Match day revenues or stadium? (8 Viewers)

[Calista]

12[SUP]th[/SUP] June 2014, final day of the Judicial Review (CCFC official website):-
“SISU QC responded by saying that CCFC were interested in a deal which provided them with match-day revenues, not an interest in the stadium. He recited that the issue which faced the Club was access to a share of revenue generated from the match days.”

12[SUP]th[/SUP] June 2014 Mark Labovitch (statement in CET)
“The club cannot be financially viable unless it can access the match-day revenues it generates. However, the council leadership has refused categorically to sell an interest in the stadium to the club. The club is therefore building its own stadium.”

24th April 2014 Supporters’ Consultative Group minutes (CCFC official website):-
Tim Fisher – “... the real value is not just in the stadium but land enablement and what is around it.”

Nobody can pretend it’s clear. Which is it - match day revenues or the stadium?

And who are we talking about – CCFC or SISU? Perhaps the interests of the football club and its current owners are diametrically opposed. The club desperately needs to have its mountain of debt written off and to start again with a clean sheet. But maybe the owners need to keep the club on basic life support for evermore, so it can carry on paying interest to them and open the door to property deals which won’t benefit the football club at all.

This lack of clarity is the cause of division between supporters. Financial Fair Play seems to severely restrict the kind of income that can be used to fund the football. So tell us the plan in plain English Joy - how would SISU owning the Ricoh benefit COVENTRY CITY FOOTBALL CLUB? I am genuinely open to persuasion – but PLEASE don’t say “access to match day revenues”, I’m too confused already!

 

---

[stupot07]

I'm not entirely sure at what you're getting at.

The ideal scenario would be the club/or a company in the ccfc group accounts having the leasehold of the entire stadium.

Yes in league one and two FFP is based on football income, but in the championship it's based on allowable losses, so the more revenue you can recycle into the club the better. The point would be yes, FFP (league one) is based on football income only, but that's only players wages so there's a lot more costs that need to be paid which additional income would support.

Coincidently Reading have hotel which counts towards their turnover and quite a lot of the big PL clubs have an extensive property portfolio which ultimately supports the club.


http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...-united-secures-success-off-the-field-1232807


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Calista]

Stupot - I’m not getting at anything, there is no clarity and that’s the point.

If SISU can put forward an unambiguous plan to run the stadium and the football club as mutually-beneficial businesses, and to plough serious money into success on the pitch, they might stand a chance of getting more fans behind them.

But at every turn they contradict themselves (see above), and their actions over the last few years have demonstrated absolutely no footballing ambition in keeping with a city of our size. They’ve turned us into a small-town club with a third division mentality.

I for one am willing to be persuaded, but they need to make their case so much better.

 

[shmmeee]

Would be nice to know what the plan is.

I get the distinct impression we don't know because they don't know.

Maybe things will get clearer at the forum, but I seriously doubt it.

Seems a bit silly that we still don't even know if they want to be back at the Ricoh, let alone what sort of deal they are expecting.

 

[dadgad]

Norman, you make a very good point while giving clear examples of the contradictory nature of Sisu; their strategy, and professed aims.
They are deceived by their own deceptions - couldn't sing from the same hymn sheet if they tried.
We can only hope that somehow soon they do one.

 

[stupot07]

Stupot - I’m not getting at anything, there is no clarity and that’s the point.

If SISU can put forward an unambiguous plan to run the stadium and the football club as mutually-beneficial businesses, and to plough serious money into success on the pitch, they might stand a chance of getting more fans behind them.

But at every turn they contradict themselves (see above), and their actions over the last few years have demonstrated absolutely no footballing ambition in keeping with a city of our size. They’ve turned us into a small-town club with a third division mentality.

I for one am willing to be persuaded, but they need to make their case so much better.

What kind of footballing ambition would you like, given that we struggled financially both prior to them taking over and since they took over regularly losing £6-7m per annum. The clubs turnover in the relegation season was £10.8m and promoted reading, Southampton and West Ham's wage bill were all £28m+. Are you saying that sisu should have allowed the club to spend circa x3 it's turnover and lose £20m+ to have a punt?

