CET: Club turn down 50% reduction in rent. (1 Viewer)

skyblu3sk

Well-Known Member
club says no to deal to halve annual payments
COVENTRY City FC have rejected an offer from Ricoh bosses to dramatically halve their rent for playing at the stadium, the Telegraph has learned.

The offer of a new rent deal of £650,000-a-year follows the deficit-hit Division One club's refusal to make monthly payments since April, in a bid to force a renegotiated deal.
The stadium's management company Arena Coventry Ltd (ACL) took the Sky Blues to the High Court last week over nonpayment of five months of £100,000 instalments into a mutually arranged bank account.
The Telegraph understands ACL ­ joint owned by the Alan Edward Higgs Charity and Coventry City Council ­ has given the Sky Blues until September 13 to reach a deal.
Rumours have been rife the football club ­ which announced operating losses of £6.7 million for 2010/11 in June ­ could face liquidation unless it cuts costs and finds new revenue streams.
The Telegraph understands Coventry city councillors have been briefed by senior officers about the club's rejection of the offer to halve the rent.
One said: “It's a big offer to knock off 50 per cent ­ it's a big drop. There is a lot of frustration, and a concern that the club could try to paint the council, ACL and the Higgs charity as the big baddies who are effectively putting the club into liquidation, when in fact 70 per cent of its finances go on players' wages.“
Council chief executive Martin Reeves and finance director Chris West are directors on the ACL board.
Profits in ACL were just £470,000 last year, for a project designed to deliver a return to city taxpayers on the council's investment and create jobs.
Although profits are expected to rise to around £1 million this year, a £650,000 drop in rent would be a major dent in the stadium company's finances. Yet the hit would be doubled without a football club playing there.
Sky Blues directors, and the club's London-based hedge fund owners SISU, have maintained they can no longer afford annual rent of over £1.2 million, partic ularly after further lost income of several million pounds from to this year's relegation from the Championship.
The Sky Blues also want to obtain a 50 per cent stake in ACL by buying out the Higgs charity's shares, long believed to be valued at around £10 million.
A half-stake in the stadium would give the football club new income streams from the Ricoh's commercial activities, including hotel and conference bookings.
Sisu, the Sky Blues and ACL have held intermittent and “ongoing“ talks throughout the summer.
Until now, ACL has been able to draw on a reserve of £500,000 placed by the Sky Blues into the joint bank account for rent called the ESCROW account, which was set up under historic agreements over building the Ricoh.
But the reserves are expected to very soon run out.
The threat of administration or liquidation was alleviated in June when SISU boss Joy Seppalla belatedly agreed to sign off the football club's 2010/11 ac counts, by agreeing to underwrite any further losses this year.
But the club still insists reaching agreement with ACL, the Higgs charity and the council ­ which is also the stadium's freehold owners and would have to approve any deal on stadium ownership ­ are fundamental to stabilising its finances.
An ACL spokesman said: “We continue to work hard with Coventry City Football Club to secure a level of rent which is workable and sustainable for both parties.
“However, we feel it is appropriate not to discuss commercially sensitive matters in the public domain while negotiations remain on-going.“
Tim Fisher, chief executive of Coventry City Football Club, said: “Our stance, all along, has been to not comment on commercially sensitive negotiations and that remains the case. “Our talks continue and as soon as there is something concrete to report, we will communicate that to our supporters.“
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
I've had to read that about six times.

The club have turned down an offer of a 50% rent reduction? :confused:
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
Maybe I am being cynical here but anyone else thinking they don't want to accept this offer because they would then have to pay up on all the rent they are withholding and they haven't got the money to do so?
 

Ccfcisparks

Well-Known Member
Maybe I am being cynical here but anyone else thinking they don't want to accept this offer because they would then have to pay up on all the rent they are withholding and they haven't got the money to do so?

Never thought of that, but surely if that was the case would we have been spending the money on players while we have owed the rent??
 

Houchens Head

Fairly well known member from Malvern
Maybe I am being cynical here but anyone else thinking they don't want to accept this offer because they would then have to pay up on all the rent they are withholding and they haven't got the money to do so?

Agree with that Otis. Surely any offer of reduction would be for AFTER all current arrears are paid in full?
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
That's what I'm thinking.

Just get the feeling they are withholding rent cos they simply can't afford to pay what they owe even if there was now a 100% reduction in the rent offered.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
The game is definitely on today.


Only it's on Car Park C.

Get there early. Standing room only.
 

covkid69

Well-Known Member
Tim Fishface says all negotiations will remain confidential.....well there's a fookin surprise....then once it's sorted out...undisclosed :):)
 

CovisGod

Well-Known Member
Dont want to sound like a prick, but today's game could well be called off.....

Why the funky chicken would today's game be called off !? It says the we've got till the middle of September to reach a deal so there just gonna go, "right that's it stop negotiations straight away, it's my ground and I'm going home"
 

6 Generations

Well-Known Member
Maybe I am being cynical here but anyone else thinking they don't want to accept this offer because they would then have to pay up on all the rent they are withholding and they haven't got the money to do so?
You may have a valid point but I thought that due rent had been drawn from the Escrow account up until this month, at the end which the well would run dry as our owners were refusing to then invest further monies in to that Escrow account. That would leave us in a position where the rent would not be honoured in September . And surely by their refusal to top up that fund would render SISU or Sconset or Arvo in breach of contract. Forgive me if I have misunderstood.
 

I'mARealWizard

New Member
Not to make this appear too simple...

But if they have been given until mid-September to reach an agreement, wouldn't it be bad business practice to accept the first offer?
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
Maybe I am being cynical here but anyone else thinking they don't want to accept this offer because they would then have to pay up on all the rent they are withholding and they haven't got the money to do so?

No Otis, you're not cynical - that may well be one reason they refuse. I wrote a few weeks ago that ACL might have an interest in dragging the negotiation until the escrow fund was used up as a way to make sure they got the £500k in it. Now the fund is empty and a new agreement will have to include the size of a new fund. The story does not report ACL's demands for the size and it may be too much for the club.

50% sounds a lot, but that's really totally uninteresting. If 600k/yr is more than the club can afford then how can the club accept?
 

Godiva

Well-Known Member
You may have a valid point but I thought that due rent had been drawn from the Escrow account up until this month, at the end which the well would run dry as our owners were refusing to then invest further monies in to that Escrow account. That would leave us in a position where the rent would not be honoured in September . And surely by their refusal to top up that fund would render SISU or Sconset or Arvo in breach of contract. Forgive me if I have misunderstood.

It is the club that is in breach of the contract - nobody else.
 

sky blue john

Well-Known Member
50% reduction if true is a fair deal !!!
If you look at ACL profits then anymore could put them into a loss making situation.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
Not to make this appear too simple...

But if they have been given until mid-September to reach an agreement, wouldn't it be bad business practice to accept the first offer?


You think 50% was the first offer? I would very much doubt it and would say that would be pretty stupid of ACL/Higgs/Council etc. to offer that straight off.
 
Says to me they have no intention of paying anything and are waiting for someone to wind the club up for them, when they would receive first divvy on all monies allegedly owed to them through their debenture.

Scum.
 

I'mARealWizard

New Member
You think 50% was the first offer? I would very much doubt it and would say that would be pretty stupid of ACL/Higgs/Council etc. to offer that straight off.

Well, it's certainly not their final offer :thinking about:

Who knows what else was attached to that? An increase to more than the previous rent on a return to higher leagues?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Says to me they have no intention of paying anything and are waiting for someone to wind the club up for them, when they would receive first divvy on all monies allegedly owed to them through their debenture.

Scum.

If that were the case why sign 9 new players and why are they still trying to secure 2 more on loan?

These attract agent fees, signing on fees and Barton cost some money.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
Maybe the sticking point here is that the club want this rent reduction offer back-dated perhaps?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Maybe the sticking point here is that the club want this rent reduction offer back-dated perhaps?

Probably for 4 years!
 

Ashdown

Well-Known Member
The way I read it is that the club have actually paid the rent through the ESCROW account but haven't topped it up to date?? Personally I think its a good offer if true, I'm not sure what this cursed hedge fund expects. ACL have come down to a level that protects their bottom line to a point to prevent them making losses. The onus is on SISU/CCFC to win matches and attract revenue. This all somehow makes todays result even more important to build up momentum.
 

sky blue john

Well-Known Member
If i was offered 50% off my mortgage just to stay in my house i would snap the banks hand off.
Obviously Sisu are intent in putting ACL, council and Higgs trust into financial trouble also.
If 50% has been offered sisu wont have a leg to stand on if it goes back to court.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top