CET: The deal turned down by sisu revealed (1 Viewer)

[oldskyblue58]

Just some rhetorical questions

- Is this really about the rent ?
- is there anything in the timing of all this ? Last season we were panicing because accounts not signed off because we didnt know if SISU would back us yet we did nothing about the rent?
- what would the average rent be if all L1 clubs paid rent ? what evidence do we actually have to prove the TF new claim of £170k?
- Average means that someone has the highest and someone has the lowest neither of those have the average unless all teams pay the same doesnt it ?
- can you compare the facilities, pitch, income potential in terms of tickets of the Ricoh to say Yeovil (dont know if they rent or not) and say it should cost the same? Is that commercially logical or reality ?
- Am i right in my recollection that TF said he would pay twice the average rent to settle this (that would seem to be £340K) yet £400k is not acceptable?
- Is CCFC viability really pinned around a rent of £170k ?
- how does a move to an alternative ground help the club assuming the £400k rent is correct offer?. Hinckley capacity 5000, Nene Valley 6500, rest not in the equation because they dont have L1 grading. We had nearly 11000 there yesterday and as we succeed it will be more. Thats a potential loss of income from 5000 fans, that cant get in, of £75000 + each week in tickets alone. Thats CCFC income not ACL income
- how many fans will actually go to a home venue 30 minutes away- on a good travel day
- will the rental savings actually find its way into the team when the level of team expenditure is governed by the FFP rules and we had already budgeted to max that out (per TF at fans forum )?.
- Surely team expenditure is governed by 65% of turnover not rent savings ?
- how would moving ground affect the FFP calculation and subsequent penalty/embargo for over spending?
- can ACL survive without CCFC ?
- would ACL make an offer that they could not afford and put their business at risk ?
- What gives ACL the confidence to make the offer and to draw a line?


Like i said the above are rhetorical questions - have my own thoughts as to the answers.

Think the posturing needs to stop, Too much spin going on and the maths doesn't seem to work in places yet again. The deal offered is sensible in my opinion. Get it done and get on with the football.

final thought I will be interested to see what the 2012 and 2013 ccfc accounts say when they are published..... wonder what the losses will be and what contributes to them :thinking about:

 

---

[BurbageSkyBlues]

As always, we'll said OSB.

we need to look at the bigger picture, which you paint so clearly.

I do get the impression that the most frequent and vocal on here, are in the minority; there is an undercurrent of short posts that suggest the majority of our fans accept that the deal that is on offer, is a fair and reasonable one, and that fisher should put this to bed and move the club forward. As you say, the club's financial health cannot be in the balance just because of a (nominal) £100k difference of opinion, there is something else at stake here.

 

[Tank Top]

Could there be a more sinister move afoot? by withholding the rent from ACL and running up over a million debt, could it not be possible to assume that sisu capital
Are attempting to stop a large chunk of ACL's working capital cash flow, so putting them in a difficult situation regarding payments to "Yorkshire Bank" if the bank calls in the loan would it, or would it not put ACL in a situation where they would have the Stadium put into Administation, with sisu likely to be the only bidder it would give siSu, what they've always wanted, getting ownership of the Stadium on the Cheap.
does this make sense, and could it happen?..or is "Jack Daniels" talking for me

 

[Wrenstreetcarpark]

If it is Jack Daniels talking, get him to advise us all as he is talking sense.

 

[skybluehugh]

ACL would probably double it.

How much are you paid by SHITSU to come on here and spout such bull****.

 

[Moff]

How much are you paid by SHITSU to come on here and spout such bull****.

Is it the same amount ACL are paying you?

This was a joke just like Torchys was, did you notice the wink icon on his post?
Why is it that some people cant accept that others have a different view?

