Different kettle of fish. They are taking it on to make a profit, not as an emergency. If they loose that is their fault. Here they Said it was to be Short Term and they were to sell it back at an agreed formular - should have happened long ago and it is not Higgs fault that that didnt happen.
Charity Value of its share (23 Viewers)
- Thread starter dongonzalos
- Start date
Different kettle of fish. They are taking it on to make a profit, not as an emergency. If they loose that is their fault. Here they Said it was to be Short Term and they were to sell it back at an agreed formular - should have happened long ago and it is not Higgs fault that that didnt happen.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
What they are worth and what you are prepared to accept are to different things
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Duffer is on the ropes. He needs re-enforcements. Ron, jack, dongle?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Nick
Administrator
Did they not ask for a short team deal before they even moved out which was turned down?
They are all as bad as each other, which is why I think independent parties can assess what is fair, if people don't agree , they have to be seen as stopping the club from coming home.
Whether that is sisu refusing to pay or other parties wanting too much.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
If they did why won't they accept one now it's on the table?
Nick
Administrator
duffer
Well-Known Member
So stalemate. If Higgs believe the shares are above their true market value, then sisu should pay more than they are worth? This is why some independent valuations would be beneficial at least fans and tax payers would know if anyone side is being ripped off rather than the current guess work and conjecture...
Hmmm perhaps a new ground is the way forward....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
You're going to have to go back to OSB and DazzleTommyDazzle to get a full understanding of value and how difficult that is to determine, but basically the value of the Higgs share is what a seller is prepared to sell for, and a buyer is prepared to pay.
At the moment Higgs don't have to sell. They know what they put in, and not unfairly (imho) they want to get at least close to that. If SISU aren't prepared to match it (right now), then there's no reason for Higgs to sell (right now). Maybe things will change in a few months...
And obviously SISU can't be forced to buy the share, but when thinking of value maybe it's worth considering what they are going to have to pay for a new stadium and what they're currently losing by staying in Northampton.
Higgs in the meantime clearly think that ACL has a future, even without the club, and have a duty to get the best return for the charity.
It doesn't have to be stalemate; there are probably all kinds of negotiations that might be able to move things forwards, and heading back to the Ricoh even in the short term might help build trust. Not much chance of that now though, at least until after the JR, imho.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Why didn't acl accept so we didn't even move?
What makes you so sure we still wouldn't have moved?
stupot07
Well-Known Member
They should probably do a valuation both with and without the club.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Question for Simon if he's reading this.
Don't you think it would be a good idea for the CET to get an independent body to value the Ricoh Arena complex?
I'm sure your readers would take great interest in the findings and might help us to shed some light further on all this.
Don't you think it would be a good idea for the CET to get an independent body to value the Ricoh Arena complex?
I'm sure your readers would take great interest in the findings and might help us to shed some light further on all this.
duffer
Well-Known Member
Bloody hell if that's on the ropes I assume they are made of rubber
If it comes to dealing with WUMs like Grendel, then rope-a-dope would seem to be particularly apposite, and I don't think I'm in need of any help with regard to him.
To be honest I just ignore him, fwiw, though it cheers me up that I still get under his skin from time to time. Petty, I know.
Nick, LordS, Godiva, guys like that I can disagree with but respect - and I enjoy the debate, without offering or receiving offence (I hope). If I take a (metaphorical) kicking from time to time, then so be it, at least I'll go down swinging.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
The CET Areana. I like it, it's catchy.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Just realised I've agreed with Grendel.
The trouble is virtually no one any longer believes the new ground scenario. SISU's so called trump card has been shown to be the joker. ACL have called SISU's bluff, and basically said,' go on then ,be our guest'. Plus of course SISU are apparently now only interested in the freehold, so now you have not only an unwilling seller, but apparently an unwilling buyer as well.So stalemate. If Higgs believe the shares are above their true market value, then sisu should pay more than they are worth? This is why some independent valuations would be beneficial at least fans and tax payers would know if anyone side is being ripped off rather than the current guess work and conjecture...
Hmmm perhaps a new ground is the way forward....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Grendel
Well-Known Member
If it comes to dealing with WUMs like Grendel, then rope-a-dope would seem to be particularly apposite, and I don't think I'm in need of any help with regard to him.
