Freehold of The Arena AND all its surrounds?!? (1 Viewer)

smouch1975 · Jan 28, 2014

I've posted on this stuff before. And I would hope for support from us that live in Brisbane, Melbourne, Florida and LA.

We have complexes that deliver hotels, sports, eateries, shopping, bars, casinos and ladies spas. This is the package they want.
If in doubt, spend a weekend at Euro Disney. Do you spend more having your photo taken with Mickey Mouse? Or eating drinking, gambling and shopping there all weekend?

The bottom of Hen and Burbages Lane are not the home to CCFC. They are sadly viewed by SISU and the city of London as a potential gold mine for leisure weekends. A prem team would complete that

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Jan 28, 2014

torchomatic said:
Well, he must be a pretty crap property developer then if he wants to buy something where he can't develop property. Maybe he was only buying into us because he thought Joe E was a nice bloke? "Nah, Joe. Nothing in it for me. I'm doing it for the kids."

Again, I never commented as to whether he was nice or not. Simply confirming that he was looking at buying ACL from the council and Higgs. By unifying that entity, with the football club; there is a very nice business to be had - make no mistake. All of that is in the public domain.

SISU are - it is claimed - demanding unfettered freehold ownership of the arena, and it's surrounding lands. All you have to do is comment on whether that's reasonable or not. And you can't. Or won't. Which speaks volumes - but comes as no surprise whatsoever

RoboCCFC90 · Jan 28, 2014

Moff said:
If Haskell or Byng were our owners and brought us home, I would want them now

BUT

lets not hide behind the bullshit. SISU like Haskell or Byng want the stadium, its freehold and the land surrounding, as that is where the money lies, not in the club. None of them want the club on its own, as it doesn't make the cold hard cash and that is what they are after.

People are in denial if they cant see this hard fact. There are very few Abramovich's or Sultans, or megalomaniacs like Vincent Tan around to buy clubs, so its left to those that either want to lose cash for their own vanity as club owners or those like SISU or Haskell or Byng who want the club to get their hands on where the real cash is..the land. I mean lets face it did the Glazers really buy Man Utd because they love football..:facepalm:

100% agree, purchasing the Freehold does open a door of possibility with regards to the land, PH4 is a property developer so you can assume he would do something with the space, Byng wanted to build a train station at the Ricoh and use the rest of the land to aid his and the Chinese rail plans, Sisu have openly stated they'd look at the Brentford model so potentially accomodation, it's all about improving the revenue and there all the same, Richardson was the same when we were at Highfield Road hence why we are in this mess.

Noggin · Jan 28, 2014

Grendel said:
So you know the details of the arrangement do you?

Are you saying this has never, ever happened before in the uk with any business? There is no way anyone could ever get round this watertight legislation? Are you absolutely sure?

:facepalm: This your new way of dealing with having lost a debate and not having a reasonable response?, I'm not sure it's better than you skulking off quietly with your tail between your legs.

SISU got out of their contract by liquidating the company, that seems like a good idea lets liquidate the council

Do I know the details of the contract no, but im just as confident that ACL wouldn't have agreed a deal that allowed the council to kill them at any point by demanding 14 million as I'm that there are no fairys at the bottom of my garden. There is also the fact that if your new ridiculous situation did happen and was possible, acl wouldn't liquidate straight away, first they would try to get funding from elsewhere, if they couldn't they would go into administration and attempt to be sold, or to sell off their assets, neither of these things allows the council to sell the freehold without an acl lease, as the administrator would sell the lease.

and of course there is the fact that doing this means the council likely lose out on a significant amount of their 14 mill loan and this would need to be added to the sale price for it to be a good idea.

For once instead of being an ass, instead of trying to make smart ass comments like this, try to actually demonstrate how this is a viable suggestion.

Noggin · Jan 28, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
100% agree, purchasing the Freehold does open a door of possibility with regards to the land, PH4 is a property developer so you can assume he would do something with the space, Byng wanted to build a train station at the Ricoh and use the rest of the land to aid his and the Chinese rail plans, Sisu have openly stated they'd look at the Brentford model so potentially accomodation, it's all about improving the revenue and there all the same, Richardson was the same when we were at Highfield Road hence why we are in this mess.

But you don't need the unfettered freehold for this, you buy the freehold and you buy acl. Then other than the fact you have casinos and shops etc who contracts you must honor, you can build yourself a train station, you can build a pub, another building where you sell the lease to nandos etc etc.

We don't know what acls lease entitles them too, you might be able to do that stuff without the freehold at all, or you might be able to do it without acl at all, of course without acl you don't get to play a football team there.

smouch1975 · Jan 28, 2014

Percentage cut. Or more accurately. Where do they want the dollar... Sorry pound to stop

Noggin said:
But you don't need the unfettered freehold for this, you buy the freehold and you buy acl. Then other than the fact you have casinos and shops etc who contracts you must honor, you can build yourself a train station, you can build a pub, another building where you sell the lease to nandos etc etc.

