p>

Good luck with social housing 200 years ago, the British worker earned the right to affordable social housing after the Second World War, which is why they voted for a Labour government, didn't vote to have it all sold off so that property speculators could make money from the lack of it.

There was social housing about 30 years before ww2.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Well as Jan kindly highlighted (which I already knew from past posts) ACL have already offered 80% for free, so am I being ridiculous?

I think you're misunderstanding the point, my point was purely for revenue generated at CCFC games, not other events held organised by ACL, we also sold the rights to that too.

6m or a figure in-line with inflation should be what CCFC should be able to buy back their 50% share in ACL.

80% of the F+B profits, not ACL itself!

 

[RoboCCFC90]

The owners' finances aren't important when it comes to L1 FFP-it's all about the club's turnover. If we sell 20,000 STs and get a 10k walk up every week we'd be able to outspend every other team.

Also I would run through West Orchards in my pants and the Queen would be pregnant but none are likely...

 

[coundonskyblue]

<p>

Also I would run through West Orchards in my pants and the Queen would be pregnant but none are likely...

Last time we won this league our average was over 26k

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Share in revenues would help everybody though, fans, club and ACL.

Would certainly be more incentive to offer very cut-price tickets if shortfall from ticket prices could be offset against increased income from larger crowds.

Think you're missing the point. The rent and revenue was never deemed a problem in the Championship until SISU mismanagement got us relegated to an even worse league.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Also I would run through West Orchards in my pants and the Queen would be pregnant but none are likely...

I'm illustrating the point that the more fans buy STs or turn up on the day, the more we can spend on players. 20,000 sold at an average of £300 each brings in £6m before the season even starts.