Just catching up on a few things I am left with a lot of questions and things that trouble me
- was there ever actually an offer of £2m from SISU for the Charity shares? It reads to me that it was a conversation between Seppala & Harris and Harris rejected the the notion out of hand. Any deal that was died in August 2012 according to Justice Leggatt well before any vote required by CCC surely? Yet negotiations with CCC carried on with SISU knowing the Charity were very unlikely to accept a figure massively below their own valuation?. The share purchase was integral to any deal with CCC wasnt it?
- did the PwC report that suggested nil value actually suggest other scenarios where there was a worth, the CT article seems to imply it did? Was it with or without CCFC? What other values were suggested?
- The values referred to relate to early/mid 2012 we have moved on from there with the site attracting more income and by connection a footfall? Does that extra footfall equate to 300,000 people/visits? Is the cash flow so pressured and ACL at risk of default now?
- If YB were offered 6m, 12m and finally agreed on 14m what makes SISU so confident they could have got a better deal?. YB do not seem to have believed ACL were as distressed as painted.
- what business taxes are being lost by the City exactly? Surely ACL would have to pick up the full amount for the site with no discount for long term sport or community use? What businesses have failed solely or mainly because CCFC are not here
- I assume that the increased turnover by ACL must represent real sales and that there is a supply chain to local businesses (we have already seen one exhibition provider move to the old peugeot site for instance). That visitors to the Arena also use the other pubs, restaurants and hotels in the area? That increased sales must mean increased employment for people in the area?
- How exactly does SISU/CCC paying off the YB even for a much discounted figure actually leave ACL debt free. Wouldn't ACL owe SISU/CCC the much discounted amount? The accounting entries have to work surely?
- The details regarding Compass having guaranteed income that's new, have not seen this in any documents published so where has this come from? Does it relate to now or 2011/12 before reorganisation? I assume that the source would have to be ACL or SISU from their due diligence? but dont know. If from due diligence then surely it is covered by a NDA?
- So far the only public data in terms of the stadium build that is available is the pronouncements in the press or on radio, the Fisher forums and the minutes of the Garlick meetings. What else gives confidence this is happening.?
- SISU want unencumbered freehold. CCC say the unencumbered freehold is not for sale. To get to unencumbered then the council would have to compensate ACL for loss of that business, ACL would have to break the contracts/leases etc with De Vere, G Casino, Compass etc, Compass would need compensation for the 10 year service contract they have with IEC/ACL. That makes the freehold being unencumbered very expensive for the CCC to achieve and yet they are expected to to all that on what seems a confused basis of £7m or £8m ?
- What is the basis of these independent valuations? What is being valued? The bricks and mortar? the current business? the future business? the encumbered or unencumbered site? etc
- Say the CCC valuation is significantly higher than the SISU one does that leave councillors liable for the shortfall between the average and the CCC valuation? In which case why would they go for the average? Could they legally?
- In the year to 31/05/13 Swansea had a turnover of 67m but the benefit of the club being in the premiership to Swansea the City is £58m ? If that is the case the last set of accounts for SBS&L showed a turnover of 7m at the Ricoh does that mean the benefit to Coventry the City is actually £6m (very simplistic I know and not very scientific but .....) . Is it wrong to compare a club in the premiership to one in League 1? CCFC could be in League 1 for a long time, Charlton were there for something like 6 years weren't they?
- The other side to the economic worth argument has to be considered ie what if anything replaced CCFC not being a tenant doesnt it? . We have been told that turnover will be in the region of 14m at ACL without CCFC this year 2014(without the Olympics). In 2012 ACL had a turnover of £7.7m in 2013 it was 14m 2014 is expected to be £14m or more without CCFC or Olympics. Say the turnover relating to CCFC was 2m in those years to 2013. That is an increase by 2014 of 9m excluding CCFC above 2012 levels. Using the same calculation of economic worth does that mean the replacement is worth around £8m? The staging of a football match is basically an event isnt it? and it has been replaced by events? (yes i know it excludes the emotional/pride/community worth to Coventry but how much is that worth for a struggling League 1 team? Surely you have to compare that to a n other League 1 team not a premiership one ie not what could be if everything goes to a dream plan?)
-If the economic argument does not stack up regarding loss of CCFC and its replacement why would CCC or ACL or Charity sell? Not what we want to hear perhaps but it has to be considered
- Surely CCFC can do their own economic worth study? Have they? What did it say? Why must it be the CCC that does the study?
- As yet we dont know whether CCC tried to force a regime change surely we are waiting for evidence, proof and judgement of that in court aren't we?
I was surprised to read that PWKH has said there have been no meetings. Does that mean none of the information has come directly to GCBTR from ACL or the Charity?
Just some of the questions I have from what I have read from posters in this thread. Am trying to keep an open mind on all this. A successful deal i have always been told is when both sides feel they have gained.....
Just to be clear I am not making any accusations of lying or anything else against Rob or anyone else who has posted. As far as I know Rob has provided information he has acquired, formed an opinion on what he understands and promoted a course of action. As is his right to do so. These are the questions I have based on that and other posts.
