I've long thought that there could be some truth in this. Perhaps somebody versed in company law cud shed light?
how long do you think ccfc will be financially viable for otium/sisu? (31 Viewers)
- Thread starter intercity
- Start date
I've long thought that there could be some truth in this. Perhaps somebody versed in company law cud shed light?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Answer me this.
Your business is in turning around loss making companies.
these loss making companies are as liable to fail as to succeed.
if you were minded to load your toxic debts onto a company, in an ethically dubious and borderline legal way... why on earth would you choose the company in your portfolio with highest public profile to do so, thus drawing most attention to your practices?!?
Your business is in turning around loss making companies.
these loss making companies are as liable to fail as to succeed.
if you were minded to load your toxic debts onto a company, in an ethically dubious and borderline legal way... why on earth would you choose the company in your portfolio with highest public profile to do so, thus drawing most attention to your practices?!?
CarpyCov84
New Member
What I wanna know is - who the Hell are their creditors & what's their thinking about these doughnuts constantly Fucking everything they touch up ???
I can't prove it ... I rely on OSB58 and skyblusquirrel, the forums two number cruncher. Their investigations have found sisu have injected between £20m and £30m up till 2012.
As for the much quoted management fee's there's no evidence they have anything to do with sisu retrieving some of the money they have put in. It's much more likely management fee's was between the different companies in the SBS&L group to distribute cost.
A hedge fund is usually paid a fee by their investors.
Usually between 1.5% and 2.5% of the profit in the funds they manage plus a fixed annual fee based on the value of the assets they manage.
I haven't heard of any hedge fund taking fee's from the companies they manage.
Hedge funds have a fixed charge of between 2-5% of the value of the fund plus a percentage of any increase in the value, usually 15-20%.
CCFC wasn't acquired by the SISU hedge fund, it was a managed asset and would have been subject to agreed management charges plus a percentage of any increase in value.
You mean 'who are their investors'?
Well, it could actually be you - if you have a pension plan or have money in a bank.
Most pension funds distribute their investments over a wide range of sectors and investment vehicles. - even hedge funds managed by companies like sisu. Also most banks have investment arrangements that includes hedge funds.
But in sisu's case I would think most investors are very rich individuals and none of them have ever heard of Coventry City Football Club and probably never will.
All investment funds publish, at least yearly, a breakdown of all their investments during the period.
Rich individuals usually get to hold onto their riches by reading these reports.
I meant to say 15% to 25% but was distracted by the wife telling me something (I have already forgotten).
We should also mention that a hedge fund performance fee can be based on a formular where they get nothing if the performance is on par with the average stock return for the sector and then 15%-25% of the performance above.
But the interesting thing is that they get paid a percentage of the asset value. So if they build a new stadium and thereby increase the assets they manage by £20m they can make a fee of almost £1m a year - paid by the investors.
No future with SISU
New Member
They never pumped in £20m and £30m, it was £10m with massive interest. They are wonga in disguise, they will not tell you how much interest is being charged on the £10m.It is a lot as the accounts for 2011 had a £10m to £11m coming in to the club and £4m wages going out and £1m rent, leaving £5m to £6m. They turned that into a loss of £15m.
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
I agree with that.
However that leads me to conclude that SISU must hope/plan to get a "normal" (i.e. not ethically dubious and borderline) return from the business. That in turn leads me to believe that NOPM will be an effective lever in, at least, making them reconsider their strategy.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Are you saying they don't have one?
Astute
Well-Known Member
Only about half of them were Coventry fans though.
Astute
Well-Known Member
They didn't have a clue on how much resistant our fans would be. Their threats seem to have worked on the FL. But the legal action they have taken so far has failed. In recent times judges have said that they work in an ethically dubious way. I would also say that we are much more of a higher profile than they thought. They took us to Division 3 before they started all this crap. Was this with the thought of it going unnoticed as we are now nowhere near the Prem?
mrtrench
Well-Known Member
Hoorah, an Emperor's new clothes moment! Debt pit my arse, nobody likes losing money. Each legal entity has to pay its own tax. Companies write off tax against debt as making the best of a bad thing - but as SISU are hiding all their legal entities in tax havens anyway it's irrelevant.
Besides that, they are a hedge fund, operating funds. These losses in CCFC are real people who invested cash to make a profit and are losing instead.
Of all these people who keep going on about debt pits, how many actually work in finance? Come on admit it, you have heard the phrase and bandy it around assuming it is relevant. It isn't. Wise up - Not a Penny more will work - SISU will at some stage be forced to give up by their investors and then they will go.
Otis
Well-Known Member
The big concern for me is, that after 3-5 years away, even if they do build a new stadium there is no guarantee they will fill it as they may well have lost thousands of fans for good by then.
They could have this grand scheme, build the stadium and then find they can't fill it. That surely must be playing on their minds.
It is not just a case of build a new stadium and fans returning. There is surely the possibility of building a new stadium and having that half empty too. And if that's the case, then you have to wonder what's the point in the first place?
At the moment fans are being driven away from Coventry City FC. This could well end up as a permanent situation. Fans aren't just going to sit around, twiddle their thumbs and wait for 5 years for the club to return. They will find other things to do with their lives, or follow a new club which will surely arise if something isn't sorted soon.
ESB
New Member
Err me actually, trader and risk manager.
Should also fess up to a Masters in Finance
Last edited:
Snozz_is_god
New Member
Every day that goes by strengthens my resolve to stay away until SISU have gone, I will not put another penny into the club.
Mind you I did start my NOPM a year earlier than most of you, the only game I went to last season was Crewe JPT & that was a disaster on the field.
I'm one of the 5000 that they lost when the gates went from 15000 to 10000
I'm already finding other things to do on Saturdays & I've now started supporting local football, which quite frankly I'm enjoying and is refreshing honest.
Apologies if its already been said but timmy said they can keep the club going for next 3 years, rising to 5, whilst fantasy island is being built. Someone mentioned back at ricoh by xmas, i was told Saturday night that we'll be back after the next two home games. The source isnt bad and pretty well connected but of course until it happens its rumour
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
if the toxic debt dumping is true, i will say that again if true. i would argue that the profile off the business has nothing to do with it, if shitsu were bothered about image they wouldn't be in the business they are in. i would say it would have more to do with the ease that they could do it, mostly down to the fact that the FL/FA make it easy for companies to do so. i think the pompey story highlights this, how many owners did they have before their trust took hold off the club? and each one left the club straddled with more debt than the last
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
I mentioned Christmas I just think it is no solution to keep losing money week on week.
DazzleTommyDazzle
Well-Known Member
I hope that your source is proven to be right!!!
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It'd only be right if there were talks we didn't know about though, surely?
Not that it would be a bad thing if they were talking to each other without the need to release umpteen statements about it...
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
The profile has everything to do with it. It's not about image, it's about getting away with it.
The 'theory' applies no common sense. If they were doing that, you'd pick a company nobody would notice!
thaiskyblue
New Member
But this is sisu we are talking about run by the hide away Seppela ? we don't know the half of what is going on .
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
The "common sense" is that they can get away with it as the FL/FA rules enable them to get away with it and as you say "its not about image" so no, the profile is not important as they are not in the image business so they are not bothered if they get noticed.
if they were worried about getting noticed they wouldn't purchase a high profile business in the 1st place and then keep them constantly in the press by selling their best players, sacking managers, bombing out high profile players, moving the club 30miles away against the wishes of the fans when it was more financially viable to keep the club at the ricoh, have a weasel faced smug director making idiotic statements in the press that get laughed at and fabricate a high profile rent row.
sounds obvious to me.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
But all that is good surely, making the club live within its means rather than spunk cash on big name/big waged players it can't afford? (thus making a loss before it does that, in fact, without need to dump debt onto the club).
Common sense does also make you move from the Ricoh. If the club is unviable as is, breaking the monopoly of supply and introducing some competition is not a bad move in common sense terms. it might not be a move you or I like, but it *is* rational. High risk, but rational.
And if the club should be dead anyway, we're onto the highest risk strategies of a high risk organisation.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
any football club should live within its means, that's just basic common sense. but what you need to ask yourself is why the club only has the means available that it does and it isn't down to the successful ownership and management of shitsu.
"High risk, but rational" are you for real? 1000 home fans at a ground that even if at half the cost of what they were offered the ricoh at for the next 10 years is commercial suicide, the word rational doesn't even come into it and what you said before that is just nonsense david brent talk at best.
whats it like on your planet? is the weather nice?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Because the previous boards sold all the family silverware leaving it with nothing.
And yes, I am for real. No offer has yet to be made to the club for such a deal that was able for them to be accepted. The only reason there has been movement up to this point has been because the stadium supply monopoly has been broken. Just because you don't like their strategy (I don't either) doesn't mean it isn't rooted in a good financial sense for what they are, and what they're trying to do.
It doesn't make SISU loveable and cuddly to say that. It does however go back to the fact that somehow in a culture of blame, a simple message that two sides should really sit down and talk (I'll buy them a coffee in Costa in Waterstone's myself if they like) is getting totally lost.
Ta for the pointless insult btw. Childish, stupid, moronic.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you will find that NW lives on planet Earth, and to answer your question the weather is just fine.
You are mixing present circumstances with future potential. The club has since deciding to build and move to Ricoh lived beyond its means. Had the club moved to the Ricoh owning ACL it would have been in much better condition than it is - and sisu wouldn't have come here.
The club need more income and the future potential is either acquiring ACL or building a new stadium. ACL is protected against sisu ownership by CCc, Higgs and many fans, so that won't happen. The only solution is to build a new stadium.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Which is always worth remembering.
Until we sort out the basic ills of the club, we'll always be vulnerable to the likes of SISU coming in, in the future.
Personally I have no great desire to be owned by a succession of speculators looking to make a fast buck by spunking some token cash on players we shouldn't own rather than on the infrastructure, and us depending on the vagueries of a lucky promotion or not. I'd far rather the foundations of the club were built back up after being destroyed under previous regimes.
Does that mean I want SISU here? No. But it does mean I want to question very carefully what appears post SISU, as I really don't want replays of investment, speculation, followed by pain.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
"Just because you don't like their strategy (I don't either) doesn't mean it isn't rooted in a good financial sense for what they are, and what they're trying to do." again, really?
"good financial sense" their isn't any sense what so ever.
and as I've resulted to pointless insults when are you and Godiva getting married, can i have an invite?
While ccfc limited is not liquidated and there is still a small chance sisu and CCc/Higgs can work out a long term solution, it would be reckless and stupid to finalize a purchase of a building site. With no building site all Fisher has to show is the model of the Rotherham design that the new stadium is being based on.
D