I didn't mean to imply ther would be less goals, although that might follow. I meant that teams with more equal budgets would lead to closer matches, with less big margin wins.
It would logically lead to tighter league tables with less points between top and bottom.
Didn't we see that last year to some degree?
Of course exceptions occur eg some matches where one or even two players get sent off.
imp:
He really has got a problem with playing at the Ricoh. Maybe CCC should give it to him?
Too literal man!
I wasn't suggesting they would sell the stadium for a profit after 5 years, I was ilustrating the debt doesn't need to be paid off to benefit!
The benefit with buying the stadium will come in increased revenues, over the long term.
They can finance buying the stadium for little more than the cost of the rent, or maybe even less than the £1.2m we were being fleeced for!
imp:
Nonsense - London house prices increase because there is demand. How much demand is there for a crappy 15,000 stadium in Coventry or S Warwickshire (apart from our deluded owners)?
Absolutley, the value of something increases due to amongst other things the scarcity of the item i.e. supply and the number of people who would like to buy it i.e. demand. Stadiums are what I would describe as specialist purchases unlike say houses, and as such the scarcity of such sites is a factor in how much they are valued. How much is the Timpot "White Elephant" stadium going to be worth when there is an arguably better larger stadium i.e. the Ricoh quite nearby that someone could get instead?
I've got 3 mortgages thanks.
If you brought a 500k house with a 3% mortgage, kept it for 5 years and sold it even if house prices go up by 5% a year you do not make anything like 140k.
Firstly you spent £75k interest on your 500k mortgage over those 5 years. You spent £20k on stamp duty when buying the property. You Spend about 13k on estate agents or auction fees. You probably spend 3 grand with search fees, legal fees, arranging mortgage fees, survey fees etc, council tax on a 500k property in london is about £14k over 5 years and your profit is down to £15k and if it doesn't rise at 5% you might find you actually lose money.
I don't remember what was spent to build the Ricoh, I know you know though, add 5% per year to that, do you really think we could sell the Ricoh for that? If so if ACL/council are greedy, why not just said screw it to the football club and cash in?
I didn't mean to imply ther would be less goals, although that might follow. I meant that teams with more equal budgets would lead to closer matches, with less big margin wins.
We can twist figures around and present them in different lights.
Yes there are costs in buying, but also you saved all the dead money you would have paid in rent,
I wasn't trying to start a rant on the benefits of house buying, I was trying to illustrate that the debt we are left with is not something we should worry about having to pay off.
Its not external debt that can challenge SISU its all internal debt that they are comfortable with as a housholder would be with a mortgage.
The completion report for the Ricoh shows £115m, but the stadium is only a part of that. Similar stadiums have been built for £30m. Ask yourself why the Ricoh was 4 times as much?
imp:
but that is only benefit to SISU .........no benefit for the club ,so why are we going through this ..Like Deluded 4 yr contracts..........to gain book Value ...........look where that got us.
Too literal man!
I wasn't suggesting they would sell the stadium for a profit after 5 years, I was ilustrating the debt doesn't need to be paid off to benefit!
The benefit with buying the stadium will come in increased revenues, over the long term.
They can finance buying the stadium for little more than the cost of the rent, or maybe even less than the £1.2m we were being fleeced for!
imp:
We can move past your flawed analogy (admittedly no where near as flawed as Fishers plan)
The simple question is which of the following are best for the club in the short, medium and long term.
Staying at the ricoh and paying 400k rent, or moving outside the city for 3 years+ and building our own stadium? The answer is staying at the ricoh is best in the short, medium and even long term. If they buy the food and beverage revenues then it becomes even more the case.
Finance £30m for little more than the cost of the rent, I doubt that very much.
For any loan, the interest rate is set after assessing the risk of non-repayment of the loan and the residual value of the asset. Building a new stadium for SISU would be considered by any sane lender as very high risk with very little residual value.
I find it difficult to believe that any reputable institution would advance money for such a project and, in the unlikely event that they did, the interest rate would certainly be well over 10%, i.e. over £3m per year.
