£10m shares claim for GODIVA (1 Viewer)

[Nick]

Very much like Michael Doyle's 65k a week wages!

 

---

[ashbyjan]

Torchy - the figure is probably quite accurate at that time and was approx what the agreed formula would have given but subsequent conversations with the Higgs Charity revealed that the figure that was being discussed by them and the club was lower than this. To be fair at the time no one disputed the number so not quite sure why all the fuss 5 months on.

Just to be clear with you the Trust is 100% for CCFC and if a lower rent helps the club then so much the better however we cannot condone the success of the club at all costs as some seem to advocate - if we suddenly got new owners who were willing to put millions into the club yet were shown to be drugs barons and child traffickers then the Trust could not support this. Obviously this is an extreme example to make a point but please be totally assured that all the Trust wants is what is best for the club and its fans - what that may be we can bicker over (as we have to have something to chunter about) but we are committed to the club and its long term prosperity on and off the pitch.

 

[torchomatic]

Thanks Jan. The fuss was caused by SBK who got his knickers in a twist about it.

Torchy - the figure is probably quite accurate at that time and was approx what the agreed formula would have given but subsequent conversations with the Higgs Charity revealed that the figure that was being discussed by them and the club was lower than this. To be fair at the time no one disputed the number so not quite sure why all the fuss 5 months on.

Just to be clear with you the Trust is 100% for CCFC and if a lower rent helps the club then so much the better however we cannot condone the success of the club at all costs as some seem to advocate - if we suddenly got new owners who were willing to put millions into the club yet were shown to be drugs barons and child traffickers then the Trust could not support this. Obviously this is an extreme example to make a point but please be totally assured that all the Trust wants is what is best for the club and its fans - what that may be we can bicker over (as we have to have something to chunter about) but we are committed to the club and its long term prosperity on and off the pitch.

 

[torchomatic]

Being a bit selective, aren't you? I said if I was the only one with my opinon then fair enough, I don't have a problem with that. For some reason you didn't quote that bit.

However, you seem pretty sure that 100% - minus one or two - agree eactly with your point of view. Again, I'll ask you to show me the stats to back up your argument. I know how much you love stats so I'm sure you'll have no problem producing them.

Andddddd, you expect every poster to agree with what you've said! Otherwise you would make any posts.......... would you?:facepalm:

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

This thread seems a waste of time then.

SBK said he had a 'fact' that wasn't a fact but a "general understanding" :facepalm:

Whilst, in the think of it, he said my actual facts weren't facts and I was spouting SISU propaganda, although I had links to my figures (bar Colchester) and made my own independent calculations. That still aren't complete.

It seems SBK is not only an "old codger" but a senile old codger.

 

[crowsnest]

The claim about the £10m was that this was when Mr Fisher was saying that the deal for buying the Higgs Charity 50% of ACL had been agreed, subsequently this has been shown to be slightly off the mark.

Wasn't it the council quoted in the CT as saying a deal had been agreed?

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

Jimmyhillsfanclub
Am a new member to site and normally just read posts and never reply but just had to say what an idiot you are.
Why dont you actually read the whole post and not insulot others.

Idiot !

Thanks for your inpulot

To be honest...I did read the whole thread.....but its boring.....same old arguments just typed in a slightly different manner....

...Then someone mentioned the utter farce that was "Save our city".....

...So I thought I'd share my thoughts on what a pathetic & embarrassing shambles that was......I'm glad their stupid little campaign imploded before ruining any more of their mums bedsheets.

 

[dongonzalos]

How did a Norse God break in here :facepalm: Thawing don.

Ha ha, .......

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

This thread seems a waste of time then.

SBK said he had a 'fact' that wasn't a fact but a "general understanding"

Whilst, in the think of it, he said my actual facts weren't facts and I was spouting SISU propaganda, although I had links to my figures (bar Colchester) and made my own independent calculations. That still aren't complete.

It seems SBK is not only an "old codger" but a senile old codger.

(bar Colchester) and made my own independent calculations. That still aren't complete.



I DON'T remember reading that your "Colchester calculations" still weren't complete!
Does that make me a "Senile Old Codger"???



AshbyJan says...
Torchy - the figure is probably quite accurate at that time and was approx what the agreed formula would have given but subsequent conversations with the Higgs Charity revealed that the figure that was being discussed by them and the club was lower than this. To be fair at the time no one disputed the number so not quite sure why all the fuss 5 months on.

Thanks Jan.
I've just finished a phone call with the CET sports desk. Apparently the "Formula" was very accurate at that time(£10m) but although SISU saying that they had the money to buy the share in the Stadium was documented in the papers, both CET and Nationals. What SISU failed to say at that time was that THEIR valuation of which they were prepared to pay for the share of the Stadium wasn't even in the same "Ball park" as what ACL wanted......So what did SISU value the shares to be???...20 Bensons, a packet of Salt'n'Vinegar crisps, and a stick of Wrigleys gum?

 

[Jack Griffin]

Originally Posted by SkyBlue_Taylor
What, this evidence?

League 1 club rents:

Stevenage - 25k (could face 75k though) http://www.thecomet.net/news/stevena..._rent_1_537909

Doncaster - 100k http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/yorks...news_section=7

Bournemouth AFC - 15k a month (down from 30k a month) 15k x 12 = 180k a year http://www.bournemouth.vitalfootball...e.asp?a=143155

Colchester - 300k - no website for this, but few on here have said 'The U's' pay 300k a year.

Walsall - 460k - http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/d...l-stadium-sale

Average: 213k. Joy said we pay 6x the market value, 1.28 divided by 6 equals 213.3333...

Pretty sure this is concrete.


What..like kduffy/Grendels estimated facts about undisclosed transfer fees?:facepalm:

And looking at the capacities and quality of those grounds I would say it is not unreasonable for City to be charged one of the higher rents in the division..

Stevenage - 6,722 people, including 3,142 seats

Doncaster - 15,231

Bournemouth - 10,000

Colchester Utd - 10,084

Walsall - 11,300

 

[ashbyjan]

So the average annual cost to these average league 1 clubs for each seat is £1,065,000/53337 = £19.97
Ricoh holds 32500 therefore rent should be 32500 x £19.97 = £648,939

Not saying that's a correct way of setting rent but shows what bollox you can come up with when playing with averages and statistics

 

[Grendel]

So the average annual cost to these average league 1 clubs for each seat is £1,065,000/53337 = £19.97
Ricoh holds 32500 therefore rent should be 32500 x £19.97 = £648,939

Not saying that's a correct way of setting rent but shows what bollox you can come up with when playing with averages and statistics

No lets use the model and work with it.

The flaw of course is if you apply the same logic to our championship days. Then I think you will find ACL owe us £5 million. So next 8 years FOC.

 

[Jack Griffin]

So the average annual cost to these average league 1 clubs for each seat is £1,065,000/53337 = £19.97
Ricoh holds 32500 therefore rent should be 32500 x £19.97 = £648,939

Not saying that's a correct way of setting rent but shows what bollox you can come up with when playing with averages and statistics

Don't be silly, but the point is that the ground is a cut above the average, not only for this league but for the league above! So using the average league one rent for comparisons is a non sequitur! To me 400K plus food revenue seems a very reasonable offer, I guess that is not the 'best price', more like an opening shot. I think the final figure will be £300K, and backdated for this whole season, but I can't see it being sorted till the summer at the earliest as the league City play in next year will matter!

 

[torchomatic]

Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle, wriggle.

Looking forward to the results of the poll you conducted. When will the results be published?

Thanks Jan.
I've just finished a phone call with the CET sports desk. Apparently the "Formula" was very accurate at that time(£10m) but although SISU saying that they had the money to buy the share in the Stadium was documented in the papers, both CET and Nationals. What SISU failed to say at that time was that THEIR valuation of which they were prepared to pay for the share of the Stadium wasn't even in the same "Ball park" as what ACL wanted......So what did SISU value the shares to be???...20 Bensons, a packet of Salt'n'Vinegar crisps, and a stick of Wrigleys gum?

 

[ashbyjan]

No lets use the model and work with it.

The flaw of course is if you apply the same logic to our championship days. Then I think you will find ACL owe us £5 million. So next 8 years FOC.

Maybe you have the time to bother calculating the average seat rent in the championship over the past half decade but I haven't and the purpose of the mini calc was simply to show that you can "prove" pretty much anything by manipulating statistics. Every case is different and each ground has its own pro's and con's so to talk of averages is pointless. It is just another case of pointless posturing which is helping no one (and both sides are guilty of it) so if this whole mess is simply about rent just get it sorted and let us all get on with the business of arguing about Murphy v Doyle etc

 

[torchomatic]

I think we should compare these too, while we're at it:

Don't be silly, but the point is that the ground is a cut above the average, not only for this league but for the league above! So using the average league one rent for comparisons is a non sequitur! To me 400K plus food revenue seems a very reasonable offer, I guess that is not the 'best price', more like an opening shot. I think the final figure will be £300K, and backdated for this whole season, but I can't see it being sorted till the summer at the earliest as the league City play in next year will matter!

 

[Grendel]

This thread seems a waste of time then.

SBK said he had a 'fact' that wasn't a fact but a "general understanding"

Whilst, in the think of it, he said my actual facts weren't facts and I was spouting SISU propaganda, although I had links to my figures (bar Colchester) and made my own independent calculations. That still aren't complete.

It seems SBK is not only an "old codger" but a senile old codger.

(bar Colchester) and made my own independent calculations. That still aren't complete.



I DON'T remember reading that your "Colchester calculations" still weren't complete!
Does that make me a "Senile Old Codger"???



AshbyJan says...
Torchy - the figure is probably quite accurate at that time and was approx what the agreed formula would have given but subsequent conversations with the Higgs Charity revealed that the figure that was being discussed by them and the club was lower than this. To be fair at the time no one disputed the number so not quite sure why all the fuss 5 months on.

Thanks Jan.
I've just finished a phone call with the CET sports desk. Apparently the "Formula" was very accurate at that time(£10m) but although SISU saying that they had the money to buy the share in the Stadium was documented in the papers, both CET and Nationals. What SISU failed to say at that time was that THEIR valuation of which they were prepared to pay for the share of the Stadium wasn't even in the same "Ball park" as what ACL wanted......So what did SISU value the shares to be???...20 Bensons, a packet of Salt'n'Vinegar crisps, and a stick of Wrigleys gum?

Strangely the formula sounds a lot less scientific than my transfer fee information on players bought in by sisu yet over 6 months down the line you still go on about my "facts".

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

Hey...Battery boy!

I'm not wriggling about anything....Where are your figures to back up your assumptions. You're quick to have a go at others posts but never come up with anything when "As SBTaylor says" "Concrete"
Those figures were as near as damn it at the time Such a pity SISU valued the shares a million miles off what ACL wanted!
It's like I and lots of others have said......SISU want something for nothing, and will trample roughshod over anyone or anything that gets in their way!:jerkit:
As for Sky Blue Talk figures...why don't you start a poll as to who is Pro, and who is Anti, SISU?....Or is doing something, run against the grain where you are concerned?...Or perhaps your chum Grendel can start a poll.
PS...I said imo, I think that there are far more Anti-Sisu than Pro-SISU on this forum, and as an overall figure with supporters that still go to games, there is far more than YOU think will be Anti-SISU and therefore will NOT be in the minority....Go on then..Prove me wrong big boy!

 

[lordsummerisle]

SBK,

Did you use to post on GMK?

 

[Bennets Afro]

Seeing as we are a league one club and our rent is £1.2m then why are these missed out of the calculations.

Surely it should be considered to get a true reflection of an average league one rent

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

@ Grendel...

Strangely the formula sounds a lot less scientific than my transfer fee information on players bought in by sisu yet over 6 months down the line you still go on about my "facts".



That's because YOU claimed "Undisclosed transfer fees" to be (This is the bit that makes me laugh)"Estimated facts"...YOUR words not mine
Funny how when anything is said, it is frowned on and "Turned" when it's not in your favour eh?:facepalm:

 

[Grendel]

@ Grendel...

Strangely the formula sounds a lot less scientific than my transfer fee information on players bought in by sisu yet over 6 months down the line you still go on about my "facts".



That's because YOU claimed "Undisclosed transfer fees" to be (This is the bit that makes me laugh)"Estimated facts"...YOUR words not mine
Funny how when anything is said, it is frowned on and "Turned" when it's not in your favour eh?:facepalm:

No mine was from an official website which used financial information to give a pretty accurate amount for each player.

I seem to recall Westwood was the cause as you said you'd "heard" he cost either £100 or £200k. I said the site valued him at nearer £750k which most accept as nearer to the truth.

Where did your info come from. The bloke down the pub or did you make it up to suit your own argument?

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

@ Lordsummerisle..

No m8 I've never posted on GMK...Why?

 

[torchomatic]

No, you didn't say "IMO" you said: SBT has a membership of over 4 thousand, if I'm not mistaken. Quite a sizeable chunk of support of CCFC fans. If the majority are against your view, then that is a damning indictment against you!

Now, if I'd said something similar then I'm sure you'd have pulled me up on it.

Also, you stated: Where are your figures to back up your assumptions. You're quick to have a go at others posts but never come up with anything when "As SBTaylor says", a statement which is fairly ironic as your whole thread hangs on "Jan Says". Now, where are YOUR figures to back up YOUR assumptions?

The thing is, you haven't got a leg to stand on, you started this thread as a "fact", basically because Jan said something when even Jan has now admitted it wasn't a fact but a figure plucked out of the air.

PS...I said imo, I think that there are far more Anti-Sisu than Pro-SISU on this forum, and as an overall figure with supporters that still go to games, there is far more than YOU think will be Anti-SISU and therefore will NOT be in the minority....Go on then..Prove me wrong big boy!

 

[lordsummerisle]

Just there was a SkyBlueKid who used to, and he was right up Sisu's arse.

Wondered if you were one of the "Born Agains".

 

[lordsummerisle]

I think people underestimate the depth of the damage done to the club by previous regimes honest and professional running of the club. I am sure that due to the relative haste that the deal was done by SISU full due diligence may well have been foregone and over the past couple of years new horrors have reared their ugly heads (no not McGinnity). The task they have faced has been immense and they probably underestimated the mess the club was in and the amount of work needed to turn it around. Obviously the recession hasn't helped with the health of SISU themselves and the ability of the apathetic Coventry public to pay for a poor standard of football. They are definitely heading in the right direction, although not at the speed many would like, but as far as I remember the only promise Ranson has ever made was that they would leave the club in a better state than they found it. Not difficult since it was basically bankrupt and trading insolvently.
The clubs finances seem on a better footing with the long term debt allegedly under control but the operating deficit can only be addressed by increasing the revenue and as the club has pretty much made all the cost cuts possible it is up to the Coventry public to support the club and get behind the team. That does not mean supporting and worshipping Ranson etc but supporting the club many of them claim to support yet do sod all to actually do so - why should SISU stump up millions for new players etc if from a catchment area of approx 450,000 only 15,000 bother to show their support? Maybe they have worked out that the max support the club is likely to get on a regular basis, even if succesful, is around 23,000 and 8000 extra punters would not bring in enough revenue (£2 millionish) to cover the investment needed (£3 millionish) to get that success.

 

[WillieStanley]

Maybe you have the time to bother calculating the average seat rent in the championship over the past half decade but I haven't and the purpose of the mini calc was simply to show that you can "prove" pretty much anything by manipulating statistics. Every case is different and each ground has its own pro's and con's so to talk of averages is pointless. It is just another case of pointless posturing which is helping no one (and both sides are guilty of it) so if this whole mess is simply about rent just get it sorted and let us all get on with the business of arguing about Murphy v Doyle etc

This is exactly what puts me off the SBTrust. Read your opening sentence back to yourself. Its a needless put down. A reaction you resort to on this forum whenever you are questioned. This isn't Question Time or any other political debate and you won't win more voters by simply being obnoxious. This is a reason why membership of the SBTrust and support of it is so off putting.

Jan, I think you have a lot to contribute and you are obviously quite an intelligent man, but while you continue to put yourself across as a self important megalomaniac who refuses to reason with those who disagree, the Trust will remain as credible as the last one, certainly in my eyes.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

And looking at the capacities and quality of those grounds I would say it is not unreasonable for City to be charged one of the higher rents in the division..

Stevenage - 6,722 people, including 3,142 seats

Doncaster - 15,231

Bournemouth - 10,000

Colchester Utd - 10,084

Walsall - 11,300

Hence why I said we should pay average Championship rent, which is quoted at 240k, I will probably do research on this, when I can be bothered. Again, I said it's a good indicator of what we should pay.

From the Championship teams I know who pay rent, Leeds, Hull, Ipswich, the average is 600k, but Leeds is too high, Ipswich and Hull pay meagre rent.

 

[Grendel]

Maybe you have the time to bother calculating the average seat rent in the championship over the past half decade but I haven't and the purpose of the mini calc was simply to show that you can "prove" pretty much anything by manipulating statistics. Every case is different and each ground has its own pro's and con's so to talk of averages is pointless. It is just another case of pointless posturing which is helping no one (and both sides are guilty of it) so if this whole mess is simply about rent just get it sorted and let us all get on with the business of arguing about Murphy v Doyle etc

Odd as you had the time to calculate it when it suits your argument. You and I both know that this will not extend to the Championship with bigger stadiums.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

@ Grendel..

Every one of my figures were, "I stressed" as them being "Hearsay"..."I challenge you to say different" At no point did I claim them to be anything more than that..... NOT "Estimated Facts" like you claimed (Those were the actual words that you used..."Estimated Facts") Lmfao.:laugh:

 

[Godiva]

So here's a quick resumé on this threads original topic:

Taken from an Interview between "AshbyJan" and "The Observer

"What frustrates is they [Sisu] can suddenly find £10m to try and buy the stadium, but they can't pay the rent on it and they can't buy players," said their spokesman, Jan Mokrzycki. "It's obvious they don't give a monkeys about the club. No one else is going to come in and save us, it's up to the fans to do it ourselves. We might as well get in a position to do it now, rather than be like Portsmouth, scrambling around at the last minute trying to get something done.

NOW! If you still want to call me a liar...You are saying it to AshbyJan who QUOTES what I have said!

Why did you start a new thread? You could easily have bumped the old one up.

Anyway - here is what I said in response to some of your post in the the old thread:

Interesting.
If you're a believer of facts, then why do you say that they have said the debts are 60-70m? They have never said that!
If you're a believer of facts, then why do you say they were about to buy half the stadium for £10m - they never said that!
(They said they were in talks with Higgs to buy their shares - which Higgs has confirmed, but they never said at what amount).

You accuse them of lying ... but are you not lying yourself?

In the old thread you tried to justify your claim (that sisu themself had said they were going to buy the Higgs shares for £10m) with a few quotes from people who were not sisu. And now you come back starting a new thread with another quote from anybody but sisu.

You can't find any quotes anywhere from sisu saying they are prepared to buy the Higgs shares at £10m, because they are not.
They want the shares absolutely, but not above fair value.

I never directly called you a liar ... I asked you a question because it seemed to me you were doing exactly what you accused sisu of. Giving false information.

Blimey 21 pages on an article written 5 months ago - slow weekend for some.
Link to the "offending" article here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/football-league-blog/2012/sep/08/coventry-city-abyss-sisu

The claim about the £10m was that this was when Mr Fisher was saying that the deal for buying the Higgs Charity 50% of ACL had been agreed, subsequently this has been shown to be slightly off the mark. The general understanding was that the cost of that 50% was in the region of £10m. Hope this clears up the details from this old article.

@SBK:
Are we good now?
Can we agree that there are no evidence of sisu ever saying they were prepared to pay £10m for Higgs shares?

And btw - I think TF said (back in the summer) that ccfc and ACL had agreed on headlines for a purchase of the Higgs shares. I can't recall him ever saying they had agreed a price.

 

[Grendel]

@ Grendel..

Every one of my figures were, "I stressed" as them being "Hearsay"..."I challenge you to say different" At no point did I claim them to be anything more than that..... NOT "Estimated Facts" like you claimed (Those were the actual words that you used..."Estimated Facts") Lmfao.:laugh:

In other words you made them up -- I wouldn't be so picky about phrases in future old chap as this whole thread was built on a fact that very much wasnt.

Done the poll yet?

 

[Grendel]

So here's a quick resumé on this threads original topic:







@SBK:
Are we good now?
Can we agree that there are no evidence of sisu ever saying they were prepared to pay £10m for Higgs shares?

And btw - I think TF said (back in the summer) that ccfc and ACL had agreed on headlines for a purchase of the Higgs shares. I can't recall him ever saying they had agreed a price.

I'm sure SBK will know the price -- his mate down the pub told him.

 

[lordsummerisle]

I think people underestimate the depth of the damage done to the club by previous regimes honest and professional running of the club. I am sure that due to the relative haste that the deal was done by SISU full due diligence may well have been foregone and over the past couple of years new horrors have reared their ugly heads (no not McGinnity). The task they have faced has been immense and they probably underestimated the mess the club was in and the amount of work needed to turn it around. Obviously the recession hasn't helped with the health of SISU themselves and the ability of the apathetic Coventry public to pay for a poor standard of football. They are definitely heading in the right direction, although not at the speed many would like, but as far as I remember the only promise Ranson has ever made was that they would leave the club in a better state than they found it. Not difficult since it was basically bankrupt and trading insolvently.
The clubs finances seem on a better footing with the long term debt allegedly under control but the operating deficit can only be addressed by increasing the revenue and as the club has pretty much made all the cost cuts possible it is up to the Coventry public to support the club and get behind the team. That does not mean supporting and worshipping Ranson etc but supporting the club many of them claim to support yet do sod all to actually do so - why should SISU stump up millions for new players etc if from a catchment area of approx 450,000 only 15,000 bother to show their support? Maybe they have worked out that the max support the club is likely to get on a regular basis, even if succesful, is around 23,000 and 8000 extra punters would not bring in enough revenue (£2 millionish) to cover the investment needed (£3 millionish) to get that success.

Sorry, forgot to put it in quotes!

That was from AshbyJan a few years ago!

 

[Astute]

Really for all we know we could be owned by , one, two or three people.
Who are extremely wealthy.
They may have the business knowledge. That allows them to disguise their investment. Ensuring they are protected by anonymity for tax reasons and protected from the hassle of fans.

If anyone owns 10% or more of any club they have to declare it. Nobody owns 10% so nobody has to declare a stake in our club.

Thought you would remember this coming out before when the question was asked to SISU previously.