We represent 1.4% of their annual revenue. I think investors would want far more than that if the club stays - or they will see us as an inhibitor.
We represent 1.4% of their annual revenue. I think investors would want far more than that if the club stays - or they will see us as an inhibitor.
Well is it 1.4%? When we attract more fans than they do. I haven't got a clue if I'm honest but I will go with it.
I'm guessing that's if our rent stays at 100k per season which I doubt it will be. Sure more rent means we are more useful to them in their eyes.
Tbf, we only pay £100k rent, and they only get £75k profit on f&bs, and then car parking? Its not alot given their turnover. I would think any new deal wasps will be wanting to increase rent significantly to justify us staying. They don't need us there on current terms.Well is it 1.4%? When we attract more fans than they do. I haven't got a clue if I'm honest but I will go with it.
I'm guessing that's if our rent stays at 100k per season which I doubt it will be. Sure more rent means we are more useful to them in their eyes.
I think that is a tactic to put pressure on the CCFC, a 2 year countdown is now ticking, meanwhile the FA/FL continue to ask for progress on that new stadium.No, they definitely definitely definitely want us there and to demonstrate this have put negoations on hold.......oh, hang on a minute!
countdown is now ticking
I think that is a tactic to put pressure on the CCFC, a 2 year countdown is now ticking, meanwhile the FA/FL continue to ask for progress on that new stadium.
There is nothing to stop Wasps agreeing something at the last moment, I assume they are confident there is no realistic new ground plan, everybody will get a heads up if ever a planning application is submitted.
ACL have a total turnover of around £20 - £21 million I believe. It's frankly absurd to suggest we are valuable to their investors.
The rent will have to be increased by 8 or 9 fold to justify that.
That would halve our playing budget.
ACL have a total turnover of around £20 - £21 million I believe. It's frankly absurd to suggest we are valuable to their investors.
The rent will have to be increased by 8 or 9 fold to justify that.
That would halve our playing budget.
We represent 1.4% of their annual revenue. I think investors would want far more than that if the club stays - or they will see us as an inhibitor.
http://coventryobserver.co.uk/news/...utts-move-attractive-says-coventry-city-boss/
Mr Anderson said Coventry City Football Club estimates it received a paltry circa £75,000 of non-ticketing matchday revenue as tenants of the Ricoh Arena in the season just ended.
It comprised of just £72,000 from the sale of kiosk food and drink to fans around the stadium concourse – with 85 per cent of those revenues going to ACL/Wasps – and just £2,700 from car parking from just five games, with the rest going to ACL/Wasps.
Where did you get the figure of 1.4% from?
The rent is £100K, 15% of F&B is £75K, so the rest is approx £425K and parking assume car parks half full, 1000 cars at £5 for 25 matches is £125K. I make that £650K or roughly 3%.
Ive
I thought the food beverage went to the other company partly owned by compass so I excluded it
They take a smaller cut. I should take their bit out. So say roughly 2.5% then.
ACL have a total turnover of around £20 - £21 million I believe. It's frankly absurd to suggest we are valuable to their investors.
The rent will have to be increased by 8 or 9 fold to justify that.
That would halve our playing budget.
You are only measuring our value in monetary terms of what the club pay out though. We also bring footfall which helps the casino, hotel and other businesses that operate from the site. That's an added value above what the club pays out in cash. We also raise the profile of the Ricoh. Again this is an added value from the club being there. You're looking at it two dimensionally and failing to see the bigger picture. I would imagine that this added would be part of the points CA had brought to the negotiation table before they went on hold.
You are only measuring our value in monetary terms of what the club pay out though. We also bring footfall which helps the casino, hotel and other businesses that operate from the site. That's an added value above what the club pays out in cash. We also raise the profile of the Ricoh. Again this is an added value from the club being there. You're looking at it two dimensionally and failing to see the bigger picture. I would imagine that this added would be part of the points CA had brought to the negotiation table before they went on hold.
Its probably less than that, £100k rent, £72k profit on f&bs (we get 50%, they get 50%), and your estimate of £125k on parking (although they will have costs for the 15-20 people that man it), so £300k, so probably is not far off G's 1.5%.They take a smaller cut. I should take their bit out. So say roughly 2.5% then.
Certainly enhances the arena sponsorship potential.
Do ACL own the hotel and the casino?
Which the club wouldn't benefit from.
Can you see wasps handing over a cut of the stadium sponsorship?The club could benefit from it though if they were as capable as West Hams owners. They're taking a cut from stadium sponsorship of the Olympic stadium because they have sold the added value to the owners and this has rewarded them.
Can you see wasps handing over a cut of the stadium sponsorship?
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
No. But I can see the possibility of the club negotiating for a share. Wasps aren't going to hand us nothing. That's not how business works. There's a model already there with West Ham and this is what CA should be using. It's been done once, no reason why it can't happen again but all parties involved need to understand the added value that the club brings to the Ricoh. It's not just about two dimensional figures on a spread sheet.
They don't have to. ACL is there to (amongst other things) promote footfall for the whole site and generate business for the whole site and the presence of CCFC aids them do that. Again, an added value. Whether they own the casino and hotel is irrelevant and as usual you've missed the point. Whether that's deliberate ignorance or stupidity I'll let you decide.
I would say from a footfall perspective both these institutions would consider alternatives. Do you think for example the hotel would prefer out of town people or people from CCFC? If it's out of town it people then surely they would rather more concerts and see CCFC as an inhibitor to footfall?
Isnt that because the rooms are closed to be used as boxes?I would suggest the hotel and casino want both. They would welcome all activity. concerts, football, rugby, any events have to be better for footfall than their average Tuesday night.
Also, when ccfc play at home, its very difficult to get a room at the hotel. I normally stay in town as they are full.
Isnt that because the rooms are closed to be used as boxes?
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
I can't see it myself. Any share of the naming rights will be counter balanced by an increase in rent. Unfortunately with the monopoly wasps have they don't have to accept deal which leaves them short in the pocket.
The west ham model is a completely different beast.
We represent 1.4% of their annual revenue. I think investors would want far more than that if the club stays - or they will see us as an inhibitor.
I don't think Wasps will have as much trouble meeting their commitments as some think.
I spoke to someone who works at the Ricoh.
He is there are events and conferences almost daily now.
Plus with the big gigs back as well.
I don't think Wasps will have as much trouble meeting their commitments as some think.
It just shows the absolute potential the Ricoh/ACL had.
It also still makes me think that Wasps would take us on if we were available in administration without the debts.
The turnover hasn't improved from 2006 / 7 has it? If you throw in the main sports club? It was £20 million then wasn't it?
Spoke to the chap last night
He works there in a company renting office space.
Said the change recently is crazy.
Conferences and exhibitions on a daily basis now.
Turnover hasn't changed has it?
I assume that ACL are paid a ground rent by these organisations regardless of footfall Tony so I'm a bit puzzled by this.
Also I would say from a footfall perspective both these institutions would consider alternatives. Do you think for example the hotel would prefer out of town people or people from CCFC? If it's out of town it people then surely they would rather more concerts and see CCFC as an inhibitor to footfall?
In fact as CCFC have primacy this prevents wasps from having games on a Saturday. When you look at footfall from a hotel perspective Friday Saturday are key. So having more wasps games on a Saturday I would think would outweigh any CCFC presence there.
If that's ignorance or stupidity - or a lack of understanding of substitution impact Tony well I'll suggest you take a course on economics.
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?