It was richardson's 'ambition' that has led is to where we are now.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Danceswithhorses]

What kind of footballing ambition would you like

ANY football ambition would be a start

 

[skybluetony176]

Would be nice to know what the plan is.

I get the distinct impression we don't know because they don't know.

Maybe things will get clearer at the forum, but I seriously doubt it.

Seems a bit silly that we still don't even know if they want to be back at the Ricoh, let alone what sort of deal they are expecting.

We don't know because they know we wouldn't back it, either that or they're completely incompetent and are flying by the seat of their pants.

Whichever, they ain't the sort of owners any self respecting CCFC fan should be endorsing in any way shape or form.

 

[sky blue john]

I'm not entirely sure at what you're getting at.

The ideal scenario would be the club/or a company in the ccfc group accounts having the leasehold of the entire stadium.

Yes in league one and two FFP is based on football income, but in the championship it's based on allowable losses, so the more revenue you can recycle into the club the better. The point would be yes, FFP (league one) is based on football income only, but that's only players wages so there's a lot more costs that need to be paid which additional income would support.

Coincidently Reading have hotel which counts towards their turnover and quite a lot of the big PL clubs have an extensive property portfolio which ultimately supports the club.


http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...-united-secures-success-off-the-field-1232807


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Lol !!!
You really don't get it do you your buddies don't care what's best for CCFC !!!
They have already said if they got the stadium it wouldn't be in CCFC. Arvo have an ownership charge over any future property.

 

[Grendel]

ANY football ambition would be a start

Nice to see you couldn't respond to any if the points raised in stupots post.

 

[Grendel]

Lol !!!
You really don't get it do you your buddies don't care what's best for CCFC !!!
They have already said if they got the stadium it wouldn't be in CCFC. Arvo have an ownership charge over any future property.

"Your buddies" - pantomime season already I see.

 

[Danceswithhorses]

Nice to see you couldn't respond to any if the points raised in stupots post.

Stupot asked-What kind of footballing ambition would you like ?

I answered-Any kind of footballing ambition.

An emphasis on football, rather than spin (Labovtich) and litigation (Sepalla)

Valid question and answer.

In what way are your snide remarks, a response to Stupots post ?

 

[stupot07]

Lol !!!
You really don't get it do you your buddies don't care what's best for CCFC !!!
They have already said if they got the stadium it wouldn't be in CCFC. Arvo have an ownership charge over any future property.

"Your buddies" lol!!!

You're so big and clever. Lol!!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[hill83]

Lol !!!
You really don't get it do you your buddies don't care what's best for CCFC !!!
They have already said if they got the stadium it wouldn't be in CCFC. Arvo have an ownership charge over any future property.

Two exclamation marks do not a valid point make.

 

[Jack Griffin]

And who are we talking about – CCFC or SISU? Perhaps the interests of the football club and its current owners are diametrically opposed. The club desperately needs to have its mountain of debt written off and to start again with a clean sheet. But maybe the owners need to keep the club on basic life support for evermore, so it can carry on paying interest to them and open the door to property deals which won’t benefit the football club at all.

BANG, Norman hits the nail on the head!

 

[Astute]

"Your buddies" - pantomime season already I see.

Mellow out Grendel. It is another 6 months before your job as panto Dame starts again

 

[Hobo]

"Your buddies" - pantomime season already I see.

I won't contest the Pantomime Season, I bow to your superior knowledge of it, considering it employs you full time.

 

[dongonzalos]

12[SUP]th[/SUP] June 2014, final day of the Judicial Review (CCFC official website):-
“SISU QC responded by saying that CCFC were interested in a deal which provided them with match-day revenues, not an interest in the stadium. He recited that the issue which faced the Club was access to a share of revenue generated from the match days.”

12[SUP]th[/SUP] June 2014 Mark Labovitch (statement in CET)
“The club cannot be financially viable unless it can access the match-day revenues it generates. However, the council leadership has refused categorically to sell an interest in the stadium to the club. The club is therefore building its own stadium.”

