Fisher : CCFC would not own Ricoh Areana if Otium bought the freehold (10 Viewers)

SkyblueBazza · Nov 4, 2013

The bit that makes me laugh is "It is not the club's fault we are at Sixfields."
He is right of course because despite his club title - his true allegiance not to the club but to the companies that own the club...which he is a director of. So it is not the clubs fault, it is that of HIM & his colleagues in the wider group that own CCFC.

theferret · Nov 4, 2013

Cheshire Sky Blue said:
The issue that I referred to was when you stated "That doesn't mean to say that the club would be charged rent and/or that revenues would not be channeled to the club from stadium activity. You're just guessing, and to say we'd be "no better off" is a massive leap to make given that you have no facts with which to back it up.

With all the available data, you can only see that SISU would do what is good for them, not CCFC. That is the premise of Dreamer!

Not really, unless you genuinely think their dastardly plan would be to close down a business owing them tens of millions (they couldn't sell it, only a mentalist would buy the football club if it was offered for sale separate from the arena), simply so that they could sell on the stadium for a few million quid more than what they bought it for? That's their genius plan you think? What is good for SISU might, in this case, actually be good for CCFC too. Has that possibility not occurred to you, or do you genuinely think the people who trust SISU with their money would be happy to wave goodbye to so much of it, for good, in return for a modest return on the sale of a stadium?

And let's be clear, it WOULD be a modest return (people always overstate the value of the ricoh(. Even if they did get it 'on the cheap', it's unlikely it'd be more than a few million below market value - certainly nowhere near enough to allow for a resale that would generate a profit margin to cover their losses, not even fucking close. Their only hope of ever getting their money back involves turning around the fortunes of the football club and selling it, along with the stadium, to new owners.

Cheshire Sky Blue · Nov 4, 2013

theferret said:
Not really, unless you genuinely think their dastardly plan would be to close down a business owing them tens of millions (they couldn't sell it, only a mentalist would buy the football club if it was offered for sale separate from the arena), simply so that they could sell on the stadium for a few million quid more than what they bought it for? That's their genius plan you think? What is good for SISU might, in this case, actually be good for CCFC too. Has that possibility not occurred to you, or do you genuinely think the people who trust SISU with their money would be happy to wave goodbye to so much of it, for good, in return for a modest return on the sale of a stadium?

You make a fair assertion. However, I do not believe that SISU's initial plan involved making a success of CCFC, but was to derive value from the arena. At the end of the day it boils down to trust. Do I trust SISU? No. Do I trust Timmy? No. Do I trust Joy?? No. I totally accept that any owner has to make the Arena & CCFC work as independent entities. What SISU have to do is increase trust. If they do not do that then the 'Investors' will have lost out big time. And again the evidence is that SISU will not do what is right to build trust.
As for the modest return on a stadium. Do you really believe that a 12k Stadium outside Coventry would be of real benefit to Investors? Now that would be a slow burn investment.

theferret · Nov 5, 2013

Cheshire Sky Blue said:
You make a fair assertion. However, I do not believe that SISU's initial plan involved making a success of CCFC, but was to derive value from the arena. At the end of the day it boils down to trust. Do I trust SISU? No. Do I trust Timmy? No. Do I trust Joy?? No. I totally accept that any owner has to make the Arena & CCFC work as independent entities. What SISU have to do is increase trust. If they do not do that then the 'Investors' will have lost out big time. And again the evidence is that SISU will not do what is right to build trust.
As for the modest return on a stadium. Do you really believe that a 12k Stadium outside Coventry would be of real benefit to Investors? Now that would be a slow burn investment.

I understand the trust issue, and your final point is a valid one (I don't believe a new stadium will ever be built). I genuinely believe it is now a straight choice between a CCFC owned Ricoh or no CCFC.

The point is though, despite their previous mismanagement, their intentions with regard to Ricoh ownership and the football club are pretty clear. They want to engineer a future sale that enables them to recoup the money they have invested - but the bottom line is that this will not happen without first turning the fortunes of the football club around, because it won't happen with the resale of the Ricoh alone, no matter how 'on the cheap' they acquire it.

Will they succeed? Who knows, but given that the very future of our football club is at stake, isn't it worth giving them another go? The alternative is what? A new club playing in tier 8 at Liberty Way and the break up of our most promising team for years?

I know some people want this, but I think they should be very careful what they wish for.

James Smith · Nov 5, 2013

theferret said:
Notreally, unless you genuinely think their dastardly plan would be to close down a business owing them tens of millions (they couldn't sell it, only a mentalist would buy the football club if it was offered for sale separate from the arena), simply so that they could sell on the stadium for a few million quid more than what they bought it for? That's their genius plan you think? What is good for SISU might, in this case, actually be good for CCFC too. Has that possibility not occurred to you, or do you genuinely think the people who trust SISU with their money would be happy to wave goodbye to so much of it, for good, in return for a modest return on the sale of a stadium?

And let's be clear, it WOULD be a modest return (people always overstate the value of the ricoh(. Even if they did get it 'on the cheap', it's unlikely it'd be more than a few million below market value - certainly nowhere near enough to allow for a resale that would generate a profit margin to cover their losses, not even fucking close. Their only hope of ever getting their money back involves turning around the fortunes of the football club and selling it, along with the stadium, to new owners.

Wait you appear to be suggesting that anyone wanting to buy the club would be "mentalists" for doing so with the stadium unattached to the club. Isn't that what SISU did, they bought the club without the stadium? Admittedly they did have the option to buy the Higgs share at that point but now if they were looking to sell the club they don't even have that:facepalm:

letsallsingtogether · Nov 5, 2013

Also mentioned at the meeting council admitted that it very rare for a council to sell a freehold on any large building.

valiant15 said:
Well let's hope and pray that the council doesn't sell them the freehold.

Fisher can then piss of and build his 12k ground for his Warwickshire franchise.

Oops,i forgot that is more sisu bullshit.

SkyBlueScottie · Nov 5, 2013

None of this is news. All had been out in the public domain.

Diehard Si · Nov 5, 2013

Really about the only thing I've ever agreed with Sisu on is that the club MUST own the stadium... And he's now saying no, they just want it themselves and will rent it to CCFC?

So that's pretty much all hope lost.

Snozz_is_god · Nov 5, 2013

Why do SISU want the Ricoh? Is it

1/ To give Coventry City more revenue streams and help make a profitable successful club
2/ So they can sell it on and Joy and her investors get back a fair chunk of her 'investment'

I think you'll find the answer is 2

Kingokings204 · Nov 5, 2013

I agree with a post from page 4 as the Ricoh will never be sold to CCFC and that it is a straight choice now between

A. CCFC owning the ricoh freehold

or

B. CCFC going bust and wound up after 5 years.

Has to be option B. Enjoy the sky blues while we can.

will am i · Nov 5, 2013

kingharvest said:
At the SCG he said there would be a prop-co and an op-co which is normal but that all revenues would go to ccfc.

How would the football club be better off under this set up. Its not much different to now. Instead of the council siphoning off profits through over charging on rent we would have an Otium company doing the same thing. Either they are uniting the stadium and the club or they are not. If not, why would any of you who agree to selling the stadium to Otium sell it to them?

Snozz_is_god · Nov 5, 2013

Kingokings204 said:
I agree with a post from page 4 as the Ricoh will never be sold to CCFC and that it is a straight choice now between

A. CCFC owning the ricoh freehold

or

B. CCFC going bust and wound up after 5 years.

Has to be option B. Enjoy the sky blues while we can.

5 years? They aren't going to throw money at it for 5 years, just to wind it up, they'll do that the moment any chance of getting the Ricoh disappears for good

Snozz_is_god · Nov 5, 2013

will am i said:
How would the football club be better off under this set up. Its not much different to now. Instead of the council siphoning off profits through over charging on rent we would have an Otium company doing the same thing. Either they are uniting the stadium and the club or they are not. If not, why would any of you who agree to selling the stadium to Otium sell it to them?

I don't want the stadium sold to SISU, not at any price

Nick · Nov 5, 2013

It would be interesting to see how other clubs do it. I bet a large percentage do it with a seperate company.

Grendel · Nov 5, 2013

will am i said:
How would the football club be better off under this set up. Its not much different to now. Instead of the council siphoning off profits through over charging on rent we would have an Otium company doing the same thing. Either they are uniting the stadium and the club or they are not. If not, why would any of you who agree to selling the stadium to Otium sell it to them?

No investor will ever want the club without the stadium and any investor will also separate the club from the stadium. So are you saying the club may as well close now?

Grendel · Nov 5, 2013

Snozz_is_god said:
I don't want the stadium sold to SISU, not at any price

Even if that means the end of the club? Brilliant.

blueflint · Nov 5, 2013

Grendel said:
Even if that means the end of the club? Brilliant.

if and its a big if so be it

valiant15 · Nov 5, 2013

Sisu have done the unthinkable to a lot of football fans, theyve worn us down to the point where we'd rather start from scratch under new owners.

The way in which they've treated us alone is a reason for me why they shouldn't get the arena cheap so they can sell on at a profit.

