Details of Wasps' Ricoh Arena deal with council revealed (2 Viewers)

CCFC said:

Point conceded maybe that was oversight on my part, it restricts us to being mostly a L1 club with the odd couple of years in the championship.

What are the reason are revenue is low then? number one would be attendances, what are the other 3 that are ranked higher for the reasons are revenues is low?

Click to expand...

Ticket Revenue from low attendances is the main one and the others are all attendance related (though the lack of stadium is also), number 2 is lack of sponsorship (from low attendances and from being associated with sisu being poisonous), all sorts of sponsorships are included here but shirt is the most significant. Then there is merchandising (again attendance related) but also related to lack of stock, poor promotion, poor selection of products, shit shop location etc etc, 4th is lack of corporate and hospitality income. If we were doing these properly then we could really start to worry about not having food and beverage income and stadium naming rights etc.

Since we started hearing how important revenues are almost every single area we bring them in has tanked due to sisus actions, despite the negative effect those actions were going to have being completely obvious and predictable.

But we had better attendances than 9 other clubs the seasoj we went down, yet had lower turnover than all bar 3 of them - peterborough, doncaster and barnsley who all had c5k/33% less attendances than us, the other 6 clubs had higher turnovers.

To add to that, not only do we still have little/no access to additional revenues, we're not in competition for paying customers with a Premiership Rugby club. Most people don't have money to attend both clubs matches regularly, and this will increasingly become a problem as wasps embed themselves in the community.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Noggin said:

Ticket Revenue from low attendances is the main one and the others are all attendance related (though the lack of stadium is also), number 2 is lack of sponsorship (from low attendances and from being associated with sisu being poisonous), all sorts of sponsorships are included here but shirt is the most significant. Then there is merchandising (again attendance related) but also related to lack of stock, poor promotion, poor selection of products, shit shop location etc etc, 4th is lack of corporate and hospitality income. If we were doing these properly then we could really start to worry about not having food and beverage income and stadium naming rights etc.

Click to expand...

SISUs lack of intererest in increasing revenues show they are unfit to run a football club but I'd say stadium ownership or at least revenues is more important than all of them apart from ticket revenue. Naming rights alone would probably bring in as much or more than shirt sponsorships, point about the shop could be partly addressed through stadium ownership with the club shop being at the stadium site increasing footfall, point 4 would surely be dwarfed by the all year round revenue brought from a stadium.
If a new owner came in tomorrow two of his main priorities would be increasing attendance and at the very least getting a good chunk of stadium revenue(ideally ownership). All the other revenues like sponsorship/club shop/hospitality would then fall into place much more easily.

CCFC said:

SISUs lack of intererest in increasing revenues show they are unfit to run a football club but I'd say stadium ownership or at least revenues is more important than all of them apart from ticket revenue. Naming rights alone would probably bring in as much or more than shirt sponsorships, point about the shop could be partly addressed through stadium ownership with the club shop being at the stadium site increasing footfall, point 4 would surely be dwarfed by the all year round revenue brought from a stadium.
If a new owner came in tomorrow two of his main priorities would be increasing attendance and at the very least getting a good chunk of stadium revenue(ideally ownership). All the other revenues like sponsorship/club shop/hospitality would then fall into place much more easily.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure if shirt or stadium naming rights bring in more to be honest but sponsorship includes alot more than shirt, they have game sponsors, player sponsors, corner sponsors, official x/y and z to the club suppliers, advertising hoardings, programme sponsors (and all the adverts in the programme) all of these have been massively harmed due to the lower attendances and how people don't want to be associated with sisu.

I guess it depends what we are talking about here, if we are talking just revenue figures then I agree the stadium is high up the list, but I think for the most part thats not that relevant we need meaningful revenue (ie profit) and for that I still think it comes 4th or 5th. Attendances though are everything as they affect all of the revenue streams, if we get up to 20k average attendance and our revenue is too low then we have an issue but at this point in time a stadium isn't a problem we can solve, we should be focusing on what we can do something about and for that sisu have to go.

CCFC said:

SISUs lack of intererest in increasing revenues show they are unfit to run a football club but I'd say stadium ownership or at least revenues is more important than all of them apart from ticket revenue. Naming rights alone would probably bring in as much or more than shirt sponsorships, point about the shop could be partly addressed through stadium ownership with the club shop being at the stadium site increasing footfall, point 4 would surely be dwarfed by the all year round revenue brought from a stadium.
If a new owner came in tomorrow two of his main priorities would be increasing attendance and at the very least getting a good chunk of stadium revenue(ideally ownership). All the other revenues like sponsorship/club shop/hospitality would then fall into place much more easily.

Click to expand...

Well if the Ricoh has been loosing money then surely CCFC were better not buying it would take us from being cash flow positive to in the Red?

Looks like there is no money to be made without paying rent so if Sisu had of brought it what sort of Rent would they have charged City, to get back their investment and make a bit for their investors?

Noggin said:

I'm not sure if shirt or stadium naming rights bring in more to be honest but sponsorship includes alot more than shirt, they have game sponsors, player sponsors, corner sponsors, official x/y and z to the club suppliers, advertising hoardings, programme sponsors (and all the adverts in the programme) all of these have been massively harmed due to the lower attendances and how people don't want to be associated with sisu.

I guess it depends what we are talking about here, if we are talking just revenue figures then I agree the stadium is high up the list, but I think for the most part thats not that relevant we need meaningful revenue (ie profit) and for that I still think it comes 4th or 5th. Attendances though are everything as they affect all of the revenue streams, if we get up to 20k average attendance and our revenue is too low then we have an issue but at this point in time a stadium isn't a problem we can solve, we should be focusing on what we can do something about and for that sisu have to go.

Click to expand...

The attendances and stadium go hand in hand, its no use owning a stadium if no one turns up and large attendances are partly wasted if we haven't got any revenue streams to profit from high attendances. Sort these two out and the rest will fall into place.

letsallsingtogether said:

Well if the Ricoh has been loosing money then surely CCFC were better not buying it would take us from being cash flow positive to in the Red?

Looks like there is no money to be made without paying rent so if Sisu had of brought it what sort of Rent would they have charged City, to get back their investment and make a bit for their investors?

Click to expand...

You could be right but its not as simple as you make out, I think the year before sixfields when we were on a rent strike showed a profit didn't it? You'd have to factor in the losses ACL incurred from Coventry moving out other than rent.

How much did the Ricoh lose in sponsorship and advertising? How much money did they lose because of no F & B sales or any sort of other sales on match day, how much did they lose in car parking, hotels and anything else I can't think of right now?

CCFC said:

The attendances and stadium go hand in hand, its no use owning a stadium if no one turns up and large attendances are partly wasted if we haven't got any revenue streams to profit from high attendances. Sort these two out and the rest will fall into place.

Click to expand...

All of the revenue streams we've been discussing are attendance based, the only ones that aren't are player sales, prize money and tv money I think. Not having a stadium is a disadvantage sure but high attendances still provide nearly all the benefit anyway, food and beverage is the least significant of the revenues imo especially when costs are so high. It's easier to compete with it of course it is but when we could easily triple most of our revenue streams if we were properly run it seems silly to be focusing on the lack of stadium as the reason we are struggling in league one, its not the reason in the slightest, nore does not having one of our own prevent us from getting out of this league.

Yes we would struggle to be a self sufficient club in the championship but thats because only a small handful of teams are self sufficient, the vast majority of teams have massive debts and lose money.

lack of revenues really arnt our issue though, lack of money is (though of course they are directly linked) and of course some of the worst and most destructive owners ever.

I also wonder how much investment was made in ACL by the Council and Higgs. If reluctant owners then I suspect little investment. I severely doubt that ACL was at maximum revenue. Did Wasps pick it up at its lowest value and work out for themselves that it was an asset that could be sweated?

Noggin said:

All of the revenue streams we've been discussing are attendance based, the only ones that aren't are player sales, prize money and tv money I think. Not having a stadium is a disadvantage sure but high attendances still provide nearly all the benefit anyway, food and beverage is the least significant of the revenues imo especially when costs are so high. It's easier to compete with it of course it is but when we could easily triple most of our revenue streams if we were properly run it seems silly to be focusing on the lack of stadium as the reason we are struggling in league one, its not the reason in the slightest, nore does not having one of our own prevent us from getting out of this league.

Yes we would struggle to be a self sufficient club in the championship but thats because only a small handful of teams are self sufficient, the vast majority of teams have massive debts and lose money.

lack of revenues really arnt our issue though, lack of money is (though of course they are directly linked) and of course some of the worst and most destructive owners ever.

Click to expand...

if you don't own your stadium then revenue generating opportunities are severely restricted. Clubs have three sources of revenue, the one source that has the most potential (outside the premiership TV money) is the stadium.

fernandopartridge said:

The biggest impact on turnover would be if the people of Coventry bothered their arses to go up and watch them. Forgot NOPM, SISU will stick it out whilst they still have a cause in CCFC to take to court.

NOPM will not force them out, it will assist the continued decline.

Click to expand...

"assist".

I dont agree with you, but you admit than the decline is happening and will continue.

Many fans wont return any time soon.

Too risky there will be no club to return to

Intheknow said:

if you don't own your stadium then revenue generating opportunities are severely restricted. Clubs have three sources of revenue, the one source that has the most potential (outside the premiership TV money) is the stadium.

Click to expand...

If SISU agreed, you wonde why its taking them so long to find a bit of grass to build this cash generator

ccfcway said:

If SISU agreed, you wonde why its taking them so long to find a bit of grass to build this cash generator

Click to expand...

The answer must surely be that Sisu don't want to spend the money and that belatedly Sisu now realise that its opportunity has gone. How many clubs have home grounds that generate or could generate the revenue that the Ricoh offers. Monumental fail by an arrogant hedge fund.

Intheknow said:

The answer must surely be that Sisu don't want to spend the money and that belatedly Sisu now realise that its opportunity has gone. .

Click to expand...

so they dont want to spend the money on what many on here believe is the greatest money generator ?

Where does that leave us then ?

Noggin said:

All of the revenue streams we've been discussing are attendance based, the only ones that aren't are player sales, prize money and tv money I think. Not having a stadium is a disadvantage sure but high attendances still provide nearly all the benefit anyway, food and beverage is the least significant of the revenues imo especially when costs are so high. It's easier to compete with it of course it is but when we could easily triple most of our revenue streams if we were properly run it seems silly to be focusing on the lack of stadium as the reason we are struggling in league one, its not the reason in the slightest, nore does not having one of our own prevent us from getting out of this league.

Yes we would struggle to be a self sufficient club in the championship but thats because only a small handful of teams are self sufficient, the vast majority of teams have massive debts and lose money.

lack of revenues really arnt our issue though, lack of money is (though of course they are directly linked) and of course some of the worst and most destructive owners ever.

Click to expand...

Stadium revenue and attendances are directly linked, if you have 20k at a match but have no stadium revenue you are clearly missing out on income, and whats the point in having stadium revenues if you only have 5k at a match.

When attendances were fairly high at the Ricoh (yes it did happen), so all the things you've been mentioning about sponsorship and merchandise would have been significantly higher than now the club was still massively struggling then. We know its a model which hasn't worked in the past, its tried and failed.

Yes getting rid of SISU is more important as they don't seem to have any real plans to address any of the things being discussed here (attendances, merchandise sales, sponsorship, stadium etc.) but any new owner would still need the stadium revenues to turn the club around. Lets consider this SISU pack up there bags tomorrow and sell to a responsible owner, his running of the club on and off the pitch is exemplary and nobody has problems with it. Without the stadium revenues he will still struggle to make us anything more than a strong L1 club/weak championship club unless he is prepared to finance it thereselves. There top two priorities would be to increase attendances and to try and get stadium ownership, the rest will then follow.

I agree the current deal shouldn't stop us getting out of this league which I conceded earlier in the thread. A well run club getting 10-12k in L1 should be enough to be regularly competing for promotion from this league, we'd still massively struggle in the championship though as you said.
The people who did buy the Ricoh considered it massively important so much they went to great lengths to get them.

My point is that the football club (not SISU) long term need it, regardless of who owns the club.

ccfcway said:

so they dont want to spend the money on what many on here believe is the greatest money generator ?

Where does that leave us then ?

Click to expand...

Bertola said:

I thought the key to any deal was the development of the surrounding land? Isnt that what we were told?

Click to expand...

The key to a succrsful deal is the willingness of all parties to NEGOTIATE an amicable mutually beneficial arrangement.

PUSB

Intheknow said:

The answer must surely be that Sisu don't want to spend the money and that belatedly Sisu now realise that its opportunity has gone. How many clubs have home grounds that generate or could generate the revenue that the Ricoh offers. Monumental fail by an arrogant hedge fund.

Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth!