Don't keep us in suspense, Joy! (1 Viewer)

[torchomatic]

True enough.

Yep, and nobody complained about CCC offering state aid then, even though they were a lender of last resort when no private entity would touch us.....

 

---

[Hobo]

With the JR verdict having shown sisu's claim they were forced out of the Ricoh was completely untrue and the truth is JS chose to move to NTFC, it's now clear (apart from to half a dozen posters on here ) that our future depends on JS deciding whether we will kick off the new season at NTFC or the Ricoh. Do the right thing Joy!

Joy is sort of an unwanted dominatrix, not giving pleasure just taking it. Bring back the platonic love of football

 

[chiefdave]

That's a hell of a large profit, nearly £2m over a season. Is that just from the match days or does that include concerts etc. They make in profit per match almost as much as is generated at the Ricoh over an entire season. Have Swindon got any published accounts we (or OSB58 in my case) can look at to see how this all breaks down?

That Swindon figure seems off to me. That would be a profit of £10.16 on every person who attends during the season. Even if they're running on a decent profit margin the spend per person it huge!

 

[Deleted member 5849]

The SBT Q&A (which I keep going back to, but only because it's the most complete set of answers we've got from either side)

FWIW that's an excellent piece of work, and one of the more worthwhile things the Trust have done.

Maybe they need to have a go at a similar kind of thing (same questions in part?!?) this season?

 

[James Smith]

The revenues stay with ACL obviously and ACL take no dividends.

I fail to see what the club has to gain from buying the share - no change to rent and no access to revenues generated.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong with this but I thought the initial deal with the council over the new stadium was that our half of ACL had the rights to the pie money, was held in a company (FILL?) and we owned that company. We then sold that company and our share of ACL and the pie money to the Higgs. Therefore why would our ownership of the ACL share not come with the pie money?

 

[chiefdave]

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong with this but I thought the initial deal with the council over the new stadium was that our half of ACL had the rights to the pie money, was held in a company (FILL?) and we owned that company. We then sold that company and our share of ACL and the pie money to the Higgs. Therefore why would our ownership of the ACL share not come with the pie money?

Not sure about the company but our half which we originally owned came with all matchday revenues. That was the half we had the option to buy back so for £4m or whatever it was Higgs accepted we could have had that back.

 

[spider_ricoh]

The Higgs share does not entitle the club to any of these revenues.

Not true - if you own 50% of ACL you get half the profit. That is the case for Higgs and CCC right now, and why CCFC want to buy ACL.

 

[Nick]

Where was it said about them not getting anything if they bought higgs share? I remember hearing it but no idea if true

 

[Astute]

All profits so far have been used to pay off the mortgage and improve the arena. I am happy that Higgs haven't taken any money out but have used them wisely. Once ACL are debt free all profits will be exactly that.......profit.

 

[skybluetony176]

The revenues stay with ACL obviously and ACL take no dividends.

I fail to see what the club has to gain from buying the share - no change to rent and no access to revenues generated.

I think you mean Higgs and CCC take no dividends.

There's a reason for that isn't there?

 

[James Smith]

Where was it said about them not getting anything if they bought higgs share? I remember hearing it but no idea if true

I don't think I've ever seen confirmation either way about whether the Higgs share ownership will return the pie money - hence my question.

Sent from my GT-I8190N using Tapatalk