fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
He hates you, everybody else, life itself and quoting posts.
Fisher on new stadium (24 Viewers)
- Thread starter SkyBlue_Bear83
- Start date
He hates you, everybody else, life itself and quoting posts.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Where did I say we shouldn't pay rent? What I did say was that earning everything from the ground is preferable to earning a fraction of it-surely that can't be disputed? When I eventually move back to England then I can go to the Ricoh. Until then it's Tannadice and Dens Park for me.
Your best for this club is to piggyback off Wasps-that isn't good enough.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
The figures I have shown were for 2010 and 2011 when SISU were in charge, I have not looked at the previous 3 years of management fees since beginning of tenure. As for OSB58's statement. His findings are for when OTIUM took charge and NOT before. Am I right OSB?.....Very weird how you quote OSB statements when most of the time you question them?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
FWIW this is the concern.
Stadium co. and club co. is indeed the way things seem to work now. Hell, it's partly why we ended up Ltd. and Holdings in the first place.
Protecting an asset is the way it works too. In itself nowt he suggetss is odd... and let's face it, if we couldn't afford a heavy rent before without going bust, why on earth would SISU charge the football club one later? Either they really were distressing ACL to reduce the value of the business, or they weren't. They'd hardly reduce their own business.
However...
The cautionary tale is Ron Noades and what happened to Palace when he kept ground but sold club.
Oh, and of course a ground owned is an asset on the books. One could make a case for said asset being produced at a discount with partners, so sold instantly for profit... or someone has to be paid to run it.
davebart
Active Member
The main problem I see with this scenario is that using the Ricoh as a guide: It cost £110m to build and yet is only now valued at £5.5m.
Would a stadium that cost say £30 to build including land be worth more than £2m?
Anything is only actually worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Just like CCFC - which is worth F all to anybody.
Read this again:
And yes, I argue a lot with OSB.
And may I add we argue in a civilized and amicable fashion.
The common thing we share is the devotion for the club and the sadness of the current state.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
I can't see any business sense in this at all.
The Rotherham stadium, has a capacity of 12K and cost £20m. So, use this is a bottom-line comparison if you wish.
Fisher states he wants matchday and non-matchday incomes for the football club.
So, where's the return for the investor providing the equity to finance the stadium? They stack-up £20m+ to build the stadium; and Fisher is saying that another company (the trading football club) would be eligible for all of the revenues generated 24/7/365.
Where's the pay-back for the (third party) equity investor? Without access to incomes (as the football club seemingly gets those in Fisherland) they can only get a return on their investment via a high rent to the football club. And I thought this was what we moved to Sixfields to get away from?!?
Of course, all of this could be dispelled with a simple business-plan with one ofr two figures on from Fisher. If he's searching for venues, such facts must exist. Please share them so that we can take a view.
And please don't tell me they're confidential, as this information would be included in any investor prospectus in any case
Last edited:
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
The plan should be....
Build a stadium on finance
Use the increase in matchday/non matchday revenue to fund a more competitive squad.
Gain promotion to the championship
Find a way to increase revenue streams
Gain (fluke if neccesary) promotion to PL
Stadium finance paid off
Owners (and club) make a fuck load out of TV revenue...
Owners leave
If it was anyone else we would think it's an as sensible plan as we could manage given our situation.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
It would be beautiful, eh? But now, a non-starter. Who - and I mean who - will invest equity given the business model Fisher eludes to; and given the uncertainty surrounding the club?!?
'I know we've got a decimated balance sheet, I know we've alienated our customer base, I know we have a reputation for breaking contracts; but can you build us a stadium we get all the revenues from please - and we only want to pay 'Average League One rentals''. Doesn't look like a prospectus we'd have folk queueing around the block to be involved with...
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Which is why we have to be wary of discounting the idea.
Because it's SISU, they're in danger of killing off the club as much because nobody will listen to many of the possible ways forward.
By all means, it's not like they've shown any ability to get this off the ground in any way, shape or form. But once they're gone...
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
I don't think it's as simplistic as discounting any ideas as it's SISU per se; or even Fisher for that matter, it's that it makes no sense.
For an investor to part with their cash, they want a return. They get that via revenues or rent. Fisher says the football club keeps all the revenues (matchday and non-matchday); so the separate-company investor has to charge high rent as there are no active revenue streams open to it. A £20m stadium, allowing for term and return would need £2m+ per annum in rent from it's tenant to make this even close to viable.
Who's going to extend that line of credit in CCFC/SISU's favour now? And isn't that what we tried to move away from?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
I still reckon that even if SISU left tomorrow then any new owner would see the need to leave the Ricoh and have our own place. Or, as Duffer said on another thread, wait for Wasps to fail. Preferable option for me.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
That, my friend, can be the only strategy left in SISU's armoury. Hope to win the latest court case, and/or wait and hope for Wasps failure. They are the only logical end-games that give SISU a genuine 'out'.
The rest, in the interim, is just posturing and rhetoric
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
.... To go back to the Ricoh opening, ACL were effectively that investor, they invested £21m for the fit-out / lease purchase. ACL had access to both the match day and non match day income as well as a high rent. Yet it ultimately still didn't pay. Even before the rent strike. The club were destitute and the investor was reliant on the club.
I don't see how the circumstances for any new stadium could be any better.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
SISU themselves.
One would assume any model is an accountancy trick, so you have a nice large asset on your books that, until the depereciation kicks in properly, is on there for more than the cost. So in that instance, things look nice and healthy for a few years. If SISU internally financed part of it too, the repayments would be areturn, wouldn't they. And they don't need partners as such, they just need people willing to pay the cost to build, say, their uber OAP nursing home, capable of housing 14,327 pensioners. They hand over the cash for that bit, costs are shared on scaling up the building... a ground costs less than the headline figure.
In that respect, as per the Ricoh, a football ground is a decent battering ram to get things through that otherwise wouldn't be allowed... or rather, it would be if our owners had any kind of popular backing, anyway!
You then start the clock... to either sell or use that spare 'cash' to go for the promotions.
And if it all goes wrong? Well, it was high risk anyway, that's why people invested in the first place.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Yup, true.
Grounds tend to kill clubs. Not just us, but even Chelsea and Wolves in the 70s found themselves near-as-bust because of their stadium building.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Indeed, it was only new stands back then too!
Really unsure why people are discussing finance etc over something that clearly is never going to happen, the first team picture should show you that, sepella showing no interest whatsoever apart from putting in the BARE MINIMUM to run the club each week, the lack of funding in terms of purchasing players to build a competitive squad which would put more bums on seats and create more revenue should show you that.
So why go through all the bother of posing questions etc for something that our beloved chairman has a fantasy about that is clearly never going to happen whilst SISU are at the helm.
So why go through all the bother of posing questions etc for something that our beloved chairman has a fantasy about that is clearly never going to happen whilst SISU are at the helm.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Why do you constantly move around the forum telling people what they can or can't talk about?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Yup!
Only one I can think of who emerged (relatively) unscathed was Arsenal, and that was as much thanks to Wenger as anything... and even then they've stopped winning things.
Perhaps we should just tenant out at Villa Park and be done with it.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Wonder if they'd extend the radius of a new ground a few more miles so we could pick up St Andrews when Birmingham go bust...
Its beggers belief that people still bang on about this, its all a ploy to keep the fans on side.. talk about all you want its just laughable that some still think its going to happen.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
The premise of the conversation isn't about it happening it's trying to identify the merits of the idea, which is difficult to do.
The ONLY way CCFC will effectively own their own stadium is if a very rich individual or consortium took us on as a plaything and was prepared to throw £150 million + at it. Any other of these pipe dreams are non viable. We could be turned easily into the next Leicester City, owning our own stadium, crowds of 30,000 +, bottom end of Premiership but only with the level of investment thrown at that club. SISU are relying purely on the latest legal action and after that its curtains or deep stagnation and a wait to see if 'Wasps' fail ?!
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
You can't move for people being convinced by every word they say.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Although Leicester's ground is in a separate company, isn't it?
I don't think so ?
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
King Power is owned by the owners company I think
http://www.lcfc.com/news/article/010313-lcfc-owners-purchase-king-power-stadium-686232.aspx
http://www.lcfc.com/news/article/010313-lcfc-owners-purchase-king-power-stadium-686232.aspx
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
But a separate company to that which owns the football club.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Will this be a place for us middle aged supporters that will still be waiting for our club to have a new home?
Nick
Administrator
I think its quite common, I know quite a lot of normal businesses tend to do it too with their properties.
Oh, remember them days.
Nah, we'll be in the institution built on the side, having all been driven mad.
Good revenue stream for the club, though. So we can feel we are still a part.