Astute
Well-Known Member
Whatever your thoughts of SISU are we would be better off with SISU owning the arena than Wasps owning it.
Auditors query Coventry City FC as a going concern (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter antineorevolutionery
- Start date
Whatever your thoughts of SISU are we would be better off with SISU owning the arena than Wasps owning it.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
We certainly did, and as Tony said we had a shop in West Orchards for many years. Think that closed down as they were losing a fortune as the majority of the sales were still being made at the shop at the ground.
Can't see us opening our own shop in the city centre but there must be shops run by city fans who would carry stock for a small cut of the profit. Maybe something the SCG could suggest.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Wasps don't want an instant profit, they want to become the best club in Europe.
It would be that beneficial to wasps anyway. We would keep all of the revenue we make, they keep all the revenue they make. So it's all the other revenue that they would have to share. Us being in the championship isn't going to increase bookings for the exhibition hall, etc....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
U.S. been successful and committed long term to the Ricoh would instantly increase the value of ACL.
Is paying them more than what they paid for half of ACL would help them become the best in Europe as they could clear a lot of the loan and reduce interest payments freeing up cash for their playing squad.
A successful football club get the stadium more attention and marketing and does impact on the success of ACL as a whole.
Also a partnership would reduce staffing costs.
All of which helps Wasps achieve their aim
The two hardest bits would be gaining their trust and convincing themSISU are serious about pushing the club towards the top six of the championship.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Exactly how much do you suggest they pay for 50%?
It isn't going to reduce that many staff costs.
Adding value to the share value, doesn't add anything unless wasps want to sell the other 50%, which as they are here to stay isn't going to happen.
Let's face it Don, Wasps will not want to sell 50% of ACL to anyone unless they have no other option and are desperate for the cash. They have come with a business plan which includes taking 100% of the revenue/profit made and it's going to take them 3-4 years (as Eastwood stated to SBT).
Being in the championship doesn't not bring that much commercial activity to the ricoh. It didn't under the old regime.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Astute
Well-Known Member
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Yea but Wasps have other revenues.
He does have a bit of point, SISU aren't going to convince an outside investor to spend 30 million to only have a return on there investment of 100k a year. I think the only reasonable way it could happen is if its SISU who are going to stump up the cash themselves in the hope they can make the club a success and recoup it by selling the club one day.
But do SISU have the finances to do that? Even if they did have the money what have they done the last few years to convince us it would be invested in the club?
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Exactly how much do you suggest they pay for 50%?
It isn't going to reduce that many staff costs.
Adding value to the share value, doesn't add anything unless wasps want to sell the other 50%, which as they are here to stay isn't going to happen.
Let's face it Don, Wasps will not want to sell 50% of ACL to anyone unless they have no other option and are desperate for the cash. They have come with a business plan which includes taking 100% of the revenue/profit made and it's going to take them 3-4 years (as Eastwood stated to SBT).
Being in the championship doesn't not bring that much commercial activity to the ricoh. It didn't under the old regime.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
The only thing I can see it bringing is higher attendances so more match day revenue. I think the best we can hope for from Wasps is a fair rent and a % of match day revenue, we shouldn't expect any more from them than that. Is it enough? I doubt it.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Theoretically you do it by adding value and / or smoothing the planning process. That could be through building retail outlets that are then leased or something similar, that income is offset against the cost of the stadium build. It works in theory but we're not in the best climate for attracting people to a project and of course location will be key, out in the middle of nowhere and there will be little interest.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Is that your plan to be the only one left ?
It's certainly Sisu's plan and it's working.
Good luck when it's just you and Tim.
italiahorse
Well-Known Member
Never in a million years.
Astute
Well-Known Member
And this is why I am saying that I can't see it happening. Nobody will put miilions in so they can build a shop. Even Tescos have stopped building shops. The Ricoh wouldn't happen these days. And who would build for SISU for a much less income than just letting the money gain in interest. This is without trust implications or the very high depreciation of football stadiums. You would be better off putting the money under your bed.
Astute
Well-Known Member
So we are better off with Wasps owning the arena and not having the chance to own it ourselves?
