shy_tall_knight
Well-Known Member
My fear is that SISU are here for a long time yet but its not easy cash for them I expect next years STs to be massively down as crowds slip to 4,000 - 5,000
Exit stratergy (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Tonylinc
- Start date
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
Next year might be a little tougher for them though, as I think most of the goodwill has gone already from the move back to the Ricoh and unless they invest properly there is no way I will be renewing my season ticket (as I have said before if they invest I will invest if not I might go to the odd game). I also can't see many windfalls coming early knocked out in the cup and a playing staff that combined aren't worth a million pounds, even if they sell Haynes before Pressley burns him out how much is he worth £250k?
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
I fear you are not far wrong on these sort of attendances and season ticket sales will be very slow, it would be interesting to know on the season tickets the breakdown of full price, senior citizen and juniors.
SkyBlueScottie
Well-Known Member
As things currently stand me +3 will not be renewing, thats 3 adults and a child ticket.
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
How could they tempt you into renewing?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Hard drugs?
MichaelCCFC
New Member
With all the short-term contracts sisu can liquidate as soon as there is a problem for them and lack of season ticket sales for 2015/16 could be such a problem. Or they could just reduce the playing budget to match whatever the income level is. They key for sisu is not making a loss, short/medium-term potential windfalls, and for the longer-term just waiting and seeing what happens eg if wasps fail options would open up.
Mr T - Sukka!
Active Member
They are in a mess and need to turn things around but history can tell us another disaster is not far off. But for me the following needs to happen.
1) SISU/AVRO write off any debts/payments.
2) SISU drop £1.82M per year admin fees on the club.
This would free up £1.82M per year to be invested in the squad/acadamey.
1) SISU/AVRO write off any debts/payments.
2) SISU drop £1.82M per year admin fees on the club.
This would free up £1.82M per year to be invested in the squad/acadamey.
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
I think Wasps failing will take a bit of time. My concern will be if they keep cutting costs how low could we fall?
shy_tall_knight
Well-Known Member
I'm not renewing next year, I won't be going to WASPS nor CRFC nor Coventry United - the whole matchday experience is awful, the worst that I have ever known, the heart and hope has been ripped out of the club and I find it too depressing to sit in empty stadium populated by equally depressed fans there is no singing etc.. The only hope is real meaningful investment or a change of ownership.
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
They could start the cost savings by firing Fisher and although some seem to like him on here Waggott for a start and things like moving out of the Gallagher why not rent the old Johnsons site in Tesco at least it's near the ground, these clowns have overseen the worst spell in the clubs history and have no shame!
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Why don't SISU try making Wasps an offer for 50% of ACL? They could offer say £5m. Wasps would near double their investment overnight, still own 50% and guarantee us sticking around long term therefore increasing overall revenues.
They may tell us to get stuffed but surely worth a try.
They may tell us to get stuffed but surely worth a try.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Why should sisu (or the club) pay double what wasps have paid for? After higgs rejecting out bid, it just wouldn't feel right to me, it would feel like us getting shafted again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
An exit strategy has to include a motive to sell up, I can't say I have seen that so your post is merely objector..
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
Why should sisu (or the club) pay double what wasps have paid for? After higgs rejecting out bid, it just wouldn't feel right to me, it would feel like us getting shafted again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Okay - who's 'our'? Wasn't one of the issues that Higgs couldn't even - thanks to labyrinthine accounts and company structures - understand who 'owned' the option?
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
From the information that has been made public there are no indications as to why the CCFC bid failed, it looks as if the Higgs were always going to choose the Wasps bid and it wouldn't have mattered if CCFC had bid ten times more than the Share Value.
From Nick Eastwood's reaction any accepted bid by Higgs on behalf of a bid by CCFC would have been veto'd anyhow.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Covstu
Well-Known Member
Why should sisu (or the club) pay double what wasps have paid for? After higgs rejecting out bid, it just wouldn't feel right to me, it would feel like us getting shafted again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Not perfect but would be a decent compromise to this whole mess in my opinion. I would rather have 1/2 stake in ACL and pay over the odds than have nothing and try and plan a ficticious stadium. Wasps clearly wouldnt go for it anyway as they wouldnt be able to change seats etc but at least it wouldnt feel like we have lost our home for good (more renting a room out!)
