Is this a fair deal to return to Ricoh? (1 Viewer)

[Ian1779]

This is what I think would be a fair deal for the club to return to Ricoh on short term deal.

SISU pay ACL rent figure that matches Sixfields deal - which IIRC is about £175K

SISU pay match day costs as per normal arrangements.

SISU responsible for stadium pitch and football facilities maintenance, and share other stadium maintenance with ACL.

ACL give CCFC 100% of all parking revenue, F&B sales and all football related sponsorship within the stadium bowl.

If CCFC were to be promoted - then Season 2 would see rent increase to £300K - all other terms stay the same.

Now although it may seem that ACL are giving a bit more here - we are told that they have a sustainable business, yet they don't receive any money from any of these sources as things currently stand. So there would be no loss to them - and they would gain money through rental income and sponsorship outside of the stadium bowl by a returning football team.

ACL could also benefit by being able to secure a better deal for the stadium sponsorship which needs renewing next year.

The revenue streams that SISU want are the non-matchday revenue that is associated with the stadium (and as it shares the same location as the club then it can be taken for FFP calculations)

So they either use the short term deal to negotiate a position to buy out ACL in full at a fair price (meaning the council have to play ball) or use the time in the short term deal to build 'New Highfield Road' at which point they can generate their own.


Thoughts?

 

---

[Sick Boy]

That sounds fair to be fair.

 

[coventry is my faith]

I think it's very reasonable and I am hopeful this is the sort of deal that is put to the club,and is accepted !!! #PUSB !!!

 

[spider_ricoh]

Fingers crossed - i have a feeling that the eventual outcome will be on similar lines to those you suggest

 

[blueflint]

how can ACL give revenue streams for food and drink they don't own it all compass do

 

[lordsummerisle]

how can ACL give revenue streams for food and drink they don't own it all compass do

Think something like 77% is owned by ACL as part of the joint venture with Compass.

Besides, the same argument applies, they're getting 100% of zero match revenues at the moment.

 

[sky blue john]

Good luck with that one Ian. Sisu have to want a deal for anything to happen. Ball is in Sisu's court they will probably be more interested in continuing court action though !!

 

[italiahorse]

Lets start there and talk about it.
Feel we need some of the main management to stand down and start afresh. TF from Sisu needs to be moved on. Not sure who ACL are management wise.

 

[Otis]

This is what I think would be a fair deal for the club to return to Ricoh on short term deal.

SISU pay ACL rent figure that matches Sixfields deal - which IIRC is about £175K

SISU pay match day costs as per normal arrangements.

SISU responsible for stadium pitch and football facilities maintenance, and share other stadium maintenance with ACL.

ACL give CCFC 100% of all parking revenue, F&B sales and all football related sponsorship within the stadium bowl.

If CCFC were to be promoted - then Season 2 would see rent increase to £300K - all other terms stay the same.

Now although it may seem that ACL are giving a bit more here - we are told that they have a sustainable business, yet they don't receive any money from any of these sources as things currently stand. So there would be no loss to them - and they would gain money through rental income and sponsorship outside of the stadium bowl by a returning football team.

ACL could also benefit by being able to secure a better deal for the stadium sponsorship which needs renewing next year.

The revenue streams that SISU want are the non-matchday revenue that is associated with the stadium (and as it shares the same location as the club then it can be taken for FFP calculations)

So they either use the short term deal to negotiate a position to buy out ACL in full at a fair price (meaning the council have to play ball) or use the time in the short term deal to build 'New Highfield Road' at which point they can generate their own.


Thoughts?

Well that's all well and good, but why no mention of the building of the statue of Joy Seppala for outside the stadium?

 

[Como]

She wants it in Rio.

 

[skybluetony176]

That seems a reasonable proposal Ian.

 

[Otis]

She wants it in Rio.

And what does Rio have to say about this? Does he mind?

 

[Kingokings204]

This is what I think would be a fair deal for the club to return to Ricoh on short term deal.

SISU pay ACL rent figure that matches Sixfields deal - which IIRC is about £175K

SISU pay match day costs as per normal arrangements.

SISU responsible for stadium pitch and football facilities maintenance, and share other stadium maintenance with ACL.

