Charity Value of its share (20 Viewers)

Forums New posts
D

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
I've just valued my house at £2 million. That's the most expensive house in the street. Its the value though as I did it myself.
Click to expand...

Did you buy it for 2 million?

If so unless some strange things have been done to your house recently by the same bloke trying to buy it , I bet your valuation is not too far off? It certainly shouldn't be zero.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
dongonzalos said:
Did you buy it for 2 million?

If so unless some strange things have been done to your house recently by the same bloke trying to buy it , I bet your valuation is not too far off? It certainly shouldn't be zero.
Click to expand...

Well carrying the anology on the mortgage is £2 million so actually I have just increased the valuation to £4 million

Higgs will never get the money back -- the end and also his dumbass comment at the end tells me all I need to know about him
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
Not very professional those comments.

What I don't get is if they are so sure it is worth £6.5 million and nothing less, didn't they agree a million less before? To which the council fella said it was way over priced?
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
Not very professional those comments.

What I don't get is if they are so sure it is worth £6.5 million and nothing less, didn't they agree a million less before? To which the council fella said it was way over priced?
Click to expand...

It isn't worth that. Its not a valuation. Its not a story just more pro council shit from the CET.
 
duffer

duffer

Well-Known Member
lordsummerisle said:
It's not semantics at all. They bought the share from the club.

The fact they should never have got involved in the first place is irrelevant to that.
Click to expand...

If the charity didn't get involved, the club would have gone down the pan - would you have been happy about that at that point in time, with a brand new ground just completed?

The charity bailed out CCFC once, by stepping in then. Now it seems you're asking them to bail out CCFC again (or at least SISU), by handing over their share of ACL for less than they value it.

This wasn't an investment made in the hope of any great return, as can be seen by the fact that they agreed to sell it back at a set formula (and subsequently agreed to sell it back to SISU for less than they bought it for).

It really, really winds me up that there are people here who would have the charity give the share back to SISU. There's a price to be paid for the share, if SISU don't want to pay it then that's up to them, but don't blame the charity for the actions of our owners both past & present.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Nice to see duffer wading in as well. The charity is making a business decision. If that decision costs them money tough.
 
H

Houdi

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
Would be interesting to see a "market" value. Especially as the council thought 5.5 million was way over priced.
Click to expand...
Not sure if a 'market' value is that relevant in all this. Higgs have got a price they are willing to sell at, if SISU or anybody else for that matter is not prepared to meet that price then there is no sale. A seller is free to ask any price they like, similarly a buyer is free to offer any price he wants.
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
duffer said:
If the charity didn't get involved, the club would have gone down the pan - would you have been happy about that at that point in time, with a brand new ground just completed?

The charity bailed out CCFC once, by stepping in then. Now it seems you're asking them to bail out CCFC again (or at least SISU), by handing over their share of ACL for less than they value it.

This wasn't an investment made in the hope of any great return, as can be seen by the fact that they agreed to sell it back at a set formula (and subsequently agreed to sell it back to SISU for less than they bought it for).

It really, really winds me up that there are people here who would have the charity give the share back to SISU. There's a price to be paid for the share, if SISU don't want to pay it then that's up to them, but don't blame the charity for the actions of our owners both past & present.
Click to expand...

While of course I think it would be unfair for them to get nothing, people seem to say that the high rent is all SISU's fault because they agreed to it. If the Higgs have bought something that is now actually worthless, who's fault is that?

(just putting it out there)
 
duffer

duffer

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
While of course I think it would be unfair for them to get nothing, people seem to say that the high rent is all SISU's fault because they agreed to it. If the Higgs have bought something that is now actually worthless, who's fault is that?

(just putting it out there)
Click to expand...

Maybe it's the fault of those who are trying to make it worthless by their actions, and thereby presumably hoping to pick it up on the cheap.

Would you rather the charity hadn't bought the share, and the club had gone under? Just putting it out there... ;)
 
Nick

Nick

Administrator
duffer said:
Maybe it's the fault of those who are trying to make it worthless by their actions, and thereby presumably hoping to pick it up on the cheap.

Would you rather the charity hadn't bought the share, and the club had gone under? Just putting it out there... ;)
Click to expand...

Could the same not be said would we rather SISU didn't buy the club at that time?

I am not saying a charity should be ripped off, but if a charity put loads of money into something that loses it's value over time then what happens then? They refuse to sell it for nothing but what they paid but nobody will because it isn't actually worth that?
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
duffer said:
Maybe it's the fault of those who are trying to make it worthless by their actions, and thereby presumably hoping to pick it up on the cheap.

Would you rather the charity hadn't bought the share, and the club had gone under? Just putting it out there... ;)
Click to expand...

So if browns goes downhill and loses money what are you saying. All those people who have gone to a bar down the road pay for the losses?

You are even more bonkers than I thought.
 
lordsummerisle

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
duffer said:
Maybe it's the fault of those who are trying to make it worthless by their actions, and thereby presumably hoping to pick it up on the cheap.

Would you rather the charity hadn't bought the share, and the club had gone under? Just putting it out there... ;)
Click to expand...

If it had gone under then so be it, helping out millionaire owners and players shouldn't really be the concern of a charity.

If we'd gone under then, the share in ACL would have become worthless much sooner, and in fact should have gone under in 2007 before Sisu came in and after Robinson and Mcginnity had spunked away the Higgs money.

Take away the emotive stuff about it being a charity, and you have a business that made a business decision, for good or bad.

I don't accept it when people say that social services, libraries and the poor little kiddies are going to suffer because of the CCC loan to ACL, and I don't accept it from the Higgs side either.
 
J

Jack Griffin

Guest
B

Broken Hearted Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
lordsummerisle said:
They got the old board out of a hole very temporarily.

Their choices in doing that should maybe be questioned, but they're the charity not Sisu.

If running Browns which they've taken over doesn't go too well, will we all chip in to make sure that they get their money back?
Click to expand...

Yes well worth it to get rid of that T--t Brown.
 
duffer

duffer

Well-Known Member
lordsummerisle said:
If it had gone under then so be it, helping out millionaire owners and players shouldn't really be the concern of a charity.

If we'd gone under then, the share in ACL would have become worthless much sooner, and in fact should have gone under in 2007 before Sisu came in and after Robinson and Mcginnity had spunked away the Higgs money.

Take away the emotive stuff about it being a charity, and you have a business that made a business decision, for good or bad.

I don't accept it when people say that social services, libraries and the poor little kiddies are going to suffer because of the CCC loan to ACL, and I don't accept it from the Higgs side either.
Click to expand...

So I guess you're saying that the charity don't do any good works in or around Coventry where £6.5m might be better spent. Interesting.

However on one thing here I entirely agree - the charity shouldn't be helping out helping out millionaire owners and players.

On that basis I think the charity are quite right to either sell their share for whatever they think is a fair return, or hold on to it until it suits them if no such offer is forthcoming, even if it doesn't suit the current owners of the club.

I'm sure both you and Nick would agree, since it seems you're all in favour of the charity taking a cold, hard business approach to financial matters and the club.

Unless, that is, you're saying that the charity should be obliged to sell way below what they want, just to help out the club - but you can't be saying that because it's an obvious contradiction, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 21 (members: 0, guests: 21)
Top