To be honest I just ignore him, fwiw, though it cheers me up that I still get under his skin from time to time. Petty, I know.
Nick, LordS, Godiva, guys like that I can disagree with but respect - and I enjoy the debate, without offering or receiving offence (I hope). If I take a (metaphorical) kicking from time to time, then so be it, at least I'll go down swinging.
Well I suppose to you I am a WUM -- I am only interested in the football club. Your only interest in the club seems to be shoving a photo of a player on your Avatar who never played for us. Apt in a way I suppose.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
The formula is top secret. Why?
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
I hope that they're not taking it on to make a profit, charitable trusts aren't allowed to be run for profit.
You'd best get onto the Charities Commission mate.
Mind you, maybe CCFC could become a Charitable Trust, defintely not in danger of breaching that rule.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Seems to me this is just a stand off..
SISU trying to run the club at break even, trimming costs, trying to keep them in the FL & hoping fan pressure makes a difference to the council.
ACL trying to run the Arena at break even whilst servicing the debt & hoping public opinion remains on their side (yes it is largely on their side, these forums are not representative).
If one strategy fails (badly) then maybe there will be a deal, if not then the club stays in Northampton for the foreseeable future.
SISU trying to run the club at break even, trimming costs, trying to keep them in the FL & hoping fan pressure makes a difference to the council.
ACL trying to run the Arena at break even whilst servicing the debt & hoping public opinion remains on their side (yes it is largely on their side, these forums are not representative).
If one strategy fails (badly) then maybe there will be a deal, if not then the club stays in Northampton for the foreseeable future.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
It must be good, otherwise it would have been in sisu's skeletal argument.
Either that or it's in the same safe as the arrangements for the club at a sisu owned stadium.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It is tough shit either way
SimonGilbert
Telegraph Tea Boy
A great idea, but one which would require the consent of ACL.
As they won't even reveal the length of the Ricoh naming rights deal, or how much it costs to hire the pitch for a one off cup fixture, I think consent may not be forthcoming.
There have been two PWC reports into ACL's value. We have only seen snippets of one. I think pushing for these to be made public is the best chance we have of ascertaining the business's true value - at least at one point.
I'm not convinced that will happen though.
Another point is that for any deal to be struck, the parties involved would need to be talking to each other. As far as I'm aware that is not happening at the moment.
Let's hope things move on this summer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Three weeks?
They intend using the monies gained for purposes such as job creation and improving Coventry and not boosting the accounts of Cayman Isles investors. That may count in their favour with the charities commission.
Try listening to or reading about Labovitch's comments. Then ask him if there is any need for it anymore...
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Though to be fair it's a charity rather than a trust, so maybe different rules.
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
We are all doomed.
Surely it's make or break this summer. It seems neither side can continue at it's current situation and both need eachother and can't work independently. Ccfc need the Ricoh and Ricoh needs ccfc. No matter about all the figures it's as simple as that.
It's only down to pigheadedness and stupidity and "childish" antics it isn't this simple IMO
Surely it's make or break this summer. It seems neither side can continue at it's current situation and both need eachother and can't work independently. Ccfc need the Ricoh and Ricoh needs ccfc. No matter about all the figures it's as simple as that.
It's only down to pigheadedness and stupidity and "childish" antics it isn't this simple IMO
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
Oh and greed.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Simon you need to read a different paper
the Coventry Observer said that the ricoh naming deal had been extended to 2025 source:http://www.coventryobserver.co.uk/2...th-Olympic-name-snub,-insist-Ricoh-34881.htmlSimonGilbert
Telegraph Tea Boy
Simon you need to read a different paper
I'd like to get that verified before accepting it as fact. Seems an odd thing to just drop into the middle of an article without any obvious quotes to back it up.
I'm not saying it's incorrect. I'd just like it backed up by a reliable source.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
If you have a dig around on here I think PWKH has mentioned it before when someone was claiming Ricoh would terminate their contract due to the club not being there.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
"Their future performance would play a small part in whether we renewed our contract but the key benefits are from concerts and other events."
L
limoncello
Guest
He asked for a reliable source. Boom boom.