Stuff them and their investors.

sky blue john · Nov 5, 2013

Sorry but if im expected to support Sisu getting the Ricoh for a knock down price. I want to know that the club and ground can't be separated before doing so!!!!!
If Sisu are going to pay market value then obviously its theirs to do with whatever they want !!!

Matty_CCFC · Nov 5, 2013

Grendel said:
Even if that means the end of the club? Brilliant.

The Football League have made some massive mistakes, they will not want another club to fold especially one with a History as ours, it will make them look even more stupid. The club will not die, the GS will be passed onto another organisation or phoenix club if it was in Coventry.
I imagine the FL may even want this to happen so they can get out of the mess thay have caused.

Grendel · Nov 5, 2013

Matty_CCFC said:
The Football League have made some massive mistakes, they will not want another club to fold especially one with a History as ours, it will make them look even more stupid. The club will not die, the GS will be passed onto another organisation or phoenix club if it was in Coventry.
I imagine the FL may even want this to happen so they can get out of the mess thay have caused.

blueflint said:
if and its a big if so be it

Excellent - that's fine and dandy then.

SIR ERNIE · Nov 5, 2013

theferret said:
Fine, but please then give up the pretence that what you advocate is for the good of the club. By your own admission, you would rather the club ceased to exist than return home under the stewardship of SISU. For what it's worth, I don't think you are alone, there are a significant number of people who put their hatred of SISU before the love of their football club.[/QUOTE]

That's because SISU have demonstrated that they have no love, empathy or respect for the football club or its fans. They have only one goal and it has nothing to do with football. You need to realise that. Logically therefore it is futile for any fan to dream about a rosy future as long as SISU own the football club. I and the majority of fans recognise that SISU owning the Ricoh would be ruinous for the future of the football club. Those fans are expressing that belief by boycotting Sixfields.

torchomatic · Nov 5, 2013

Shame they didn't do something about it then. There is always a "choice".

Sub said:
so the fans are not the only ones that thought the adminstration process was a complete joke and one sided

Nick · Nov 5, 2013

SIR ERNIE said:
theferret said:

Fine, but please then give up the pretence that what you advocate is for the good of the club. By your own admission, you would rather the club ceased to exist than return home under the stewardship of SISU. For what it's worth, I don't think you are alone, there are a significant number of people who put their hatred of SISU before the love of their football club.[/QUOTE]

That's because SISU have demonstrated that they have no love, empathy or respect for the football club or its fans. They have only one goal and it has nothing to do with football. You need to realise that. Logically therefore it is futile for any fan to dream about a rosy future as long as SISU own the football club. I and the majority of fans recognise that SISU owning the Ricoh would be ruinous for the future of the football club. Those fans are expressing that belief by boycotting Sixfields.

Click to expand...

Can you stop talking on behalf of all fans all the time? I think you will find most would go back to the ricoh.even if sisu owned it.

ajsccfc · Nov 5, 2013

Sub said:
* Football League advised Administrator Paul Appleton to consider all offers. They feel he didn't.

* Football League were unhappy with the administration process and feel it was very rushed.

* Football League received the groundshare application one day before the deadline and thus had no choice but to accept it.

* FL will only allow an extension to the groundshare if significant progress had been made with a new stadium and said they would check on progress at the end of the season.

Considering how they appear to have shrugged their shoulders and meekly allowed the first three points, I wouldn't put too much faith in them enforcing the fourth.

The FL don't exactly come out of this looking authoritative.

torchomatic · Nov 5, 2013

"The majority of fans"? Where's your evidence to back that little statement up?

SIR ERNIE said:
That's because SISU have demonstrated that they have no love, empathy or respect for the football club or its fans. They have only one goal and it has nothing to do with football. You need to realise that. Logically therefore it is futile for any fan to dream about a rosy future as long as SISU own the football club. I and the majority of fans recognise that SISU owning the Ricoh would be ruinous for the future of the football club. Those fans are expressing that belief by boycotting Sixfields.

oldskyblue58 · Nov 5, 2013

To be honest if I were advising SISU about how the Ricoh/a stadium would be owned then I would be putting it in a seperate company also. The seperate property company may or may not charge the operating company Otium a rent - it doesnt have to. The reason it is put in a seperate company would be (a) to keep it away from the losses and debts incurred by the football club and (b) because it gives it flexibility in terms of potential sale. You could tie CCFC to a long lease at the stadium but sell the property company to a third party.

Think you have to bear in mind that whilst the fans see the stadium as the clubs and the club being essential to the stadium, it is not really the case because CCFC would contribute only a small percentage of income to the whole site whilst in L1 or Championship. As one method of valueing the property would be on the basis at least in part of turnover then you can perhaps see where the worth is. This is a business deal to SISU i suspect it is not anything JS has any great affinity to.

Would the club benefit from the additional income brought by owning the stadium. Yes even if in another group company. FL league rules would allow this to happen so long as in the same group. Here is how I think it will work based on CCFC having a long lease and the stadium owned in a prop company. Small or peppercorn rent with regular rent reviews say every 3 years. So the team could get 60% of the full turnover for FFP even if it doesnt actually receive it. The property company would have a loan to Otium of the cashflow it wishes to provide, which should leave something still in the pot (the net profit on the 40%)to drive down the SISU debts.

If they sold the stadium on but not the club, well that might be a problem in several ways for the club. The turnover would no longer count, would SISU still fund the club, is the club saleable (maybe with a long lease and proper cost structure, would SISU discount their loans

One final point I think you would find the first thing that JS would be to put a charge over the stadium in favour of ARVO.

covcity4life · Nov 5, 2013

why the drama?

we dont own the ricoh now,council do

sisu always said they would own ricoh in first place, this isnt news.

and finnally arsenal emirates ground is owned by different company to the club.

lewys33 · Nov 5, 2013

I am far from a SISU fan, but for a different company to own the Ricoh it does make sense. My issue would be if they were charging rent some way or another. Would basically render this whole process pointless.

covcity4life · Nov 5, 2013

lewys33 said:
I am far from a SISU fan, but for a different company to own the Ricoh it does make sense. My issue would be if they were charging rent some way or another. Would basically render this whole process pointless.

yeah,the worry is if SISU sell the club but refuse to offer it as a package with ricoh,we will be back to square one

rock meet hard place.

italiahorse · Nov 5, 2013

Sub said:
dont think i said they should own it i said they should be tied together so CCFC will always have a home

The best idea is that the council own it in a share with Sisu. Spreads the risk and guarantees it as a stadium into the future.
The club rent it back at a fair rent. All takings on the day related to football matches go to the club.

sky blue john · Nov 5, 2013

covcity4life said:
why the drama?

we dont own the ricoh now,council do

sisu always said they would own ricoh in first place, this isnt news.

and finnally arsenal emirates ground is owned by different company to the club.

If your not interested in protecting that ccfc have a future and their own stadium to play in that's fine !!!

When Sisu put a derisory bid in you will probably be screaming at the council to accept it ?
Not me unless it is tied up that ccfc can't be sold without the Ricoh and vice versa. This doesn't mean they need to be in the same company though !!!
I would think an Arvo charge over it is likely to cause my acceptable scenario a problem !!!

luwalla · Nov 5, 2013

nothing is known for fact.. but having listened to Tim Fisher speak about the suggested set up for stadium ownership.. AND having seen the way they have already racked up debt on the club for 'management fee's' etc .. i have no doubt in my own mind that should they obtain ownership of the stadium they would recharge rent to the club , and i very much doubt it would be at the rates they are currently touting around as 'acceptable for this league'!

Also knowing how they have acted to date.. i doubt that even if we had certain 'no rent charging' clauses built into any agreement, they would find a way to still charge some kind of levy ( again maybe management fees, running costs etc ) they have just fed us so much bull in the past .. and then even recently when they held their hands up & said they knew they had made mistakes & not communicated well enough with fans, but that they would change.. they have still gone on to make false statements ( "all creditors will be paid in full.. every penny they are owed" etc etc ) they just can not be trusted..

I'm not stating this as fact.. but just my view

italiahorse · Nov 5, 2013

Sub said:
dont think i said they should own it i said they should be tied together so CCFC will always have a home

The only guarantee CCFC have a home is if the council own it.
If a private company owns it they can do what they want with it.
IF the Ricoh is a goer without the club perhaps they need to offer the rental at cost in this league and increase based on attendance for Championship and PL.
Surely someone could come up with an equation that would suit all parties. Perhaps spread the risk by allowing Sisu 49% at some point as the relationship grows.

The high rent may have been a necessity in the early days but it looks as if ACL are addressing it in the offers. Whether they would if SISU had not done what they did is another matter.

Lets just agree that both parties have done the right thing (ACL to get arena established - SISU to make them see sense), shake hands and move this on.

stupot07 · Nov 5, 2013

Matty_CCFC said:
The Football League have made some massive mistakes, they will not want another club to fold especially one with a History as ours, it will make them look even more stupid. The club will not die, the GS will be passed onto another organisation or phoenix club if it was in Coventry.
I imagine the FL may even want this to happen so they can get out of the mess thay have caused.

They won't, we will have to start outside the football league.

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

Fisher : CCFC would not own Ricoh Areana if Otium bought the freehold (10 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

New Member

New Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency