Borrow my calculator Timmy ? (8 Viewers)

[ohitsaidwalker king power]

There is no chance 18,000 would attend. Under robins with mcgoldrick scoring for fun we scraped 10,000. Many of those were not paying customers and gate receipts have never exceeded £5.2 million even in the championship days and that included vat.

I think its your calculator that needs changing.

ok G... so do the maths based on 10k..or maybe 9k for margin of error reasons please.

 

---

[James Smith]

You need to look at the bigger picture, the Sky Blues have no future whatsoever if either the club or the owners own our own stadium and have access to ALL revenue streams.

FIFA Fair Play rules based on 'gross income', not profits! PUSB

I agree with you about the revenue streams but why do we need to own the freehold?

 

[Grendel]

ok G... so do the maths based on 10k..or maybe 9k for margin of error reasons please.

Ownership equals equity on a balance sheet. That enhances saleable value and it certainly improves borrowing capability.

 

[skybluetony176]

You haven't read it properly (under the terms & conditions we were playing under at the Ricoh, no chance of making money either short or long-term!). TO BREAK EVEN AT THE RICOH WE'd Require gates in excess of 23,000!!!!!!!!!!

if they are making more money at sixfields RFC you must be obese and have coronary heart problems with the amount of pie's sh1tsu need to sell you to make up the lost turnover from the ricoh regardless of the rent deal.

 

[skybluetony176]

Not at all, Im just saying there is far less pressure on the players this season because we're not playing at the Ricoh.

but have you not noticed how the players react to the pulsing, vibrant sky blue traveling fans at away games.

i think you underestimate this young team. i think they would blossom at the ricoh in front of 12,000+.

 

[skybluetony176]

Ownership equals equity on a balance sheet. That enhances saleable value and it certainly improves borrowing capability.

what's up grendull, has your calculator broke or have you just realised your argument doesn't stack up, even based on 9,000.

 

[kmj5000]

There is no chance 18,000 would attend. Under robins with mcgoldrick scoring for fun we scraped 10,000. Many of those were not paying customers and gate receipts have never exceeded £5.2 million even in the championship days and that included vat.

I think its your calculator that needs changing.

The gate receipts declared in the accounts are NET of VAT.

 

[Grendel]

what's up grendull, has your calculator broke or have you just realised your argument doesn't stack up, even based on 9,000.

As usual you make no sense. What are you blathering on about?

 

[skybluetony176]

As usual you make no sense. What are you blathering on about?

i'll dumb it down for you, i just hope i can dumb it down enough for you.

you questioned the gate numbers that had been suggested so you were asked to do it base on a lower gate number of 9,000.

your reply was "Ownership equals equity on a balance sheet. That enhances saleable value and it certainly improves borrowing capability"

as usual when you cant back your self up, you've gone of at a tangent instead in an attempt to deflect that what you are blathering on about makes no sense.

so i'll put the question to you again. do the maths for 9,000. if your not sure how to do it go and ask a responsible adult.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

As usual you make no sense. What are you blathering on about?

ointlaugh:

Coming from you Classic

 

[RegTheDonk]

Ownership equals equity on a balance sheet. That enhances saleable value and it certainly improves borrowing capability.

Grendel, his quote was "FIFA Fair Play rules based on 'gross income', not profits! PUSB" so stuff equity, saleable value, improved borrowing - its punters cash he is talking about.

 

[Grendel]

i'll dumb it down for you, i just hope i can dumb it down enough for you.

you questioned the gate numbers that had been suggested so you were asked to do it base on a lower gate number of 9,000.

your reply was "Ownership equals equity on a balance sheet. That enhances saleable value and it certainly improves borrowing capability"

as usual when you cant back your self up, you've gone of at a tangent instead in an attempt to deflect that what you are blathering on about makes no sense.

so i'll put the question to you again. do the maths for 9,000. if your not sure how to do it go and ask a responsible adult.

Again you make no sense.

The point made is if the club owned a stadium it's balance sheet and equity stake is enhanced. No "back up" is required.

Peter hill-wood I believe once famously said you don't need fans at football matches. In his case of course he referred to the huge revenue gained from TV.

However, if investors or one investor has agreed to support losses for a period and then promised a return if the equity conditions are met we also are in a position where attendances are not relevant.

 

[Grendel]

Grendel, his quote was "FIFA Fair Play rules based on 'gross income', not profits! PUSB" so stuff equity, saleable value, improved borrowing - its punters cash he is talking about.

Fair play rules will be waived by the FA while we remain at Sixfields. I'm fact there is a view the loans guaranteed to the club will be counted in the equation.

 

[italiahorse]

Again you make no sense.

The point made is if the club owned a stadium it's balance sheet and equity stake is enhanced. No "back up" is required.

Peter hill-wood I believe once famously said you don't need fans at football matches. In his case of course he referred to the huge revenue gained from TV.

However, if investors or one investor has agreed to support losses for a period and then promised a return if the equity conditions are met we also are in a position where attendances are not relevant.

No, the balance sheet is 'balanced out' with debt from the new stadium and many years of self inflicted reduced income. Your talking bollocks.

 

[italiahorse]

Fair play rules will be waived by the FA while we remain at Sixfields. I'm fact there is a view the loans guaranteed to the club will be counted in the equation.

Again wrong. Any monies put in needs to be equity not loans. Do your homework before opening your mouth.

 

[Grendel]

No, the balance sheet is 'balanced out' with debt from the new stadium and many years of self inflicted reduced income. Your talking bollocks.

This is sensational. Italiahorse has inside knowledge as to sisu's future plans. He confirms tonight a new stadium will be built. He also knows that debt is to be piled against it.

Any chance you have a source?

 

[No future with SISU]

There is no chance 18,000 would attend. Under robins with mcgoldrick scoring for fun we scraped 10,000. Many of those were not paying customers and gate receipts have never exceeded £5.2 million even in the championship days and that included vat.

I think its your calculator that needs changing.

You are right about the gate receipts they were £4m to £5m in the 2011 accounts, but what you have not looked at is sponsorship £6m to £7m in 2011 accounts. This will all stop soon.

 

[No future with SISU]

You haven't read it properly (under the terms & conditions we were playing under at the Ricoh, no chance of making money either short or long-term!). TO BREAK EVEN AT THE RICOH WE'd Require gates in excess of 23,000!!!!!!!!!!

That was when we had a premier wage bill. The new stadium they keep talking about will not generate a premier wage.

 

[kmj5000]

GRENDEL.

We're all still awaiting your calculations?

 

[skybluetony176]

Again you make no sense.

The point made is if the club owned a stadium it's balance sheet and equity stake is enhanced. No "back up" is required.

Peter hill-wood I believe once famously said you don't need fans at football matches. In his case of course he referred to the huge revenue gained from TV.

However, if investors or one investor has agreed to support losses for a period and then promised a return if the equity conditions are met we also are in a position where attendances are not relevant.

blah blah blah.

so what were the calculations again based on 9,000? you seemed to have chosen to amit that from your "reply" again!

 

[skybluetony176]

GRENDEL.

We're all still awaiting your calculations?

i have a feeling that we will see the plans for the HR2 before we see grendull's sums.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

Or even a reply to the many questions he has been asked?

Oh well he will just jump to or start another Thread..

i have a feeling that we will see the plans for the HR2 before we see grendull's sums.

 

[oldskyblue58]

You need to look at the bigger picture, the Sky Blues have no future whatsoever if either the club or the owners own our own stadium and have access to ALL revenue streams.

FIFA Fair Play rules based on 'gross income', not profits! PUSB

is it just me or does that not read right? If CCFC or the owners (SISU) own the stadium and all income rights the Sky Blues have no future ?????

 

[letsallsingtogether]

No your right

So we are DOOMED...................

QUOTE=oldskyblue58;576367]is it just me or does that not read right? If CCFC or the owners (SISU) own the stadium and all income rights the Sky Blues have no future ?????[/QUOTE]

 

[Deleted member 5849]

is it just me or does that not read right? If CCFC or the owners (SISU) own the stadium and all income rights the Sky Blues have no future ?????

tbf to RFC, whatever his/her errm, style of presentation, I'll forgive a typo

 

[italiahorse]

This is sensational. Italiahorse has inside knowledge as to sisu's future plans. He confirms tonight a new stadium will be built. He also knows that debt is to be piled against it.

Any chance you have a source?

Common sense in analysing SISU plan A.
I can see why your struggling though ?

 

[italiahorse]

tbf to RFC, whatever his/her errm, style of presentation, I'll forgive a typo

Getting difficult to filter out some of the typos. Some of them are the whole post

 

[RegTheDonk]

Fair play rules will be waived by the FA while we remain at Sixfields. I'm fact there is a view the loans guaranteed to the club will be counted in the equation.

Well, thats a big sigh of relief then. Fisher has no excuse to sell players in Jan becase he has previously stated SISU will fund the club and, more importantly, Grendel has stated the FA will waive the FFP rules while we are at Sixfields.

Thank the lord - we do NOT have to sell! And screw every other club that has to abide by FFP.

 

[kmj5000]

Fair play rules will be waived by the FA while we remain at Sixfields. I'm fact there is a view the loans guaranteed to the club will be counted in the equation.

And whose view exactly is that based on? Your's Grendel?

 

[andyboy81]

Fuck me, is it Groundhog day??

 

[fernandopartridge]

Well the 1500-2500 at sixfield is based on data I think-the Ricoh figure subject to conjecture I agree- but even if you reference last years home attendances as the comparator the maths to move to Norhtampton doesn't stack does it?- thus does VOR not post a reasonable hypothesis?

I never said the move to Northampton stacked up either.

 

[ohitsaidwalker king power]

Sorry but there is no evidence to support your forecast.

I never said the move to Northampton stacked up either.

The point of my post was in part to establish that although you stated there was no evidence to support the original hypothesis posed by VOR- the attendance numbers at Sixfield is very much evidence based- I wasn't trying to imply you supported the move to Northampton- sorry if you read it as such.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

The original post makes the common error of judging solely on the immediate numbers however, which it's never been about!

 

[ohitsaidwalker king power]

The original post makes the common error of judging solely on the immediate numbers however, which it's never been about!

Immediate numbers and a sustainable business plan not important then whilst a 5 year "new build" emerges from wherever it emerges(if ever)- please do me a favour.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Really, why on earth do we have to go round this every week?

Do you *really* think Fisher and Seppala are so stupid that they haven't noticed 2,500 fans paying a tenner is less income than 10,000 fans paying £15?