Are People really Bleating? (3 Viewers)

[Otis]

But not as high risk as CCFC building a new stadium with only 12,000 seats.

Sounds more like a suicide strategy to me.

 

---

[skybluetony176]

Been on holiday so struggling to get up to speed on all this.

Seems to me that but for their stubborn hard-nosed approach to things...SISU could have actually got the prize they truly desired. Greed perhaps got the better of them?!
Despite the comments made about no offer for CCFC...I think it is pretty much inevitable that Wasps ownership will foster good relations & if CCFC get some momentum of success going - the offer will come. The Ricoh owners will make much more hand over fist profits with a successful football & rugby club than ever they are likely to with a successful rugby club & a football tenant.
Give it 4yrs...the bid will come - & that ownership will I believe cement CCFC in the City AT the Ricoh!


PUSB

It's a good theory. Sooner rather than later would be better IMO. SISU's mere presence is enough to keep our club down (in more sense than one). The road to recovery starts with them hitting the road for me.

 

[torchomatic]

Ah, here we go, the first post of the day trying to justify the franchise.

Of course, fans travel to see those teams from far flung places, however they are established teams. They haven't just been picked up and plonked down 80 miles away.

I agree it is a high risk stratergy, moving any club over distance is. You have to re establish your fan base. But rugby fans do travel for top class rugby. People follow Leicester and Northampton from Coventry. People from the Black Country followed Worcester when they were in the Prem. That is fact.

So coming to Coventry they have no competition north until you get to Sale. I think they could have only done better by going to Birmingham and they did look at options there. The fact they play on a Sunday makes a difference as it frees up a potential fan base of people who play club on a Saturday.

They say they would have gone bust in three to five years if they stayed where they were, so perhaps even a high risk stratergy is worth it to them?

Don't get me wrong here, I am not a fan of this deal. I think it has potentially damaged the future of CCFC and CRC. It is unfair on the existing Wasps fans, although I detect a change in mood of a few of their fans on the message boards now Wasps have briefed them.

All I can do is support CCFC and CRC as best I can around my work pattern. I encourage other people to do the same, not everyone can attend every game, but when you can make the effort and go!

 

[MichaelCCFC]

Yup Bazza, that is pretty much the way I see it, they will run the club at a profit for the next 4-5 years, suck the profit out to cover losses & then sell a profitable company on for half decent money up front & some deal to pay premiums on completion of promotions (like SISU did with GR etc.)

Agree with this Jack except for the bit about selling. sisu's model for ccfc has been clear for some time - no investment and no losses to be incurred (ie playing budget plus other costs always to be no greater than income) and take out any possible profit from player sales and windfalls like Arsenal. It means they're not losing any money week to week and occasionally can help themselves to the odd few hundred thousand pounds, even £1m+ sometimes, and I can see that's enough to keep sisu from liquidating ccfc. But I don't see why sisu would reach a point of letting go of the money they can continue to squeeze out of the club nor why anyone else would pay decent money up front to buy ccfc.

 

[Ian1779]

sisu's model for ccfc has been clear for some time - no investment and no losses to be incurred (ie playing budget plus other costs always to be no greater than income)

Shouldn't this be a model for all clubs - at a basic level?

Investment and withdrawing monies from club... well that's a different aspect, and one that SISU need to think very carefully about if they ever have any intention of making anywhere near the money they have put in back

 

[stupot07]

Agree with this Jack except for the bit about selling. sisu's model for ccfc has been clear for some time - no investment and no losses to be incurred (ie playing budget plus other costs always to be no greater than income) and take out any possible profit from player sales and windfalls like Arsenal. It means they're not losing any money week to week and occasionally can help themselves to the odd few hundred thousand pounds, even £1m+ sometimes, and I can see that's enough to keep sisu from liquidating ccfc. But I don't see why sisu would reach a point of letting go of the money they can continue to squeeze out of the club nor why anyone else would pay decent money up front to buy ccfc.

I must disagree with you there Michael, we haven't had a set of accounts where we have broken even yet, so money from players sales, arsenal, etc IMO have been part of the clubs turnover to try and fund operating costs. I don't believe sisu have been taking money out from these windfalls. The last season at the Ricoh turnover was £6,6m total wage bill was about £9.5m, we'd have certainly been making big losses last season.

I don't believe we will be cash flow positive/break even this season as suggested by TF.


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

 

[dongonzalos]

I must disagree with you there Michael, we haven't had a set of accounts where we have broken even yet, so money from players sales, arsenal, etc IMO have been part of the clubs turnover to try and fund operating costs. I don't believe sisu have been taking money out from these windfalls. The last season at the Ricoh turnover was £6,6m total wage bill was about £9.5m, we'd have certainly been making big losses last season.

I don't believe we will be cash flow positive/break even this season as suggested by TF.


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

Mr Fisher keeps saying we are cash flow positive for the first time.

If that is true at the moment we have less than 10k fans attending the Ricoh.
The club shop is in the wrong place.
Our marketing is very poor.

If we get back up to speed with our marketing and get some success on the pitch so the crowds go up.

We will be making profits, why then is staying at the Ricoh not sustainable?

 

[Jack Griffin]

I must disagree with you there Michael, we haven't had a set of accounts where we have broken even yet, so money from players sales, arsenal, etc IMO have been part of the clubs turnover to try and fund operating costs. I don't believe sisu have been taking money out from these windfalls. The last season at the Ricoh turnover was £6,6m total wage bill was about £9.5m, we'd have certainly been making big losses last season.

I don't believe we will be cash flow positive/break even this season as suggested by TF.


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

At Monday's SBT meeting Fisher was asked directly if the club was being run at break even, he avoided answering the question & talked instead about the club being cashflow positive, which says to me they still are making a loss and will post a loss in the next accounts, but I think that is largely due to the Sixfields fiasco. Of course they are cash flow positive right now, they have just sold 4500 season tickets and another 30,000+ tickets to non season ticket holders!

The accounts published in 2016 will I think tell a different story, provided there are a few player sales to boost the figures I'm pretty sure they will show a profit.

Waggot was less elusive, he said that the player budget this season would be about £2.7M, which is a mid-table budget for this league. Last season is was (from dodgy memory) just shy of £4M.

 

[Frisky blue]

I'll speak to you because I'm sick of speaking to that other div. You, Godiva and others have been saying for ages that it's a white elephant blah blah blah and who the fuck would be interested in the Ricoh. So after proving you all wrong you now move the goalposts to another angle. They CHOSE Wasps simply because Sisu didn't want it, if you're going to tell me they did then why the fuck didn't they when they have had numerous chances and 7 fucking years to take up that option. They come back for a rental period saying they will still build a new stadium and will only be at the Ricoh for 2 + 2 years. If that time went by with ACL sitting on their arses getting streaking contests then when it came to Sisu leaving you would all be saying see, look no one is interested. ACL/CCC took this course as a direct result of Sisu and their fucking shitty devious antics when quite simply they could have just bought the fucking thing like Wasps have.

People say that we will never own the Ricoh now but would we if Sisu had it? No, and the same if they built a new one, we would still pay rent. At least this way we are still in Coventry and there may be a chance that this could force the fucking scum to sell and I would imagine that the Wasps owners may want to buy us.

Lastly, I have said in other threads that I don't really like what has happened, but there are far worse things going on in the world for me to start screaming and crying like some have with threads like RIP ffs. Franchise happens all over the world in all walks of business and I couldn't give a fuck about them so why should I care now. I still get to watch my team in Cov when I can and if (we don't know either way yet) this turns out good for CCFC then so what.

I really think this has pissed some people off because of their hate for ACL/CCC (just as some hate Sisu). Just like when I said if people want to go to MK to watch football, I think of this in the same way. My team is at the Ricoh with different owners of the stadium, so what. Like I said, there are far worse things to get my blood boiling.

A very good post, and accurate too. Some just cannot accept the facts, and either ignore them or make things up to suit their point of view. The JR gave us the facts, but some posters choose to ignore those facts, to the point of blaming everyone but sisu ffs. Thankfully the majority of Coventry City fans are aware of the damage done to our club by sisu, and sisu alone. We are all entitled to our opinions, but some on here really do baffle me. For example, do people actually believe that sisu would be good custodians of the Ricoh?
They certainly have not been good for our club, sisu are not CCFC, and never will be.

 

[stupot07]

Mr Fisher keeps saying we are cash flow positive for the first time.

If that is true at the moment we have less than 10k fans attending the Ricoh.
The club shop is in the wrong place.
Our marketing is very poor.

If we get back up to speed with our marketing and get some success on the pitch so the crowds go up.

We will be making profits, why then is staying at the Ricoh not sustainable?

Do you only listen to the bits you want to hear?

He said that we can breakeven in league one, but that we cannot compete if we ever get promoted to the championship - the wage demands are too high. On the current/past rent only/little revenue model, we simply do not have the income to compete. Our turnover was in the lowest 3-4 in the league the season we got relegated despite having midtable attendances. People wondered why we got relegated. On the current deal and for the medium to long term - a rent only/little revenue deal we will be confined to a league one - championship yo-yo club. How do you market that to fans that believe we should be in the PL?

And yes the shop is in the wrong place, would be fair better in one of the units on the tesco arena park....unfortunately rent there is very high.


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

 

[Nick]

A very good post, and accurate too. Some just cannot accept the facts, and either ignore them or make things up to suit their point of view. The JR gave us the facts, but some posters choose to ignore those facts, to the point of blaming everyone but sisu ffs. Thankfully the majority of Coventry City fans are aware of the damage done to our club by sisu, and sisu alone. We are all entitled to our opinions, but some on here really do baffle me. For example, do people actually believe that sisu would be good custodians of the Ricoh?
They certainly have not been good for our club, sisu are not CCFC, and never will be.

Nothing worse than people making shit up is there? It is like the people who go on and on about people thinking SISU are good and everybody but SISU being blamed.

Either making stuff up,thick as fuck or a WUM. Not sure which one.

 

[dongonzalos]

Do you only listen to the bits you want to hear?

He said that we can breakeven in league one, but that we cannot compete if we ever get promoted to the championship - the wage demands are too high. On the current/past rent only/little revenue model, we simply do not have the income to compete. Our turnover was in the lowest 3-4 in the league the season we got relegated despite having midtable attendances. People wondered why we got relegated. On the current deal and for the medium to long term - a rent only/little revenue deal we will be confined to a league one - championship yo-yo club. How do you market that to fans that believe we should be in the PL?

And yes the shop is in the wrong place, would be fair better in one of the units on the tesco arena park....unfortunately rent there is very high.


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

Listening to only the bits I wanted to hear. Is a bit hard when I was referring to a written statement on midlands today that said

For the first time in a long time the club was cash flow positive.

It referred to 9 academy players been on the pitch

It made no mention if models falling over when in the championship.

When you listened did he explain how the cost of the new stadium would be funded?

If we are in the championship paying these higher wages that will it sounds be covered by the revenue we get in. What repayments will be made to cover the money borrowed to build the stadium? Will that not be offset against the revenue we receive?

 

[letsallsingtogether]

Oh so as we have asked for a fifth year at the Ricoh? I take it as we have no money or will not spend the few pence they have, we will have to stay in this dreadful league watching dreadful football for £22.00.
No wonder people are walking away give it another 2 years in this league and we will have the 6,000 Tim expected at Shitfields.

Do you only listen to the bits you want to hear?

He said that we can breakeven in league one, but that we cannot compete if we ever get promoted to the championship - the wage demands are too high. On the current/past rent only/little revenue model, we simply do not have the income to compete. Our turnover was in the lowest 3-4 in the league the season we got relegated despite having midtable attendances. People wondered why we got relegated. On the current deal and for the medium to long term - a rent only/little revenue deal we will be confined to a league one - championship yo-yo club. How do you market that to fans that believe we should be in the PL?

And yes the shop is in the wrong place, would be fair better in one of the units on the tesco arena park....unfortunately rent there is very high.


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

 

[Nick]

Oh so as we have asked for a fifth year at the Ricoh? I take it as we have no money or will not spend the few pence they have, we will have to stay in this dreadful league watching dreadful football for £22.00.
No wonder people are walking away give it another 2 years in this league and we will have the 6,000 Tim expected at Shitfields.

That £22 could go towards a Wasps shirt anyway for some. People now need to choose between top flight rugby or third division football I guess.

 

[stupot07]

Oh so as we have asked for a fifth year at the Ricoh? I take it as we have no money or will not spend the few pence they have, we will have to stay in this dreadful league watching dreadful football for £22.00.
No wonder people are walking away give it another 2 years in this league and we will have the 6,000 Tim expected at Shitfields.

Yes pretty much.


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

 

[Frisky blue]

Trust was lost long before that.

And it appears SISU may have had a point not to trust the council...

I rest my case.

 

[stupot07]

Listening to only the bits I wanted to hear. Is a bit hard when I was referring to a written statement on midlands today that said

For the first time in a long time the club was cash flow positive.

It referred to 9 academy players been on the pitch

It made no mention if models falling over when in the championship.

When you listened did he explain how the cost of the new stadium would be funded?

If we are in the championship paying these higher wages that will it sound be covered by the revenue we get in.

What repayments will be made to cover the money borrowed to build the stadium?

Will that not be offset against the revenue we receive?

I still don't believe they will built a stadium, I never have. But we will never own 100% of the leasehold and if OSB's expert analysis is proved right, we won't be owning 50%.

And no the extra revenue getting promoted won't cover wages, it's only worth c£4m, suddenly players are going form £1-2k per week to £5-8k per week and that's for poor championship standard players, blues increased agents and signing on fee's, bigger loan fees for loanees, paying a higher % of their wage. If we got promoted this season, and our turnover would be in the bottom 3-4 in the championship, then it's not unrealistic to expect that we we're be relegation certs? Or are you expecting us to do a Southampton?


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

 

[dongonzalos]

I still don't believe they will built a stadium, I never have. But we will never own 100% of the leasehold and if OSB's expert analysis is proved right, we won't be owning 50%.

And no the extra revenue getting promoted won't cover wages, it's only worth c£4m, suddenly players are going form £1-2k per week to £5-8k per week and that's for poor championship standard players, blues increased agents and signing on fee's, bigger loan fees for loanees, paying a higher % of their wage. If we got promoted this season, and our turnover would be in the bottom 3-4 in the championship, then it's not unrealistic to expect that we we're be relegation certs? Or are you expecting us to do a Southampton?


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

The only way you do a Southampton is if you throw money at it.

Joy states her two main aims for this club is to break even and get promoted.

I think achieving one means we will not achieve the other.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

What utter shit Nick.
I do believe that Wass will end up doing well at The Ricoh or JLR/ Landrover Stadium. But a majority will be from other areas of the region won't be many City fans.[

All the ones that text in CWR yesterday were mainly Rugby Fans on the wind up .QUOTE=Nick;792526]That £22 could go towards a Wasps shirt anyway for some. People now need to choose between top flight rugby or third division football I guess.[/QUOTE]

 

[stupot07]

The only way you do a Southampton is if you throw money at it.

Joy states her two main aims for this club is to break even and get promoted.

I think achieving one means we will not achieve the other.

But Southampton had a solid base of a turnover that was over x2 ours and sold oxlade chamberlaine for £15m. It wasn't all down to the owners throwing money at it. How do you compete when your turnover is one of the lowest on the league, no assets?

We have been losing £6-7m for years, and it's not even touching the side.


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

 

[letsallsingtogether]

Correct so we are where we are and we will just have to learn to live with it.

The only way you do a Southampton is if you throw money at it.

Joy states her two main aims for this club is to break even and get promoted.

I think achieving one means we will not achieve the other.

 

[skybluetony176]

Do you only listen to the bits you want to hear?

He said that we can breakeven in league one, but that we cannot compete if we ever get promoted to the championship - the wage demands are too high. On the current/past rent only/little revenue model, we simply do not have the income to compete. Our turnover was in the lowest 3-4 in the league the season we got relegated despite having midtable attendances. People wondered why we got relegated. On the current deal and for the medium to long term - a rent only/little revenue deal we will be confined to a league one - championship yo-yo club. How do you market that to fans that believe we should be in the PL?

And yes the shop is in the wrong place, would be fair better in one of the units on the tesco arena park....unfortunately rent there is very high.


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

The bit about not working in the championship made me laugh. Does anyone really believe that if we went up that SISU are going to increase the playing budget by such a huge amount that it will instantly out weigh the financial gains from playing in the championship?

 

[stupot07]

The bit about not working in the championship made me laugh. Does anyone really believe that if we went up that SISU are going to increase the playing budget by such a huge amount that it will instantly out weigh the financial gains from playing in the championship?

No, not at all, but that would result in being relegated straight back down to league one, ergo the model doesn't work in the championship.


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

 

[skybluetony176]

No, not at all, but that would result in being relegated straight back down to league one, ergo the model doesn't work in the championship.


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

Sorry yes. See the angle now. Put two and two together and come up with something other than four.

 

[dongonzalos]

But Southampton had a solid base of a turnover that was over x2 ours and sold oxlade chamberlaine for £15m. It wasn't all down to the owners throwing money at it. How do you compete when your turnover is one of the lowest on the league, no assets?

We have been losing £6-7m for years, and it's not even touching the side.


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

Southampton are a great model but it definitely helped having the owner they got.

 

[dongonzalos]

No, not at all, but that would result in being relegated straight back down to league one, ergo the model doesn't work in the championship.


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

The problem is I don't see a new stadium solving that problem either.

So they really should have done the proper deal for ACL when they had the chance.

 

[stupot07]

The problem is I don't see a new stadium solving that problem either.

So they really should have done the proper deal for ACL when they had the chance.

The new stadium won't solve and yes they should have done a deal for ACL, but alas it's never gonna happen so we're gonna be destined for shit football for a generation. Absolutely no need for them to sell shares to wasps, sisu will be gone on day, but now we will never 100% own the leasehold for the ricoh

I can only see our attendances dwindling further as we stay in league one for the foreseeable future. We will now never get to reach our "full potential".

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

 

[Grendel]

High risk strategies are what has put our club into the position it is in now. From the previous owners of our club to SISU. But SISU raised the stakes. And now it looks like we will not get any part of the lease because of them.

The Wasps could be put anywhere from low to high risk. Personally would put it from low to medium. Low because there will be a rent to collect from CCFC. Medium because you never know what SISU will do next.

So its a low risk strategy as they collect rent from CCFC ? Are you serious? That rent will form a fraction of the turnover that the company will need to make this work.

They have no established fan base and no experience of running a management company. No redevelopment history either

The owner has a history of making promises he does not always fulfill and the company has lost significant money in the last 3 years.

Where is the money coming from to achieve all these redevelopment costs? Loans against the stadium,equity release or other borrowings?

But you are right - none of these factors matter - just what sisu do next.

 

[dongonzalos]

The new stadium won't solve and yes they should have done a deal for ACL, but alas it's never gonna happen so we're gonna be destined for shit football for a generation. Absolutely no need for them to sell shares to wasps, sisu will be gone on day, but now we will never 100% own the leasehold for the ricoh

I can only see our attendances dwindling further as we stay in league one for the foreseeable future. We will now never get to reach our "full potential".

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

I just am not sure what SISU can do next.

If they have got the club 'cash flow positive' whatever that means. I assume the intended to combine that with ACL (for a very low price) then sell a profit making business.

Now what is their next move.

Do a 250 year next to nothing rent deal with wasps trying to get as much access to match day revenues then sell that?

Try and sell to wasps?

Or somehow make personal money out of building a new stadium?

 

[lordsummerisle]

Yes, no better than what Sisu offered.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

The only way you do a Southampton is if you throw money at it.

Joy states her two main aims for this club is to break even and get promoted.

I think achieving one means we will not achieve the other.

Yea you are correct, under the current Ricoh deal achieving one will mean not achieving the other, bout the only sensible thing you've said in the last 6 months. Which is why the current arrangement isn't sustainable long term unless our aim is to be like Peterborough

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Yes, no better than what Sisu offered.

I think you have so far failed to state how the SISU offer was better.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

So its a low risk strategy as they collect rent from CCFC ? Are you serious? That rent will form a fraction of the turnover that the company will need to make this work.

They have no established fan base and no experience of running a management company. No redevelopment history either

The owner has a history of making promises he does not always fulfill and the company has lost significant money in the last 3 years.

Where is the money coming from to achieve all these redevelopment costs? Loans against the stadium,equity release or other borrowings?

But you are right - none of these factors matter - just what sisu do next.

The rent is only £100k a year at the moment according to Les Reid, so certainly irrelevant to the success of the management company at the moment.

They won't be able to take a loan against the stadium though as it's not theirs.

 

[rupert_bear]

The Fisher comment about it not working in the championship just proves to me that he and his pal Steve Waggott are not fit for purpose, this sisu thing could work with proper people running the football side of things, I hope the Wasps ceo can get Sepalla's ear and convince her it can work. I think she has relied too much and too long on the Fisher/Waggott direction.

 

[lordsummerisle]

I think you have so far failed to state how the SISU offer was better.

Over 125 years rather than 250 should surely mean that Wasps should offer at least twice as much as Sisu.

Ergo, the Sisu offer was better.