Ricoh Arena and Development Land Value ? (13 Viewers)

[Astute]

There is no suggestion the club has a cash flow problem is there?

Is that why we have been able to keep all of our best players from last season?

 

---

[letsallsingtogether]

Fuck me if they are interested why do they not make a bid.
As Sisu have no cash flow problems surly they could afford say 10 million with the surrounding land to develop and all serviced by it own train station,
has to be better then a back water shed somewhere in Warwickshire.
But then again what would a simple CCFC supporter know.

The lease is worthless though as it has no tenant. That's my point. The stadium won't attract a lease purchaser as it has no marketability, no sponsor and even the car parking has been taken away - the club would be the only interested party.

 

[Jack Griffin]

There is no suggestion the club has a cash flow problem is there?

I'm literally LOLing.

 

[Astute]

The lease is worthless though as it has no tenant. That's my point. The stadium won't attract a lease purchaser as it has no marketability, no sponsor and even the car parking has been taken away - the club would be the only interested party.

No tenant? Has the casino gone? Has the hotel been sold? Have all the conference rooms disappeared?

Only the football part has no tenant. And we all know why this is.

 

[skybluetony176]

Yes, my bias is obvious - it has been the same for many years. I want ACL and CCFC under the same umbrella. I want the club to benefit from every pence spent at the stadium.
I have said it countless times. I said it before most on here believed FFP would ever become an issue.

But I don't want sisu to own the Ricoh. I have said that just as many times. I want SBS&L to own the club and ACL (or equivalent management company), but not the freehold, not the stadium itself.
Sisu own SBS&L for now, but that can change. If they lose the JR - maybe they will walk and invite Byng to buy the club.
But whoever owns the club, it is imperative they also own ACL.

It's just a shame that sisu won't confirm that SBS & L will be the entity that would own ACL or another equivalent management company.

It would be so easy to do this don't you ever wonder why they won't?

 

[Astute]

It's just a shame that sisu won't confirm that SBS & L will be the entity that would own ACL or another equivalent management company.

It would be so easy to do this don't you ever wonder why they won't?

Timothy admitted that it wouldn't be owned by our club. What he wouldn't admit to was how much rent our club would be charged.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

The lease is worthless though as it has no tenant. That's my point. The stadium won't attract a lease purchaser as it has no marketability, no sponsor and even the car parking has been taken away - the club would be the only interested party.

Even if there's only one buyer for a product, it doesn't necessarily mean that the product is worthless. Maybe someone like AEG would see worth in having a lease there, if it went to a tender could SISU really risk not being the highest bidder?

 

[skybluetony176]

The lease is worthless though as it has no tenant. That's my point. The stadium won't attract a lease purchaser as it has no marketability, no sponsor and even the car parking has been taken away - the club would be the only interested party.

Are the hotel and casino not tenants then? Have Ricoh withdrawn their sponsorship? So it doesn't have a single booking for the next twelve months? I thought it was only car park C they give up as part of the loan agreement with CCC? What makes you so sure that Sisu would be the only interested party? Why not someone like AEG for example? Rumour has it that they're very good at running this type of thing.

 

[Godiva]

Which is what most of us want. But most of us don't constantly try and make out that ACL is losing money when there is no proof at all of it being true.

No, that is not the impression I get reading here. I get the impression that it would be excellent going back to where we came from a year ago. A rental deal. Which is NOT the long term solution that will see the club ever get back where we were 15 years ago.

I also get the impression that keeping ACL outside the ccfc family is what many fights for. That this is more important than securing the clubs future.
If ACL goes bust, so what? Another will emerge as the stadium requires management.

ACL made a profit when the club was playing there. When the club paid £1.3m per year.
The club helped keeping the stadium management company healthy.
It should be the other way around - the stadium management should help keep the club healthy.

 

[Godiva]

Timothy admitted that it wouldn't be owned by our club. What he wouldn't admit to was how much rent our club would be charged.

Yes - he said it wouldn't be owned by the club - and the club is Otium, remember?
The ONLY way sisu will ever make any money is if they sell on the club and stadium management in a package. Nobody would buy one without the other.
And the only way the club would benefit from the revenue made by the stadium management company would be if they were in the same group.

Oh - and the council issues the lease. How hard can it be to have it written the club and lease should always be in the same group?

 

[skybluetony176]

Timothy admitted that it wouldn't be owned by our club. What he wouldn't admit to was how much rent our club would be charged.

You'd think that the latter would worry every CCFC fan wouldn't you.

Who at the club is going to bring up a crippling rent when the landlord is your boss. Or put the club on rent strike when the landlord is your boss. Or start talking about building our own stadium to get out of the mess when the landlord is also your boss.