 

[mattylad]

I think city might take £400k if it was back dated but Isaacs is making it clear she wants the 1.1m paying as well. Regardless of whose right or wrong there are too many ego's involved and I would like to see fresh faces negotiating on all sides

 

[Weinventedwingbacks]

I think city might take £400k if it was back dated but Isaacs is making it clear she wants the 1.1m paying as well. Regardless of whose right or wrong there are too many ego's involved and I would like to see fresh faces negotiating on all sides

A Mayfair hedge fund with an ego, surely not. Arbitration ASAP and lets get it sorted. Must be the way forward. Can't the League get involved?

 

[Bluegloucester]

A Mayfair hedge fund with an ego, surely not. Arbitration ASAP and lets get it sorted. Must be the way forward. Can't the League get involved?

The Football League had a meeting with Fisher 2 weeks ago, they are fully aware of the situation.

 

[The Reverend Skyblue]

Is it the same amount ACL are paying you?

This was a joke just like Torchys was, did you notice the wink icon on his post?
Why is it that some people cant accept that others have a different view?

Moff, it seems some posters refuse point blank to accept, or understand, some people have different views, though i think skybluehugh is a good poster in my opinion,and may have missed your wink to show you were being ironic/sarcastic

The Rev

 

[oldskyblue58]

just another thought ..........

contrary to what some of those directly involved would have us believe it is highly unusual for a hedge fund to stay in position long term and the sole driving force is making money....... perhaps we lose sight of that sometimes when weighing up the pros and cons of what is going on ?

 

[wingy]

There are several ways to skin a cat.

If sisu are genuine that they need their own ground,then let them have the "ground" ,how much would

a state of the art Stadium cost/be worth ,£50M.-£60M?

Let them have it for £25M. +Plus the Mortgage ,very generous I think.

ACL chose to take the Mortgage over 20 yrs over a 50 yr lease,why?

Could it be that they hve been trying to get the mortgage out of the way quickly to enable further developement /regeneration ?Sensible.

Why have they made mediocre profits ,well they could have been resting on their luarels .However its pointless them making a significant profit as if

they achieved anything over £3.25M. they become liable to pay a "Superate", whatever and however much that ? OSB?

Could the 20 yr mortgage when completed with secure, stable business accumen applied as has been,enable the Council at that point to be

benevelent towards the club and almost gift thePitch to the CLUB ,through the fans trust which we could all become members of through the ST

scheme? Just my thoughts.:thinking about:

 

[oldskyblue58]

I think people forget that the profits shown in ACL represent the rents they receive and a share of the profits with Compass. We should not assume that what is shown is the whole profits of the stadium clearly Compass make their share too (ACL only have 19 employees they arent going to be running the catering etc )

The bank loan - probably the bank would not lend over a longer period.

Perhaps SISU could buy the loan off the bank - there is a market in such things - that could make things awkward for ACL who may have to open their books to them to inspect. It is also a big lever to use against ACL if you squeeze income loan not paid call in administrators if you get my drift

Certainly further development of the site is high on the agenda

Superate doesnt kick in until something close to £4m so a way to go yet

Anything is possible in terms of what happens when loans paid off. I think you would find that those involved at ACL would encourage fans involvement

 

[Grendel]

just another thought ..........

contrary to what some of those directly involved would have us believe it is highly unusual for a hedge fund to stay in position long term and the sole driving force is making money....... perhaps we lose sight of that sometimes when weighing up the pros and cons of what is going on ?

Fair point. I don't understand why they are still here. I suspect they are just useless. I wouldn't want any money invested in them. They had no real workable business model and you would have thought would have tackled the rent years ago.

Delieu almost broke Southampton yet they gave him virtually free reign here. Under ranson cost control was not top of the agenda. In truth I'm not sure what the agenda is.