The one chance we have of getting rid of SISU and still having a club to support is having something of value to sell. It looks to me that they tried to get it for next to nothing to try and get their money back.
So what do you want. is it our club to be shafted for the foreseeable future? You need to put your hatred of SISU to one side. That is the same for all of us. Forget about any hatred for any side involved and look at how we can get out of this shit situation.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately though, that is Italia. And Shmmeee. And Jack. And, oh quite a few others. We all want to get rid of SISU as soon as we can but our current situation means there's no incentive for them to leave. I'm still amazed that Italia and others have taken Wasps to their hearts so easily.
lewys33
Well-Known Member
Because Wasps are going to buy us out, DUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRR!! They clearly have enough money!
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Exactly how much do you suggest they pay for 50%?
It isn't going to reduce that many staff costs.
Adding value to the share value, doesn't add anything unless wasps want to sell the other 50%, which as they are here to stay isn't going to happen.
Let's face it Don, Wasps will not want to sell 50% of ACL to anyone unless they have no other option and are desperate for the cash. They have come with a business plan which includes taking 100% of the revenue/profit made and it's going to take them 3-4 years (as Eastwood stated to SBT).
Being in the championship doesn't not bring that much commercial activity to the ricoh. It didn't under the old regime.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Wasps would want to sell some of ACL if it was the best thing to do for them business wise. As in they ties the football club to the Ricoh ling term. They ensure they get half of the extra revenue generated by a 'successful' football club been at the Ricoh.
They get an instant profit on their investment allowing them to clear a chunk of the loan.
The alternative is going alone in what many in here believe is a fragile business plan. Which for what the current CCFC offers probably it is just a nice to have. However a CCFC that really genuinely adds value and contributes heavily to the income streams of ACL that's a different ball park.
CCFC need to combine Wasps that that is what they would be getting though.
As in the amount for me that all depends on how much debt would be added to CCFC on building a new stadium and what projected income streams we get for that.
Hypothetically if we were to invest 20 million and developers invest the rest.
I would be thinking a 9 million offer to Wasps on the proviso that 7 million comes off the loan. For 49% of ACL plus we Cary responsibility for 49% of the remaining loan.
The other 11 million we were going to borrow for a new stadium we invest in a squad capable of top six in the championship.
We share physios, training facilities, academy, marketing, office space, physios. Sports scientists with Wasps.
Once the deal is struck ACL itself would increase in value.
By the time we get to the top six in the championship Half of ACL will be worth the 9 million we paid for it. Never mind the value of the club premiership dream)
Now that idea even with its many pitfalls makes far far more business sense than a new stadium.
So does borrowing the 20 million blowing it in a top six championship squad and selling the dream for 50 million.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
They will never sell it.
This is up there with your other deranged obsessions.
Thorn is a top quality manager.
Haskell wants to buy the club.
Just stop - it's RFC type of embarrassing.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
stupot07
Well-Known Member
So we buy 50% for less than what wasps paid for it, but they use the other £7m to pay off some of CCC loan?
What happens the following season if that £11m doesn't get up in the top 6 in the championship and promoted?
What happens if the football club isn't successful? I still don't see what significant increased revenue can be made from the football club being there, it's bt going to make more people hire the exhibition hall? Yes, stadium naming rights will go up, but will it be more than x2 of what wasps can get on their own?
You wouldn't share any of those things, as both clubs will remain separate, even ACL will have its own marketing department. Both clubs will need their own physio's, sports scientists, etc, as both teams often play at the same time when wasps are away. Why would you want to have the same academy and training facilities? Both clubs will lose their identities, plus they need different facilities - football pitch's/rugby pitches/ 4G facilities for our academy. It's just a bonkers idea.
And for all that we'll still be the minority partner.
Think you should go and read wycombe fans views on how their partnership with wasps completely diluted their brand and their status in their community.
The bottom line is wasps will not sell Unless they come desperate and for that we need them to struggle. Halving wasp access to revenu will likely cause then to continue to make losses, you're suggesting we splash out £11m which is essentially losses, that's going to mean two loss making organisations, with not enough extra revenue to keep them afloat meaning increased risks that the loan will be paid back and ultimately leave lots of question marks on ACL's viability.
If you had your way, PH4 would have bought nuneaton boro, moved them to the ricoh and changed their name to coventry nuns.
I'd also question whether it would increase the value of ACL to the extent you suggest - football is a risky business, your suggesting throwing cash at the squAd which then puts us at risk of further insolvency, relegation. And with the revenue flow between ACL and the clubs then there's only value of you're selling both the club and shares. And there's the complication of the existing contracts. Heck, there were plenty on here predicting ACL was worth £30m, and it ultimately was only worthy fraction of that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Last edited:
Grendel
Well-Known Member
In other words you can't answer?
You said wasps would do it to pay off some of the loan. How is questioning one of your arguments doverting?
So how can that happen?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
So we buy 50% for less than what wasps paid for it, but they use the other £7m to pay off some of CCC loan?
(We pay 9 million for half of ACL and take on 3.5 million of a loan. (On the condition. They clear 7 million of their debt first yes)
What happens the following season if that £11m doesn't get up in the top 6 in the championship and promoted?
(If we spend that kind of money purely on the squad in league one and don't get promoted then SISU don't get their money back. The same as the new stadium idea except unlike the new stadium idea they actually have a damn good chance of getting their money back this way. If they are in reach of the top six they could sell it for less)
What happens if the football club isn't successful? I still don't see what significant increased revenue can be made from the football club being there, it's bt going to make more people hire the exhibition hall? Yes, stadium naming rights will go up, but will it be more than x2 of what wasps can get on their own?
Everything will go up due to the increased marketability. If you can't see that it's a bit of a pointless conversation)
You wouldn't share any of those things, as both clubs will remain separate, even ACL will have its own marketing department. Both clubs will need their own physio's, sports scientists, etc, as both teams often play at the same time when wasps are away. Why would you want to have the same academy and training facilities? Both clubs will lose their identities, plus they need different facilities - football pitch's/rugby pitches/ 4G facilities for our academy. It's just a bonkers idea.
(Simple you save money, it's called a partnership without it we are screwed)
And for all that we'll still be the minority partner.
(Yes by 1% as oppose to the completely insignificant one)
Think you should go and read wycombe fans views on how their partnership with wasps completely diluted their brand and their status in their community.
(How is our brand and status in the community these days?)
The bottom line is wasps will not sell Unless they come desperate and for that we need them to struggle. Halving wasp access to revenu will likely cause then to continue to make losses, you're suggesting we splash out £11m which is essentially losses, that's going to mean two loss making organisations, with not enough extra revenue to keep them afloat meaning increased risks that the loan will be paid back and ultimately leave lots of question marks on ACL's viability.
(Not with CCFC investing 11 million in the squad and the loan getting halved it wouldn't)
If you had your way, PH4 would have bought nuneaton boro, moved them to the ricoh and changed their name to coventry nuns.
( your comment on this explains a lot and why you struggle to get this idea to be fair. )
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
When a troll loses a debate they will just ridicule the other persons opinion and try and divert to other matters. You know like Andy Thorn, RFC etc
I can just see you now, Keep trying........
Grendel
Well-Known Member
When a troll loses a debate they will just ridicule the other persons opinion and try and divert to other matters. You know like Andy Thorn, RFC etc
I can just see you now, Keep trying........
Your struggling now so let's carry on.
You said wasps can pay off the loan - how? ACl will bear the risk not wasps hdings.
The liability would sit with ACl not wasps.
Also you would be surrendering half the revenue for 250 years. More importantly the control of decision making is gone.
Can you answer these or do you not like debating issues?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Think you need to re read then re write
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Watch out Don, I feel a bit of "Estimated Facts" on the way
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Not being a accountant or someone who knows, but....If Wasps own ACL/Higgs. Doesn't that make them liable?
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Neither am I, I guess it would depend on the structure of the deal.
No, the only liable for the loan is ACL.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
tbf the people of Coventry, knowing the damage moving a club from its roots does, will do that without any help from SISU.