we're missing something (7 Viewers)

H

Huckerby

Guest
We have to be.

SISU isn't ran by stupid people. Clueless about football and running a football club perhaps. But they aren't stupid with money...they run a hedgefund for gods sake.

There is no way that the people they answer to would let them keep pumping dead money into a black hole of debt and failure. They must be benefitting from this somehow...but how? I keep hearing people say that they could use the club losses to avoid paying taxes elsewhere but surely they would still lose out this way.

They're not going anywhere any time soon. Anyone have any realistic theories?
 

Gazolba

Well-Known Member
We have to be.

SISU isn't ran by stupid people. Clueless about football and running a football club perhaps. But they aren't stupid with money...they run a hedgefund for gods sake.

There is no way that the people they answer to would let them keep pumping dead money into a black hole of debt and failure. They must be benefitting from this somehow...but how? I keep hearing people say that they could use the club losses to avoid paying taxes elsewhere but surely they would still lose out this way.

They're not going anywhere any time soon. Anyone have any realistic theories?

They have already stated their objective is for the club to be self-supporting. They obviously wanted to get the Ricoh on the cheap but that failed miserably. They say they are in it for the long term but do you really believe anything they say? I'm not sure they know what they want to do. They are like someone who owns stock which has plummeted in value. Do you sell and lock-in the losses or do you just hold on and wait and hope the value rises again?
 

Sutty

Member
Start of last season - 3 year deal at Sixfields, 2 year extension option
Start of this season - 2 year deal at the Ricoh, 2 year extension option

There's clearly a plan. The next phase is in 1 (or 3) years time. The question is what is that plan? It's not a new stadium that's for sure, and the fact we aren't being told what the real plan is worries me greatly.
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
I don't buy this argument that sisu is ran by intelligent people.

For a start they have already admitted themselves that they make investments into sectors they know nothing about.

They seem incapable of gauging human emotion or anticipating a natural reaction.

Lastly their staff retention levels are appalling. Does suggest they are incapable of making the judgement needed to employ the correct staff.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
They wanted the freehold of the arena. Nothing more nothing less. That is why they went back on agreements made. And then they took us to Northampton to try and starve ACL into submission. It worked. The only problem is that SISU were like a few of our supporters and thought the arena was a white elephant and shouted down anyone who disagreed.

And they stopped putting money into our club over 2 years ago. Although it will be a bit tricky soon as our attendances are so low after all of the crap going on and not having anyone of value to sell.
 

MichaelCCFC

New Member
We have to be.

SISU isn't ran by stupid people. Clueless about football and running a football club perhaps. But they aren't stupid with money...they run a hedgefund for gods sake.

There is no way that the people they answer to would let them keep pumping dead money into a black hole of debt and failure. They must be benefitting from this somehow...but how? I keep hearing people say that they could use the club losses to avoid paying taxes elsewhere but surely they would still lose out this way.

They're not going anywhere any time soon. Anyone have any realistic theories?


I suspect we all hope sisu have a master plan which includes footballing success but maybe things are no more complicated than what's in front of our eyes ie Ranson persuaded them to get involved pre financial crash when sisu had more money than they knew what to do with and Joy Seppala wasn't even involved in the decision; post crash JS realises CCFC is costing money and starts to call the shots; sisu behave as what they are - asset strippers who use litigation as a key tactic. If you see things from that perspective it all makes sense: player sales, cost cutting, legal actions, non investment and football being irrelevant - all that matters is squeezing out every last penny they can and being ready to walk away at short-notice if needs be, hence all the short-term contracts. sisu are asset strippers: they don't innovative, invest, produce a product etc so why would the act any differently to how they are? Would love to be proved wrong but reality is things are probably no more complicated than what is on the surface.
 

phildownunder

Well-Known Member
I suspect we all hope sisu have a master plan which includes footballing success but maybe things are no more complicated than what's in front of our eyes ie Ranson persuaded them to get involved pre financial crash when sisu had more money than they knew what to do with and Joy Seppala wasn't even involved in the decision; post crash JS realises CCFC is costing money and starts to call the shots; sisu behave as what they are - asset strippers who use litigation as a key tactic. If you see things from that perspective it all makes sense: player sales, cost cutting, legal actions, non investment and football being irrelevant - all that matters is squeezing out every last penny they can and being ready to walk away at short-notice if needs be, hence all the short-term contracts. sisu are asset strippers: they don't innovative, invest, produce a product etc so why would the act any differently to how they are? Would love to be proved wrong but reality is things are probably no more complicated than what is on the surface.