 

[Godiva]

Just some rhetorical questions

- Is this really about the rent ? Actually I think it's about getting the clubs finanses balanced. All other costs have come down, this is the missing piece.
- is there anything in the timing of all this ? Last season we were panicing because accounts not signed off because we didnt know if SISU would back us yet we did nothing about the rent?
We actually talked about this about a year ago. And the club stopped payments 10 months ago. Meetings have taken place till last week, so you could argue ACL have been dragging feets as they sloooowly accept terms not too far from the clubs initial offer/demand.
- what would the average rent be if all L1 clubs paid rent ? what evidence do we actually have to prove the TF new claim of £170k? Does it really matter? It is probably in or around £150k-£200k. How much more time and energy should be used on this scharade? Everybody seem to accept the rent should come down to about that level, it is the sideshows (additional terms) that are really interesting no.
- Average means that someone has the highest and someone has the lowest neither of those have the average unless all teams pay the same doesnt it ? See above
- can you compare the facilities, pitch, income potential in terms of tickets of the Ricoh to say Yeovil (dont know if they rent or not) and say it should cost the same? Is that commercially logical or reality ? No, but twist it a bit and ask: If we should move into (or build) a new stadium today, would be anything like the Ricoh?
- Am i right in my recollection that TF said he would pay twice the average rent to settle this (that would seem to be £340K) yet £400k is not acceptable? You are an accountant ... you probably know there's a difference between paying £340k or £400k but seriously we don't know all the details in what has been offered. Maybe it's the additional terms offered that is unacceptable to the club.
- Is CCFC viability really pinned around a rent of £170k ? We don't know as we don't know the precise financial status.
- how does a move to an alternative ground help the club assuming the £400k rent is correct offer?. Hinckley capacity 5000, Nene Valley 6500, rest not in the equation because they dont have L1 grading. We had nearly 11000 there yesterday and as we succeed it will be more. Thats a potential loss of income from 5000 fans, that cant get in, of £75000 + each week in tickets alone. Thats CCFC income not ACL income. Moving ground will not help the club one bit, but if that is the only way to escape a £1m+ rent then it might make some sense. But actually it is not really the club that use the argument as a threat ... ACL uses it too: Pay or go away. (Actually: Pay or get winded up - and then sisu reconstructs and in the proces move us to a new ground leaving ACL behind without the £1m+ owed and without a major tennant).
- how many fans will actually go to a home venue 30 minutes away- on a good travel day Not relevant - see above.
- will the rental savings actually find its way into the team when the level of team expenditure is governed by the FFP rules and we had already budgeted to max that out (per TF at fans forum )?. Well, it will help balancing the books, and as we have often discussed sisu is not putting in more money, so in reality the answer is Yes.
- Surely team expenditure is governed by 65% of turnover not rent savings ? Actually the team expenditure is probably governed by the clubs finances (up to the FFP limit)
- how would moving ground affect the FFP calculation and subsequent penalty/embargo for over spending? Not relevant - se above the above
- can ACL survive without CCFC ? The probably can, but they need to bring in a lot of new venues. And it is interesting really, if they can survive without the club surely they can survive with a club paying £150k per year (using the facilities 26-30 times). Still, when looking at the financial results over the past years, there are no evidence ACL can survive withou at least 500k income from either ccfc or other venues. Thus the offer at £400k (plus the add-ons we are not told).
- would ACL make an offer that they could not afford and put their business at risk ? Probably not - see above.
- What gives ACL the confidence to make the offer and to draw a line? I don't know ... Desperation? Bluff? Political interference? Holding the moral high stand? ... But have they really drawn the line? Or just bought another few weeks to get it solved while Deloitte/Yorkshire bank is tapping their feet impatiently.


Like i said the above are rhetorical questions - have my own thoughts as to the answers. Now you have my rhetorical answers to your rhetorical questions.

Think the posturing needs to stop, Too much spin going on and the maths doesn't seem to work in places yet again. The deal offered is sensible in my opinion. Get it done and get on with the football. The maths doesn't seem to add up as we are only told part of the numbers and not shown the full equation.

final thought I will be interested to see what the 2012 and 2013 ccfc accounts say when they are published..... wonder what the losses will be and what contributes to them :thinking about. Agreed. We are much closer to break even (cash flow wise) as we have discussed on many occasions over the past year or so. But it is not in the clubs best interest to let people know at this point in time. It could weaken their attempt to bring the rent down as some would argue that they could simply sell a player or two to pay the difference.