We don't know what acls lease entitles them too, you might be able to do that stuff without the freehold at all, or you might be able to do it without acl at all, of course without acl you don't get to play a football team there.

sky blue john · Jan 28, 2014

Godiva said:
Yes, that's the key issue now and has been for years -
the club must own all revenue streams generated in and around the stadium. No matter who owns the club.

Yes we all agree with this but it will never happen under Sisu !!

smouch1975 · Jan 28, 2014

sky blue john said:
Yes we all agree with this but it will never happen under Sisu !!

It will if they continue in the sue sue vain. Wrong but....

It will

italiahorse · Jan 28, 2014

There is no doubt that applications have been placed (and approved) for a hotel on car park C

http://planning.coventry.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=691932

http://planning.coventry.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=663256

Noggin · Jan 28, 2014

smouch1975 said:
Percentage cut

sorry? I don't understand the response? are you saying acl's lease entitles them to a percentage cut? that wasn't what I was asking, I mean does the acl lease allow them to develop land ie build a pub and if not does it prevent the freehold owner from developing the land, ie building a pub?

You need to know this to know what a property developer would need, but either way no one requires the unfettered freehold unless they are planning to rip the lot down.

The freehold + ACL is all anyone needs to run a football club and develop the area for extra revenue and they perhaps don't even need the freehold. Of course if you don't need the freehold and plan to significantly develop you might want to negotiate with the council to increase the length of the lease

torchomatic · Jan 28, 2014

True. They are richer and the clubs they took over were already set up quite nicely, weren't they? My point is regardless of the state of a club, very few owners are "football men".

Astute said:
Tan and Glazer may not be great owners but they have done better for their clubs than our owners have. They try to make money by having a successful club whereas.....

smouch1975 · Jan 28, 2014

I think a key thought here is. Do you want to see the team and the Holbrooks area prosper for the next 25 years ala MCFC or retain 130 years of history? Leap of faith

RoboCCFC90 · Jan 28, 2014

Noggin said:
But you don't need the unfettered freehold for this, you buy the freehold and you buy acl. Then other than the fact you have casinos and shops etc who contracts you must honor, you can build yourself a train station, you can build a pub, another building where you sell the lease to nandos etc etc.

We don't know what acls lease entitles them too, you might be able to do that stuff without the freehold at all, or you might be able to do it without acl at all, of course without acl you don't get to play a football team there.

I would say that has something to do with the current lease, Sisu did say they'd be interested in a 99 year lease..

Godiva · Jan 28, 2014

torchomatic said:
True. They are richer and the clubs they took over were already set up quite nicely, weren't they? My point is regardless of the state of a club, very few owners are "football men".

But then owners tend to install a 'football' man as CEO/Chairman ... someone like Ray Ranson

smouch1975 · Jan 28, 2014

Yes. If you build and run a profitable business on my land. I get a cut. Yes.

Noggin said:
sorry? I don't understand the response? are you saying acl's lease entitles them to a percentage cut? that wasn't what I was asking, I mean does the acl lease allow them to develop land ie build a pub and if not does it prevent the freehold owner from developing the land, ie building a pub?

You need to know this to know what a property developer would need, but either way no one requires the unfettered freehold unless they are planning to rip the lot down.

The freehold + ACL is all anyone needs to run a football club and develop the area for extra revenue and they perhaps don't even need the freehold. Of course if you don't need the freehold and plan to significantly develop you might want to negotiate with the council to increase the length of the lease

Noggin · Jan 28, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
I would say that has something to do with the current lease, Sisu did say they'd be interested in a 99 year lease..

This again is sisu trying to look reasonable but asking for the impossible. The council can't give a 99 year lease to sisu because they have a 47? year lease with acl, if sisu want a 99 year lease they have to buy acl and then negotiate with the council, the council can't take the lease from acl and sell it to someone else.

lordsummerisle · Jan 28, 2014

Didn't Haskell buy the Arena twice last year anyway?

Noggin · Jan 28, 2014

smouch1975 said:
Yes. If you build and run a profitable business on my land. I get a cut. Yes.

again that isn't what I asked, it's also not a given at all, it's quite possible it is, but it's equally (or even more likely) that it's not.

We pay the freehold owner of the block of flats we own (leasehold) a property in a tiny amount of money a year in ground rent. The freehold owner does not get any of the money from us renting it out, nore will they get any money when we sell.

Godiva · Jan 28, 2014

Noggin said:
This again is sisu trying to look reasonable but asking for the impossible. The council can't give a 99 year lease to sisu because they have a 47? year lease with acl, if sisu want a 99 year lease they have to buy acl and then negotiate with the council, the council can't take the lease from acl and sell it to someone else.

... and this is what I hope will happen.
So it's down to the price tag on ACL - and ccc's willingness to sell to sisu. Both may depend on the outcome of the JR.

smouch1975 · Jan 28, 2014

Ok. I'll try and break it down. Unlike you and I and Joy for that matter. SISU and their investors plan to be around for more than 99 years. I've heard several top US universities are the backers. Do they hope to be in existence and gaining a return in 99+ years?
Would you at your block of flats rather a 99 year lease that at that point returns to the owner, or something your great grandchildren inherit?

Has this helped. I've had a few?

Moff · Jan 28, 2014

lordsummerisle said:
Didn't Haskell buy the Arena twice last year anyway?

Yes he gifted it to Uncle Joe who promptly lost it back to ACL over a game of Darts with Ann Lucas at the 'Woodbine and Stout' public house.

He then re-bought it but sold it back to ACL when he found out we have something called 'Winter' in the UK and he couldn't top up his tan on the pitch or in the stands all year round.

magic82ball · Jan 28, 2014

torchomatic said:
You'll find that most owners know nothing about football. From the Glazers to Tan to SISU.

WTF has this got to do with anything?

You come out with some obscure irrelevant comparisons sometimes Torch. Is it not acceptable to you for the poster to say "Joy has admitted she knows nothing about football" and leave it there? Its a factually correct statement isn't it?

Noggin · Jan 28, 2014

smouch1975 said:
Ok. I'll try and break it down. Unlike you and I and Joy for that matter. SISU and their investors plan to be around for more than 99 years. I've heard several top US universities are the backers. Do they hope to be in existence and gaining a return in 99+ years?
Would you at your block of flats rather a 99 year lease that at that point returns to the owner, or something your great grandchildren inherit?

Has this helped. I've had a few?

Sorry, it hasn't helped because I already understand the situation perfectly. It seems you arn't understanding me however.

none of what you replied to me answered what I asked.

What does ACL's Lease entitle them to in terms of what land is theirs during the lease and what are they allowed to do on that land?.

I understand what sisu want and for their most part their reasons for wanting it, but as I've said they are asking for something that the council do not have in their power to sell.

There is also the fact that in reality a 99 year lease pretty much has the same value as a freehold. But of course everyone would prefer a lease they own to be as long as possible(in the vast majority of circumstances) but again the only people the council can give a 99 year lease too is acl (for the next 47? years anyway) so if sisu want a 99year+ lease they need to buy acl and negotiate with the council. Or they can buy the fettered freehold and acl.

Noggin · Jan 28, 2014

Godiva said:
... and this is what I hope will happen.
So it's down to the price tag on ACL - and ccc's willingness to sell to sisu. Both may depend on the outcome of the JR.

I can't see it happening, if sisu win the JR, seriously hurting acl and end up getting them on the cheap why would the council who now hate sisu even more than they do now agree a longer lease with them? other than for a very significant amount of money.

smouch1975 · Jan 28, 2014

You have me at a disadvantage here sir, please as I don't know. Whom presently owns the surrounding land and whom manages it. I don't honestly know. But I put my assumptions on CCC and ACL. Happy to be told I'm wrong. Then this might all end

Noggin said:
What does ACL's Lease entitle them to in terms of what land is theirs during the lease and what are they allowed to do on that land?

There is also the fact that in reality a 99 year lease pretty much has the same value as a freehold.

No. We are talking about business here that go on forever in their minds. Not humans. That age

fernandopartridge · Jan 28, 2014

Have the council been inundated with offers for the land surrounding the Arena over the past 9 years?

RoboCCFC90 · Jan 28, 2014

Noggin said:
This again is sisu trying to look reasonable but asking for the impossible. The council can't give a 99 year lease to sisu because they have a 47? year lease with acl, if sisu want a 99 year lease they have to buy acl and then negotiate with the council, the council can't take the lease from acl and sell it to someone else.

It all ties in with the Freehold though, Sisu purchases the Freehold and then establishes a lower cost effective lease term for the Club while the stadium is owned by a management company. However I agree that if Sisu want to the unfettered freehold they'd have to pay market price for this.

smouch1975 · Jan 28, 2014

fernandopartridge said:
Have the council been inundated with offers for the land surrounding the Arena over the past 9 years?

No. Because in affect there has been the collapse of the Euro zone and the GFC and a balls up with UK finance in that period. Other variables would include a shift in the earths orbit around the sun. So that Cov is basked in a constant and very pleasent 28 degrees. Then it will work.

fernandopartridge · Jan 28, 2014

smouch1975 said:
No. Because in affect there has been the collapse of the Euro zone and the GFC and a balls up with UK finance in that period. Other variables would include a shift in the earths orbit around the sun. So that Cov is basked in a constant and very pleasent 28 degrees. Then it will work. 

The Eurozone didn't collapse until 2008 at the earliest - what happened before then?

Noggin · Jan 28, 2014

RoboCCFC90 said:
It all ties in with the Freehold though, Sisu purchases the Freehold and then establishes a lower cost effective lease term for the Club while the stadium is owned by a management company. However I agree that if Sisu want to the unfettered freehold they'd have to pay market price for this.

If they want the freehold at all they have to pay market price, if they want the unfettered freehold well they simply aren't going to get it, while it might technically be possible it would cost a massive ammount more than it's worth and be incredibly complex, they could however buy the freehold and acl which is nearly the same as having the unfettered freehold and a million times more reasonable.

I'm not sure I understand the bolded bit, your saying sisu could buy the freehold, then agree a better lease for acl even though they don't own acl? I don't see how this helps anyone other than increasing the value of acl.

smouch1975 · Jan 28, 2014

fernandopartridge said:
The Eurozone didn't collapse until 2008 at the earliest - what happened before then?

Balls up in UK finance. Are you going to argue with that? Do you walk around the pound shops in the city? Past Courtalds with it's smashed windows. Or subscribe to the 'London is the bank of Europe' doctrine?

Noggin · Jan 28, 2014

smouch1975 said:
You have me at a disadvantage here sir, please as I don't know. Whom presently owns the surrounding land and whom manages it. I don't honestly know. But I put my assumptions on CCC and ACL. Happy to be told I'm wrong. Then this might all end

No. We are talking about business here that go on forever in their minds. Not humans. That age

You've obviously just misunderstood somewhere, Someone made a statement, I asked a question I didn't know the answer too as that bit of information was important to the discussion. You responded to me and attempted to answer my question but you obviously didn't know the answer and we've kinda gone on in confusion from there.

regards to your second point the same applies to businesses if you own a 99 year lease with full rights it pretty much has nearly the same value as owning the freehold, after tens of years the gap grows larger and larger of course. Of course it's better to own the freehold but 99 years is such a long time that it makes very little difference at all to the value. But either way, if sisu want a to play a football team there and own the freehold or have a 99 year lease, they have to buy acl, or acl and the freehold.

RoboCCFC90 · Jan 28, 2014

Noggin said:
If they want the freehold at all they have to pay market price, if they want the unfettered freehold well they simply aren't going to get it, while it might technically be possible it would cost a massive ammount more than it's worth and be incredibly complex, they could however buy the freehold and acl which is nearly the same as having the unfettered freehold and a million times more reasonable.

I'm not sure I understand the bolded bit, your saying sisu could buy the freehold, then agree a better lease for acl even though they don't own acl? I don't see how this helps anyone other than increasing the value of acl.

I have slightly confused things there and my apologies, but if Sisu could purchase the freehold and managed to dispose of the current lease (whether this be by purchasing ACL or a another) they could then simply set up a new lease to replace the existing one.

Astute · Jan 28, 2014

smouch1975 said:
No. Because in affect there has been the collapse of the Euro zone and the GFC and a balls up with UK finance in that period. Other variables would include a shift in the earths orbit around the sun. So that Cov is basked in a constant and very pleasent 28 degrees. Then it will work. 

Or nobody will take any risk whilst SISU are willing to sue anybody to get what they want. Who would want to invest millions in anything when they could get tied up in litigation?

duffer · Jan 28, 2014

Noggin said:
I can't see it happening, if sisu win the JR, seriously hurting acl and end up getting them on the cheap why would the council who now hate sisu even more than they do now agree a longer lease with them? other than for a very significant amount of money.

Indeed, and can I just point out that I think there are lot of steps before SISU end up owning ACL.

First, let's presume they win the JR and the Council are forced to call in the loan. At that point ACL might be able to refinance elsewhere and effectively buy the loan back off the council. If they can, then SISU won't get ACL through the JR, and they'll have to figure out an alternate plan.

Or they can't refinance, and ACL default. The next step would likely be ... Administration. The biggest debtor at this point is the Council, so as with SISU & CCFC Ltd, they've got a fair degree of control over the outcome of admin. But let's say that the Council let SISU buy ACL.

So there's three big hurdles to overcome before SISU own ACL, as I see it. Success in the JR, an inability for ACL to refinance, and Council willingness to let SISU win the administration process.

Even if SISU manage this, and they get ACL they still don't have the freehold, and the freehold is still encumbered with parties other than ACL. The Council still have a statutory duty to maximise the return they receive, should they decide to sell the freehold so negotiations are still tricky.

If SISU really needs the freehold for the club to be a success and be profitable, then it's going to be a very long time before we're in this position, I'd guess. I hope SISU's investors have very deep pockets, and a lot of patience.

Freehold of The Arena AND all its surrounds?!? (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

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

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

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

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency