The whole debate of propco/opco has been done a few times before. It has been pointed out many times that there will most likely be a third entity - the actual builder and owner of the stadium complex.
Look at the Ricoh structure: CCC owns the stadium, ACL manages the stadium (the propco) and Wasps use the stadium (the opco).
If ccfc follows that recipe, then the propco won't be financing the building cost.
That will be a new sisu controlled company OUTSIDE (unconnected) - SBS&L/Otium.
But as OSB says, there's no business plan available to us to scrutinize, no real facts to consider, so it's a futile discussion.
The whole debate of propco/opco has been done a few times before. It has been pointed out many times that there will most likely be a third entity - the actual builder and owner of the stadium complex.
Look at the Ricoh structure: CCC owns the stadium, ACL manages the stadium (the propco) and Wasps use the stadium (the opco).
If ccfc follows that recipe, then the propco won't be financing the building cost.
That will be a new sisu controlled company OUTSIDE (unconnected) - SBS&L/Otium.
But as OSB says, there's no business plan available to us to scrutinize, no real facts to consider, so it's a futile discussion.
Paying rent isn't the issue, the issue is what we get in return. No matter how cheap the rent at the Ricoh we don't get access to anything and that, as independent finance experts have confirmed, means that we can not compete above the level we are currently at.
I don't believe for a minute SISU will build a stadium but if we ever want to consider being a top championship team or getting back into the premier league at some point in the future, whoever owns us, this issue will need to be resolved. We either need, as an absolute minimum, a 50% stake in the Ricoh and access to all the revenues we generate or a new stadium.
Unless there is a radical change in football finance those are the only options that give us a chance to move forward and get back up the leagues.
At the moment Wasps can charge us anything they like. If they mess up and look like they can't repay the bonds what's to stop them putting the rent up to say £5m a year? What other options do we have? Would the league let us move to somewhere like Northampton again?
But if they are building a new stadium why do you get on at people who are suggesting working with Wasps. Surely it's irrelevant?
While we are here we might as well work with them.
not living in the City, a question to anyone who does. Is there any local politicians who, as part of their manefsto if they got in, promised to help CCFC find a suitable site within the city of Coventry ?
While I am no expert, I haven't heard anything and I am sure it would have been on here and the CET.
not living in the City, a question to anyone who does. Is there any local politicians who, as part of their manefsto if they got in, promised to help CCFC find a suitable site within the city of Coventry ?
easiest where's wally ever, hes on the right
Tim Fisher has said on record that the financial backers of the new stadium will only support development outside of Coventry.
Tim Fisher has said on record that the financial backers of the new stadium will only support development outside of Coventry.
surely it would be prudent for whoever came 2nd in the local election to adopt that policy ?
Or anyone wanting to retain their number one spot for that matter.
Another Timmy gem. I find it hard to believe that any serious backer is that sensitive that they won't deal with CCC especially if there's money to be made.
Tim Fisher has said on record that the financial backers of the new stadium will only support development outside of Coventry.
surely that was due to their relationship with the current council, as opposed to wanting to leave the city ?
Only potential backers, not confirmed, I think you will find there is a big big difference between an unattributable expression of interest made in a private meeting and a firm commitment to put up money.
So could Rugby crowds drop to a lower level? possibly but will it be below 10000 probably not
From the minuted meeting with Rugby Borough Council -
"He (Tim Fisher) confirmed that there are investors interested, so long as the physical resource is outside of Coventry (due to Coventry Council doing a hostile take-over of the Club they don’t wish to invest in Coventry)."
Seems like a firm commitment to me.
From the minuted meeting with Rugby Borough Council -
"He (Tim Fisher) confirmed that there are investors interested, so long as the physical resource is outside of Coventry (due to Coventry Council doing a hostile take-over of the Club they don’t wish to invest in Coventry)."
Seems like a firm commitment to me.
From the minuted meeting with Rugby Borough Council -
"He (Tim Fisher) confirmed that there are investors interested, so long as the physical resource is outside of Coventry (due to Coventry Council doing a hostile take-over of the Club they don’t wish to invest in Coventry)."
Seems like a firm commitment to me.
I understand where you are coming from sbw but then you need to factor in the level of secondary spend going on. Empty seats give you no income but get two taken by a dad and his lad and there is a good chance they will spend £6, £7 or more at the kiosk. Its a well tried tactic and something is often better than nothing
There is also the chance they may enjoy it so much they invest in more of a commitment
Also the longer they can maintain crowd levels then the more chance of making those who do more committed to going. By the end of two seasons at the Ricoh many people will have decided if Premiership Rugby is for them or not...... sadly that may make some choose between one sport or another
Yep but councils change. Councilors come and go.
surely it would be prudent for whoever came 2nd in the local election to adopt that policy ?
Which makes the 250 year lease even more frustrating.
Sounds like BS to me. Not that he said it, he clearly did. The detail sounds like BS. I don't believe for a minute that anyone who is willing to invest in a hedge fund is either that sensitive or bothered what postcode they invest in so long as there's a return.
In fact if I was being sceptical I'd even suggest that the whole meeting or at least some of what was said was staged knowing that certain details would come out in the inevitable FOI's that would follow.
Well you have to blame that bloke, Lineour Pockets.
And I meant it from both sides. SISU won't be here for ever and Lucas et al won't be here for ever, but the decisions they all made will be.
From the minuted meeting with Rugby Borough Council -
"He (Tim Fisher) confirmed that there are investors interested, so long as the physical resource is outside of Coventry (due to Coventry Council doing a hostile take-over of the Club they don’t wish to invest in Coventry)."
Seems like a firm commitment to me.
If you say so, but smells like bullshit to me.
And I meant it from both sides. SISU won't be here for ever and Lucas et al won't be here for ever, but the decisions they all made will be.
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?