A lot is happening, bit of a summary so far....... (2 Viewers)

[dongonzalos]

Information is seeping out bit by bit

I think this is where we are at now

1)
Cranie cannot be offered a contract according to TF as a more realistic budget has been set. This suggests the budget has been agreed and it is a tight one if we cant even afford to even offer Cranie a contract (18/05/2012, CET)

This begs the question if we have a budget, why have the books not been submitted?
How tight is this budget if we cant offer a contract to a player leaving even for him to consider and refuse if he so wishes.

2)
It seems Higgs want to sell to SISU according to Duffy listening to the radio this morning and Jon Gaunt yesterday

3)
The council are in negotiations with SISU re the Ricoh. Councillor Mutton is considering all avenues including other investors and he will not allow SISU to take half the stadium on and engulf it a fire sale or their debts (emails 17/05/2012& letter in CET 18/05/2012)

4)
ACL say they are running at a profit which I believe would still be profit minus the rent (I think, may stand corrected on that) 18/05/2012

5)
Liquidation would mean a 2 division drop. 17/05/2012 Duffy

6)
Gary Hoffman says he is still trying to get investment in China (10/05/12)

We need more information on this. Quite vague no follow up no one digging

7)
Paul Fletcher thinks developing a hotel is the way forward (18/05/12)

8)
SISU are going to use other investors to buy half the stadium and develop a hotel (18/05/12)

We do not know who or anything about these investors. Also would that mean they will have nothing to do with CCFC, just invest in the arena and hotel? Will the player budget stay the same despite this?

10)
TF demises debenture charge by AVRO as routine (BSB 18/05/12)

11)
Council in the past agreed one deal with MM BR GR about owning half the ricoh. Due to EU laws could not honour agreement. Legal battle ensued lawyers agreed council could not offer half stadium. They offered half of ACL instead as a compromise. MM said Coventry could not afford half of ACL/Higgs and asked for the money instead. ACL/higgs got the other half for 6.5 million, when it was actually worth 18.5. (17/05/12).

12)
Cllr Mutton says if SISU get half the income from revenue it will have no impact on their debts and running costs. It will not affect the budgets like SISU say.

I think that is about it?

Apologies if I have anything wrong or misinterpreted but that is what I think is going on.

 

---

[Covstu]

so all quiet then.....:thinking about:

 

[dazzled2u]

The only plus from if SISU do but half the RICOH is that it makes the club more attractive to another buyer! (if we owned the ground we wouldn't be in this mess!)

 

[PhilWasn'tBabb]

Given SISU track record I'm sure they will keep the ground(if they get there hands on it) and the club totally seprate.

There trying to cut there losses and I think once they get hold of the ground they will get rid of the club minus the ground and we'll end up paying rent to SISU..

 

[mark82]

Given SISU track record I'm sure they will keep the ground(if they get there hands on it) and the club totally seprate.

There trying to cut there losses and I think once they get hold of the ground they will get rid of the club minus the ground and we'll end up paying rent to SISU..

I don't think anyone in their right mind would buy the club without a share in the ground/land.

 

[davebart]

The only reason SISU bought CCFC in the first place was to get their hands on the stadium and land. They have never had any interest in CCFC. They will keep it entirely separate from the club and not invest in the team.

Furthermore SISU are a management company of other people's money. Everyone who owns a bit of CCFC is an investor so if they buy the ground it will just be using the same or other investor's money.

 

[ccfcway]

if we are liquidated then we drop to the conference ?

do it !!!

 

[mark82]

Add to your list that moderators keep moving threads continually making it impossible to find anything.

 

[mark82]

if we are liquidated then we drop to the conference ?

do it !!!

At least the conference. Technically Midland Alliance but we woul likely be deemed to big for the grounds at that level.

 

[ccfcway]

13) there are more board restructures on this website than there are at SISU

 

[ccfcway]

if we got liquidated tomorrow, got bought by a hoffman or ANYONE else, and got kicked into the conference, I for one would begin to get excited about the forthcoming season..

as is stands, there is just not point even trying to compete

 

[Diehard Si]

if we got liquidated tomorrow, got bought by a hoffman or ANYONE else, and got kicked into the conference, I for one would begin to get excited about the forthcoming season..

as is stands, there is just not point even trying to compete

You know what, I thought the same reading the above. The conference is a much better outcome than the midland alliance. It would save at least 4/5 years of grinding back up.

 

[coundonskyblue]

Two scenarios:

1) Sisu stay and run the club in the manor we have become accustomed too

2) Sisu pull the plug, we go into admin or liquidation, somebody comes in who is not necessarily wealthy but is ambitious, reform in the Conference.

I think scenario 2 would see us back in the Championship quicker than scenario 1.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Information is seeping out bit by bit

I think this is where we are at now

1)
Cranie cannot be offered a contract according to TF as a more realistic budget has been set. This suggests the budget has been agreed and it is a tight one if we cant even afford to even offer Cranie a contract (18/05/2012, CET) -why did anyone think we could afford to keep him given the state of our finances ?

This begs the question if we have a budget, why have the books not been submitted?Might have agreed a player budget but that isnt the whole budget and my guess is there is still a hole in the finances that SISU are not signing up for
How tight is this budget if we cant offer a contract to a player leaving even for him to consider and refuse if he so wishes. very - pretty much on the edge of collapse

2)
It seems Higgs want to sell to SISU according to Duffy listening to the radio this morning and Jon Gaunt yesterday some one has to make some sort of move in this deadlock. The Charity never set out to be long term investors. But dont expect them to give it away - charity law says they have to get full value or trustees personally liable. What they are saying in pretty much put your money where your mouth is but there are conditions and terms to be met if you want it

3)
The council are in negotiations with SISU re the Ricoh. Councillor Mutton is considering all avenues including other investors and he will not allow SISU to take half the stadium on and engulf it a fire sale or their debts (emails 17/05/2012& letter in CET 18/05/2012) agreed - the stadium has never been just about CCFC for the Council or charity - it is a city regeneration project that employs and is serviced by far more of the population of Coventry etc than CCFC

4)
ACL say they are running at a profit which I believe would still be profit minus the rent (I think, may stand corrected on that) 18/05/2012 for now yes depends on what rent is finally settled on but also what the other income streams ACL have developed are

5)
Liquidation would mean a 2 division drop. 17/05/2012 Duffy only if some one picks up the current registration - it could be worse than that - there might be no team at all

6)
Gary Hoffman says he is still trying to get investment in China (10/05/12) he didnt the CT and some other guy did

We need more information on this. Quite vague no follow up no one diggingown opinion is that there is nothing to find

7)
Paul Fletcher thinks developing a hotel is the way forward (18/05/12) it helps the stadium yes but how will it help the football team in the short or medium term - and if that what he thinks how come when at ACL he didnt make it happen

8)
SISU are going to use other investors to buy half the stadium and develop a hotel (18/05/12) no one knows that and right now talk seems to be very cheap with every tom dick tim brian and paul having their say in the papers

We do not know who or anything about these investors. Also would that mean they will have nothing to do with CCFC, just invest in the arena and hotel? Will the player budget stay the same despite this? two seperate budgets and projects and wont necessarily affect player budget any time soon - as in years

10)
TF demises debenture charge by AVRO as routine (BSB 18/05/12) well he would wouldnt he and the CT just says well thats ok then :facepalm:

11)
Council in the past agreed one deal with MM BR GR about owning half the ricoh. Due to EU laws could not honour agreement. Legal battle ensued lawyers agreed council could not offer half stadium. They offered half of ACL instead as a compromise. MM said Coventry could not afford half of ACL/Higgs and asked for the money instead. ACL/higgs got the other half for 6.5 million, when it was actually worth 18.5. (17/05/12). only worth £18.5m if you accept Fletchers valuation for a part built building site - if that was value then what is value now ? Bottom line was that CCFC had no money to get the job done without the help and giving up the rights it would have meant no ground at all and then no club at all

12)
Cllr Mutton says if SISU get half the income from revenue it will have no impact on their debts and running costs. It will not affect the budgets like SISU say.given the effect of relegation on income and the income sources that might be shifted to CCFc he may well be right...... dont forget unlike us he should have seen some sort of figures

I think that is about it?

Apologies if I have anything wrong or misinterpreted but that is what I think is going on.

Just added my own take on what you put dongonzalos but i agree with most of it

 

[dongonzalos]

Just added my own take on what you put dongonzalos but i agree with most of it

No worries I tried to keep my opinions out of it and tried to summarise what has gone on but its hard not to question some things.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Essentially agree with you there OSB. Will be interested to see if Turner elaborates by email on what Fisher said.

 

[albatross]

In response to "This begs the question if we have a budget, why have the books not been submitted?" I am a little confused here.

The accounts are a snap shot of the trading position of the company on the last day of their fiscal year. There are comparisons to previous years trading positions but I have never seen any forward looking budget figures in any annual reports (please correct me if i am wrong) other than bills that may be due.

Next year’s budget is just that , the available cash and assets to use when implementing the business plan. you don’t publish your plans for your competitors if look over.

I can only assume that there are some issues that remain with last years accounts as these will have to be signed off by the auditor (KPMG or PWC or similar) stating that it is a fair reflection of the business. The auditors are also duty bound to highlight in their summary any material threats to the business (ie outstanding loans, leases etc..) that are due in the next financial period. Ie if they have a liability of £X,000 and if they don’t find new capital or renegotiate then there is a doubt that the company can continue as a going concern.

Depending upon whether SISU are a public or Private company they have ether six or nine months after the end of their fiscal year to file the accounts….

 

[dongonzalos]

nformation is seeping out bit by bit

I think this is where we are at now

1)
Cranie cannot be offered a contract according to TF as a more realistic budget has been set. This suggests the budget has been agreed and it is a tight one if we cant even afford to even offer Cranie a contract (18/05/2012, CET) -why did anyone think we could afford to keep him given the state of our finances ?

I think people thought we were going to offer him a contract and try even if he turns it down. As both TF and AT said we would. Now the budget is in we cant even offer him a contract. Which suggests possibly we wont be able to offer anyone a contract? Unless they know how much he wanted and there was no point but they did not say that. They said now with the budget we cannot offer him a contract

This begs the question if we have a budget, why have the books not been submitted?Might have agreed a player budget but that isnt the whole budget and my guess is there is still a hole in the finances that SISU are not signing up for
How tight is this budget if we cant offer a contract to a player leaving even for him to consider and refuse if he so wishes. very - pretty much on the edge of collapse Agree

2)
It seems Higgs want to sell to SISU according to Duffy listening to the radio this morning and Jon Gaunt yesterday some one has to make some sort of move in this deadlock. The Charity never set out to be long term investors. But dont expect them to give it away - charity law says they have to get full value or trustees personally liable. What they are saying in pretty much put your money where your mouth is but there are conditions and terms to be met if you want it

I agree with that if they do sell it should be full current face value as set by an independent valuer. Also for the council not to Veto it. They should try and get assurances any revenue generated by it has to be ploughed back into players wages. Also any future sell on of the share has to be agreed by the council

3)
The council are in negotiations with SISU re the Ricoh. Councillor Mutton is considering all avenues including other investors and he will not allow SISU to take half the stadium on and engulf it a fire sale or their debts (emails 17/05/2012& letter in CET 18/05/2012) agreed - the stadium has never been just about CCFC for the Council or charity - it is a city regeneration project that employs and is serviced by far more of the population of Coventry etc than CCFC
agreed

4)
ACL say they are running at a profit which I believe would still be profit minus the rent (I think, may stand corrected on that) 18/05/2012 for now yes depends on what rent is finally settled on but also what the other income streams ACL have developed are
Agreed
5)
Liquidation would mean a 2 division drop. 17/05/2012 Duffy only if some one picks up the current registration - it could be worse than that - there might be no team at all. I don't think there will be a team someone would need to sign a complete new squad at conference level. I think they would do it though if they had agreement to buy that Higgs share as part of the deal. 20000 supporting a team in the conference if that is allowed

6)
Gary Hoffman says he is still trying to get investment in China (10/05/12) he didnt the CT and some other guy did

We need more information on this. Quite vague no follow up no one diggingown opinion is that there is nothing to find

“If our determined efforts, which have been nobly supported by Gary Hoffman and Joe Elliott, conclude in success we have every reason to believe that this will represent a new dawn for the future of Coventry City Football Club.”

7)
Paul Fletcher thinks developing a hotel is the way forward (18/05/12) it helps the stadium yes but how will it help the football team in the short or medium term - and if that what he thinks how come when at ACL he didnt make it happen
I don't think it will help the team under the current owners it will just be a tool for them to sell the package. They will if they are allowed invest nothing in the team, just cut the costs as much as possible. It does not matter in their eyes if it is championship, league one or league two. Their goal is not attendances it is half the arena. They not longer buy into the concept invest in the team - success- attendances up - revenue Coventry becomes attractive proposition, council trusts them they are allowed to buy Higgs share

8)
SISU are going to use other investors to buy half the stadium and develop a hotel (18/05/12) no one knows that and right now talk seems to be very cheap with every tom dick tim brian and paul having their say in the papers
I was under the impression SISU have stated this? Or people involved in the talks have be it the council or ACL?

We do not know who or anything about these investors. Also would that mean they will have nothing to do with CCFC, just invest in the arena and hotel? Will the player budget stay the same despite this? two seperate budgets and projects and wont necessarily affect player budget any time soon - as in years 5-10 years IMO, 2 if we are very lucky. I say lucky maybe not, if the people who buy SISU out have the same view keep the team bobbing along at break even point and earn from the development

10)
TF demises debenture charge by AVRO as routine (BSB 18/05/12) well he would wouldnt he and the CT just says well thats ok then :facepalm: Agree

11)
Council in the past agreed one deal with MM BR GR about owning half the ricoh. Due to EU laws could not honour agreement. Legal battle ensued lawyers agreed council could not offer half stadium. They offered half of ACL instead as a compromise. MM said Coventry could not afford half of ACL/Higgs and asked for the money instead. ACL/higgs got the other half for 6.5 million, when it was actually worth 18.5. (17/05/12). only worth £18.5m if you accept Fletchers valuation for a part built building site - if that was value then what is value now ? Bottom line was that CCFC had no money to get the job done without the help and giving up the rights it would have meant no ground at all and then no club at all Agree

12)
Cllr Mutton says if SISU get half the income from revenue it will have no impact on their debts and running costs. It will not affect the budgets like SISU say.given the effect of relegation on income and the income sources that might be shifted to CCFc he may well be right...... dont forget unlike us he should have seen some sort of figures agree

I think that is about it?

Apologies if I have anything wrong or misinterpreted but that is what I think is going on.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Albatross......Auditors have to look forward as well as back so the future budget and sustainability is important. Key to any accounts is if they are a going concern and directors when preparing accounts for audit have to consider a period forward of at least 12 months - the auditors then test the assertions made in the budgets forward. So unless there is an agreed, supported and sustainable budget to at least this time next year then the accounts can not be signed off

The snap shot way of looking at statements i am afraid isnt appropriate

 

[albatross]

Oldskyblue58, i think we are making the same point.

it is likely that there is some impediment calling our existance into doubt over the next 12 months, which would have to be highlighted by any auditor. So we can conclude that we do not have enough cash from our own earning potential (including current investors) to meet our obligations over the next 12 months. So as per my point above we either need more cash from SISU or an external source to pay off our creditors outstaning amounts in this fiscal year. We have to File our accounts show, it is a legal requirement, however the Auditor will have to point out where that materal threat to the company lies. knowing that would indicate who our real creditors are (is another SISU company ) and how much is due this year.

I suppose the point I am making is that we do not have the facilities to even trade at a loss for next year.

 

[oldskyblue58]

wont disagree with that albatross

 

[johnniericoh]

In response to "This begs the question if we have a budget, why have the books not been submitted?" I am a little confused here.

The accounts are a snap shot of the trading position of the company on the last day of their fiscal year. There are comparisons to previous years trading positions but I have never seen any forward looking budget figures in any annual reports (please correct me if i am wrong) other than bills that may be due.

Next year’s budget is just that , the available cash and assets to use when implementing the business plan. you don’t publish your plans for your competitors if look over.

I can only assume that there are some issues that remain with last years accounts as these will have to be signed off by the auditor (KPMG or PWC or similar) stating that it is a fair reflection of the business. The auditors are also duty bound to highlight in their summary any material threats to the business (ie outstanding loans, leases etc..) that are due in the next financial period. Ie if they have a liability of £X,000 and if they don’t find new capital or renegotiate then there is a doubt that the company can continue as a going concern.

Depending upon whether SISU are a public or Private company they have ether six or nine months after the end of their fiscal year to file the accounts….

I was involved in my little club applying for a modest bank loan to carry out urgent remedial works.

The bank wanted three years audited accounts plus a forward business plan for the next twelve months in order to establish whether we had the financial ability to repay the loan via monthly instalments.

They also wanted a detailed refurbishment plan plus quotes from suppliers and contractors and a realistic time scale from commencement to completion.

So even with very modest loan arrangements the banks require sureties to satisfy their strict lending policy requirements therefore you can fully appreciate their zealousness in dealing with multi million £ contracts and investments and requiring forward business planning as essential.

PUSB

 

[dongonzalos]

Peter Knatchbull-Huggeson
"We're not a long-term investor. We'd love to be out,
"The city council are a longer-term custodian," he added. "But, again, their sole mission is to get regeneration.
"When they've got a partner that can take that on then I assume they will go out.
"It isn't the business of either of us to be running a stadium like that."
"How could I describe the management of the football club? I think best not to because of the laws of libel and so on. And anyway I expect I'd get edited out or bleeped.
"But I think that says enough about the management of the football club that now is the best time that something could happen.
"I think it's clear that they have acknowledged that they have failed over the first few years of their ownership.
"I think they've had a very cold shower and begun to understand that they need to run it more sensibly.
"And I think the people they have got now are the most sensible people I've seen at the football club in the last 20 years."
"The stage we're at at the moment is that people will be going off and doing due diligence, which takes roughly 30 days,""

18th May 2012

 

[dongonzalos]

Local social commentator and columnist releases on twitter that the deal is done and that the whole arena will be owned by SISU within a few weeks 18th May

 

[dongonzalos]

Cllr Mutton releases statement 19th May

He said further lengthy talks at the Council House yesterday were “positive” – but added any deal was a long way off, given huge potential “show-stoppers

any agreement between the Higgs charity and Sisu would need to be approved by the council, which owns the freehold to the stadium and land around it.

Sisu were a long way off offering a deal to satisfy the council’s requirements of investment in the football club and Ricoh, and the development of surrounding land for job creation – which was all “inextricably linked”.

Yesterday’s two-and-a-half hour talks took place between council representatives Coun Mutton, deputy council leader George Duggins, chief executive Martin Reeves and finance director Chris West; Sisu’s Joy Seppala and an unnamed events management company she brought to the table for the first time; Sky Blues’ chief executive Tim Fisher and Paul Barber; and Higgs charity’s Peter Knatchbull-Hugessen and Paul Harris.


Coun Mutton said: “There are huge obstacles to the way forward and there are some potential show-stoppers, which are not necessarily in the council’s control.
“We will want to make certain any additional revenue that may be generated through the Ricoh Arena primarily goes into the football club, not to pay off Sisu’s investors. We want to see some investment in the football club.
“I don’t think we’re that much closer to putting a package together that’s in everybody’s interests. There is a lot of work to be done.”
He said another potential showstopper was “whether Sisu and the Higgs charity could come to an agreement over price”.


he said: “I would want to see the colour of their money.
“There was talk of a deal being incremental. I said I want back-to-back contracts – they can’t buy into the Ricoh on the promise something in the future would be done. We need to protect taxpayers’ property and money.
“Sisu say they recognise the importance of having hotels built, and that the figures they have put together, which they didn’t disclose to us, include an amount for building hotels

The implications of what they’re saying leads me to believe finance is available. How much remains to be seen. “If they want to buy out existing loans (a £15million mortgage is owed to Yorkshire Bank), and the Higgs charity shares (previously estimated at £10million based on a formula) there needs to be finance available, as well as for the football club and regeneration.”
He added: “While I’ve seen a number of options I haven’t seen a firm business case which shows adequate levels of resources will go into the football club to be competitive next season.”

Read More http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/ne...ver-ricoh-talks-92746-31000599/#ixzz1vPTP1gMP
​