£6-7m sale price? (1 Viewer)

[Captain Dart]

how would it affect the Compass deal if we left? They must make a decent wack from the F&B at City games.

They run the hotel & bars 24/7, losing the matches will dent their profitability a bit but won't kill them, they'll only find other events to stage on Sat afternoons.

There will be a bigger effect on Stadium Sponsorship income I think.

 

---

[Grendel]

SISU keep up with the JR's. Wasps keep on about the 'background noise' stopping negotiations. So no deal is made.

Wasps get the arena to themselves. SISU get to move us out of Coventry again...if someone will let us play in their ground again.

Wasps want a big name sponsor for the arena - life really is a bitch for wasps in that regard. It's the one thing we have left

 

[Calista]

I feel like a kid watching helplessly while a dog chews my oldest and most cherished toy to pieces. And all the adults just seem to be arguing with each other, instead of doing something about it.

 

[oldfiver]

not entirely sure what they have to do. I suspect it might simply be to ensure the two replacement pitches and some changing rooms with no specification of standard etc within the RBC boundary ARVO could call on their debenture at any time that suits them in order to maximise recovery of their loan monies

The covenants with Sport England and Rugby BC prevent a sale without a suitable/proper/ fit for purpose replacement

 

[oldfiver]

The FL looks first and foremost at getting the fixtures completed, then look at protecting its members, then paying lip service to the fans and grass root football. Personally I wouldn't rely on the FL doing anything, especially not if said action brings with it the real threat of legal action or setting a precedent that might upset an already dodgy apple cart known as football finance

Will be interesting to see WASPs results then to see if they meet their Bond Covenants
Also the Stadium revaluation is over due I think

 

[Calista]

The covenants with Sport England and Rugby BC prevent a sale without a suitable/proper/ fit for purpose replacement

Are there covenants in place? The recent Rugby Local Plan out for consultation just says (on page 22) "Implementation of site allocation DS3.9 can only occur when adequate replacement of pitch provision is made to the satisfaction of Rugby Borough Council and Sport England in accordance with national planning policy". Replacement of pitches isn't quite the same thing as a full replacement of the facilities is it? Not being confrontational here - just curious as to whether you know of stronger legal safeguards which are in place?

 

[skybluetony176]

Are there covenants in place? The recent Rugby Local Plan out for consultation just says (on page 22) "Implementation of site allocation DS3.9 can only occur when adequate replacement of pitch provision is made to the satisfaction of Rugby Borough Council and Sport England in accordance with national planning policy". Replacement of pitches isn't quite the same thing as a full replacement of the facilities is it? Not being confrontational here - just curious as to whether you know of stronger legal safeguards which are in place?

Glad you've made that point and highlighted what it actually says. The club have wishy washied over it and many posters on here seem to be sleep walking into Ryton being replaced with a few goal posts in a field near Rugby and CCFC having no first team training ground.

 

[albatross]

Glad you've made that point and highlighted what it actually says. The club have wishy washied over it and many posters on here seem to be sleep walking into Ryton being replaced with a few goal posts in a field near Rugby and CCFC having no first team training ground.

Sports England are concerned with the overall delivery of sport not the training facilities for an elite football club as they do not serve the wider community. If a professional football club re houses its training facility to say Alan Higgs, Warwick University, Copsewood, or Broad Street then then it can be argued that there has been no loss of facilities to the public or the football club.

 

[chiefdave]

Has our local media thought to check with RBC or Sport England to see what actually has to happen to allow Ryton to be sold?

 

[oldskyblue58]

Fail to see where the wording guarantees like for like replacement of the Ryton facilities. There might have been more detailed wording in correspondence that does but that would require an FOI wouldn't it. Of course the club could clear it up easily themselves couldn't they

Strange that a post entirely about the FL could illicit comments entirely about Wasps.

The Wasps bond financial covenants appear to be three, one of which kicks in for 2017. Another relates to senior debt excluding monies owed to Richardson. the other about the relationship between the bond debt and the value of the Arena plus the league share. I wont bore people with more info than that. We wait to see what the financials reveal.

As for the valuation being overdue, is it? The valuation was to be done on 30-06-16. There is no mechanism I can see for publication other than the release of the audited accounts. Those are due by 31-10-2016 latest.

 

[skybluetony176]

Has our local media thought to check with RBC or Sport England to see what actually has to happen to allow Ryton to be sold?

Why does it have to fall to local media to explain what will happen? Isn't this something that the club should be doing? Isn't this something that the club should have already done? Where does offloading Ryton fall in our owners long term plans (ha ha ha, long term plan's. I crack myself up sometimes) for the club?

Let's stop pointing the finger at local media before we start shall we. It's for those responsible for the running of the club to explain this, no one else. Yet the silence is deafening.

 

[Calista]

Why does it have to fall to local media to explain what will happen? Isn't this something that the club should be doing? Isn't this something that the club should have already done? Where does offloading Ryton fall in our owners long term plans (ha ha ha, long term plan's. I crack myself up sometimes) for the club?

Let's stop pointing the finger at local media before we start shall we. It's for those responsible for the running of the club to explain this, no one else. Yet the silence is deafening.

Well I think Fisher did say something about moving to a more modern and inspiring environment. It’s a question of how much faith you place in his pronouncements, which (to put it kindly) always seem to leave room for interpretation.

 

[skybluetony176]

Well I think Fisher did say something about moving to a more modern and inspiring environment. It’s a question of how much faith you place in his pronouncements, which (to put it kindly) always seem to leave room for interpretation.

Announcement in three weeks, new year. We've narrowed it down to two sites. We're talking to local authorities, highway agency, environment agency and preparing impact statements blah blah blah.

Enough said

 

[chiefdave]

Why does it have to fall to local media to explain what will happen? Isn't this something that the club should be doing? Isn't this something that the club should have already done? Where does offloading Ryton fall in our owners long term plans (ha ha ha, long term plan's. I crack myself up sometimes) for the club?

Let's stop pointing the finger at local media before we start shall we. It's for those responsible for the running of the club to explain this, no one else. Yet the silence is deafening.

The club have already said Ryton gets sold only when a new training facility is in place but personally I don't think taking their word for it is the best idea. Isn't this exactly the type of thing the local media should look into. They were happy to run a story intimating that sale of Ryton was imminent, why not follow up on the clubs claims?

 

[Nick]

The club have already said Ryton gets sold only when a new training facility is in place but personally I don't think taking their word for it is the best idea. Isn't this exactly the type of thing the local media should look into. They were happy to run a story intimating that sale of Ryton was imminent, why not follow up on the clubs claims?

As Simon said on here, it's up to the reader to make their own mind up...

 

[skybluetony176]

The club have already said Ryton gets sold only when a new training facility is in place but personally I don't think taking their word for it is the best idea. Isn't this exactly the type of thing the local media should look into. They were happy to run a story intimating that sale of Ryton was imminent, why not follow up on the clubs claims?

Did they? Can't see the statement on the clubs site now but from memory they suggested that that was the condition imposed by RBC and Sports England when it actual fact it isn't.

 

[skybluetony176]

As Simon said on here, it's up to the reader to make their own mind up...

No. It's for the club to explain why they're selling Ryton and how that falls into a long-term plan for the club. If they clarify the facts readers won't have to make their minds up...

 

[chiefdave]

Did they? Can't see the statement on the clubs site now but from memory they suggested that that was the condition imposed by RBC and Sports England when it actual fact it isn't.

And that's exactly why the local media should get involved. The club have said one thing, most don't believe it. What do you expect from the club, them to make the same statement again? Whatever they say they won't be believed. But if the CT, Observer or CWR went to RBC and / or Sport England and got clarification we would know where we stood.

Or is journalism now extinct and we just wait for the involved parties in any story to make their own statement?

 

[skybluetony176]

And that's exactly why the local media should get involved. The club have said one thing, most don't believe it. What do you expect from the club, them to make the same statement again? Whatever they say they won't be believed. But if the CT, Observer or CWR went to RBC and / or Sport England and got clarification we would know where we stood.

Or is journalism now extinct and we just wait for the involved parties in any story to make their own statement?

That's the trouble with the statement Dave. It was gibberish, uninformative, ambiguous and not even attributed to any one individual at the club.

 

[Captain Dart]

As Simon said on here, it's up to the reader to make their own mind up...

I'd rather have some facts to base my opinion on than guess or assume.

 

[Brylowes]

Don't know whether this has been mentioned before, but it seems everyone agrees
SISU's plan was to unite club with stadium and then sell on for a fortune. Alas it was
Not to be, they owned the club but couldn't afford or couldn't reach agreement with
ACL to complete the union.

Now it could be argued that wasps are trying to do the same, but are just approaching
From a slightly different angle, it could be said they had already aquired the harder to
Get and more valuable asset. All they need now is to get a deal to buy the football club
And they will have achieved exactly what SISU couldn't.

So stadium and football club United at last, now as a hedge fund that now own the lot
They could sell the lot for a fortune couldn't they. It's Just a thought,

 

[Captain Dart]

Don't know whether this has been mentioned before, but it seems everyone agrees
SISU's plan was to unite club with stadium and then sell on for a fortune. Alas it was
Not to be, they owned the club but couldn't afford or couldn't reach agreement with
ACL to complete the union.

Now it could be argued that wasps are trying to do the same, but are just approaching
From a slightly different angle, it could be said they had already aquired the harder to
Get and more valuable asset. All they need now is to get a deal to buy the football club
And they will have achieved exactly what SISU couldn't.

So stadium and football club United at last, now as a hedge fund that now own the lot
They could sell the lot for a fortune couldn't they. It's Just a thought,

Don't think that is the angle. Derek Richardson may buzz off with a premium but Eastwood has been in rugby for some time, a bit of googling shows he was CFO of the RFU back in 2003 and arrived at Wasps in 2012. So I see him as being the architect of the Arena purchase plan. Everything I've read about him shows he has no interest in football other than indirectly to make money from it to put into rugby projects.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Will be interesting to see WASPs results then to see if they meet their Bond Covenants
Also the Stadium revaluation is over due I think

of course you could turn it around, what if the whispers are wrong

what if the valuation remains unchanged or improves
what if the bond covenants are met or exceeded
what if the group is profitable and has turned it round from last years losses

I suspect there would be some raised eyebrows, but also a sinking feeling in some quarters. It may scotch some conspiracy stories but encourage others. Will certainly beg a few other questions too I feel.

But as I have said before, we (including me) do not know yet so we wait to see

 

[oldskyblue58]

Don't know whether this has been mentioned before, but it seems everyone agrees
SISU's plan was to unite club with stadium and then sell on for a fortune. Alas it was
Not to be, they owned the club but couldn't afford or couldn't reach agreement with
ACL to complete the union.

Now it could be argued that wasps are trying to do the same, but are just approaching
From a slightly different angle, it could be said they had already aquired the harder to
Get and more valuable asset. All they need now is to get a deal to buy the football club
And they will have achieved exactly what SISU couldn't.

So stadium and football club United at last, now as a hedge fund that now own the lot
They could sell the lot for a fortune couldn't they. It's Just a thought,

I think uniting CCFC with the stadium is some way down the list of priorities that Wasps have or had. Their focus is on the Rugby Club and driving the off field incomes at the stadium. CCFC is a small part of that, and the bigger and more entrenched Wasps become the less important CCFC are to them. They need to show progress and profits for the next 7 years bringing CCFC in to the group would make that harder. They do not need to acquire CCFC to benefit from the income streams a successful CCFC could generate at the stadium.

 

[oldfiver]

of course you could turn it around, what if the whispers are wrong

what if the valuation remains unchanged or improves
what if the bond covenants are met or exceeded
what if the group is profitable and has turned it round from last years losses
I suspect there would be some raised eyebrows, but also a sinking feeling in some quarters. It may scotch some conspiracy stories but encourage others. Will certainly beg a few other questions too I feel.

But as I have said before, we (including me) do not know yet so we wait to see

So we can speculate negative thoughts about CCFC but not WASPs?

 

[skybluetony176]

So we can speculate negative thoughts about CCFC but not WASPs?

Sure you can. There's a Wasps sub section for that very reason. Go and knock yourself out in there but lets not let them distract from the issues that are facing CCFC in the CCFC section. There's a good lad.

 

[oldfiver]

Sure you can. There's a Wasps sub section for that very reason. Go and knock yourself out in there but lets not let them distract from the issues that are facing CCFC in the CCFC section. There's a good lad.

The only point I was making in response to OSB was the CCFC comments are often unfounded speculative and often prefabricated
He said what if the negative thoughts expressed against ( in this case ) WASPs were unfounded and then gave a reverse view
However that sort of response is rarely posted for CCFC - only negative ones
So I do not need to buzz off to the WASPs forum as in effect I am trying to support the football club against biased "anti "comments
So so there you are little fellow !!

 

[albatross]

The only point I was making in response to OSB was the CCFC comments are often unfounded speculative and often prefabricated
He said what if the negative thoughts expressed against ( in this case ) WASPs were unfounded and then gave a reverse view
However that sort of response is rarely posted for CCFC - only negative ones
So I do not need to buzz off to the WASPs forum as in effect I am trying to support the football club against biased "anti "comments
So so there you are little fellow !!

Comparing the track records of the respective owners one seems to be delivering the other dissembling at best so I think OSB58's post was appropriate

 

[oldfiver]

Not saying it wasn't
But then mine wasn't either !

 

[albatross]

Not saying it wasn't
But then mine wasn't either !

agreed

 

[skybluetony176]

The only point I was making in response to OSB was the CCFC comments are often unfounded speculative and often prefabricated
He said what if the negative thoughts expressed against ( in this case ) WASPs were unfounded and then gave a reverse view
However that sort of response is rarely posted for CCFC - only negative ones
So I do not need to buzz off to the WASPs forum as in effect I am trying to support the football club against biased "anti "comments
So so there you are little fellow !!

If there was positive things to say about CCFC we'd all be saying them including you. As none of us including you can find anything positive to say about CCFC (especially the decision making at the club) doesn't mean biased it means reality.

 

[oldfiver]

If there was positive things to say about CCFC we'd all be saying them including you. As none of us including you can find anything positive to say about CCFC (especially the decision making at the club) doesn't mean biased it means reality.

I never mentioned bias
I was saying most of the CCFC rumour and comment is unsubstantiated
But make a similar reamrk about WASP's and it is defended
All I want is, if people make an allegation about either Club or person then prove it!

 

[skybluetony176]

I never mentioned bias
I was saying most of the CCFC rumour and comment is unsubstantiated
But make a similar reamrk about WASP's and it is defended
All I want is, if people make an allegation about either Club or person then prove it!

And I quote "I am trying to support the football club against biased "anti "comments".

What unproven allegations have been made against the club?

 

[torchomatic]

I never mentioned bias
I was saying most of the CCFC rumour and comment is unsubstantiated
But make a similar reamrk about WASP's and it is defended
All I want is, if people make an allegation about either Club or person then prove it!

What springs to mind for me is the plans Wasps have on building loads of houses on the Higgs site. No room for us but plenty of room for houses. A London franchise freezing us out of a facility built for us...silence...

 

[Captain Dart]

What springs to mind for me is the plans Wasps have on building loads of houses on the Higgs site. No room for us but plenty of room for houses. A London franchise freezing us out of a facility built for us...silence...

They're not building on the Higgs site, they are proposing to build on the former ST land site which is adjacent to it.
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/wasps-rfc-talks-severn-trent-10576047
If SISU had actually been looking for land to build on they would have found this site easily, it has been unused for many years.