torchomatic
Well-Known Member
So, the club doesn't need greater revenue then? You're not going to moan if we can only afford free transfers, has-beens and kids?
Waggott said he believed the club would be at the Ricoh Arena for the next four to five years but underlined the need, under rules governing how much football clubs can spend on players, for the club to generate revenue 365 days a year from its stadium.
“The simplest way of looking at it is that I can give 60p in every £1 we generate to Steven Pressley to put on the pitch,” he said. “So we have to maximise our revenue streams in order to put the best team on the pitch because the success of the first team in 90 minutes on a Saturday shapes the 90 hours of work we do the following week.”
Read more at http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/...oventry-city-2105446.aspx#0b1Up9MYLTgXcqCU.99
And how are you going to do that for the next 4-5 years when you don't own a stake in the stadium operating company? Why would Wasps give ccfc access to their acl revenues for 365 days?
So, the club doesn't need greater revenue then? You're not going to moan if we can only afford free transfers, has-beens and kids?
Everyone knows that the Club needs more revenue. Only problem is that we are homeless. Even if SISU build a small stadium somewhere, i cannot See it competing with the Ricoh and cannot imagine how it will generate enough revenue to repay the Investment. What have SISU planned as a Source of revenue other than the bowl? Plus how far have we got with the plans so far? Quite frankly, we need Wasps. They own a stadium in our home town - which we will never do. question is, will SISU sell to them or let them buy a share in CCFC? They don't have any real option, but to do a deal.
Delivered to who?Have SISU even delivered the business plan to how this will work? Surely they'd do this before they even started looking for land or commissioning designs?
I dont remember one being presented.
Delivered to who?
Delivered to who?
The future of the club lies with either it or it's owners owning, controlling and having access to ALL revenues 24/7, 365!
Tell that to the people who were creaming over Michaels offer without any proof of anything.You dont think we need proof this is a good idea? Are you going to support it with no idea if its the right move for the club? I thought we were smarter than that as a group of fans.
I'd love to know why you would think that, unless privy to that sort of information whereby your post becomes accurate..
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So, the club doesn't need greater revenue then? You're not going to moan if we can only afford free transfers, has-beens and kids?
What's wrong with the statement. It's absolutely true that CCFC need access to other revenues, particularly as the support isn't very good.
SISU need to deliver against that statement.
Have SISU even delivered the business plan to how this will work? Surely they'd do this before they even started looking for land or commissioning designs?
I dont remember one being presented.
Waggott said he believed the club would be at the Ricoh Arena for the next four to five years but underlined the need, under rules governing how much football clubs can spend on players, for the club to generate revenue 365 days a year from its stadium.
“The simplest way of looking at it is that I can give 60p in every £1 we generate to Steven Pressley to put on the pitch,” he said. “So we have to maximise our revenue streams in order to put the best team on the pitch because the success of the first team in 90 minutes on a Saturday shapes the 90 hours of work we do the following week.”
Read more at http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/...oventry-city-2105446.aspx#0b1Up9MYLTgXcqCU.99
And how are you going to do that for the next 4-5 years when you don't own a stake in the stadium operating company? Why would Wasps give ccfc access to their acl revenues for 365 days?
Tell that to the people who were creaming over Michaels offer without any proof of anything.
Weren't you one of those?
I know his offer is history, but it just shows you only want proof when it doesn't fit your way of thinking. When people were asking Michael questions you were shouting them down.What a stupid thing to say.
MO's offer is history.
SISU building a new stadium is apparently the future. You might not be interested in the clubs future but I am.
I'm sorry if i touched a raw nerve by asking questions of SISU but selling it to the fans is the very first thing they should have done and producing some or any sort of a business plan would be stage 1, not an artist impression, not searching for land. Have they done this?
What a stupid thing to say.
MO's offer is history.
SISU building a new stadium is apparently the future. You might not be interested in the clubs future but I am.
I'm sorry if i touched a raw nerve by asking questions of SISU but selling it to the fans is the very first thing they should have done and producing some or any sort of a business plan would be stage 1, not an artist impression, not searching for land. Have they done this?
365 days revenue is a great soundbyte but to have any meaning we need to know what figures we're talking about. I'm sure the accounts for ACL are avaialble and have been scruitinised on here so it shouldn't be too hard to see how much it would be if we had ownership of the Ricoh. Of course we'd need to deduct our rent from any ACL figures as you'd assume we wouldn't be paying that if we owned the place.
You also have to consider that the vast majority of other clubs don't have the facilities the Ricoh does to use on non-matchdays. So how much are those other clubs bringing in as non-matchday revenue. Once we know those figures you can compare that against the costs of a new ground. If for example those incomes are only worth £100K but the finance for a new stadium is going to cost £1m a year then it would seem to make more sense to push for a good long term rental deal at the Ricoh, reverse those figures and a new stadium is a no brainer.
The problem with SISU is they only speak in soundbytes, give us some detail. Show people a business plan that supports their stated aims and they might find they get some support.
But wimbledon rent their ground from kingstonian dont they? Maybe city could do a similiar deal with Wasps. ;-)Pretty much all of them have some form of 365 day a year income from their stadium. Some examples....
http://www.afcwimbledon.co.uk/commercial/functions/index.aspx
According to Eastwood Wasps needed it or they would have gone bankrupt
The stadium naming rights would be 500k-1 million alone wouldn't it per year? Wasn't the Ricoh 10 years for £10 million?
365 days revenue is a great soundbyte but to have any meaning we need to know what figures we're talking about. I'm sure the accounts for ACL are avaialble and have been scruitinised on here so it shouldn't be too hard to see how much it would be if we had ownership of the Ricoh. Of course we'd need to deduct our rent from any ACL figures as you'd assume we wouldn't be paying that if we owned the place.
You also have to consider that the vast majority of other clubs don't have the facilities the Ricoh does to use on non-matchdays. So how much are those other clubs bringing in as non-matchday revenue. Once we know those figures you can compare that against the costs of a new ground. If for example those incomes are only worth £100K but the finance for a new stadium is going to cost £1m a year then it would seem to make more sense to push for a good long term rental deal at the Ricoh, reverse those figures and a new stadium is a no brainer.
The problem with SISU is they only speak in soundbytes, give us some detail. Show people a business plan that supports their stated aims and they might find they get some support.
Of course it won't be. The Ricoh is a high profile venue, entertaining 2nd tier football in a prominent location at the time it was signed. Fisher's bowl in invisible Brandon, hosting 4th tier football to an ever-dwindling fan-base would be lucky to generate £100K. Look towards Colchester's sub-£200K for a much more accurate estimate
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?