Revenues - how much are they worth? (40 Viewers)

[Jack Griffin]

The problem with that being that in order for that to work, you have to believe that SISU have any plans to build a new stadium. What evidence can you supply that shows they're doing anything other than smokescreening in that regard?

How can you deal with a party who's medium term solution seems to be nothing but a work of fantasy?

Here is the way I'm thinking about it at the moment..

SISU are genuinely thinking about a new stadium but they won't put any money into it, what they want is to cut a deal on a site of similar size to the Arena project* where they can effectively get a league one standard stadium built for free and obtain ownership with full rights, later to sell it on at a profit or (less likely) become a landlord to the club and get a good long term revenue.

But there is another plan, which is to seize the Arena and its land.. with similar consequences.

Meanwhile they are content to hole up in Northampton running the club on a cost neutral basis, citing difficulties in getting an agreement with ACL or finalising a land deal (any planning application will be a long drawn out and bitter process, that happens before land is bought) for as long as they possibly can, stretching the 5 year deadline the FL set and creating press stories that generate false optimism in the fan base about 'wanting to negotiate' etc.. I figure what they really mean is they want the other party to capitulate!

There are no identifiable sites right on the edge of Coventry, so part of the problem they have is convincing the FL to move the club up to 9 miles*.

The move will cripple the club's potential forever, but if SISU can get £10-20M for the club or a steady long term rent for the ground (see the hypocrisy here) and leave the club in other hands, they will.

However, it is not the answer in to give in to SISU like Grendel & his mates want and anyway that decision is in the hands of CCC & the Higgs Charity.

* Tim Fisher has made statements that seem to back this up.

 

---

[Deleted member 5849]

But it's a short term rent deal based on a next phase that - all evidence suggests - isn't happening. How is that good for the club in any way? And given SISU know there is 'no new stadium', they're unlikely to enter negotiations when they know the knight in shining armour hasn't got a horse. Never will have and was never going to

Better the club in the right city than out of it, that's how.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Or to expand...

You don't 'win' against someone like SISU by setting in opposition. That's their whole way of working! On the contrary, you fall into the palms of their hands. Rather... you play the game, cut off the options and where the game can be played and, you never know, the beautiful thing with playing the game is it might even bring resolution too.

So a new ground is Plan A? Fine. Play that game, for the resolution is to either stop Plan A being used as a tactic... or it brings the club back. It's a win-win as far as one is available in current circumstances.

To set in opposition however, means that firstly you have to engage with some of Grendel's points and actually deal with them (it is no point the club coming back without resolution, as otherwise in five years time the same thing will happen again) and also, in setting in opposition, you end up with an impasse for an eternity, which benefits nobody.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Better the club in the right city than out of it, that's how.

Well, that's obvious. I wouldn't disagree with that. But it would be a short term plan based on no next phase. For the stability of this club, it needs better. If there was a new stadium, your suggestion would be perfect. But there's not. The stadium farce needs to be outed for the folly it is. Once everyone accepts its never going to happen, there's the basis for candid debate. Honestly, the current situation is akin to negotiating a deal that culminates in Father Christmas riding down Broadgate on a unicorn. It just has to stop

 

[Grendel]

I sold a car to my mate. He has now hit hard times and is selling that car. Cheeky sod won't give it to me for nothing, it was mine after all.

At times Grendel you sound like Tim Fisher.

Dreadful analogy showing an almost embarrassing lack of awareness.

 

[ccfcway]

showing an almost embarrassing lack of awareness.

1) we will be building a new stadium in 2-4 years
2) we will have access to 100% of revenues

Thats all we really need to be aware of isnt it ?

 

[sky blue john]

Better the club in the right city than out of it, that's how.

We all agree on this, the tricky bit is at what cost to CCFC ?
And when I mean cost to CCFC I mean debt unsustainable interest and fees making us uncompetitive on the pitch.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Or to expand...

You don't 'win' against someone like SISU by setting in opposition. That's their whole way of working! On the contrary, you fall into the palms of their hands. Rather... you play the game, cut off the options and where the game can be played and, you never know, the beautiful thing with playing the game is it might even bring resolution too.

So a new ground is Plan A? Fine. Play that game, for the resolution is to either stop Plan A being used as a tactic... or it brings the club back. It's a win-win as far as one is available in current circumstances.

To set in opposition however, means that firstly you have to engage with some of Grendel's points and actually deal with them (it is no point the club coming back without resolution, as otherwise in five years time the same thing will happen again) and also, in setting in opposition, you end up with an impasse for an eternity, which benefits nobody.

With respect, I disagree. I think SISU react best to having options and the chance for duplicity taken from them. Remember the 'we've moved on' fare when they first left the Ricoh; well look how quickly that's changed now that the JR rulings have taken a potential path from them.

We know that some bodies have completed FOI requests of neighbouring councils with regards planning approaches. The Telegraph have been proactive of late, but not in a cutting way. What if they diverted their efforts with regards a proper expose on the stadium farce - some vigorous reporting. Getting Sandra Garlick to come up with some tangible signs of progress. A small amount of investigative journalism would place together a narrative that truly has no sense to it. Let's out it. Let's get it out there, and challenge Fisher to either meet it head on, or stop this crap.

Soon, the legal avenues will be firmly closed to them. Let's stop the equally distracting folly of the stadium nonsense and then negotiate with the truth that's left. So my view is that they need 'options' or distractions closing; not being indulged.

Note to add the FL could have played a role in achieving this months ago.....

 

[Deleted member 5849]

With respect, I disagree with your disagreement. The way to close options is by engaging with them, not by automatically dismissing them.

Personally, wrt media, I'd let Les Reid loose on investigating the council side of things, get in somebody like Peter Temple to investigate the football club financial side of things, and publish anything and everything...

 

[Grendel]

1) we will be building a new stadium in 2-4 years
2) we will have access to 100% of revenues

Thats all we really need to be aware of isnt it ?

I know you like repetition as proved by your obsession by the dull and boring Portsmouth thread (that was you wasn't it?). However, even by your standards this is a bit tiresome isn't it?

 

[Grendel]

With respect, I disagree with your disagreement. The way to close options is by engaging with them, not by automatically dismissing them.

..

Exactly - something most on here fail to grasp. It's shake a fist at Timmy Fishhook and he will be embarrassed and say I surrender.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

With respect, I disagree with your disagreement. The way to close options is by engaging with them, not by automatically dismissing them.

Personally, wrt media, I'd let Les Reid loose on investigating the council side of things, get in somebody like Peter Temple to investigate the football club financial side of things, and publish anything and everything...

But it's not automatically dismissing the new stadium, is it? It's to say that, despite repeated promises of evidence, land deals being weeks away, and the like - nothing has happened. Zero. Yet in any short term plan, this fable still sits as the end-game? Neah; I prefer to deal in absolutes. Let's get the crap out of the way and deal with the actual building blocks either side has. Or doesn't have.

And I have no problems with all information - be it damning to any side in this farce - being out there. However, remember the JR process didn't yield much more clarity

 

[skybluefred]

Of course it makes a difference "we" didn't sell the rights - a bankrupt company did

Which "bankrupt company" was that and when did it go bankrupt. Or is it just another fiction of your wild imagination.

 

[Grendel]

Which "bankrupt company" was that and when did it go bankrupt. Or is it just another fiction of your wild imagination.

The company that sold the rights no longer trades. It's not difficult.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

The company that sold the rights no longer trades. It's not difficult.

I'll agree with you; it's not difficult. As you'll hopefully now agree with me; it's irrelevent

 

[skybluefred]

whatever the revenues are worth surely if the club wanted them that badly it would be cheaper to buy them than build a new stadium?

Very true--but that would take common sense and decency.

 

[James Smith]

What people continue to ignore is one clear fact. Sisu will not be leaving this club until they have a tangible asset to sell.
Potential buyers will not be interested if the club is just playing at the Ricoh Arena. It has no value.

The club needs to obtain some form of revenue control or we will never get out of the situation.

The previous rent deal is gone finished - the lease does not exist. All prior rules no longer exist. The revenues are without the football club worth nothing to anyone. The club is the only reason they will be worth one penny.

The failure for people to grasp the fact is puzzling. The best solution is a short term rent deal which includes these revenues. This would have three benefits;

- it makes the club a saleable proposition. Potential new owners could negotiate prior to purchase a deal safe in the knowledge the club at least has some competitive ability with such an arrangement

- the company that owns the catering facility has a long term prospect it will eventually yield some revenues on a consistent basis. The ultimate ideal of course for them would be new owner, long term lease or purchase and a vision of higher crowds and enhanced returns

ACL will have a permanent tenant back which creates business stability - makes sponsorship
Negotiations easier and assists their business model with confirmed cash flow.

The only reason anyone wants them to pay is because it's sisu.

This is a sure fire way if seeing them here for a lot longer. I thought people wanted them out.

I actually don't believe Sisu will be here forever (unless Joy really is that stubborn) because at some point the amount of money invested in this venture will be greater than the amount produced by a sale. At some point they will suffer from the law of diminishing returns and holding on to OEG and SBS&L will cease to be worthwhile. The new stadium is therefore essential to get us back closer to our home city and the bulk of our fans.

Of course this financial situation means as a club we're totally fecked but then if we stay too many seasons longer in Northampton I think that's a road we're travelling down faster and faster already.

 

[sky blue john]

With respect, I disagree with your disagreement. The way to close options is by engaging with them, not by automatically dismissing them.

Exactly - something most on here fail to grasp. It's shake a fist at Timmy Fishhook and he will be embarrassed and say I surrender.

Lol !
Are you two blind ?
Has engaging and discussions not already been done to death between all parties ?
What is the saying once bitten twice shy !

 

[James Smith]

Let's get one thing clear we don't know how well or not IEC are doing without us and the Olympics. In the same way we don't know how well or badly ACL are doing and won't until the next set of accounts are audited and published. So any suggestion of either company doing well or badly based on us not being at the Ricoh is pure speculation. The same goes for OEG and SBS&L.

 

[skybluefred]

The company that sold the rights no longer trades. It's not difficult.

That company was never declared legally bankrupt--it sold it's business to sisu.

 

[skybluetony176]

I actually don't believe Sisu will be here forever (unless Joy really is that stubborn) because at some point the amount of money invested in this venture will be greater than the amount produced by a sale. At some point they will suffer from the law of diminishing returns and holding on to OEG and SBS&L will cease to be worthwhile. The new stadium is therefore essential to get us back closer to our home city and the bulk of our fans.

Of course this financial situation means as a club we're totally fecked but then if we stay too many seasons longer in Northampton I think that's a road we're travelling down faster and faster already.

There investment is already past the point of making a return if you take Fulham as an example. Al Fayed made a loss on his investment.

 

[Grendel]

Let's get one thing clear we don't know how well or not IEC are doing without us and the Olympics. In the same way we don't know how well or badly ACL are doing and won't until the next set of accounts are audited and published. So any suggestion of either company doing well or badly based on us not being at the Ricoh is pure speculation. The same goes for OEG and SBS&L.

We do know that IEC are not getting much revenue every other Saturday.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Let's get one thing clear we don't know how well or not IEC are doing without us and the Olympics. In the same way we don't know how well or badly ACL are doing and won't until the next set of accounts are audited and published. So any suggestion of either company doing well or badly based on us not being at the Ricoh is pure speculation. The same goes for OEG and SBS&L.

Absolutely true. But what is factual is ACL's balance sheet - which is pretty decent given historical trading. It could, therefore and if needed, weather the storm of a few rainy years if it needed to. If you look af CCFC at Sixfields to starve ACL into submission; I don't think the football club in any way that's recognisable, would survive beyond a point which had broken ACL. That's the worry. In fact, that's the trend

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

We do know that IEC are not getting much revenue every other Saturday.

But let's not lose sight that Compass operate in 10,000 different locations and have a turnover of £1.8 billion.They won't be over the moon with what's happening in Coventry, but won't be smoked out by SISU any time soon either

 

[skybluetony176]

We do know that IEC are not getting much revenue every other Saturday.

That doesn't mean that they're not making over the period of the year without getting much revenue every other Saturday. Like James said we won't know until their next set of accounts are back. The only thing you can say with conviction is that their books will look better than ours.

Our books are what you should be concerning yourself with.

Despite your protest the other day that this site should be called ACL talk it's you that do the majority of the talking about ACL. You were the only person I recall starting a thread on ACL's last set of books. Anyone who starts a thread on something must want to talk about it.

How is your accountant by the way? Did he pass GCSE maths in the end?

 

[James Smith]

We do know that IEC are not getting much revenue every other Saturday.

So you can back that statement up with figures can you? Otherwise it's a guess at best.

 

[Jack Griffin]

But let's not lose sight that Compass operate in 10,000 different locations and have a turnover of £1.8 billion.They won't be over the moon with what's happening in Coventry, but won't be smoked out by SISU any time soon either

The compass group accounts summary highlights.... 500,000 employees, 50,000 locations, £17.5 billion revenue, 7% profit margin, 47p earnings per share (currently listed at £9.53 each).. they must be quaking in their boots at SISU's nastiness.

Mmmm.. might buy some of them shares..

 

[James Smith]

There investment is already past the point of making a return if you take Fulham as an example. Al Fayed made a loss on his investment.

We don't know for certain that it is, but it's going to come at some point if the financial situation doesn't improve.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

The compass group accounts summary highlights.... 500,000 employees, £17.5 billion revenue, 7% profit margin, 47p earnings per share (currently listed at £9.53 each).. they must be quaking in their boots at SISU's nastiness.

Mmmm.. might buy some of them shares..

Yup. My figures were for UK only. Globally, they're huge. Coventry won't be be worrying them unduly. This all just goes to add to the damn futility of it all

 

[Grendel]

That doesn't mean that they're not making over the period of the year without getting much revenue every other Saturday. Like James said we won't know until their next set of accounts are back. The only thing you can say with conviction is that their books will look better than ours.

Our books are what you should be concerning yourself with.

Despite your protest the other day that this site should be called ACL talk it's you that do the majority of the talking about ACL. You were the only person I recall starting a thread on ACL's last set of books. Anyone who starts a thread on something must want to talk about it.

How is your accountant by the way? Did he pass GCSE maths in the end?

You mentioned ACL 3 times in 1 paragraph.

 

[skybluetony176]

You mentioned ACL 3 times in 1 paragraph.

Yes, yes I did. Your blood must be boiling so much that you continued a conversion on ACL by using ACL as a diversion from the points I made about your obsession with ACL. Oh no I've done it again. Are you ready to explode?

 

[RegTheDonk]

We do know that IEC are not getting much revenue every other Saturday.

Better tell Tim he's made a clanger then. The fool moved us 35 miles away because he wanted F&B.

 

[ccfcway]

even by your standards this is a bit tiresome isn't it?

talk about pot and kettle.

Constantly going on about ACL and revenues, yet knowing they will have no long term impact on our club.

 

[chiefdave]

It's absolutely correct to say that the past sale of the clubs share in ACL and the associated revenues is now irrelevant. Any deal made now will be starting from a blank sheet of paper but I think it is naive to expect that if ACL are sat opposite Sepalla, Fisher and Labovich both sides will just forget the past, it doesn't work like that. The need is for both sides to agree to put the past behind them so we can move forward, that is why we need SISU to get on with paying the money out of escrow and confirm they will be taking no further legal action.

However it needs to be accepted that currently the club, whoever owns it, has no entitlement to the revenue streams previously sold. That would be the same for anyone else who wanted to use the Ricoh but seems to be something that some struggle with. The reality of hiring a stadium, based on my experience at least, is that you don't get access to those additional revenues. In fact in many cases you have to give more away, for example if you hire Wembley Stadium you have to agree to sell tickets through their preferred seller, with them taking a cut; you have to pay an additional fee to sell merchandise and you have no access to sell any corporate facilities so you can't sell them on. You get the ticket money and that's it.

If the club want access to those revenues, without being owners or operators of the stadium, they have to make an offer for them and that offer has to be something that is attractive to IEC, which is after all a private company who's primary concern will be making money. Its too simple to say IEC have lost out on 23 events with a 10K attendance generating 100K profit. That's all true but you have to offset it against what they lose if they agree to stage those events again. Given that the fixtures aren't available until a few weeks before the season and the club needs first option on all possible match days there will be an impact on their ability to take other bookings.

What none of us know is how those bookings stack up financially when compared against our matches? I mentioned the Insomnia event on another post, that's 10K a day for 3 days (and evenings) twice a year. I think it would be a fair guess that people who are at the Ricoh all day spend more per head than those who are there for a couple of hours on matchday. There will also be less setup and breakdown costs (4 instances compares to 46) so a possible increase in profit margin. As I said we have no idea of the numbers as we don't have access to that information but its not out of the question that those two events will generate as much if not more for IEC.

The thing I can't help but keep coming back to is if, as SISU claim, any return would be temporary it is ridiculous to let a deal stand or fall on what happens with these revenues. The increase for the clubs in other revenues will dwarf these so why let the whole deal fall down on access to these revenues, why not just forget about them? If we take SISU at that word regarding the short term nature of any deal forgetting about these revenues would 'lose' us somewhere in the region of £300K, how much are we losing in ticketing, merchandise, sponsorship etc by not playing in our home city? It's absolute nonsense to think this is where all our problems lie.

 

[Colin1883]

Why would sisu want to buy anything if they're only planning on staying 3 years?