24th April 2014 Supporters’ Consultative Group minutes (CCFC official website):-
Tim Fisher – “... the real value is not just in the stadium but land enablement and what is around it.”

Nobody can pretend it’s clear. Which is it - match day revenues or the stadium?

And who are we talking about – CCFC or SISU? Perhaps the interests of the football club and its current owners are diametrically opposed. The club desperately needs to have its mountain of debt written off and to start again with a clean sheet. But maybe the owners need to keep the club on basic life support for evermore, so it can carry on paying interest to them and open the door to property deals which won’t benefit the football club at all.

This lack of clarity is the cause of division between supporters. Financial Fair Play seems to severely restrict the kind of income that can be used to fund the football. So tell us the plan in plain English Joy - how would SISU owning the Ricoh benefit COVENTRY CITY FOOTBALL CLUB? I am genuinely open to persuasion – but PLEASE don’t say “access to match day revenues”, I’m too confused already!

It's a very valid point

First the issue was rent
That was sorted
Then the issue was food and beverages
80% was offered.
The the issue was complex web of contracts.
Around the same time the issue was price.

Then it was we have moved on completely we are building a new stadium.

Then it was Freehold or nothing.

Then back to we have moved on completely we are building a new stadium.

However we will still sue the council over lending ACL money to keep it afloat even though we have no interest in the Ricoh.

Then it was we can't do any business with those people as we cant trust them so we can't temporarily play at the Ricoh whilst building our new stadium.

Then they did a deal with the Higgs for the academy because they had no choice.
Showing they can do business with them if they have to.

Then in the build up to the JR it was we have moved on completely we are building a new stadium. They revelations in the JR will make you realise why.

At the same time encouraging fans to set up some group to get the council and SISU negotiating for the Ricoh.

It has also been a mater of days now for the land deal to be realised for the last month.

Now after a non remarkable JR utd we have been trying to negotiate but the council will not talk to us.

I think the OP has it bang on about mixed messages.

The club should submit a clear concise open later to the CET saying what they want and that they are prepared to pay a fair price for it.

They should request a rent deal at the Ricoh in the same deal they have at Northampton on the premise that meaningful negotiations begin over either a purchase if ACL or a long term f and B rent deal

 

[ccfcway]

What kind of footballing ambition would you like, given that we struggled financially both prior to them taking over and since they took over regularly losing £6-7m per annum. The clubs turnover in the relegation season was £10.8m and promoted reading, Southampton and West Ham's wage bill were all £28m+. Are you saying that sisu should have allowed the club to spend circa x3 it's turnover and lose £20m+ to have a punt?

It was richardson's 'ambition' that has led is to where we are now.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Richardson is long gone, yet some keep bringing him up.

There was a clear strategy in buying youth, trying to keep them or sell them on for a profit.SISU then changed the goalposts and we are now in this mess.

 

[Hobo]

It's a very valid point

First the issue was rent
That was sorted
Then the issue was food and beverages
80% was offered.
The the issue was complex web of contracts.
Around the same time the issue was price.

Then it was we have moved on completely we are building a new stadium.

Then it was Freehold or nothing.

Then back to we have moved on completely we are building a new stadium.

However we will still sue the council over lending ACL money to keep it afloat even though we have no interest in the Ricoh.

Then it was we can't do any business with those people as we cant trust them so we can't temporarily play at the Ricoh whilst building our new stadium.

Then they did a deal with the Higgs for the academy because they had no choice.
Showing they can do business with them if they have to.

Then in the build up to the JR it was we have moved on completely we are building a new stadium. They revelations in the JR will make you realise why.

At the same time encouraging fans to set up some group to get the council and SISU negotiating for the Ricoh.

It has also been a mater of days now for the land deal to be realised for the last month.

Now after a non remarkable JR utd we have been trying to negotiate but the council will not talk to us.

I think the OP has it bang on about mixed messages.

The club should submit a clear concise open later to the CET saying what they want and that they are prepared to pay a fair price for it.