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
No indication? I think they've been pretty clear. On the 'option' issue, for example:
'Further the question of ownership of the Option agreement has been made ambiguous by the Joint Liquidators. They claim both that it is the right of the liquidators of CCFC Ltd exclusively to exercise their option to buy and also that the Option was sold to Otium in 2013 out of the Administration of CCFC Ltd. Further, the Option has been reported in the annual accounts of the Sisu company that owns Otium, Sky Blue Sports and Leisure, in 2008, 2009 and 2010 as an asset (valued at £1m). To be absolutely clear the Option was expressly stated to be non-assignable without the express consent of the Trustees, which consent has not been asked for or given. The Trustees were reluctant to enter this morass of conflicting spurious claims.'
So, who owns it?
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
I think the first decision CCFC/SISU have to make is do they want to be at the Ricoh. From the publicised comments it would seem not. That could be because they (a) have clear plans for a new stadium (b) that they are using their reluctance to stay as leverage for a better low value lease deal including more incomes or (c) they really are just letting CCFC sit there to find its own level on the off chance of a promotion (d) they do not know what to do.
I think it is wrong for people to state categorically there is no plan, SISU etc are not stupid. Is it a good plan? ah well that's something different isn't it and as we are not privy to any real details we can not comment definitively but general consensus so far does not seem in support of their actions so far. My own opinion is that they have parked the CCFC investment for the next year or so in the hope things improve, and that will mean CCFC largely succeeds or fails on its own finance. They will take interest on loans as cash flow allows and if not taken add it to the overall debt.
From Wasps point of view whilst they would like more usage of the stadium I doubt it is an absolute necessity. The fact that it is now owned by Wasps will bring a premium to asset and income stream values to some extent, better sponsors bigger name higher profile etc. Also for CCFC to now buy any of that income they are going to have buy at a premium because Wasps do not need to sell, or CCFC ship out with all the cost that involves. There is no real connection to what Wasps paid for it. The price Wasps paid might seem wrong, for them to sell at a premium if they chose to might seem wrong to a CCFC fan but reality is that's business. Like I say Wasps do not have to sell - the premium if any is almost set by how much CCFC want it
Successive owners and others have shafted CCFC financially for years in my opinion. Where the present owners have been singularly successful is by shafting the club on an emotional level as well and thereby disconnecting the essential basis of any club - the fans
I think it is wrong for people to state categorically there is no plan, SISU etc are not stupid. Is it a good plan? ah well that's something different isn't it and as we are not privy to any real details we can not comment definitively but general consensus so far does not seem in support of their actions so far. My own opinion is that they have parked the CCFC investment for the next year or so in the hope things improve, and that will mean CCFC largely succeeds or fails on its own finance. They will take interest on loans as cash flow allows and if not taken add it to the overall debt.
From Wasps point of view whilst they would like more usage of the stadium I doubt it is an absolute necessity. The fact that it is now owned by Wasps will bring a premium to asset and income stream values to some extent, better sponsors bigger name higher profile etc. Also for CCFC to now buy any of that income they are going to have buy at a premium because Wasps do not need to sell, or CCFC ship out with all the cost that involves. There is no real connection to what Wasps paid for it. The price Wasps paid might seem wrong, for them to sell at a premium if they chose to might seem wrong to a CCFC fan but reality is that's business. Like I say Wasps do not have to sell - the premium if any is almost set by how much CCFC want it
Successive owners and others have shafted CCFC financially for years in my opinion. Where the present owners have been singularly successful is by shafting the club on an emotional level as well and thereby disconnecting the essential basis of any club - the fans
Last edited:
SkyBlueCharlie
Well-Known Member
That, OSB, is probably one of the most telling statements on this whole sorry saga!
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Then I would hope that full access to the revenues the club generates can be granted in exchange for a sensible level of rent that reflects the extras to Wasps' overheads in us being there. No different to how it was under CCC/Higgs, the revenues were always available for a price. I would also note that we have had higher crowds than a good number of teams yet lower turnover, as our last Championship season highlighted-so yes I think the extra money would be significant for us to compete at a 3rd or 2nd tier level.
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
In L1 in 2012/13 the value of a ticket per person attending was 8.95 on average to the clubs turnover. To get a 1m extra turnover from match receipts requires an increase of nearer 4700. That is based on 2012/13 prices not the scrambling around deals we have seen this season.
Also build in to calculations that break even on the current deal was based on 11k average crowd. So to get £1m extra income that takes us above break even means our average crowds in L1 would need to be 15700. to get £1m more means average crowds of 20400. Sorry but with the damage done it is going to take a monumental change in team performance and the restoration of a lot of faith that for some wont happen - not saying be done but is it likely with what we know?.
The last season in the Championship yielded 9.95 in terms of matchday income per head.
You of course have to take off any associated direct costs of supply and labour
However the key income to build is match day income - tickets, season tickets and hospitality packages personal and corporate. That does go to the club and always has. It has also been the major income reason for the spiralling downwards of the finances. It is also not reliant on ownership or tenancy
Also build in to calculations that break even on the current deal was based on 11k average crowd. So to get £1m extra income that takes us above break even means our average crowds in L1 would need to be 15700. to get £1m more means average crowds of 20400. Sorry but with the damage done it is going to take a monumental change in team performance and the restoration of a lot of faith that for some wont happen - not saying be done but is it likely with what we know?.
The last season in the Championship yielded 9.95 in terms of matchday income per head.
You of course have to take off any associated direct costs of supply and labour
However the key income to build is match day income - tickets, season tickets and hospitality packages personal and corporate. That does go to the club and always has. It has also been the major income reason for the spiralling downwards of the finances. It is also not reliant on ownership or tenancy
Last edited:
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Why should sisu (or the club) pay double what wasps have paid for? After higgs rejecting out bid, it just wouldn't feel right to me, it would feel like us getting shafted again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
That type of thing happens more often than you think. My employer purchased our head office, then immediately sold it on for a large profit on a leaseback scheme.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
I know it happens. Just makes me feel like the club had been shafted again. I doubt wasps will want to sell anyway, they will see the medium to long term benefit of keeping 100% against short term cash.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
It'd also mean council/Higgs would be shafted as well, of course
Not really they got what they asked for I presume?
Sisu out of their lives lucky they never had to pay for that!!
Astute
Well-Known Member
If SISU and some on here are to be believed the Ricoh is now at it's most valuable since it was built.
When our club left it was said to be worthless as it is a sporting arena and it didn't have any sporting clubs using it. The Ricoh now has two sporting clubs. So if it was worthless without a club using the facilities isn't it worth twice the amount with two clubs than one? SISU reduced the value by removing our club. They have doubled the value by returning. So wouldn't SISU need to pay the price?
stupot07
Well-Known Member
It doesn't necessarily work that way. I imagine that neither club would pay rent, both clubs would be insistent on keeping their own matchday revenues, sponsorship, etc so that although turnover would be higher, the actual profit of ACL would be lower as it wouldn't only be from other operations, then you've got stadium and stand sponsorship - is that really likely to double because of a league one club being there? And technically with the rent deal running out in 18 months plus maybe 2 more years the value of the ccfc currently being there wouldn't necessarily increase the value as at the minute it's time limited.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Cov Utd are currently in The Midland Football League » Division 2 - which is tier 11 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midland_Football_League
Coventry City are currently in tier 3
So even if CUFC go up & CCFC go down there will be a 6 division gap.
Sphinx are actually in tier 9, so they're currently 6 divisions lower.
Just saying..
Last edited by a moderator:
Astute
Well-Known Member
So that means that if the value hasn't gone up for having two sporting clubs instead of one the value wasn't close to zero like we were told, yet Wasps got it for next to nothing because of this.
The deal that has our club at the Ricoh isn't time limited. It is owner limited. If they want to move us away to try and get a better deal there is a good chance they will attempt to. If they try to buy a share of the Ricoh whilst we are there it would have more value than if we were playing elsewhere. Wasps bought the lease when no club were playing there. It is worth more than they paid for it just for them playing there. And what is there at this stage to say that Wasps would be happy to let our club have a share?
stupot07
Well-Known Member
No wasps bought the lease when we were playing there. We'd already moved back when the deal was signed. They negotiated when there was no club there, but they must have known ccfc would be back as it was struggling at sixfields.
I agree with your last point. There's no way wasps will sell their share to us at this stage, so it's a non starter anyway? They will want to restructure and extract every last penny out the stadium first. And actually they may very well never want to sell a stake in ACL.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Last edited:
Astute
Well-Known Member
The deal was negotiated whilst no club played at the Ricoh. This is when the valuation would have been made. SISU only brought our club home when it was too late. When they would have known Wasps had got the whole thing.
If they brought us back because of us struggling why didn't they bring us home with the offers during last season or do something during the closed season so we could have started this season at the Ricoh? It was done when it was as they knew that their stupid plan had failed very badly.
And thank you i stand corrected
Why should sisu (or the club) pay double what wasps have paid for? After higgs rejecting out bid, it just wouldn't feel right to me, it would feel like us getting shafted again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
People say Wasps paid far too little. The share is therefore worth lots more to SISU than Wasps paid and SISU at one time were Talking about 5,5m to Higgs. A 5m share of an existing stadium in Cov Must be better value than a 30m New stadium- smaller and in the wrong place. Who cares if Wasps make a profit- they made a good Deal and got rid of CCC and Higgs. SISU never got that far on their own. SISU should value that.