Breaking news about Rent Deal (10 Viewers)

[Manchester_sky_blue]

The cost of the rent is immaterial though, it makes no difference really if its £150k or £1.5 million - SISU are only interested if they can buy the stadium and get their hands on all income streams.

 

---

[DaleM]

Is it 300 total because someone who works there told me the big block in the middle have been reserved by sisu . They have kept 240 back.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The OSB post quoted a few pages back is something that both parties should snap their hands at. Buy access to all revenues and profits from football/events however ownership at least initially remains with Higgs/council.

The money that the stadium makes is what we want, not necessarily the need to develop it-a long lease at cheap rent with this money can put the club in a strong financial position.

 

[italiahorse]

The cost of the rent is immaterial though, it makes no difference really if its £150k or £1.5 million - SISU are only interested if they can buy the stadium and get their hands on all income streams.

What a naïve statement.
The income streams available only amount to £200K max after costs.

Welcome to the party, better late than never.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

What a naïve statement.
The income streams available only amount to £200K max after costs.

Welcome to the party, better late than never.

The profits aren't that big but the turnover they contribute to FFP would be substantial-around £1.1m in 2011/12.

 

[mrtickle]

You are right. People seem to confuse the revenue streams with the profit. I'm sure SISU would like the profit but I reality, the income stream is more valuable with FFP. You could have 10mill revenue stream and make no profit and it would be better Than 1million pound revenue stream which is all profit.

 

[Spionkop]

Brighton/Tickle, that's how understand it too. It relates more to FFP, more than any modest profit.
I still think the figures on catering are cooked. The number of people sinking beer and pies at the ground is amazing, and they aren't cheap.

 

[jesus-wept]

I hope the pies are cooked

 

[hill83]

You are right. People seem to confuse the revenue streams with the profit. I'm sure SISU would like the profit but I reality, the income stream is more valuable with FFP. You could have 10mill revenue stream and make no profit and it would be better Than 1million pound revenue stream which is all profit.

That's basically it. Plus my understanding is it wouldn't just be 'pies' as people like to say. A stake in the Ricoh is a stake in everything the Ricoh does, not just football.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Brighton/Tickle, that's how understand it too. It relates more to FFP, more than any modest profit.
I still think the figures on catering are cooked. The number of people sinking beer and pies at the ground is amazing, and they aren't cheap.

Also, we wouldn't just be talking football-we're also talking other events held at the arena. Few other FL teams have this kind of revenue access and in L1 at least it gives us a potentially huge advantage.

 

[hill83]

Also, we wouldn't just be talking football-we're also talking other events held at the arena. Few other FL teams have this kind of revenue access and in L1 at least it gives us a potentially huge advantage.

With the usual caveat of I wouldn't be comfortable with Sisu having access to this.

I can't believe this still needs explaining to the 'Pie Tax' brigade.

 

[Manchester_sky_blue]

What a naïve statement.
The income streams available only amount to £200K max after costs.

Welcome to the party, better late than never.

Match day revenue streams yes, but ALL combined revenue streams are a lot more with the potential to expand them much further. That's what SISU want, to control every aspect of the stadium, not just matchdays. This has never been simply about the rent.

As has been said above, FFP works on turn over, not net profit so the benefit to the club of controlling the revenue streams is vastly important.

 

[Manchester_sky_blue]

With the usual caveat of I wouldn't be comfortable with Sisu having access to this.

I can't believe this still needs explaining to the 'Pie Tax' brigade.

Once SISU have control of it, they will sell the club and stadium combined

 

[hill83]

Once SISU have control of it, they will sell the club and stadium combined

Hopefully. It's irrelevant anyway, as it's highly unlikely they'll get control of it.

 

[Manchester_sky_blue]

Hopefully. It's irrelevant anyway, as it's highly unlikely they'll get control of it.

Sadly, I concur.

 

[italiahorse]

Match day revenue streams yes, but ALL combined revenue streams are a lot more with the potential to expand them much further. That's what SISU want, to control every aspect of the stadium, not just matchdays. This has never been simply about the rent.

As has been said above, FFP works on turn over, not net profit so the benefit to the club of controlling the revenue streams is vastly important.

Is there not a way of transferring these income streams from ACL as I believe has already been proposed by ACL with some form of cross accounting.

 

[Manchester_sky_blue]

Is there not a way of transferring these income streams from ACL as I believe has already been proposed by ACL with some form of cross accounting.

Maybe once upon a time, I think now though there is too much animosity between the parties to come to an arrangement.

Am I sounding any less naive now?

 

[true sky blue]

weigh it up guys;

something has to give in this problem. one of them have to bend

Sisu do not need to bend, they have nothing to lose, they just go to sixfields and rebuild a ground. not the best situation but it is the way it is.

The Council/acl well, for them it is different, ACL will fold without the club, they need footbal at the arena, without it its a loss making company big style
then there is a judicial review that could and probably will cost the council (and us) millions of pounds to partake in and pay up on.
then there is the problem of the Ricoh and its uses

in short the council need the footbal club in the ricoh more than the football club needs to be in the Ricoh


THE ONLY ANSWER

the coucil sell up or become partners in the ground. that is the only option for them and they know it.

they get nothing and face huge amounts of costs, bills and liquidation of acl should they not sell or share.



Sisu will win this - they wil get there 50% at least on thursday and friday. last hour agreement - after they have all shouted and cried a bit - put your house on it

 

[Manchester_sky_blue]

THE ONLY ANSWER

the coucil sell up or become partners in the ground. that is the only option for them and they know it.

they get nothing and face huge amounts of costs, bills and liquidation of acl should they not sell or share.



Sisu will win this - they wil get there 50% at least on thursday and friday. last hour agreement - after they have all shouted and cried a bit - put your house on it

I agree that is what needs to happen for the greater good of the club and it is only then that SISU will finally sell up and f*ck off.

However, I don't have faith that the council/ACL will swallow their pride and bruised egos and allow it to happen.

 

[lordsummerisle]

It's a shame that the offer made yesterday wasn't made back in January/February, when they made their "final offer and no more negotiation".

Could have avoided the admin(which ACL forced), possibly have kept Robins, and even made the play-offs.

Wonder why on Earth they had to go "nuclear" over such a relatively small amount in the big scale of things, to only offer a much better deal when it's all a bit late, and could have avoided an awful lot of trouble.

If Sisu had turned down the offer back then that was offered yesterday then they would have rightly been excoriated, but don't think that they would have done to be honest, would have left further room, once mutual trust regained, for future negotiations on ownership and revenues etc.

 

[James Smith]

weigh it up guys;

something has to give in this problem. one of them have to bend

Sisu do not need to bend, they have nothing to lose, they just go to sixfields and rebuild a ground. not the best situation but it is the way it is.

The Council/acl well, for them it is different, ACL will fold without the club, they need footbal at the arena, without it its a loss making company big style
then there is a judicial review that could and probably will cost the council (and us) millions of pounds to partake in and pay up on.
then there is the problem of the Ricoh and its uses

in short the council need the footbal club in the ricoh more than the football club needs to be in the Ricoh


THE ONLY ANSWER

the coucil sell up or become partners in the ground. that is the only option for them and they know it.

they get nothing and face huge amounts of costs, bills and liquidation of acl should they not sell or share.



Sisu will win this - they wil get there 50% at least on thursday and friday. last hour agreement - after they have all shouted and cried a bit - put your house on it

And councils can't loan to companies they're part owners of - right. Still waiting to hear the answer to the question you've never answered about council loans (both Swansea and ours) that I asked you in this thread http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/34156-CVA-meeting-today?p=497773&viewfull=1#post497773 post #143

 

[torchomatic]

Couldn't agree more, though I would if I could. In fact, I do agree more.

It's a shame that the offer made yesterday wasn't made back in January/February, when they mad their "final offer and no more negotiation".

Could have avoided the admin(which ACL forced), possibly have kept Robins, and even made the play-offs.

Wonder why on Earth they had to go "nuclear" over such a relatively small amount in the big scale of things, to only offer a much better deal when it's all a bit late, and could have avoided an awful lot of trouble.

If Sisu had turned down the offer back then that was offered yesterday then they would have rightly been excoriated, but don't think that they would have done to be honest, would have left further room, once mutual trust regained, for future negotiations on ownership and revenues etc.

 

[Buster]

weigh it up guys;

something has to give in this problem. one of them have to bend

Sisu do not need to bend, they have nothing to lose, they just go to sixfields and rebuild a ground. not the best situation but it is the way it is.

The Council/acl well, for them it is different, ACL will fold without the club, they need footbal at the arena, without it its a loss making company big style
then there is a judicial review that could and probably will cost the council (and us) millions of pounds to partake in and pay up on.
then there is the problem of the Ricoh and its uses

in short the council need the footbal club in the ricoh more than the football club needs to be in the Ricoh


THE ONLY ANSWER

the coucil sell up or become partners in the ground. that is the only option for them and they know it.

they get nothing and face huge amounts of costs, bills and liquidation of acl should they not sell or share.



Sisu will win this - they wil get there 50% at least on thursday and friday. last hour agreement - after they have all shouted and cried a bit - put your house on it

WRONG Sisu have a lot to lose
Five years losing money and a 30 million pound stadium that minimal supporters will visit. The deal they have been offered is vastly better than the one they came in on. It's finally sinking in that FFP and revenue streams is their mantra to capture the stadium for peanuts. If they don't agree on Friday with a little bit of tooing and froing I would back ACL all the way to not sign and go for Sisu's testicles. For the "Buster Family" if they say yes on Friday they will have our support for the next ten years, if they don't, until they are gone, they won't see me again.

 

[CCFC_GT]

The truth of it is that it isn't at all one-sided, and both sides potentially have a lot to lose.

 

[true sky blue]

And councils can't loan to companies they're part owners of - right. Still waiting to hear the answer to the question you've never answered about council loans (both Swansea and ours) that I asked you in this thread http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/34156-CVA-meeting-today?p=497773&viewfull=1#post497773 post #143

i did answer you. your just not listening to anyone but you. they cant loan to a business simply to fight off sisu, thats unlawful, it is not a regeneration loan

 

[TheParsonsHose]

The only revenues we really have in big numbers are the fans..... If SISU take the deal with a break clause or even a rolling contract based on the terms then surely its better to keep the fanbase. Losing the fan base by moving to Northampton will destroy just about the only revenue of significant importance to this club.

 

[true sky blue]

The truth of it is that it isn't at all one-sided, and both sides potentially have a lot to lose.

with respect GT it is a bit more one sided to sisu than it is to the council. the judicial review is huge .. why are they making it a priority do you think?

 

[CCFC_GT]

with respect GT it is a bit more one sided to sisu than it is to the council. the judicial review is huge .. why are they making it a priority do you think?

It may be no more so than SISU making the CVA a priority before the first meeting when ACL made no pre-conditions, and I don't expect either of us are informed enough or qualified to make a judgement on that.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

It's a shame that the offer made yesterday wasn't made back in January/February, when they made their "final offer and no more negotiation".

Could have avoided the admin(which ACL forced), possibly have kept Robins, and even made the play-offs.

Wonder why on Earth they had to go "nuclear" over such a relatively small amount in the big scale of things, to only offer a much better deal when it's all a bit late, and could have avoided an awful lot of trouble.

If Sisu had turned down the offer back then that was offered yesterday then they would have rightly been excoriated, but don't think that they would have done to be honest, would have left further room, once mutual trust regained, for future negotiations on ownership and revenues etc.

I can see your point.

So why didn't ACL make this offer all those months ago? My guess is that it was because firstly they thought that the offer they'd made was already good enough and perhaps secondly because they'd concluded that SISU had no real intention of reaching an agreement.

So why change now? Again my guess, would be because of the all round nuclear option that was played out as the alternative scenario.

So we can conclude that ACL's revised offer is a success for SISU's tough negotiating stance can we?

Well we can, unless we take note of the collateral damage - the 10 point deduction that some think cost us the play offs (a view I don't share, by the way), the transfer embargo, the legal fees and the administrator's fees (certainly well into the hundreds of thousands of pounds), the break costs on the Northampton contract (if we stay at the Ricoh and if we believe TF's comments on the contract), the loss of sponsorship and last but not least the ill will that the whole debacle has brought about.

Let's hope that we do end up at the Ricoh for the new season, but whatever the outcome, I can't see that there have been any winners in this saga.

 

[italiahorse]

I think the deal in L1 L2 is at a loss.
Once we get to the Championship the 400K will be profitable.
A little bit of an incentive for everyone.

If they turn it down I think Crawley will be my last game. ;(

 

[true sky blue]

It may be no more so than SISU making the CVA a priority before the first meeting when ACL made no pre-conditions, and I don't expect either of us are informed enough or qualified to make a judgement on that.

i know about judicial reviews and local governement law. and i know the 14 million pound loan was completely unlawful. and a waste of public funds

 

[James Smith]

i did answer you. your just not listening to anyone but you. they cant loan to a business simply to fight off sisu, thats unlawful, it is not a regeneration loan

No you didn't answer why where all parties have agreed with the loan in both cases, Swansea is different from us. Who said the £14M was to fight off SISU? Only Young Timothy has made any noises in that direction by cliaming but not producing any evidence that they were in it with the council.

 

[mark82]

It's a shame that the offer made yesterday wasn't made back in January/February, when they made their "final offer and no more negotiation".

Could have avoided the admin(which ACL forced), possibly have kept Robins, and even made the play-offs.

Wonder why on Earth they had to go "nuclear" over such a relatively small amount in the big scale of things, to only offer a much better deal when it's all a bit late, and could have avoided an awful lot of trouble.

If Sisu had turned down the offer back then that was offered yesterday then they would have rightly been excoriated, but don't think that they would have done to be honest, would have left further room, once mutual trust regained, for future negotiations on ownership and revenues etc.

Exactly. There always has been 2 sides of this mess and ACL are equally to blame.

 

[Johnnythespider]

So if they managed to get it down to like £75,000 and then spent more on players and invested it in the club / team, would that not be classed as an amazing bit of business?

This is what i don't get, there are many on here who tell us that the Ricoh can't survive without the football club, but they seem to believe that it can if the club are allowed to play there for nothing. Both scenario's result in no money for ACL yet one breaks there business and one doesn't, i don't get it !!!

 

[true sky blue]

No you didn't answer why where all parties have agreed with the loan in both cases, Swansea is different from us. Who said the £14M was to fight off SISU? Only Young Timothy has made any noises in that direction by cliaming but not producing any evidence that they were in it with the council.

of course the 14 mill was to fight off sisu. why do you think the judicial review is underway??? think