Oh, I need to add 10 characters outside the quote box ....

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Go back to the Cayman Islands.

 

[wingy]

Godiva there may be another obstacle in the oft quted Sisu don't share the same regeneration ambitions of ACL.

There may or may not be someone who is willing to pick up that batton.Sisu could be seen as an obstacle.

ACL have been investigating other tennents to occupy and that could be alongside the football code

 

[Godiva]

Godiva there may be another obstacle in the oft quted Sisu don't share the same regeneration ambitions of ACL.

There may or may not be someone who is willing to pick up that batton.Sisu could be seen as an obstacle.

ACL have been investigating other tennents to occupy and that could be alongside the football code

True ... it's all rhetorical and speculative.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Oh, I need to add 10 characters outside the quote box ....

Sorry Godiva but i really dont know where to start with that........... there is quite a bit i disagree with...... but each to their own opinion

I posed it as a series of rhetorical questions to try to get everyone to keep an open mind, to question what we are told from both sides, to not just accept what we are told by TF or ACL has been going on, to challenge whether the 2+2 we are told actually does equal 4, to think as they say about the "big picture"

So with that in mind i will leave it as that basis and not reply further :thinking about:

 

[Godiva]

Sorry Godiva but i really dont know where to start with that........... there is quite a bit i disagree with...... but each to their own opinion

I posed it as a series of rhetorical questions to try to get everyone to keep an open mind, to question what we are told from both sides, to not just accept what we are told by TF or ACL has been going on, to challenge whether the 2+2 we are told actually does equal 4, to think as they say about the "big picture"

So with that in mind i will leave it as that basis and not reply further :thinking about:

Don't be sorry - I am not

Most of my rhetorical answers were made simply to emphasize your whole point - there may be so many other factors in the rent farce that we are not told, so we shouldn't really put too much trust in what either says - and especially not in what either says the other has said.
They keep talking about monthly rent figures, but none of them tells us what additional terms are on the table. It may be ACL have offered a reduced rent of 60% - but they could also demand add-ons that bring the total cost back near the £1m mark. And there's the issue about the owed £1m+ ... what is offered, what is counter offered?

I don't think this is about 2+2 ... there are so many more numbers we are not told.

 

[coundonskyblue]

I think the one thing we can all agree on is this whole project was set up wrong in the first place.

 

[cloughie]

Match day Walsall fisher did a question and answer session in one of the lounges, it was a farce, in fact Godiva you talk just like the slithery deceiver fisher.

He answered every direct question regarding the rent and the lockout with an answer that wasn't what was asked.

IE If locked out where will we play . ANSIt won't come to that , Q But you have said you had a contingency plan if locked out? ,,,, waffle waffle it won't come to that, But if it does what is your plan? yet again no answer

Why have you not accepted the generous £400.000 rent offer, ANS we want an average lge 1 rent ie 170,000. Q But we are not an average lge1 club ie better facilities you are renting and double the amount of paying customers than the average lge 1 club Again answered not the question asked ,

Surely you should have been paying the rent and then tried to change the rental figure, What about the moral situation about not paying the charity and council.

Fisher...... a very good question waffle waffle then but business is business and we are doing what is best for the club

I thought he might have moved onto we are all in this together crap hey but he is doing what is best for the club..........................not sisu :thinking about::thinking about::thinking about:

 

[Sky Blues]

Fisher says he wants to pay an average League 1 rent.
The current rent is reported to be £1.2million per year, which works out at £100,000 a month.
ACL says the club owes £1.6million.
Does that mean the club has not been paying the rent for 16 months?
If so, surely seeking a League 1 rent was not the original intention as we were in the Championship 16 months ago?