Go along with much of this but where does the 4 year contract given to SP fit in with short termism?
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Could it be that while they own the club they haven't technically lost the money, it's still sat on a balance sheet somewhere as a debt owed or as an asset (the equity swap?). If, at the point they leave, that is when it all comes crashing down and they have to admit to their investors they have lost the money that would give them incentive to stay.

They say the club is close to running at break even, if that's right then they can hang around for years without putting another penny in hoping a fan wins Euro Millions and buys the club off them.
 

MichaelCCFC

New Member
Go along with much of this but where does the 4 year contract given to SP fit in with short termism?

Getting out of one (or even a handful) of long-term contracts is very different to having a whole squad on 2/3/4 year deals, as was shown by what happened with SP. The shift away from longer term contracts for players seems pretty clear.
 

Terry Gibson's perm

Well-Known Member
Go along with much of this but where does the 4 year contract given to SP fit in with short termism?

He had a piece of paper with four years on it, but as he has just had an 18 month pay off it was really only worth 2 years so fitting in with the short term stuff.
 

MichaelCCFC

New Member
Could it be that while they own the club they haven't technically lost the money, it's still sat on a balance sheet somewhere as a debt owed or as an asset (the equity swap?). If, at the point they leave, that is when it all comes crashing down and they have to admit to their investors they have lost the money that would give them incentive to stay.

They say the club is close to running at break even, if that's right then they can hang around for years without putting another penny in hoping a fan wins Euro Millions and buys the club off them.


'Break even' is probably the key phrase. If, as a simplified example, the cost of running the club for the 2015/16 season is £100 but Season Ticket sales produce only £20 and other projected income is £20 then unless there are assets (players) to be sold there is going to be a loss so that's the time to walk away. If, however, income from whatever sources is £101 then it's worth staying. Nothing to do with football, everything to do with squeezing every last penny out.
 

Hobo

Well-Known Member
Go along with much of this but where does the 4 year contract given to SP fit in with short termism?

We don't know the small print in the contract and what the pay out would be. We can guess that he would be as cheap as chips.

Lets see if they are prepared to back Mowbrey with the required finances?
 
H

Huckerby

Guest
I don't buy this argument that sisu is ran by intelligent people.

For a start they have already admitted themselves that they make investments into sectors they know nothing about.


They seem incapable of gauging human emotion or anticipating a natural reaction.

Lastly their staff retention levels are appalling. Does suggest they are incapable of making the judgement needed to employ the correct staff.

They have to be pretty intelligent to run a hedge fund. Investing in sectors they personally know nothing about is quite common I imagine...they employ people who do know what they're talking about to advise them...the rest of it is pre-empting expectations of value...
With regards to the incapability of human emotion...don't believe that's the case, they simply don't care. And why would they if it's a simple investment?


Astute said:
They wanted the freehold of the arena. Nothing more nothing less. That is why they went back on agreements made. And then they took us to Northampton to try and starve ACL into submission. It worked. The only problem is that SISU were like a few of our supporters and thought the arena was a white elephant and shouted down anyone who disagreed.

And they stopped putting money into our club over 2 years ago. Although it will be a bit tricky soon as our attendances are so low after all of the crap going on and not having anyone of value to sell.


Makes sense, and I agree with you. But now that that dream is over, and it is definitely over, what now? They can't honestly believe their court room battles will bring any luck. So...just holding tight and trying to make the club break even while they a) hope someone buys them or, and i don't believe this for a second, b) invest more to try get us promoted and then sell us for a loss anyway?

chiefdave said:
Could it be that while they own the club they haven't technically lost the money, it's still sat on a balance sheet somewhere as a debt owed or as an asset (the equity swap?). If, at the point they leave, that is when it all comes crashing down and they have to admit to their investors they have lost the money that would give them incentive to stay.

They say the club is close to running at break even, if that's right then they can hang around for years without putting another penny in hoping a fan wins Euro Millions and buys the club off them.


This is interesting. I think this is plausible, and why would investors care where there money has gone as long as they are still seeing handsome returns on it? They've got no reason to even question whether they can get their capital back. Besides...realistically £60million probably isn't even a drop in the ocean to the fund/s they are handling...probably billions. That could go some way to explaining why it's only now that they've sort of "given up" that they've decided to make the club cash neutral or whatever the term is. And it's better to just keep the club ticking over than to actually write off the losses.

Shit. We're stuck with these fuckers for a long long long time.
 

georgehudson

Well-Known Member
perhaps their investors are now being told how their money has been used or abused,
i would hope that the performances of the succession of persons, over the last 7 years,
either at, or near, the helm of CCFC, have been accurately reported back to those investors,
which ever is the truth,
how does an organisation like sisu intend to make CCFC a success ?
they do have the opportunity to speculate on a realistic level, to accumulate,
but their achilles heel is their relationship with their customers,
you simply cannot treat your customers as they have done,
and hope that they will forgive and forget,
well over 10,000 fans feel abused
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Could it be that while they own the club they haven't technically lost the money, it's still sat on a balance sheet somewhere as a debt owed or as an asset (the equity swap?). If, at the point they leave, that is when it all comes crashing down and they have to admit to their investors they have lost the money that would give them incentive to stay.

They say the club is close to running at break even, if that's right then they can hang around for years without putting another penny in hoping a fan wins Euro Millions and buys the club off them.

It shouldnt be if accounting (eg FRS102) and investment principles have been applied properly. Those principles require the "investment" or loans to be shown at fair value and for that assessment to be carried out each year. Fair value being an assessment of what they are really worth. It surely has got to be very hard to argue that the loans, let alone the shares, are capable of being repaid in full ......I would think so the fair value is a lot lower than the 38m loans included. Same applies to the shares in issue

The preference shares, the accounting rules I believe say, they should be shown as liabilities not equity based on what has been disclosed - there is no repayment date and the income is not discretionary. That would put an entirely different slant on the Otium and SBS&L balance sheets. There may be good reason why this is not the case that have not been disclosed however

Just my opinion but I think there has been a bit of moving paper around so that the cracks are covered up and I do not believe it is being done to benefit CCFC (again just an opinion)

other things .......

Are they clever people of course they are and they make use of some advisors with extremely good reputations. The angle fans come from is from their interest and love for the club. That's entirely different to being a London based hedge or private equity fund using other peoples money to earn an expensive crust. A SISU speciality is dealing in debt as I understand it - well take a look at the football club balance sheets

Originally they came in expecting to take a gamble and bounce in to the Premiership. The financing was done off balance sheet and it looks like it only cost them shy of £3m to come in. Then they found out what a shambles it was and those heading it up didn't deal with the real issues (a) acquiring an interest in the Ricoh and (b) living within means. That meant they bled money and CCFC racked up the losses. Fisher etc then replaced the likes of Igwy and Dulieu and started to look for a way out whilst slashing costs to match income better. The way out was to be a delinquent tenant and to pressure the owners of ACL to sell the Ricoh to them at knock down prices - as the judge indicated in the first JR case. That hasn't worked but the bi-product of their actions has been relegation to L1 where we have struggled and, despite "clever" paper shifting, a toxic ownership of CCFC through Otium.

Where do they take from here. Well they parked the original 28m loans about 2 or 3 years ago, the individual funds have probably accounted for the losses already and there may have been other paper shifting in the back ground that eases the pain. The only recent source of funding has been ARVO and that now seems to be being drawn to a close so that the club "stands on its own two feet" It leaves Otium with a large annual interest bill that is difficult to pay over because the cash flow doesn't allow it so it is charged and rolled up creating even more debt. So that debt is parked also in the hope that one day they make profits and can draw it down in actual payments not worthless pieces of paper. Other than the court cases there isn't anywhere to go with it that I can see. Having parked the funding then, bar some slice of luck, they have basically parked the club also

Which is worrying both in terms of the future with or without SISU. If they stay where does the money to invest in the squad and challenge at the top of L1 let alone Championship come from? What happens if income drops further and fans are further alienated? If they cut and run there who comes in?, would anyone come in?, could the fans help/invest in that?

SISU of course make their money out of restructuring companies and debt.......

CCFC has always been a tool in a means to an ends (an ends that has shifted as events unfurled), something to be kicked about but not cared for...... I really do not see why any fan thinks that the owners care or have an affinity for the club say like Whelan at Wigan, there is just no evidence of it from where I am sitting

All just my opinion of course
 
Last edited:

MichaelCCFC

New Member
perhaps their investors are now being told how their money has been used or abused,
i would hope that the performances of the succession of persons, over the last 7 years,
either at, or near, the helm of CCFC, have been accurately reported back to those investors,
which ever is the truth,
how does an organisation like sisu intend to make CCFC a success ?
they do have the opportunity to speculate on a realistic level, to accumulate,
but their achilles heel is their relationship with their customers,
you simply cannot treat your customers as they have done,
and hope that they will forgive and forget,
well over 10,000 fans feel abused


Again suspect this is reading too much into it. They are asset strippers. The pre financial crash investment was the phase that was out of character and that was due to sisu having more money than they knew what to do with and seppala not being involved in the decision to buy ccfc. since JS started calling the shots they've acted to type with selling assets, litigation etc. It's about squeezing every penny out of ccfc not investing in any way - just look at the shop/merchandising! People can get into the complexities of the finances but the overall strategy has been in place for some years now and is in truth very simple.
 

SkyBlueSid

Well-Known Member
Again suspect this is reading too much into it. They are asset strippers. The pre financial crash investment was the phase that was out of character and that was due to sisu having more money than they knew what to do with and seppala not being involved in the decision to buy ccfc. since JS started calling the shots they've acted to type with selling assets, litigation etc. It's about squeezing every penny out of ccfc not investing in any way - just look at the shop/merchandising! People can get into the complexities of the finances but the overall strategy has been in place for some years now and is in truth very simple.

I think you are right. Seppala can't be stupid - you don't get to have a £10 million house in one of the swishest parts of London when you are stupid. You don't get that by throwing money around either.

I'm not so confident about some of the others running the club. Waggott and Fisher do seem to be completely clueless individuals.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
you see my understanding of asset stripping is that the assets are sold on and the owners extract the sales value...... where have they actually done that? It seems to me that this car crash has resulted in crisis knee jerk decisions just to keep it afloat and that any asset sold has been done so to finance on going operations.

The cutting costs .......... well I have always said they have to live within means. With the prospect of no further external funds it isn't about squeezing costs so they can extract more, it is more about the cash flow does not allow them to pay out on things like proper merchandising space at the Ricoh

SISU have always said they have never taken anything out of CCFC - well no I don't think they have. It isn't where they make their money is it - that's usually in the fund managers fees their investors pay. Have the investors taken anything out? Well ARVO have seen enough value to take preference shares in the group in exchange for debt owed or some of the interest accrued - why they place such value on it you can only wonder. The original funds grew to 29m in 2011 but now stand at 28m so something must have been "taken out" but there are no other details.

I just do not see any real evidence of money disappearing in to the owners pockets thereby leaving CCFC short
 
Last edited:

MichaelCCFC

New Member
I think you are right. Seppala can't be stupid - you don't get to have a £10 million house in one of the swishest parts of London when you are stupid. You don't get that by throwing money around either.

I'm not so confident about some of the others running the club. Waggott and Fisher do seem to be completely clueless individuals.

If you take the view that this is nothing to with football but the aim is all about money - and assuming Waggott and Fisher aren't working on a voluntary basis and are more likely to be on the kind of wages the rest of us would give our right arm for - then they're pretty successful!
 

SkyBlueSid

Well-Known Member
If you take the view that this is nothing to with football but the aim is all about money - and assuming Waggott and Fisher aren't working on a voluntary basis and are more likely to be on the kind of wages the rest of us would give our right arm for - then they're pretty successful!

Yes, financially successful, certainly prior to their running of CCFC anyway. Fisher in particular has never really understood his customer base which is why we are in the mess we are. I simply cannot see why he is still in a job.

Seppala is entirely about money and seems to have neither interest nor skill in the football world. She clearly knows that but no doubt CCFC is only one part of her portfolio, given her wealth.
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
They have to be pretty intelligent to run a hedge fund. Investing in sectors they personally know nothing about is quite common I imagine...they employ people who do know what they're talking about to advise them...the rest of it is pre-empting expectations of value...
With regards to the incapability of human emotion...don't believe that's the case, they simply don't care. And why would they if it's a simple investment?




Makes sense, and I agree with you. But now that that dream is over, and it is definitely over, what now? They can't honestly believe their court room battles will bring any luck. So...just holding tight and trying to make the club break even while they a) hope someone buys them or, and i don't believe this for a second, b) invest more to try get us promoted and then sell us for a loss anyway?

[/COLOR]

This is interesting. I think this is plausible, and why would investors care where there money has gone as long as they are still seeing handsome returns on it? They've got no reason to even question whether they can get their capital back. Besides...realistically £60million probably isn't even a drop in the ocean to the fund/s they are handling...probably billions. That could go some way to explaining why it's only now that they've sort of "given up" that they've decided to make the club cash neutral or whatever the term is. And it's better to just keep the club ticking over than to actually write off the losses.

Shit. We're stuck with these fuckers for a long long long time.

Would you seriously hand your money over to someone who said "I'm going to go and invest this in something I know nothing about, it might make a profit, or it might not, your guess is as good as mine. Doesn't matter though as its your money not ours".

Who are these people that advise them that supposedly know what they are doing? Can you name one good board room appointment since December 2007?
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
If you take the view that this is nothing to with football but the aim is all about money - and assuming Waggott and Fisher aren't working on a voluntary basis and are more likely to be on the kind of wages the rest of us would give our right arm for - then they're pretty successful!

Personally they are successful, however with their directors hats on they have been dismal failures.
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
Would you seriously hand your money over to someone who said "I'm going to go and invest this in something I know nothing about, it might make a profit, or it might not, your guess is as good as mine. Doesn't matter though as its your money not ours".

Who are these people that advise them that supposedly know what they are doing? Can you name one good board room appointment since December 2007?

It didn't quite happen that way, did it?
It was Ranson - the former footballer - who persuaded sisu to invest, Ranson - the football man - who chaired the board the first three years.

Interestingly a lot of posters supported the first board and many still want Hoffman/Elliot back. Of course they are totally ignoring the first board wasted the prime opportunity to turn the failing club around. It's been an uphill struggle ever since.
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
It didn't quite happen that way, did it?
It was Ranson - the former footballer - who persuaded sisu to invest, Ranson - the football man - who chaired the board the first three years.

Interestingly a lot of posters supported the first board and many still want Hoffman/Elliot back. Of course they are totally ignoring the first board wasted the prime opportunity to turn the failing club around. It's been an uphill struggle ever since.

What way did it happen then?

Do you think Ray Ranson or any of the first board were good? Do you think any board members since have been good?

It sounds like you are now complaining that fans originally supported Sisu. Should we have hated them from the start?
 

Tonylinc

Well-Known Member
Why are people confused about this? As someone said earlier our owners bought the club in the hope of a fluke promotion which did not come off. Ever since then they have been looking for a way out. The first and perhaps obvious way was to get the freehold to the Ricoh. That again failed spectacularly. From that date onwards they have been looking for another way (which explains the stupid legal actions). What will the eventual exit be is anyone's guess. I don't think even they know the answer to that one!
 
H

Huckerby

Guest
Would you seriously hand your money over to someone who said "I'm going to go and invest this in something I know nothing about, it might make a profit, or it might not, your guess is as good as mine. Doesn't matter though as its your money not ours".

Who are these people that advise them that supposedly know what they are doing? Can you name one good board room appointment since December 2007?

No. I'd hand it over to whoever can guarantee the best returns. Probably would want assurances that it wasn't going to be invested in blood diamonds or arms deal but that's about as much as I'd care. Probably closer to reality than your conversation.

No I can't. And I didn't say they were on the board.
 

MichaelCCFC

New Member
you see my understanding of asset stripping is that the assets are sold on and the owners extract the sales value...... where have they actually done that? It seems to me that this car crash has resulted in crisis knee jerk decisions just to keep it afloat and that any asset sold has been done so to finance on going operations.

The cutting costs .......... well I have always said they have to live within means. With the prospect of no further external funds it isn't about squeezing costs so they can extract more, it is more about the cash flow does not allow them to pay out on things like proper merchandising space at the Ricoh

SISU have always said they have never taken anything out of CCFC - well no I don't think they have. It isn't where they make their money is it - that's usually in the fund managers fees their investors pay. Have the investors taken anything out? Well ARVO have seen enough value to take preference shares in the group in exchange for debt owed or some of the interest accrued - why they place such value on it you can only wonder. The original funds grew to 29m in 2011 but now stand at 28m so something must have been "taken out" but there are no other details.

I just do not see any real evidence of money disappearing in to the owners pockets thereby leaving CCFC short

I'd forgotten this quote about Labovitch's role in relation to Tony Blair "Labovitch was at the centre of a complex web of companies that, due to the way they are structured, have to disclose only a minimal amount of information concerning Blair's business operations, the profits he makes or indeed how he makes his money". Apply that to ML's involvement with sisu and is it perhaps the case that when people such as yourself with great expertise and knowledge are still left with so many questions about ccfc finances, it's an indication of just how good hedge funds and someone like ML are at making things impenetrable?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Take it back to basics then...... despite the sales of players or other assets being included in the accounts, the SBS&L group has made 53.6m in losses to 31/05/14, which is matched by annually increasing loans from investors / ARVO or preference shares issued to ARVO. That implies money coming in not going out. If they are making charges against SBS&L then they are having to lend SBS&L the money to repay themselves...... with no great prospect of those loans/shares being repaid..... wouldn't think that was great money management or how to asset strip

There is probably some angle to it whereby someone "benefits" but it is away from the SBS&L balance sheet. If you asset strip you acquire something then strip the value you don't put it back in as loans that have little prospect of being paid. Has the asset base been eroded absolutely but everything points to the assets being sold just to keep SBS&L going

Do you really think ML was making the decisions in this and controlling it? He couldn't even explain simple accounting entries when interviewed
 
Last edited:

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Take it back to basics then...... despite the sales of players or other assets being included in the accounts, the SBS&L group has made 53.6m in losses to 31/05/14, has which is matched by annually increasing loans from investors / ARVO or preference shares issued to ARVO. That implies money coming in not going out. If they are making charges against SBS&L they are having to lend SBS&L the money to pay themselves...... with no great prospect of those loans/shares being repaid..... wouldn't think that was great money management or how to asset strip

Do you really think ML was making the decisions in this and controlling it? He couldn't even explain simple accounting entries when interviewed

ML wouldn't be able to manage the accounts of a village chip shop which attracts one customer a week.

A shrewd business brain didn't seem at the forefront of his talents.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Not saying he wasn't well educated but he is almost certainly not the brains behind what has gone on at CCFC. The architect of such scheming I am sure lays elsewhere

As for wealth - I have no idea as to his worth nor whether he created or inherited it. Care to enlighten us as to cv and worth?
 

MichaelCCFC

New Member
Not saying he wasn't well educated but he is almost certainly not the brains behind what has gone on at CCFC. The architect of such scheming I am sure lays elsewhere

As for wealth - I have no idea as to his worth nor whether he created or inherited it. Care to enlighten us as to cv and worth?


I don't think there is any suggestion that ML was the brains behind sisu/ccfc (and I certainly wouldn't suggest that!) but as per the first post I did today, seeing what skills he brought to Blair's finances means it doesn't seem too great a leap to think he was brought in by sisu to utilise those same skills regarding ccfc?
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
I'd suggest ML's main reason for existe4nce with us was contacts, more than anything else, and the hope he'd smooth a better relationship between various stakeholders.

If so, worked well eh...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top