They should request a rent deal at the Ricoh in the same deal they have at Northampton on the premise that meaningful negotiations begin over either a purchase if ACL or a long term f and B rent deal

And did not Anne Lucas suggest the reason distrust had grown around SISU for CCC (as I would suggest the majority of fans) was; "they never produced a clear future plan".

It is no good a certain faction on here saying "where is the evidence they will do that"....the onus has to be on them from the beginning, "this is what we intend to do and why"..SISU needed and should have got people on board.

Seppala in my opinion has isolated the whole organisation, she has even isolated some individuals in her own organisation at times and compounded the confusion around their goals.

 

[stupot07]

Richardson is long gone, yet some keep bringing him up.

There was a clear strategy in buying youth, trying to keep them or sell them on for a profit.SISU then changed the goalposts and we are now in this mess.

We are not in this mess because they changed the strategy, we're in this mess because they never properly tackled the wage bill and other high costs earlier enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[stupot07]

It's a very valid point

First the issue was rent
That was sorted
Then the issue was food and beverages
80% was offered.
The the issue was complex web of contracts.
Around the same time the issue was price.

Then it was we have moved on completely we are building a new stadium.

Then it was Freehold or nothing.

Then back to we have moved on completely we are building a new stadium.

However we will still sue the council over lending ACL money to keep it afloat even though we have no interest in the Ricoh.

Then it was we can't do any business with those people as we cant trust them so we can't temporarily play at the Ricoh whilst building our new stadium.

Then they did a deal with the Higgs for the academy because they had no choice.
Showing they can do business with them if they have to.

Then in the build up to the JR it was we have moved on completely we are building a new stadium. They revelations in the JR will make you realise why.

At the same time encouraging fans to set up some group to get the council and SISU negotiating for the Ricoh.

It has also been a mater of days now for the land deal to be realised for the last month.

Now after a non remarkable JR utd we have been trying to negotiate but the council will not talk to us.

I think the OP has it bang on about mixed messages.

The club should submit a clear concise open later to the CET saying what they want and that they are prepared to pay a fair price for it.

They should request a rent deal at the Ricoh in the same deal they have at Northampton on the premise that meaningful negotiations begin over either a purchase if ACL or a long term f and B rent deal

The rent was never sorted, and as we found out the £400k offer was a time limited offer, and it cross invoicing of F&B's, not actual revenue, but then again due to the crap contracts they have with compass they only make c10% profit anyway so that would have been a mere £75-80k.

We all know they would be better off at the Ricoh, and they should ask for a short term rent deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Moff]

Richardson is long gone, yet some keep bringing him up.

There was a clear strategy in buying youth, trying to keep them or sell them on for a profit.SISU then changed the goalposts and we are now in this mess.

Do you know SISU are shit, the worst owners a club could have, and I cant wait until the day they have gone. That is my opinion and I am sure nearly everyone shares it.

I then think back and remember why they own the club, and where the rot started with the 'lets have a punt' Richardson amassing huge debts, and having a wage bill bigger than our turnover.

Then guess what, we could never clear that debt, and went downhill rapidly so much so that we were desperate for new owners before we went bust, and you know who those were, who were ratified by the board and the Council et al, it was SISU.

So you know why people bring Richardson up, its because the rot started with him. So if you know the club, and know its history you would realise that and be able to deal with that small bit of history.

Oh and the bring in youth policy, I think you should check the in comings and outgoings of the club during that period. It may make you realise that wasn't really a policy, but if and when it was in place take a good look at how much we lost. Perhaps start with Richard Spong the youth team player and then Delorge, Zuniga, Normann etc etc

 

[stupot07]

You also forgot the selling HR bit...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Moff]

You also forgot the selling HR bit...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

I try to imagine its all a bad dream, but realise the nightmare stewardship of that joke of a Chairman, started us down this disastrous route, but hey dont shout it too loudly as some people prefer to pretend it didn't happen. :facepalm:

 

[Astute]

I try to imagine its all a bad dream, but realise the nightmare stewardship of that joke of a Chairman, started us down this disastrous route, but hey dont shout it too loudly as some people prefer to pretend it didn't happen. :facepalm:

Are you implying that some people don't know what Richardson did had a bad effect on the future of our club?

The biggest difference between Richardson and SISU is that Richardson fucked our club up by giving our supporters what they said they wanted. SISU are fucking our club up by doing what none of us other than RFC wants.

 

[Moff]

Are you implying that some people don't know what Richardson did had a bad effect on the future of our club?

The biggest difference between Richardson and SISU is that Richardson fucked our club up by giving our supporters what they said they wanted. SISU are fucking our club up by doing what none of us other than RFC wants.

No I am saying some people are either too dumb to acknowledge what Richardson did or like to bury their heads in the sand.

Re the rest, read my original post I dont disagree that SISU are f*ckers of the highest order, I just get sick of people being fucking pricks about what started this whole sack of shit off. Hope that clears things up.

Oh and Richardson didnt give all supporters what they wanted as I never wanted the twat to sell Highfield Road.

 

[Astute]

No I am saying some people are either too dumb to acknowledge what Richardson did or like to bury their heads in the sand.

Re the rest, read my original post I dont disagree that SISU are f*ckers of the highest order, I just get sick of people being fucking pricks about what started this whole sack of shit off. Hope that clears things up.

Oh and Richardson didnt give all supporters what they wanted as I never wanted the twat to sell Highfield Road.

Both Richardson and SISU are undefendable. But people on here try to defend both.

I don't know anyone who wanted our club to leave HR. But otherwise how many of us complained about the players we were signing or how much they were costing our club?

 

[dongonzalos]

The rent was never sorted, and as we found out the £400k offer was a time limited offer, and it cross invoicing of F&B's, not actual revenue, but then again due to the crap contracts they have with compass they only make c10% profit anyway so that would have been a mere £75-80k.

We all know they would be better off at the Ricoh, and they should ask for a short term rent deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Agree with your last paragraph

However re the rent Tim Fisher himself said the 400k was fine and that was no longer the issue

So the RENT was sorted then the goalposts moved

 

[Como]

That was then, now would probably be different.

 

[Moff]

Both Richardson and SISU are undefendable. But people on here try to defend both.

I don't know anyone who wanted our club to leave HR. But otherwise how many of us complained about the players we were signing or how much they were costing our club?

Fair point, but come on surely we were both shocked at the signing of Colin Hendry

 

[Calista]

What kind of footballing ambition would you like

I appreciate what you’re saying, and obviously the previous regime got us into a scandalous mess. But that’s a long time ago now, and SISU had the chance to start afresh with much of the debt eradicated, yet through utter incompetence they’ve taken us ten steps backwards.

By footballing ambition, I don’t mean just chucking money at the playing budget – I mean understanding that when running a football club, NOTHING WORKS UNLESS YOU PUT THE FOOTBALL FIRST. There have been plenty of times when the chance was there to build momentum. An obvious example was when Mark Robins started to get the whole city behind him. They could have capitalised on that feeling, shelved the stadium dispute for a while, kept Robins happy and swung public opinion behind them through success on the field. With a bit of patience and honest talking, they would have had a much better chance of a stake in the stadium business (or whatever it is they want – I still don’t know). All by prioritising the football.

Since they took over, they’ve sold an entire team of players who were capable of challenging at the top of the Championship and maybe getting into the Prem. They’ve allowed a string of talented people to leave too soon and for too little money. In doing so, they’ve turned off thousands of fans and shrunk their gate income, most obviously through relegation to the third tier. All this even BEFORE the mental move to Northampton.

Just my opinion – and in my view they STILL haven’t got it. OK there’s a fine emphasis on developing young players, but they’ve turned into us into Crewe Alexandra, only with much lower gates and the debts of a small Latin American country.

 

[Hobo]

Wherever we play there will be costs. A stadium and running costs. It doesn't matter whether it is ACL, AEG, Compas, hotel chains, shops they will all want something out of it.

Once your costs are covered the club should be a least sharing some of the profit....the sharing bit will happen wherever we play, own stadium or rented, if other people are involved.