We could end up limping from season to season with no investment in the club because all the profit is being extracted by your landlord, who's also your boss.

 

[skybluetony176]

Yes - he said it wouldn't be owned by the club - and the club is Otium, remember?
The ONLY way sisu will ever make any money is if they sell on the club and stadium management in a package. Nobody would buy one without the other.
And the only way the club would benefit from the revenue made by the stadium management company would be if they were in the same group.

Oh - and the council issues the lease. How hard can it be to have it written the club and lease should always be in the same group?

I love the way people keep saying that nobody would buy the club without the stadium conveniently forgetting that that's exactly what sisu did and are you seriously telling me that nobody has ever bought or sold a football club without the stadium?

That's straight out the same book of lame evidence as "every football financial expert says that no club can survive without ownership of its ground" then it turns out we're far from the only club in the world who don't own there stadium and I'm still looking for a list of every football financial expert, it seems very illusive.

 

[Astute]

No, that is not the impression I get reading here. I get the impression that it would be excellent going back to where we came from a year ago. A rental deal. Which is NOT the long term solution that will see the club ever get back where we were 15 years ago.

I also get the impression that keeping ACL outside the ccfc family is what many fights for. That this is more important than securing the clubs future.
If ACL goes bust, so what? Another will emerge as the stadium requires management.

ACL made a profit when the club was playing there. When the club paid £1.3m per year.
The club helped keeping the stadium management company healthy.
It should be the other way around - the stadium management should help keep the club healthy.

We have as many that would be happy with a long term rental agreement as would only be happy with the whole thing handed on a plate to SISU.

Where the disagreements are would be not putting the long term future in the hands of SISU. The best way and easiest way forward to me could be SISU paying off Higgs and sharing ACL with CCC. All the money going to our club and a peppercorn rent being charged. The idea of CCC keeping a share would be to stop SISU charging whatever rent they want. I am the same as the vast majority of us and don't trust them in the slightest.

 

[Astute]

Yes - he said it wouldn't be owned by the club - and the club is Otium, remember?
The ONLY way sisu will ever make any money is if they sell on the club and stadium management in a package. Nobody would buy one without the other.
And the only way the club would benefit from the revenue made by the stadium management company would be if they were in the same group.

Oh - and the council issues the lease. How hard can it be to have it written the club and lease should always be in the same group?

And how much does SISU agree with and keep to legal documents and contracts without using litigation to get their own way?

 

[letsallsingtogether]

KerChing nice one Tony

I love the way people keep saying that nobody would buy the club without the stadium conveniently forgetting that that's exactly what sisu did and are you seriously telling me that nobody has ever bought or sold a football club without the stadium?

That's straight out the same book of lame evidence as "every football financial expert says that no club can survive without ownership of its ground" then it turns out we're far from the only club in the world who don't own there stadium and I'm still looking for a list of every football financial expert, it seems very illusive.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I love the way people keep saying that nobody would buy the club without the stadium conveniently forgetting that that's exactly what sisu did

Which is surely the best argument for getting them united...

 

[skybluetony176]

Which is surely the best argument for getting them united...

If you mean it would future proof the club from another sisu type turning up in the future you may well have a point.

I just ain't convinced that sisu uniting club and stadium (if that's what they will do) will automatically mean that they will offload us as a package to make a profit.

For starters I don't think it will necessarily make them a profit.

 

[Moff]

When we owned a stadium, due to gross mismanagement, we ended up nearly 60 million in debt.

We sold it and were bought by SISU without a stadium, and are now 70 million in debt, and rising.

Both are stories of tragic mismanagement and abuse of our once proud club, by people who are hardly fit to run a pub team let alone a league club.

Whilst I dont want to ignite any of the current arguments, I would always want us to be in the first scenario, with a ground we own, with its revenues, as my hazy memories of that period take me back to a time of Premier League football, and better days, which without catastrophic overspending perhaps would have seen us better equipped to bounce back after relegation.

I want the club and the stadium back hand in hand, just not in SISU'S hands, but will it take SISU to get it, before they will move on?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

If you mean it would future proof the club from another sisu type turning up in the future you may well have a point.

I just ain't convinced that sisu uniting club and stadium (if that's what they will do) will automatically mean that they will offload us as a package to make a profit.

For starters I don't think it will necessarily make them a profit.

Profit wouldn't be a profit from when they took over the club (first time).

 

[letsallsingtogether]

So to make a profit how much would they have to sell the club for?

Who would spend that amount of money even if we owned the Ricoh?
The only way they could would be to offset the loan for buying the club within the club as the glaziers did at ManU.

That would put us in even more debt then we are now who could sustain that?

Profit wouldn't be a profit from when they took over the club (first time).

 

[Como]

How much is a first division team with no immediate prospects worth?

I thought most such teams are lucky to break even, making a profit seems very unlikely.

 

[sky blue john]

You'd think that the latter would worry every CCFC fan wouldn't you.

Who at the club is going to bring up a crippling rent when the landlord is your boss. Or put the club on rent strike when the landlord is your boss. Or start talking about building our own stadium to get out of the mess when the landlord is also your boss.

We could end up limping from season to season with no investment in the club because all the profit is being extracted by your landlord, who's also your boss.

Exactly and this would be on top of the 1.8million a year interest fees to Arvo !!!

 

[skybluetony176]

Exactly and this would be on top of the 1.8million a year interest fees to Arvo !!!

Interest rates and high rent are the only way I can see SISU/ARVO ever getting there money back with a return out of our club.

Take Fulham as an example. Look at what Mohamed Al Fayed paid for it. Look at how much he had to lend them (interest free by the way) to get them into the premiership and keep them there. Then look at what he sold them for. He made a loss.

 

[Astute]

Interest rates and high rent are the only way I can see SISU/ARVO ever getting there money back with a return out of our club.

Take Fulham as an example. Look at what Mohamed Al Fayed paid for it. Look at how much he had to lend them (interest free by the way) to get them into the premiership and keep them there. Then look at what he sold them for. He made a loss.

And has offered to buy them back for half the amount he sold them for

 

[skybluetony176]

And has offered to buy them back for half the amount he sold them for

Don't give sisu ideas

 

[letsallsingtogether]

So sisu wil buy it back for half of nothing?

Don't give sisu ideas

 

[letsallsingtogether]

But you have never defended it against the likes of sixfields?
I wonder why?
How can any City supporter not defend there own ground?

I think you'll find I said facility wise the Ricoh was far superior than high field road.

 

[Grendel]

But you have never defended it against the likes of sixfields?
I wonder why?
How can any City supporter not defend there own ground?

It's not our own ground it's the councils.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

So is Sixfields???????????

I hope you enjoy it ....

It's not our own ground it's the councils.

 

[skybluetony176]

It's not our own ground it's the councils.

What a ridiculous notion. I spent my whole childhood and a good part of my adult life living in a council house and it was always my home.

Home is where the heart is. Bricks and mortar do not make a home.

 

[Terry Gibson's perm]

By the end of our time at Highfield Road we rented that as well.

 

[Grendel]

What a ridiculous notion. I spent my whole childhood and a good part of my adult life living in a council house and it was always my home.

Home is where the heart is. Bricks and mortar do not make a home.

Its not ridiculous. Swansea rent but that is their home. We don't have their benefits. We are very much the tenant not the owner and until this is recognised we will not have the team back in Coventry.

 

[skybluetony176]

Its not ridiculous. Swansea rent but that is their home. We don't have their benefits. We are very much the tenant not the owner and until this is recognised we will not have the team back in Coventry.

No different to our council house. We were the tenants not the owners. I don't know what you're trying to spin this into but quite frankly you're pissing in the wind.

The only thing that the Ricoh hasn't got going for it is that the club has never enjoyed any real success there. If we had a promotion season there we'd have made some history for ourselves there and it would give us all some extra attachment to the place. This isn't the fault of the fabric of the building this is down to the fabric of our owner's. Past and present.

Whether you and sisu like it or not it is our home. Which is why the suxfields folly is a resounding failure and why a new ground in the Coventry "area" is doomed for failure. Unless sisu are going to build another ground in the city of Coventry the club is doomed to failure.

You and sisu need to realise this otherwise there will be no club to return to Coventry. When they purchased the club they did not buy a benign cold corporation, they purchased a living breathing entity. Something they've never understood and something you have forgotten.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

That could be never then.
Sisu won't pay to get it as they say it is worthless?

So we end up paying Northampton council rent instead and still have no rights to anything brilliant business that.


When we move into our newly built stadium fuck me we will be renting that as well so it looks like we will always be homeless.

Tim said football club will get add on Oh right and we believe him.:facepalm:

Its not ridiculous. Swansea rent but that is their home. We don't have their benefits. We are very much the tenant not the owner and until this is recognised we will not have the team back in Coventry.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

You always mention Swansea if they are that good fuck off and support them.

Its not ridiculous. Swansea rent but that is their home. We don't have their benefits. We are very much the tenant not the owner and until this is recognised we will not have the team back in Coventry.