ACL group accounts 2013 (2 Viewers)

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Same approach as with the SBS&L Group. Facts/details from the group accounts not the individual companies. Any explanations that are mine are in italics

ACL is the holding company which owns Arena (2006) Ltd 100% (that company is there purely to hold the site lease) and 77% of IEC Experience Ltd which operates the functions, catering, events etc at the Ricoh (23% is owned by Compass who paid £4m in 2012 for the shares they have)

Directors Report
Describes the site, its major events in the year and the establishment of IEC Experience Ltd. The £4m from Compass was reinvested in to the site. Turnover up from £7.8m to 14.5m. (Would include the Olympics August 2012). Site employs 80 full time staff and 450 flexible contract staff. 41 more hotel rooms opened (total 121). Profit £775k (2012 £1.086m). Olympics though good also restricted normal trading for 3 months
Total value of the Yorkshire Bank loan and interest hedge was £19m and was settled by loan of 14.4m. Operations have been restructured and loss of ccfc income mitigated. Otium is required by FL to pay ACL £590k still not been paid

Auditors Report Clean audit report with no paragraph highlighting any auditors doubts about Going Concern. There is a note in the accounts from the directors highlighting how they have addressed the issue but the auditor is satisfied there is no material uncertainty that he needs to refer to. Auditor has to consider not less than 12 months from when he signs the report in this case to at least 26/02/15

Profit & Loss
- Turnover £14,490,703 compared to 7,782,519 in 2012
- direct costs have increased from 441,444 to 3,246,397 (I suspect there has been a change in how things operate between ACL and Compass that causes this in the group figures)
- administrative costs have also significantly increased from 5,261,107 to 10,189,173 (again possibly the effects of the new structure might even include some dispute costs plus some costs due to the Olympics (it isn't all about what came in there would be significant costs to pay for the event) but no real details
- there is an exceptional item of 475,761 that is the benefits of restructuring
- interest payable is down from 995,627 to 817,741. The new loan with its savings did not kick in until January 2013
- minority interests show a positive 60,994
- Bottom line is a profit of 775,465 compared to 1,086,886 in 2012

Balance Sheet
Fixed assets after additions disposals and depreciation are now 24,818,306 (2012 was 24,016,340)
there are net current assets of 1,457,051 including 852,940 at the bank (2012 3,778,488 and 3,876,141 respectively <would include effect of £4m from Compass>)
creditors falling due after more than 1 year 14,260,975 (2012 14,893,358)
Accruals and deferred income due after more than 1 year 4,705,789 (2012 6,307,348)
Net assets £7.3m (2012 6.6m)

Cash Flow Statement
shows Interest actually paid out in year 817,741 (2012 1,005,444)
Assets paid out for 2,155,002
Loan repaid £14,533,360
new loan 14,400,000

Notes to the Accounts
- Note regarding going concern made by the directors. Refers to CCFC leaving, the restructuring of overheads that will save estimated £700k pa and the new loan. Cash flows to 31/05/15 indicate that turnover is key to going concern
- staff costs for ACL group are 959,931 (2012 1,434,334) with a total of 18 employees (2012 - 23). The 80 staff and 450 flexible mentioned above I believe are mainly provided through Compass and charged to ACL
Directors fees are 170,673 (2012 256,907)but none of the directors representing the Council or Charity are paid (2012 £ nil)
-Interest payable is split in 2013 Bank £544,949 and other (CCC?) £272,792 In 2012 it was all Bank £995,267
- exceptional item is detailed as the benefit of a fundamental restructuring
- no tax to pay
- the lease owned is valued in the accounts at 18.8m
- there have been additions to Fixtures & Fittings 2.07m computers 77k and catering equipment 7k
- Council loan is detailed as £14,372,882 at an interest rate of 5%. Repayment is quarterly and it runs to December 2053 which ties in with the lease period
- included in Accruals and deferred income 2.7m in respect of the lease assignment on the casino that is being drawn down at 960k pa
- there are no capital commitments at 31/05/13
- Business Rates for the group payable to CCC are 530,986 (2012 299,935) with still to pay at 31/05/13 - 342,290 (2012 183,200)
- sales made to CCC in the year were £254,398 (2012 £876,658) of which 129,398 was still owed to ACL at 31/05/13
- similar details of CCC loan again in related party note stating it was at arms length and at a commercial rate
- 25/04/12 ACL sold the rights to provide hospitality, catering, and facilities management to IEC Experience for £4m (Compass bought in to IEC for £4m then IEC used money to buy the rights from ACL and ACL used that money to develop the complex further)
- ACL recharged expenses to IEC £1.9m (2012 395k) IEC recharged ACL 31k
- confirmation of escrow draw down of 315,218
- ACL controlled by North Coventry Holdings Ltd (100% subsidiary of CCC) and by Football Investors Ltd (100% subsidiary of Alan Edward Higgs Charity)

That's the bare bones.

Profit 775k, net assets £7.3m, loan from CCC 14.4m at 5% being repaid over 40 yrs
 

Last edited:

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
The 450 flexible staff I'd imagine mostly Compass staff on zero hours contracts - nice venture for a council and a charity?

[that's a joke by the way]
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
osb - the lease is valued at around £19m, would be a good value purchase for City based on these accounts

Well the worth of the site is tied up in the lease really because the freehold is encumbered which would depress that value. Is it a fair value ? I would have to see the reasoning to comment. What I would say is that the auditors would have to form an opinion on the valuation and have accepted the £19m. The directors would have to satisfy themselves that it was worth that and to then explain as to why to the auditors To knowingly overstate assets could be fraud. The value is key to so much so you would expect a thorough examination of that area

Personally I would think it was a better buy than building from scratch........... income streams take time to develop even when the stadium is built it wont happen day 1
 

SkyBlue76

New Member
So it would seem fair to say that ACL are more financially secure than CCFC. If the auditors reported no going concerns until at least 2015 (without the football club) it would appear to be true that the Ricoh does not need CCFC to survive.

Hmm, I wonder what that does to SISU's negotiation position. Doesn't look good for them :) looks like they have put all their eggs in one basket - the Judicial Review.

Can't wait for the next SISU press release which paints it all rosy!
 

Hobo

Well-Known Member
So it would seem fair to say that ACL are more financially secure than CCFC. If the auditors reported no going concerns until at least 2015 (without the football club) it would appear to be true that the Ricoh does not need CCFC to survive.

Hmm, I wonder what that does to SISU's negotiation position. Doesn't look good for them :) looks like they have put all their eggs in one basket - the Judicial Review.

Can't wait for the next SISU press release which paints it all rosy!

They certainly are more financially secure. 1) income seems to be in profit. 2) they have an asset (home) they can sell if required
 

Rob S

Well-Known Member
...

- included in Accruals and deferred income 2.7m in respect of the lease assignment on the casino that is being drawn down at 960k pa



Profit 775k …

So would I be right in assuming that the previous casino owners buying out their contract is what is preventing a loss?
 

Sky Blue Dal

Well-Known Member
So the profit of 775k would be higher if Otium paid the £590k they owed as required my the FL minus the tax deduction.

Just thought it needed to be highlighted.
 

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
Won't ACL actually be paying a lot more for the loan now over 40 years to the council than they would have done if continued with the Yorkshire Bank loan which had around 15 years left to run?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Won't ACL actually be paying a lot more for the loan now over 40 years to the council than they would have done if continued with the Yorkshire Bank loan which had around 15 years left to run?

£32,635,000 if its standard 5% payment terms.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
So would I be right in assuming that the previous casino owners buying out their contract is what is preventing a loss?

Well if you were to apply the accounting treatment wrongly then yes ....... however that would have meant the full amount of lease premium settlement would have been written off by now and the Balance sheet would be £2.7m better off because the full amount would have been moved to profit reserves.

Going forward of course this positive will run out in the 2016 accounts. But equally the full year overhead savings will kick in at £700k pa, the interest charge will have reduced from £817k to something like £460K there wont be the exceptional item of £475k either. Not to mention any bad debt they have included for CCFC wont be there (600k+?), nor will the costs of the dispute

It is easy to focus on one item but you have to look at the whole picture
 
Last edited:

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Won't ACL actually be paying a lot more for the loan now over 40 years to the council than they would have done if continued with the Yorkshire Bank loan which had around 15 years left to run?

could it be the case that it's a longer term to mean a smaller payment required each quarter but in the hope, from ACL POV, that they can continue to make overpayments and clear it quicker? guess it depends how the interest is being applied and if there's any penalty for early payment.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
So what you are saying is the ACL loan is a great deal for the Coventry Tax Payer?

I wouldn't know. They could be borrowing the money themselves at 4.9% in which case no.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
could it be the case that it's a longer term to mean a smaller payment required each quarter but in the hope, from ACL POV, that they can continue to make overpayments and clear it quicker? guess it depends how the interest is being applied and if there's any penalty for early payment.

On a standard payment its £68,000 a month so unlikely unless there is a different arrangement.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Ok FP wasn't sure myself

Have found some minutes from various councils that indicate a rate between 4.5 and 4.8%. Which is still less than the 5% ACL are paying. Perhaps the CCC accounts will tell us
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
So if ACL can carry on without CCFC. Considering only now are they really starting to drive business in that direction.

The JR really is the last throw of the dice for SISU.

What will they do if they lose

1) appeal and stay at Northampton
2) sign a long term rent deal
3) attempt to buy ACL
4) appeal and build a new stadium
5) put the club up for sale
6) put club into admin with a view to trying to liquidate it?
 
Last edited:

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Well, I think we'll need to look at the accounts released in a years time to see if they can "carry on". They need each other.

So if ACL can carry on without CCFC. Considering only now are they really starting to drive business in that direction.

The JR really is the last throw of the dice for SISU.

What will they do if they lose

1) appeal and stay at Northampton
2) sign a long term rent deal
3) attempt to buy ACL
4) appeal and build a new stadium
5) put the club up for sale
6) put club I to admin with a view to trying to liquidate it?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Did the auditor not have to consider 12 months ahead though and said there is no concern?

Ultimately proves nothing for the long term.
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Ultimately proves nothing for the long term.

Does he not have to forecast on what he has seen and the predictions for the coming year there is nothing to suggest a concern about ACL ( including taking CCFC's kidnapping into consideration)
 

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
Won't ACL actually be paying a lot more for the loan now over 40 years to the council than they would have done if continued with the Yorkshire Bank loan which had around 15 years left to run?

Perhaps someone needs to sit down and explain inflation to you.
 

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
What about interest rates?

I don't know what the interest rate was on the loan off the Yorkshire Bank, but would have had to have been about 13% to equal the same amount being repaid over 40 years as they were on the 15 remaining.

If the council loan taken out over 40 years also(don't know anything about terms of that loan), then would make very little money over the 40 years for the "Coventry Tax Payer" over that time if loan taken out at 4.5-4.8%(again don't know, don't think details have been released by CCC on the terms of the loan at all?).
 

Calista

Well-Known Member
"the auditor is satisfied there is no material uncertainty that he needs to refer to"

What about the JR?!
 

Rusty Trombone

Well-Known Member
"the auditor is satisfied there is no material uncertainty that he needs to refer to"

What about the JR?!

The JR is related to the Council, not ACL. If the Council lose then I guess the ACL Auditor is happy that ACL can obtain other funding, assuming the loan has to be paid back.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top