Thanks so we're on a winner and have been for four years.
Anyway stop being a negative baddie and exposing the charlatan.
But we dont have any other income....... (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter oldskyblue58
- Start date
Anyway stop being a negative baddie and exposing the charlatan.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Which illustrates another issue with our situation. We are paying retail for the F&B in hospitality so struggle to make anything on it. In fact as we have to purchase for every game on the basis of hospitality being at capacity it wouldn't be at all surprising if we actually make a loss on this for some games.
Probably similar to when we were at HR but as a top club, with the associated liabilities too.
Only guessing here but I think the reason we're probably the highest was a hike to accommodate our cut.
Astute
Well-Known Member
If Fisher is so unhappy about someone else running the catering and taking a cut why does he hand over other parts of income streams we have to others? They won't be doing it for free either.
Which is why some levels of it have been dropped /unavailable.
Probably as demand isn't there.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
You are comparing two different things so the comparison is flawed. You can only do a valid comparison of the £70k to the net figure (turnover less costs) that Scunthorpe receive which at a 30% margin would be £110k. Any other comparison is a fisherism
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Wouldn't you have to look at each agreement? Its not like ACL do the F&B themselves, they outsource it in the first place as I would imagine most clubs do.
They key is what you get back in return and looking at the information on this thread we get a fraction of what Scunthorpe get even when you factor in associated costs.
Bill Glazier
Active Member
Great analysis as ever OSB. What's SISU's game do you think? If they were looking for the club to thrive you'd think they'd try and increase revenues wherever they could, but as you imply, they don't seem that bothered. So, is it to sell off all remaining assets, mainly academy players and Ryton, and finally the club's name and golden share whilst all along pretending they're not? I'm darned if I can see any other explanation.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
You're still not looking at £360K to £75K, you're looking at £ 90K - £126K (based on 25-35% profit) against £75K but you also have to factor in costs and ricks of the whole sit. If we owned the Ricoh and took the whole profit of £150K it wouldn't be a case of thank you very much let's throw it at the first team, you have the cost of operating the whole site to take into consideration first. How much of Scunthorpes £90K - £ 126K actually gets reinvested in the team? How much goes towards the operating cost's of the site? is it more than the £75K that we take with non of the associated costs and risks? I would bet no.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
That's my point! Factor in the difference in attendance and that margin for Scunthorpe would equate to £360K for us based on the same 30% margin.
You get around 65-70% without any risk and it appears our hospitality goes to us whatever that is.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
You could argue that essentially the match day catering has been franchised out like the shop, tickets and programs.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Scunthorpe won't get much more than us. For that they take all the risks and organise everything. Fisher receives our share for doing nothing. It pays most of our present rent. Scunny have to pay for the upkeep of their stadium. That won't be cheap. So overall we will be better off stadium and income wise.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
think you have to own your own stadium or at least have a long term commitment to something to get that 30%.............. which then of course brings the indirect costs like capital finance or higher rents & stadium overheads 365/24/7 in to play ............. which then decreases the amount F&B ends up contributing to player budgets.....
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Fisher wanted to outsource the whole lot didn't he if SISU took control of the Ricoh. To AEG if I remember correctly. What would that have left for the club? Also why AEG? Is there a conection there with SISU?
Astute
Well-Known Member
There is no arguing. Fisher moans about someone taking a cut then gives others a cut out of our other income streams. But it suits him well.
Astute
Well-Known Member
How big would the stadium be?
How good would the amenities be?
Would we share the profit with CRFC?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
It's hard to see how it would. Especially when you're capping your ticket revenue. It all depends on what long term deal we can negotiate at the Ricoh I guess but based on the current deal I cant see how it does. Especially when you start to factor in the cost of developing and associated running cost that we don't currently have.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Copy and pasting someone elses work is his MO
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Just work on the basis that if his lips are moving he's talking shit.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
If I was running the show I advice SISU that you have to speculate to accumulate. There is no better time to do it than division4 where the investment would not need to be extortionate.
I would convince them that under Robins we have a genuine chance. I would convince them to give Robins a top 2 budget. I would convince them that we need to earn the fans trust.
I would devise a scheme where you agree to buy a season ticket for £300. You pay £100 upfront. At the halfway point of the season. If we are not within 9 points of the playoffs you can walk away if you choose however if we are within 9 points you are automatically charged the £200
It's shows firstly SISU are prepared to give us a top two budget and do want success.
It shows they have confidence that we will achieve it.
It's an incentive and a thank you to the loyal fans who no longer believe and are about to walk away.
For SISU you are speculating to accumulate, of course there is a gamble. However under the current plan the drop in ticket sales will result in us been very lucky if we can mount a challenge.
I would convince them that under Robins we have a genuine chance. I would convince them to give Robins a top 2 budget. I would convince them that we need to earn the fans trust.
I would devise a scheme where you agree to buy a season ticket for £300. You pay £100 upfront. At the halfway point of the season. If we are not within 9 points of the playoffs you can walk away if you choose however if we are within 9 points you are automatically charged the £200
It's shows firstly SISU are prepared to give us a top two budget and do want success.
It shows they have confidence that we will achieve it.
It's an incentive and a thank you to the loyal fans who no longer believe and are about to walk away.
For SISU you are speculating to accumulate, of course there is a gamble. However under the current plan the drop in ticket sales will result in us been very lucky if we can mount a challenge.
Last edited:
Astute
Well-Known Member
It is something you will have to decide for yourself. If anyone calls him a liar on here certain posters jump in and try to defend him.
But to make it easier for you to decide Fisher says our only income is from ticket sales. We are talking about other income streams other than ticket sales.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
But then you would offset those costs against what we pay in rent wouldn't you? How much are other teams paying annually on maintenance.
The only one I'm aware of is Pompey having to pay out £400K when the trust took over but that's a 120 year old stadium that didn't have any maintenance done for years.
If the model we currently have is a good one then it raises the question of why are we the only club doing it?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Fisher did indeed say that the deal signed for the stadium was a good one at this level, but not a good one higher up. Don't remember it being broken down any more precisely than I've said, but that point was made about the ground.
hill83
Well-Known Member
I'll have a proper read through later on at work. I'm doing the classic night shift, 'trying to sleep in the day and instantly being wide awake for no reason', routine at the moment.
Novel.
Or on promotion we all commit to throw in an extra hundred.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Would be no different to now would it. Wasps own it and ACL operate the stadium and associated facilities.
AEG would be ideal, they're the worlds largest operator of sports stadiums and the worlds second largest operator of live music and events.
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
I love it when Timmy bullshit is deconstructed.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
But at the preferred option of the BPA we'd still be paying rent, we would be capping our attendances at a much lower (maybe nearly a third) level than what we could get now, what extra income streams would we actually be getting (why are CRFC likely to share any of the other 24/7/365 income more than Wasps/ACL?) and at what cost, what other associated costs will we be stumping up for that we don't have to now?
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Hedge fund 101. The CCFC accounts do show transfer profits.
Astute
Well-Known Member
If you don't own your own stadium you don't have long term security. We know that very well. You depend on others.
How many people would you employ to keep your stadium in good shape? Add materials. Or do you use a company that would want to make a profit?
A long term agreement at a low rate like we have now is an advantage. A high rent like we had before is a liability.
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
He is waiting a while before trying to derail the thread.