I don't think SISU will be nipping out to the Coventry Economic for a mortgage. They are a reputible institution (despite what they get called on here) they will have their own sources of finance!
imp:
So if fisher was quoting FFP a couple of years ago when it wouldn't come into play in championship until 2014, is it suggestible that they were already talking as if we were a league 1 or 2 team, had no intention of us staying in champ and made sure we were relegated?
the only way they'll get their money back is by getting promotion to prem, and that's not gonna happen.
So why are they still here?
I don't disagree with your logic and I don't think Fishface would either!
I just think he is very bad at explaining that they don't have that choice!
imp:
they can have one of their sky blue saver accounts,one of the benefits is discount on rent:facepalm:I don't think SISU will be nipping out to the Coventry Economic for a mortgage. They are a reputible institution (despite what they get called on here) they will have their own sources of finance!
imp:
I don't think SISU will be nipping out to the Coventry Economic for a mortgage. They are a reputible institution (despite what they get called on here) they will have their own sources of finance!
imp:
Too literal man!
I wasn't suggesting they would sell the stadium for a profit after 5 years, I was ilustrating the debt doesn't need to be paid off to benefit!
The benefit with buying the stadium will come in increased revenues, over the long term.
They can finance buying the stadium for little more than the cost of the rent, or maybe even less than the £1.2m we were being fleeced for!
imp:
Maybe half of the fans on here are not house owners so very scared of "debt".
An ordinary semi in London today costs £500k. Buy it on a mortgage and hold it for 5years. With house prices going up at 5% pa after 5 years you sell it and it has gone up to £640k! You didn't need to worry about "paying off the debt", the new buyer did it for you and you put £140k in your pocket!
Thats a simplistic picture and stadium financing is more complicated, but thats the way it works!
imp:
Perhaps the one thing Fisher has got the fans to agree on is the vital importance with financial fair play rules.is the urgent need to maximise revenues.
Well a non loss making model always was the only realistic way to go, FFP or no FFP.
Do us a favour. Put some rough figures together and see if you can make it work.
Just talking about it is a waste of time.
I've done it and it does not work.
So to put a little figure work on that
Say the player budget was 2m that would require a minimum turnover of 3.3m. That leaves 1.3m to play other wages (non FFP players, coaches, academy costs, directors, commercial staff etc) the general overheads, the rent of the ground share, direct costs (policing stewards etc) Interest on loans etc. Can all that be covered by 1.3m ? Been paying ARVO best part of £1m in interest I believe for example
I assume there would be some TV money, sponsorship, league money etc say that 1m. that leaves matchday income at 2.3m. So say the matchday average for tickets was £10 (thats after concessions, freebies etc) that would mean crowds of 10000.
btw if you back and divide matchday income by attendance each year it works out around £12 per head net of VAT roughly speaking
so if crowds were 3000 at £10 per head that gives a turnover of 690k
Yes there might be other bits of income, cup runs etc but it looks bleak to me
all playing with figures i know but i just can not get it to make much sense and it hammers the ffp calculation .......... and any ambition
we could of course get lucky and get promoted........... but i wouldnt bet anyones mortgage on that right now would you ?
Have not heard the interview, so can only base thoughts on what is posted as being said. The most startling thing there is the acceptance that the administrator will decide where we play whilst in admin...contrast that with the persistent "The Club is not for sale" stance. In other words - is this now an admission that the Heart of the Club IS for sale? Otherwise, if another bidder gets CCFC Ltd - THEY then decide where Holdings field the players?!
They wouldn't want that, so it suggests that in that scenario it would either be total buy out or lengthy court process for SISU...depending on the size/resource of the other party SISU may yet go quietly.
As far as HMRC...experience tells them that almost all struggling clubs have eventually been found to be owing a wad of cash to the taxman through one guise or another.
I know Tim reads the forum, but I also know he can read my thoughts.
Meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow
I know Tim reads the forum, but I also know he can read my thoughts.
Meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow
And, to be fair, that is my point of view. I'm quite happy for a new stadium, just want to stay at the Ricoh in the meantime. But, if we stayed at the Ricoh, that would be OK too. Anything but a ground share really.
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?