 

[Godiva]

Fisher...... a very good question waffle waffle then but business is business and we are doing what is best for the club

I thought he might have moved onto we are all in this together crap hey but he is doing what is best for the club..........................not sisu :thinking about::thinking about::thinking about:

... and by doing what is best for the club, he is doing what is best for sisu.

 

[SuperCov]

Fisher says he wants to pay an average League 1 rent.
The current rent is reported to be £1.2million per year, which works out at £100,000 a month.
ACL says the club owes £1.6million.
Does that mean the club has not been paying the rent for 16 months?
If so, surely seeking a League 1 rent was not the original intention as we were in the Championship 16 months ago?

I thought they owed £1.1million. If it is £1.6million then I'd say the other £500k is to top up the Escrow account.

 

[cloughie]

Yes Tim but what is best for sisu is not going to be best for the club long term

 

[Godiva]

Yes Tim but what is best for sisu is not going to be best for the club long term

Excellent - now I am Tim. My name seem to change every so often.

Anyway, I can't agree with your sentiment. If the owners of the club manage to get the finances balanced the club will have a future. That is probably the best case scenario there is right now.

 

[Sky Blues]

I thought they owed £1.1million. If it is £1.6million then I'd say the other £500k is to top up the Escrow account.

They owe £1.6million, but ACL has only issued the demand for £1.1million (source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-20616466)

Yes, I imagine the difference is the Escrow. But I think that is empty because ACL drew on it to cover unpaid rent. So if you add that to the £1.1million (or 11 months) of rent that was not covered by the Escrow, it suggests the club has not been contributing anything to ACL for 16 months.

 

[cloughie]

Excellent - now I am Tim. My name seem to change every so often.

Anyway, I can't agree with your sentiment. If the owners of the club manage to get the finances balanced the club will have a future. That is probably the best case scenario there is right now.

I would give you more credit than to believe that I really think you are fisher

 

[SuperCov]

They owe £1.6million, but ACL has only issued the demand for £1.1million (source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-20616466)

Yes, I imagine the difference is the Escrow. But I think that is empty because ACL drew on it to cover unpaid rent. So if you add that to the £1.1million (or 11 months) of rent that was not covered by the Escrow, it suggests the club has not been contributing anything to ACL for 16 months.

Yes, you're right. I thought it was just the £1.1 million they owed. I do remember something about them not topping up the Escrow account but then the story just seemed to disappear. Apologies I've been up since stupid o'clock.

 

[Godiva]

I would give you more credit than to believe that I really think you are fisher

Thanks ... I guess.

 

[TrueSkyBlueLiam]

It's still too much. But if i were SISU, i would accept that deal. Its 67% off our rent bill. Its affordable for now, so accept the deal, then in a few years time try and get them down a bit more. We need to stay int heir good side

 

[covcity4life]

TF should propose 250k l1

350k champioship

and back to 1.2m if prem

 

[davebart]

In my limited experience it is not the tenants that decide halfway through a tenancy what the rent should be.

if you are, say, a bank manager living in a four bed detached house and you lose your job and have to take a job packing crisps, within a few months you will be selling your home and moving into something you can afford.

if you are a business owner and you f*ck up and the business goes tits up you will expect to stay in your luxury house because the house will be in your wife's name and the business registered abroad and all the creditors can f*ck off.

Guess which group the SISU investors are in?

 

[italiahorse]

in my limited experience it is not the tenants that decide halfway through a tenancy what the rent should be.

If you are, say, a bank manager living in a four bed detached house and you lose your job and have to take a job packing crisps, within a few months you will be selling your home and moving into something you can afford.

If you are a business owner and you f*ck up and the business goes tits up you will expect to stay in your luxury house because the house will be in your wife's name and the business registered abroad and all the creditors can f*ck off.

Guess which group the sisu investors are in?

yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn