how long do you think ccfc will be financially viable for otium/sisu? (2 Viewers)

italiahorse · Aug 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
But all that is good surely, making the club live within its means rather than spunk cash on big name/big waged players it can't afford? (thus making a loss before it does that, in fact, without need to dump debt onto the club).

Common sense does also make you move from the Ricoh. If the club is unviable as is, breaking the monopoly of supply and introducing some competition is not a bad move in common sense terms. it might not be a move you or I like, but it *is* rational. High risk, but rational.

And if the club should be dead anyway, we're onto the highest risk strategies of a high risk organisation.

So cut your income stream and then live within your means is good? That's daft, at the least.

Most successful businesses rent there premises. It's part of there business plan. In the next 10 years CCFC can negotiate for the income streams and ownership. ACL have already said they can use the ACL income streams if they want and have given indications of a reasonable rent is available.

In reality It's in SISU's DNA to attempt to get it all for free.
Nothing wrong with that but when it fails you have to take it on the chin and move on. I hope the JR is the final throw of the dice before we all move on.

skybluetony176 · Aug 27, 2013

Godiva said:
While ccfc limited is not liquidated and there is still a small chance sisu and CCc/Higgs can work out a long term solution, it would be reckless and stupid to finalize a purchase of a building site. With no building site all Fisher has to show is the model of the Rotherham design that the new stadium is being based on.

good point shitsu are anything but reckless and stupid, that's sarcasm by the way.

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 27, 2013

Godiva said:
While ccfc limited is not liquidated and there is still a small chance sisu and CCc/Higgs can work out a long term solution, it would be reckless and stupid to finalize a purchase of a building site. With no building site all Fisher has to show is the model of the Rotherham design that the new stadium is being based on.

Would it be wreckless to not buy building sites? Land has value regardless of a stadium on it or not, after all.

I also find it slightly surprising that nobody could be bothered to draw a picture of a ground, either. For Arena 2000 we were inundated with pictures!

Godiva · Aug 27, 2013

skybluetony176 said:
and as I've resulted to pointless insults when are you and Godiva getting married, can i have an invite?

I can't marry NW, I am already engaged to Valiant15.

skybluetony176 · Aug 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
There is sense.

:jerkit:

explain the sense then, educate me!

Ta for the pointless insult btw. Childish, stupid, moronic.

Godiva · Aug 27, 2013

italiahorse said:
So cut your income stream and then live within your means is good? That's daft, at the least.

You have it wrong mixing current situation with the future potential. The plan is to increase income streams to be able to live within means.

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 27, 2013

Why do i get the feeling this is a never ending circle where no matter what I say you'll choose not to listen?

Have a good day.

skybluetony176 · Aug 27, 2013

Godiva said:
I can't marry NW, I am already engaged to Valiant15.

can i have an invite to that wedding instead then?

skybluetony176 · Aug 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
Why do i get the feeling this is a never ending circle where no matter what I say you'll choose not to listen?

Have a good day.

because you haven't really said anything. like i said explain the sense, educate me.

Godiva · Aug 27, 2013

skybluetony176 said:
can i have an invite to that wedding instead then?

As you probably know we can't seem to agree on much - including the wedding date.

Grendel · Aug 27, 2013

skybluetony176 said:
can i have an invite to that wedding instead then?

Hope it doesn't clash with the ACL festival as no doubt you and a other good folk will be off there. You can all fantasise about the sold out fortune teller, pretend there is a future without the club and all here the Grand Master Mad Jack as he preaches to the converted.

Godiva · Aug 27, 2013

skybluetony176 said:
because you haven't really said anything. like i said explain the sense, educate me.

Moving to the Ricoh without owning it or at least the stadium operation (ACL) restricted the clubs economical situation so much that it really haven't been able to at the same time live within means and field a competitive team. Up till Ranson left the club was focusing on fielding a competitive team rather than balancing the costs and income. Losing between £3m and £6m per year is not exactly living within means.

That is more or less the basis for the current situation.

The sense in the current 'transition' is that building a new stadium or buying ACL (100%) will increase income streams and provide a better foundation for the future. I would prefer a ccfc/ACL merger, but that is not likely as neither CCc or Higgs or many fans are approving this under sisu ownership, so it makes sense sisu go for option two and build a new stadium.

lordsummerisle · Aug 27, 2013

italiahorse said:
S

Most successful businesses rent there premises. It's part of there business plan. In the next 10 years CCFC can negotiate for the income streams and ownership. ACL have already said they can use the ACL income streams if they want and have given indications of a reasonable rent is available.

.

Most big businesses that have gone under in the last few years have because they couldn't afford the rent on their premises.

Generally go into admin on quarterly rent due day.

lordsummerisle · Aug 27, 2013

Godiva said:
Moving to the Ricoh without owning it or at least the stadium operation (ACL) restricted the clubs economical situation so much that it really haven't been able to at the same time live within means and field a competitive team. Up till Ranson left the club was focusing on fielding a competitive team rather than balancing the costs and income. Losing between £3m and £6m per year is not exactly living within means.

That is more or less the basis for the current situation.

The sense in the current 'transition' is that building a new stadium or buying ACL (100%) will increase income streams and provide a better foundation for the future. I would prefer a ccfc/ACL merger, but that is not likely as neither CCc or Higgs or many fans are approving this under sisu ownership, so it makes sense sisu go for option two and build a new stadium.

Up until Ranson left we were spending a fortune on poor players who were anything but a competitive team.

Ashdown1 · Aug 27, 2013

Godiva said:
Moving to the Ricoh without owning it or at least the stadium operation (ACL) restricted the clubs economical situation so much that it really haven't been able to at the same time live within means and field a competitive team. Up till Ranson left the club was focusing on fielding a competitive team rather than balancing the costs and income. Losing between £3m and £6m per year is not exactly living within means.

That is more or less the basis for the current situation.

The sense in the current 'transition' is that building a new stadium or buying ACL (100%) will increase income streams and provide a better foundation for the future. I would prefer a ccfc/ACL merger, but that is not likely as neither CCc or Higgs or many fans are approving this under sisu ownership, so it makes sense sisu go for option two and build a new stadium.

We may have contrasting views and I'm baffled by your stance but you are not mental...........you know as well as I do that SISU have no intention of building a new stadium !!

lordsummerisle · Aug 27, 2013

GaryPendrysEyes said:
Or is there any truth in the 'CCFC being used as a debt pit' theory???

If there is any truth to the "debt-pit" theroy then NOPM would surely be welcomed by them?

NOPM supports the SISU business plan in your scenario.

You'd best get a season ticket!

RPHunt · Aug 27, 2013

Could one of those fantasising about a new ground please explain how it will be financed.

I think there is general agreement that any new ground is going to cost £25-30m to build. If the money is borrowed, the interest on a high risk project such as this is going to be £2-3m a year. Anyone who puts the money in as an investment is going to expect a return - commercial property returns over 7% at the moment so any investor is going to be looking for around £2m a year return on their investment.

I would welcome some sensible answers as to how the club can afford this sort of payment when the idea of a new ground is supposedly to reduce costs. Please do not bother about any claptrap that involves retail development etc as there are property companies, larger and more experienced than SISU, that will have sought and been refused permission on any viable sites in the Coventry area.

Grendel · Aug 27, 2013

RPHunt said:
Could one of those fantasising about a new ground please explain how it will be financed.

I think there is general agreement that any new ground is going to cost £25-30m to build. If the money is borrowed, the interest on a high risk project such as this is going to be £2-3m a year. Anyone who puts the money in as an investment is going to expect a return - commercial property returns over 7% at the moment so any investor is going to be looking for around £2m a year return on their investment.

I would welcome some sensible answers as to how the club can afford this sort of payment when the idea of a new ground is supposedly to reduce costs. Please do not bother about any claptrap that involves retail development etc as there are property companies, larger and more experienced than SISU, that will have sought and been refused permission on any viable sites in the Coventry area.

Where has anyone said its about reduced costs?

luwalla · Aug 27, 2013

lordsummerisle said:
Up until Ranson left we were spending a fortune on poor players who were anything but a competitive team.

have to disagree with that.. a large majority of the players from that team have gone on to play in the premiership, some still are ! it still amazes me that we couldnt do better with the players we had back then!

Godiva · Aug 27, 2013

Ashdown1 said:
We may have contrasting views and I'm baffled by your stance but you are not mental...........you know as well as I do that SISU have no intention of building a new stadium !!

Actually I don't know that.
If they can't have ACL, then their next best move surely is building a new stadium.

- It won't require sisu to come up with another £20m (if that's the cost), as much would be financed by mortgages and selling leases to businesses in and around the stadium.
- It would increase their chance of a sell-on profit as the club and stadium would have amuch higher value than the club alone today.
- Sisu are paid fee's by the investors (funds) and part of the payment is an annual amount based on the asset value they manage. Increase the asset value by £20m and sisu's yearly paycheck is increased by up to £1m.

oh and of course - increasing the revenue will allow for a higher wage cap (FFP) and increase the chances of promotion (which would increase the value of the assets sisu are managing and increase their paycheck even more).

DazzleTommyDazzle · Aug 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
But all that is good surely, making the club live within its means rather than spunk cash on big name/big waged players it can't afford? (thus making a loss before it does that, in fact, without need to dump debt onto the club).

Common sense does also make you move from the Ricoh. If the club is unviable as is, breaking the monopoly of supply and introducing some competition is not a bad move in common sense terms. it might not be a move you or I like, but it *is* rational. High risk, but rational.

And if the club should be dead anyway, we're onto the highest risk strategies of a high risk organisation.

Deleted member 5849 said:
Because the previous boards sold all the family silverware leaving it with nothing.

And yes, I am for real. No offer has yet to be made to the club for such a deal that was able for them to be accepted. The only reason there has been movement up to this point has been because the stadium supply monopoly has been broken. Just because you don't like their strategy (I don't either) doesn't mean it isn't rooted in a good financial sense for what they are, and what they're trying to do.

It doesn't make SISU loveable and cuddly to say that. It does however go back to the fact that somehow in a culture of blame, a simple message that two sides should really sit down and talk (I'll buy them a coffee in Costa in Waterstone's myself if they like) is getting totally lost.

Morning - as usual we partly agree and partly disagree

Completely agree about the need for the club to live within its means, though (going over old ground) I thought that the way KD attempted to acieve this was brainless at best - let's cut the wage bill to such an extent that relegation is virtually inevitable, meaning that the revenue loss is a multiple of the cost savings :facepalm:

In a totally theoretical world, I can see sense in moving away / threatening to move from the Ricoh, in order to get a better deal. In the practical world, this is one of the best ever examples of cutting off your nose to spite your face. Moving to a 7,000 capacity stadium (soon I believe to have its capacity reduced for a year or so for building work), 35 miles away from your customer base is a move that makes one look back wistfully at the days when good old KD ran the club......

In the short term the move brings about serious financial pain (with or without NOPM), in the medium term there is a huge danger, as Otis frequently points out, that if/when the club returns to Coventry, its erstwhile customer base will have metaphorically moved on.

As for the ACL related issue - in my view, ACL made a (belatedly) significant move in cutting the rent by two thirds to £400k. If we are to believe the comments posted here by someone who claimed to have spoken to TF at half time on Saturday, the rent at Northampton is £170k. So £170k for a 7,000 capacity stadium (soon to be reduced to 5,500?), as against £400k for a 32,000 capacity stadium. Doesn't sound too ridiculous to me. ACL have also indicated willingness to agree to lower figures with the reported "£150k while in the third division offer".

Should this have been made direct to SISU? Yes in my opinion.

Should TF be picking up the phone to ACL and asking if that offer is available to him? Yes in my opinion.

In a logical world there must be sufficient common interest for a deal to be done.

My concern is that in a logical world we would never have moved to Sixfields - so who knows what will happen!

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 27, 2013

luwalla said:
have to disagree with that.. a large majority of the players from that team have gone on to play in the premiership, some still are ! it still amazes me that we couldnt do better with the players we had back then!

Unfortunately for every Westwood, there was an Eastwood!

lordsummerisle · Aug 27, 2013

luwalla said:
have to disagree with that.. a large majority of the players from that team have gone on to play in the premiership, some still are ! it still amazes me that we couldnt do better with the players we had back then!

Large majority?

Dann, Fox, Westwood, Gunnarsson?

Can't think of anymore?

covcity4life · Aug 27, 2013

only way it will be viable is if we get access to income streams be that at ricoh or new stadium

people can hate sisu all they want,but this change has been required for a looooooooooooooooooong time.

Grendel · Aug 27, 2013

luwalla said:
have to disagree with that.. a large majority of the players from that team have gone on to play in the premiership, some still are ! it still amazes me that we couldnt do better with the players we had back then!

So a large majority must mean 7 or 8?

wince · Aug 27, 2013

While ccfc limited is not liquidated and there is still a small chance sisu and CCc/Higgs can work out a long term solution, it would be reckless and stupid to finalize a purchase of a building site. With no building site all Fisher has to show is the model of the Rotherham design that the new stadium is being based on.

to quote fisher

"It will be in the Coventry area, we've got a number of sites both in the north and all around the Coventry boundary. They are very, very close.

"Ideally I'd like to get exclusivity on two, simply because it gives you the right to exclusive negotiation to close them and, frankly, you don't go into the final furlong of a horse race (with one), you want to get two lined up.

"Then we'll have the whole development of the scheme, the masterplan and all the commissioning that will be required.

"On Friday, we've got the beauty parade of architects, we've got the highways consultant - we are pushing like crazy."

Fisher, who plans to bring Coventry fans on board for full consultation, added: "The model is Rotherham's New York Stadium, it's a great stadium. It's modular so it grows as the club grows

that Friday was weeks ago , agreed you do not have to sign on the dotted line yet ,but there must be some plans

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 27, 2013

DazzleTommyDazzle said:
Should this have been made direct to SISU? Yes in my opinion.

Should TF be picking up the phone to ACL and asking if that offer is available to him? Yes in my opinion.

In a logical world there must be sufficient common interest for a deal to be done.

My concern is that in a logical worl we would never have moved to Sixfields - so who knows what will happen!

How do.

Yep, as ever we're actually rather close to each others positions really

There is unfortunately often on this board (not be you ) a tendency to shoot the messenger, a suggestion that by attempting to explain something it means tacit approval of the explanation.

This bit however is worth quoting, as it appears the most common sense way forward really. Blame one side or the other and what do we have? A team playing in Northampton and people looking for scapegoats.

What I do know is if both sides talk to one another they still might not do a deal.

If they don't talk to one another however, they *definitely* won't do a deal.

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 27, 2013

lordsummerisle said:
Large majority?

Dann, Fox, Westwood, Gunnarsson?

Can't think of anymore?

Cork, Turner, Best.

Whatever happened to Van Aanholt btw?

lordsummerisle · Aug 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
Cork, Turner, Best.

Whatever happened to Van Aanholt btw?

Thinking of players "bought" whilst under Ranson's tenure rather than pre-Ranson or loanees myself.

RPHunt · Aug 27, 2013

Godiva said:
- It won't require sisu to come up with another £20m (if that's the cost), as much would be financed by mortgages and selling leases to businesses in and around the stadium.

If there is a piece of land that can be developed to provide premises for other businesses, then why haven't one of the big developers spotted it? And why would anyone bother building a football stadium, surely a lot more money in building premises for other businesses? My claptrapometer is twitching.

lordsummerisle · Aug 27, 2013

RPHunt said:
If there is a piece of land that can be developed to provide premises for other businesses, then why haven't one of the big developers spotted it? And why would anyone bother building a football stadium, surely a lot more money in building premises for other businesses? My claptrapometer is twitching.

I've had the same thought myself when it comes to the land around the Ricoh.

Grendel · Aug 27, 2013

lordsummerisle said:
I've had the same thought myself when it comes to the land around the Ricoh.

Yeah beat me to it - that prime land ready for development - that nobody has developed and the council expects the club to.

fernandopartridge · Aug 27, 2013

Grendel said:
Yeah beat me to it - that prime land ready for development - that nobody has developed and the council expects the club to.

The whole area would still be derelict had the Council not encouraged Richardson et al to use it as the site for Arena 2000. Even back then they were interfering, the other site at Parkside would have been far better.

valiant15 · Aug 27, 2013

Godiva said:
I can't marry NW, I am already engaged to Valiant15.

Ooh er missus!

ajsccfc · Aug 27, 2013

Deleted member 5849 said:
Whatever happened to Van Aanholt btw?

Back in the Netherlands, I think he's on a long-term loan but it might as well be permanent.

how long do you think ccfc will be financially viable for otium/sisu? (2 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known 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

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency