Club’s owners “not prepared to take on the risk” of sharing the Ricoh (3 Viewers)

[Nick]

@ Nick....I've made numerous posts today, asking you a question. You have made 6 posts after my first one, yet fail to answer, why? You are usually "On my posts instantly"....I'll ask the question once more.....Have you, or do you, watch Solihull Barons(Blaze) at the Sky Dome?

I have been in the bar when a game has been on as I met some friends who are from Cardiff after a game once. I don't support or follow Blaze though.

I guess if some of the money from the bar went to Blaze?

I have no interest in Blaze or Ice Hockey (apart from liking Mighty Ducks as a kid and NHL on the computer when you could start a fight).

 

---

[The Lurker]

I'm still confused as to what this 'partnership with Wasps' is supposed to be.

Even assuming SISU had a change of heart and wanted to buy into ACL, is there any evidence anywhere that Wasps would want to sell?

Edit: Just on the cost of land - the suggestion is upwards of £100,000 per acre for green-belt, and a lot more (c. £650,000) for stuff with permission for houses. Let's say the club can get something for £200k/acre, and are looking at 25 acres (equivalent to Brandon), that would be more like £5m for the land. I think. Still has to be £20m at least for the stadium complete though, I'd agree - and it's going to be smaller, obviously.

Instead of assumptions use facts please. End of the day sisu didn't wanna buy the Ricoh or even part, fisher admits that. Wasps wanted to buy and stumped the cash. Sisu have fucked us up by using the Ricoh as a bargaining tool and lost. They tried to put pressure on ACL and it backfired. But hurt the long term future of our club. Only hopeful outcome is wasps buying out sisu. Would you welcome that move?

 

[duffer]

Mr Fisher said the club had options to buy two sites in the Coventry area. One, Brandon speedway stadium, has hit setbacks. Problems include complex ownership involving HMRC, and planning issues.

He said 60 acres was needed for training and academy facilities next to a £20million stadium which could begin at 12-15,000 capacity, and expand to 23,000, with planning permission potentially taking “18 months”.

Fair enough, I've taken the 25 acres from the SCG minutes, which I thought implied that they could build just a stadium in the smaller area. They considered 24 acres at Brandon, and 23 at Ryton, according to Fisher.

 

[Godiva]

I apologize for attempting to bring back the original post:

Minutes of the Stadium Forum Committee, 21st January 2015

TF was asked whether the club could buy 50% of the Ricoh. TF said that it is unlikely that
a deal can be done re a share of the ownership of the Stadium with Wasps. TF
confirmed that the club’s owners and Directors are not prepared to take on the risk of
financial liability for half of the £14 million loan. TF has analysed the financial risk of the
loan which is a sub-investment grade loan – meaning the loan is financially speculative
and having a high risk of default. TF will not expose the club to the risk of going into
another administration by being joint and severally liable on the £14 million loan.​

The loan, the loan, the loan - this entire fiasco and the destruction of our club has always been about the f***ing loan hasn’t it?

How many know what a 'sub-investment grade loan' is?
I had to look it up.
It's a loan given to creditor with a poor credit rating given by one or more agency's like Standard & Poor.

It's not really surprising that ACL has a poor credit rating given their latest accounts and their cash-flow problems the past year.
Sisu, being experts in loans are of course well aware of the financial situation in ACL and I believe they now sit back and monitor how ACL/Wasps will be doing the next couple of years. At present I fully understand why they do not want to get into part ownership of ACL.

CCFC is merely sustainable enough to be a mid-table league 1 club. Wasps is suffering heavy losses every year. ACL may just make a small profit with new sponsor agreements and two sports businesses there.
Will all three make a combined profit going forward? I am not so sure, and I think it's questionable if any profit will leave enough for both Wasps and ccfc to make significant investments.

One thing that strikes me is that there seem to be quite a few people who want Wasps to take over the club and at the same time they do not attend ccfc matches at the Ricoh. This is odd because ACL/Wasps need all the revenue they can get to become a profitable business ... and subsequently have the potential to buy out sisu.
NOPM not only hurts the club, it also hurts ACL.

 

[duffer]

Instead of assumptions use facts please. End of the day sisu didn't wanna buy the Ricoh or even part, fisher admits that. Wasps wanted to buy and stumped the cash. Sisu have fucked us up by using the Ricoh as a bargaining tool and lost. They tried to put pressure on ACL and it backfired. But hurt the long term future of our club. Only hopeful outcome is wasps buying out sisu. Would you welcome that move?

Let's use facts then, I'm up for that. In fairness, I asked first, where's the evidence that Wasps would sell part of ACL to SISU?

As for SISU not wanting to buy into the Ricoh - fair enough, it looks like Fisher has admitted that they didn't want to, at least on those terms. That seems odd to me, because from where I'm standing I think Wasps got a very good deal. As much as SISU have hurt the club, it's the council who decided to make that deal with Wasps, let's remember, instead of giving time to rebuild bridges or enter into any kind of negotiation with the club - that too, is a fact.

So, would I want Wasps as owners instead of SISU? Good question, although again it's actually a big assumption that they'd want to buy.

In truth it's hard to imagine anyone doing a worse job than SISU, but these are people who have ripped their club eighty miles away from their fanbase - they wouldn't give a fuck about the club any more than SISU do. They bought into a league position with Wasps, and then moved the club lock, stock and barrel to Coventry when it suited them to do so. I don't see these people as being investors in the club any more than SISU are. I'm not sure that I'd want either of them as owners.

 

[dongonzalos]

Fair enough, I've taken the 25 acres from the SCG minutes, which I thought implied that they could build just a stadium in the smaller area. They considered 24 acres at Brandon, and 23 at Ryton, according to Fisher.

Yes I saw that as well, I think that was either build a stadium there and the rest somewhere else. Or just for the training academy?

I know what you are saying though.

 

[duffer]

The subsequent sale process saw Prologis successfully close the land deal with a bid of £650,000 per acre.

• The price of land ranges from £100,000 per acre for Greenbelt to £350,000-£400,000 being the current market value for Commercial use.

£350,000 is the cheapest we will get as it is for commercial use.

Unless we're looking to buy land without planning permission for commercial use, and then try to push it through. Given SISU's apparent love of taking councils on, I wouldn't put this approach past them. If you promise enough jobs, it seems that you've got a chance of getting anything through. Just to be clear I'm not trying to make SISU's case for them here, but I think we need to make clear our assumptions. 60 acres at £350k is £21m, agreed - but 24 acres at less costs less. If they are really going to do it, they're going build it on the cheap, obviously.

 

[italiahorse]

I'm still confused as to what this 'partnership with Wasps' is supposed to be.

Even assuming SISU had a change of heart and wanted to buy into ACL, is there any evidence anywhere that Wasps would want to sell?

Edit: Just on the cost of land - the suggestion is upwards of £100,000 per acre for green-belt, and a lot more (c. £650,000) for stuff with permission for houses. Let's say the club can get something for £200k/acre, and are looking at 25 acres (equivalent to Brandon), that would be more like £5m for the land. I think. Still has to be £20m at least for the stadium complete though, I'd agree - and it's going to be smaller, obviously.

Green belt is green belt.
If you could just buy green belt and build on it everybody would be doing it.
There is a demand for land for housing so Sisu would be bidding against the more profitable housebuilders.
In addition if there is a hint of green belt changes builders will just take an option on the land with an option to buy it.
It suits them but CCFC want it now so they can get started.

 

[The Lurker]

Let's use facts then, I'm up for that. In fairness, I asked first, where's the evidence that Wasps would sell part of ACL to SISU?

As for SISU not wanting to buy into the Ricoh - fair enough, it looks like Fisher has admitted that they didn't want to, at least on those terms. That seems odd to me, because from where I'm standing I think Wasps got a very good deal. As much as SISU have hurt the club, it's the council who decided to make that deal with Wasps, let's remember, instead of giving time to rebuild bridges or enter into any kind of negotiation with the club - that too, is a fact.

So, would I want Wasps as owners instead of SISU? Good question, although again it's actually a big assumption that they'd want to buy.

In truth it's hard to imagine anyone doing a worse job than SISU, but these are people who have ripped their club eighty miles away from their fanbase - they wouldn't give a fuck about the club any more than SISU do. They bought into a league position with Wasps, and then moved the club lock, stock and barrel to Coventry when it suited them to do so. I don't see these people as being investors in the club any more than SISU are. I'm not sure that I'd want either of them as owners.

Come on duffer. Sisu have had 7 fucking years to buy the Ricoh or even a chunk. They started to play silly buggers and get the ground on the cheap. In fact for free by distressing ACL and moving the club to Northampton. During that time they officially said they would NEVER play at the Ricoh again and will start building a new ground. True yes? So during that time, ACL had an empty ground. Wasps seen an opportunity and enquired while ccfc were playing in Northampton. True yes? So sisu's childish games fucked any chance of us owning the ricoh. All the above are facts. No-one knows whether wasps would be good owners or not but one thing is for sure, they couldn't do a worse job then sisu. That my friend is all facts.

 

[LB87ccfc]

this pretty much catagorically shows that their "bid" for half the Ricoh was just done to turn people against the council/acl and they knew it wasn't good enough to be accepted and didn't want it to be.

To me it also shows without a doubt in my mind that they have no intention of building a stadium, if taking half of a 14m loan is too big a risk, building a stadium is a complete non starter.

Absolute spot on, its mind boggling to even think they would part with £20M plus to build their own stadium if the risk is too great at £7m for the Ricoh and all the facilities it has available at it's disposal.

Their simply is NO plan for a new stadium and their never has been, its all been bluff bluff and double bluff.

 

[duffer]

Come on duffer. Sisu have had 7 fucking years to buy the Ricoh or even a chunk. They started to play silly buggers and get the ground on the cheap. In fact for free by distressing ACL and moving the club to Northampton. During that time they officially said they would NEVER play at the Ricoh again and will start building a new ground. True yes? So during that time, ACL had an empty ground. Wasps seen an opportunity and enquired while ccfc were playing in Northampton. True yes? So sisu's childish games fucked any chance of us owning the ricoh. All the above are facts. No-one knows whether wasps would be good owners or not but one thing is for sure, they couldn't do a worse job then sisu. That my friend is all facts.

Mate, I'm not denying that SISU screwed up hugely in the initial negotiation before the rent strike and subsequently in taking the club away. But it's also clear to me that on the return to the Ricoh the council didn't even give a chance to rebuilding trust, they sold out to Wasps instead. That is completely indisputable, if you want to talk facts.

The other fact is that Wasps owners have treated their club as a franchise. I find that utterly immoral and on that basis alone I'd be reluctant to put these people in charge of our club. What's the point in trading one set of shits for another set?

 

[duffer]

Green belt is green belt.
If you could just buy green belt and build on it everybody would be doing it.
There is a demand for land for housing so Sisu would be bidding against the more profitable housebuilders.
In addition if there is a hint of green belt changes builders will just take an option on the land with an option to buy it.
It suits them but CCFC want it now so they can get started.

Brighton built a stadium not just on green belt, but by an Area of Outstanding National Beauty. I'm not saying that that's right, but it can be done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falmer_Stadium

 

[The Lurker]

Mate, I'm not denying that SISU screwed up hugely in the initial negotiation before the rent strike and subsequently in taking the club away. But it's also clear to me that on the return to the Ricoh the council didn't even give a chance to rebuilding trust, they sold out to Wasps instead. That is completely indisputable, if you want to talk facts.

The other fact is that Wasps owners have treated their club as a franchise. I find that utterly immoral and on that basis alone I'd be reluctant to put these people in charge of our club. What's the point in trading one set of shits for another set?

Duffer that's the issue here. Trust. Council don't trust them (rightly so) I don't trust them. They had too many chances to get things right and time and time again fucked up. How many more chances did they want? And moving the club to Northampton was the final straw for me. Could never trust them again after that. As for wasps. Are they in a stronger position now compared to 12 months? I reckon so. Not excusing it because ethically it's wrong. But least the owner looks to make a go of things unlike our owners

 

[Noggin]

Brighton built a stadium not just on green belt, but by an Area of Outstanding National Beauty. I'm not saying that that's right, but it can be done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falmer_Stadium

yeah but it took 13 years from the site being identified till they moved in.

 

[chiefdave]

Fair enough, I've taken the 25 acres from the SCG minutes, which I thought implied that they could build just a stadium in the smaller area. They considered 24 acres at Brandon, and 23 at Ryton, according to Fisher.

I think Fisher said Brandon was too small so only considered for a training ground. Using the same logic could Ryton have been just for a stadium but close enough to keep the existing training ground?

 

[albatross]

I apologize for attempting to bring back the original post:



How many know what a 'sub-investment grade loan' is?
I had to look it up.
It's a loan given to creditor with a poor credit rating given by one or more agency's like Standard & Poor.

It's not really surprising that ACL has a poor credit rating given their latest accounts and their cash-flow problems the past year.
Sisu, being experts in loans are of course well aware of the financial situation in ACL and I believe they now sit back and monitor how ACL/Wasps will be doing the next couple of years. At present I fully understand why they do not want to get into part ownership of ACL.

CCFC is merely sustainable enough to be a mid-table league 1 club. Wasps is suffering heavy losses every year. ACL may just make a small profit with new sponsor agreements and two sports businesses there.
Will all three make a combined profit going forward? I am not so sure, and I think it's questionable if any profit will leave enough for both Wasps and ccfc to make significant investments.

One thing that strikes me is that there seem to be quite a few people who want Wasps to take over the club and at the same time they do not attend ccfc matches at the Ricoh. This is odd because ACL/Wasps need all the revenue they can get to become a profitable business ... and subsequently have the potential to buy out sisu.
NOPM not only hurts the club, it also hurts ACL.QUOTE=Godiva;853776]


Godiva, ACL has suffered 1 year of losses at about 400K and further Mr Fisher's comment do not stack up with the judicial review that stated , when ccc attempted to purchase the loan for 12m that "Therefore, despite the valuations of ACL’s interest in the Arena, the Bank continued to have confidence in ACL’s ability to service the full £15.5m loan on commercialterms, with repayments of £1.3m per year. "

in the JR review the Judge declared CCFC as balance sheet insolvent, based upon poor management. Please square that circle rather than hang on one of mr Fisher's many throw away lines.

[/SIZE][/FONT]

1. SISU are acommercial organisation, committed (and entitled) to pursue their own commercialinterests. Until April 2012, ACL had been profitable: its balance sheet showed aprofit every year (see paragraph 13 above). On the other hand, the SISU companyCCFC had incurred substantial losses – regular losses of £4m-6m per year including,in 2011-12, a £5m loss on a turnover of £10m – and was clearly balance sheetinsolvent. It appears to be common ground that poor management greatly contributedto these commercial problems of CCFC. SISU invested about £40m in CCFC until2012, and, as I understand it, another approximately £10m from April 2012 untilCCFC’s demise.

 

[oldskyblue58]

I apologize for attempting to bring back the original post:



How many know what a 'sub-investment grade loan' is?
I had to look it up.
It's a loan given to creditor with a poor credit rating given by one or more agency's like Standard & Poor.

It's not really surprising that ACL has a poor credit rating given their latest accounts and their cash-flow problems the past year.
Sisu, being experts in loans are of course well aware of the financial situation in ACL and I believe they now sit back and monitor how ACL/Wasps will be doing the next couple of years. At present I fully understand why they do not want to get into part ownership of ACL.

CCFC is merely sustainable enough to be a mid-table league 1 club. Wasps is suffering heavy losses every year. ACL may just make a small profit with new sponsor agreements and two sports businesses there.
Will all three make a combined profit going forward? I am not so sure, and I think it's questionable if any profit will leave enough for both Wasps and ccfc to make significant investments.

One thing that strikes me is that there seem to be quite a few people who want Wasps to take over the club and at the same time they do not attend ccfc matches at the Ricoh. This is odd because ACL/Wasps need all the revenue they can get to become a profitable business ... and subsequently have the potential to buy out sisu.
NOPM not only hurts the club, it also hurts ACL.

Have to say I didn't recognise the term either Godiva

Although a number of the articles recommend that such investments should form part of a good diverse portfolio.

What is ACL's credit rating now? It may well have been poor in the past (almost certainly) but is it now? Is that rating based on just the financials filed or other information too?

Given what is going on in the background in terms of court cases, the object of which is compensation for SISU investors, the football kitty being there then now it isn't, the lack of real progress on the fantasy stadium etc....... you have to wonder whether the real reason they didn't invest was that JS was simply just not prepared to make the money available to buy in to ACL. Of course it sounds better if it is couched as ACL is a big risk of failure doesn't it. If it was such a bad thing to do why bid for the shares at all?

I find it strange that ACL didn't attempt to quantify the effects of the dispute in their accounts. Could be they missed a trick, it doesn't matter or there are real problems.

Will Wasps continue to make 3m losses annually? who knows. Certainly all the PR etc will be costing them but on the other side they wont be paying rent £600k as at Wycombe, will they have interest to pay? what will the match day takings be compared to Adams Park? etc Plus the wasps info we have is best part of 18 months out of date (last accs 30/06/13). I would expect further losses in 2014 accounts ...... but the whole set up is now entirely different isn't it and we wont begin to get a feel for it until the 2015 financials are filed even then that will be a year where they moved halfway through.

ACL made a loss to 31/05/14 certainly. The reasons have not been properly explained but CCFC were not there for that year. Therefore in part at least the ACL well being relies on the stadium bowl being used. That is not the same as saying ACL relies on CCFC. Had Wasps not rocked up then you could perhaps make that argument but they are here and that will make a significant difference to the ACL financials. In addition since the May 2014 figures ACL have also attracted events like that gamers show (said to be worth 6m over 5 years)

Yes Wasps have given away a large number of free tickets, discounted prices etc that has an effect but surely not to drop the paying customers to the 2013 average gate of 6654? In three games so far the attendance has been over 66k (in 13 games for CCFC it has been 125315). The significant factor is going to be the secondary spend of those attending. Apparently something like £3.50 per head at football games, I would guess it might be higher for Rugby games. I would guess income from the 3 Wasps games has brought Wasps/ACL in well over £700k already even if 50% were free tickets. CCFC in comparison (a guess)may have brought in 1.125m to CCFC in ticket sales and something less than 440k to ACL

But it is all going to be guess work isn't it until we get proper figures. It may be that SISU are waiting for it to go belly up but they haven't got a great reputation in gambling at the Ricoh have they. There is no evidence at all that loans to ACL are very high risk under normal trading. All payments have been made on time as far we know (in fact some paid early). Personally I think that SISU strategy is focussed on one thing and one thing only - compensation from victory in court ...... CCFC doesn't come in to it other than to keep a connection and right to instigate court cases

Combine ACL & Wasps do you get a profit this year next year or the year after...... who knows. What I do know is that whatever is going on is not benefitting CCFC and that includes the actions of the owners of CCFC

 

[Captain Dart]

Fair enough, I've taken the 25 acres from the SCG minutes, which I thought implied that they could build just a stadium in the smaller area. They considered 24 acres at Brandon, and 23 at Ryton, according to Fisher.

You don't need 60 acres for a stadium & training complex.

You do need 60 acres if the whole shebang relies on a deal to sell/finance the land not needed for a stadium with partner investors to cover your costs.

Therefore I reckon SISU can't take the new stadium project forward unless they identify a 60 acre site and a partner or partners.

 

[dongonzalos]

Unless we're looking to buy land without planning permission for commercial use, and then try to push it through. Given SISU's apparent love of taking councils on, I wouldn't put this approach past them. If you promise enough jobs, it seems that you've got a chance of getting anything through. Just to be clear I'm not trying to make SISU's case for them here, but I think we need to make clear our assumptions. 60 acres at £350k is £21m, agreed - but 24 acres at less costs less. If they are really going to do it, they're going build it on the cheap, obviously.

I know what you mean.

I have found the two statements conflicting to be honest. If its the smaller development then I don't think that would include all the commercial developments that I thought SISU were suggested would partly finance the deal hotels, supermarkets etc. Also we would then need to fund a desperate training facility/academy.

But personally I think best case scenario you are looking at 350k an acre and I just don't see it as affordable whichever way you look at it. I genuinely do think it will be a case of rent at the Ricoh with costs as low as possible. Continue fruitlessly trying to sue the council. Hoping for compensation and at the same time watch Wasps to see what opportunities present themselves. Unfortunately I think they will wait till wasps are distressed rather than try and sort something mutually beneficial out now.

Personally I think after a few years it will finally become evident wasps are going to collapse and it will all come to a head.

 

[Captain Dart]

I apologize for attempting to bring back the original post:

How many know what a 'sub-investment grade loan' is?
I had to look it up.
It's a loan given to creditor with a poor credit rating given by one or more agency's like Standard & Poor.

It's not really surprising that ACL has a poor credit rating given their latest accounts and their cash-flow problems the past year.
Sisu, being experts in loans are of course well aware of the financial situation in ACL and I believe they now sit back and monitor how ACL/Wasps will be doing the next couple of years. At present I fully understand why they do not want to get into part ownership of ACL.

What credit ratings do the OTIUM group of companies have?

 

[Rusty Trombone]

What credit ratings do the OTIUM group of companies have?

Per Experian both Otium and Sky Blue Sport & Leisure have a risk rating of Maximum, and a score out of 100 (100 being the best) of 15, the suggested credit limit is £0.

For ACL, the risk is Low, a score of 87, and a credit limit of £220k.

 

[fernandopartridge]

What credit ratings do the OTIUM group of companies have?

Edited after RT's post. Credit reference agencies are obviously a bit cannier than I thought.

 

[italiahorse]

Per Experian both Otium and Sky Blue Sport & Leisure have a risk rating of Maximum, and a score out of 100 (100 being the best) of 15, the suggested credit limit is £0.

For ACL, the risk is Low, a score of 87, and a credit limit of £220k.

Wasps ?

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

Wasps ?

they appear to be ok.....well, they've certainly started to "borrow" a lot of fans......:wave:

 

[fernandopartridge]

they appear to be ok.....well, they've certainly started to "borrow" a lot of fans......:wave:

They get loads of credit on here!

 

[Noggin]

Per Experian both Otium and Sky Blue Sport & Leisure have a risk rating of Maximum, and a score out of 100 (100 being the best) of 15, the suggested credit limit is £0.

For ACL, the risk is Low, a score of 87, and a credit limit of £220k.

That credit limit also takes into account the fact that ACL already owe 14mill. Not really sure how much value you would place in Exerians thoughts but they obviously think it's still fine to loan to ACL despite the fact they already have a very large loan. Experian clearly have it right with Otium though, it's not a good idea to give them credit even just for a few albums to sell in the club shop.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Wasps ?

Exactly the same as Otium.

 

[duffer]

Duffer that's the issue here. Trust. Council don't trust them (rightly so) I don't trust them. They had too many chances to get things right and time and time again fucked up. How many more chances did they want? And moving the club to Northampton was the final straw for me. Could never trust them again after that. As for wasps. Are they in a stronger position now compared to 12 months? I reckon so. Not excusing it because ethically it's wrong. But least the owner looks to make a go of things unlike our owners

I hear what you're saying mate - but my point is that there was a chance to rebuild trust, the council indicated that they wanted to rebuild trust but then they sold to Wasps almost immediately.

It's kind of old ground fella, and I don't want to start winding people up. I'll bet we agree on almost everything but come to different conclusions!

From my point of view, and in my opinion, the right thing to do would have been to rebuild trust as the council said should happen on their return. I think it was obvious then, as it's becoming obvious now, that despite everything Fisher says, a new ground isn't a realistic option. Similarly, before Wasps, it's clear that the best chance for ACL (and the best option for the economy of the city) would have been with CCFC in place. At some point over the next year or two, you would have to imagine that calmer heads would get involved, common sense would prevail, and a deal could have been struck that suited both parties. That would have been good for the club, and a thriving CCFC is better for the city than Wasps I'd argue (and for me, the moral argument against what I see as enabling a franchise is impossible to get over in any case).

However, we're now in a place where I think SISU are genuinely looking at the madness of building a new, smaller stadium, because there is no other option. I can't see that Wasps will sell us 50% of what they need for themselves.

There is good logic to your common ownership of Wasps & CCFC at the Ricoh, but leaving aside the moral argument then I think there's also the point to be made that CCFC has never in it's history turned a profit, and might actually pull Wasps (who are struggling themselves) further down.

Can I float this possibility though. What if Fisher's right and Wasps have actually taken on a bad deal here? The only thing that makes me consider this possible is all of the mess around the the Compass deal, where it seems that ACL is tied into something that means they don't make as much money as they should. In that case, is the smart move for the club to stay away for now, and see if it all falls apart?

I don't know. I don't trust anyone involved here, so we've got to try to figure it out ourselves without all the facts we need. I absolutely take your point that it would be hard to imagine anyone worse than SISU, but I've got to stick to my morals and say that I think what Richardson has done to Wasps is even worse than what SISU have done to us. I'd accept entirely that they're doing a good job now that they're here though, absolutely.

As you can see, I don't have the answer here mate, and I don't mean to pretend that I do. Everywhere I look now I see further problems ahead!

 

[fernandopartridge]

That credit limit also takes into account the fact that ACL already owe 14mill. Not really sure how much value you would place in Exerians thoughts but they obviously think it's still fine to loan to ACL despite the fact they already have a very large loan. Experian clearly have it right with Otium though, it's not a good idea to give them credit even just for a few albums to sell in the club shop.

Make your mind up.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Ps Noggin, Experian don't lend money to anybody

 

[duffer]

I know what you mean.

I have found the two statements conflicting to be honest. If its the smaller development then I don't think that would include all the commercial developments that I thought SISU were suggested would partly finance the deal hotels, supermarkets etc. Also we would then need to fund a desperate training facility/academy.

But personally I think best case scenario you are looking at 350k an acre and I just don't see it as affordable whichever way you look at it. I genuinely do think it will be a case of rent at the Ricoh with costs as low as possible. Continue fruitlessly trying to sue the council. Hoping for compensation and at the same time watch Wasps to see what opportunities present themselves. Unfortunately I think they will wait till wasps are distressed rather than try and sort something mutually beneficial out now.

Personally I think after a few years it will finally become evident wasps are going to collapse and it will all come to a head.

'Conficting' is a tremendously polite way of putting it. Who could blame anyone for thinking that it's flat out bullshit!

I think they're actually serious about building a new stadium - but like everyone else I can't really see how it adds up. I also think it's entirely possible that they are happy to bobble this along very slowly whilst hoping to get something from the courts and/or for Wasps to go pop. I think on that basis in some ways it might actually make some sense to buy a contentious site on the cheap, delays don't really seem to bother them, and it's going to take years for either Wasps to fail or the courtroom path to be completely exhausted. Not very good for us as fans though....

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Ps Noggin, Experian don't lend money to anybody

What an a**e reply! You know exactly what Noggin is saying but try to twist his words. Something I expect Grendel to do, not you!!!

 

[Noggin]

Ps Noggin, Experian don't lend money to anybody

I was pretty clear in saying not really sure how much value you would place in experians thoughts. I know exactly who and what they are. I do not know how much better their commercial entity credit reports are than their personal ones though. Not really sure what issues you have with what I said and apparently it was so bad it even deserved 2 posts.

All I said was
1) the credit report takes into account the 14m loan (because I expected many people to see 220k and think experian think they shouldn't have a 14m loan given to them)
2) not sure of the value of experians thoughts.
3) as we all know you're mad to lend to Otium
which of these upsets you?

I think you might have misunderstood me saying experian think it's fine to lend to ACL, to mean that experian would/do lend to acl. whereas I was saying experian are saying its fine to lend to acl to other entities.

 

[will am i]

'Conficting' is a tremendously polite way of putting it. Who could blame anyone for thinking that it's flat out bullshit!

I think they're actually serious about building a new stadium - but like everyone else I can't really see how it adds up. I also think it's entirely possible that they are happy to bobble this along very slowly whilst hoping to get something from the courts and/or for Wasps to go pop. I think on that basis in some ways it might actually make some sense to buy a contentious site on the cheap, delays don't really seem to bother them, and it's going to take years for either Wasps to fail or the courtroom path to be completely exhausted. Not very good for us as fans though....

That makes zero sense. Bobbing along for a few years there will be no club they are already down to around 6000. Next year will undoubtedly be less unless something changes. So, in a few years time they could probably share with Leamington. Good luck getting a return on investment at that point.

 

[duffer]

That makes zero sense. Bobbing along for a few years there will be no club they are already down to around 6000. Next year will undoubtedly be less unless something changes. So, in a few years time they could probably share with Leamington. Good luck getting a return on investment at that point.

If we are, as Fisher claims, cash-flow positive then the only thing they need to do is survive and wait on the payoff. We're down to the hard core now, even if we lose another 1,000 the relative losses won't hurt them enough to dissuade them if this is their plan I'd venture. To them, it might well make sense - as fans it's horrible.