ACL give CCFC 100% of all parking revenue, F&B sales and all football related sponsorship within the stadium bowl.

If CCFC were to be promoted - then Season 2 would see rent increase to £300K - all other terms stay the same.

Now although it may seem that ACL are giving a bit more here - we are told that they have a sustainable business, yet they don't receive any money from any of these sources as things currently stand. So there would be no loss to them - and they would gain money through rental income and sponsorship outside of the stadium bowl by a returning football team.

ACL could also benefit by being able to secure a better deal for the stadium sponsorship which needs renewing next year.

The revenue streams that SISU want are the non-matchday revenue that is associated with the stadium (and as it shares the same location as the club then it can be taken for FFP calculations)

So they either use the short term deal to negotiate a position to buy out ACL in full at a fair price (meaning the council have to play ball) or use the time in the short term deal to build 'New Highfield Road' at which point they can generate their own.


Thoughts?

Great post Ian. Think we all agree this would be great news and fair all round.

My only gripe is why mention promotion as I don't believe in miracles.

 

[Ian1779]

Great post Ian. Think we all agree this would be great news and fair all round.

My only gripe is why mention promotion as I don't believe in miracles.

If we don't turn up with the intent to win then why turn up at all.

 

[Kingokings204]

If we don't turn up with the intent to win then why turn up at all.

Yes but he don't have a team at this moment in time and its July 2nd. We have sold around 100 adult season tickets at around £150 a go and our owners have just been battered in court. We wont be getting promotion I assure you.

 

[tisza]

Really only a hundred adult season tickets sold?

 

[Kingokings204]

Really only a hundred adult season tickets sold?

If that Tisza. Last report I saw was 84 adult season tickets which is around £150-200 a piece.

The rest sold are all concessions.

 

[lewys33]

I think that is a very reasonable offer. The issue may be with Compass as has been said before. ACL may have a share in that but not 100%.

What about the possibility of 50% revenue?

 

[mark82]

Agree with other comments on revenue.

Only other thing I would add is that match day costs are included in the rent paid at sixfields. That has been a stumbling block on the "rent free" offers previously made.

Other than that I don't see why they wouldn't go for something like that.

 

[Kingokings204]

It's not about rent or revenues. It's irrelevant. One reason we don't play at the Ricoh and it isn't rent or revenues.

Look up the judges report to find the answer.

 

[sky blue john]

There is only one fair deal I can see where CCFC return to the Ricoh. And that is without the parasites that the judge has viewed to have caused this mess !!!

 

[Gosford Green]

The match day revenue line is just an excuse. Its so small in the overall scale of things when compared to the loss of income from gates and sponsership since SISU decided thay prefered to play football in Northampton.

The only reason they cling on to the match day revenue bollocks is because its out of the control of ACL and in the control or part control of Compass, if I remember correctly the club sold these rights as far back as when we played at Highfield Rd.

If ACL came up with a deal with Compass and offered SISU access to the tea and pie profits along with reduced rent they would move the goal posts and find another excuse.

 

[Kingokings204]

The match day revenue line is just an excuse. Its so small in the overall scale of things when compared to the loss of income from gates and sponsership since SISU decided thay prefered to play football in Northampton.

The only reason they cling on to the match day revenue bollocks is because its out of the control of ACL and in the control or part control of Compass, if I remember correctly the club sold these rights as far back as when we played at Highfield Rd.

If ACL came up with a deal with Compass and offered SISU access to the tea and pie profits along with reduced rent they would move the goal posts and find another excuse.

Good post. It's never been about rent or f and b. Like GG says it is just the easiest excuse for sisu as FFP and it's out of ACLs control so easier to blame them.

Think about it. 12k ticket sales per match or pie and beer money. And some people still believe sisu and it's about revenues. Good grief.

 

[duffer]

This is what I think would be a fair deal for the club to return to Ricoh on short term deal.

SISU pay ACL rent figure that matches Sixfields deal - which IIRC is about £175K

SISU pay match day costs as per normal arrangements.

SISU responsible for stadium pitch and football facilities maintenance, and share other stadium maintenance with ACL.

ACL give CCFC 100% of all parking revenue, F&B sales and all football related sponsorship within the stadium bowl.

If CCFC were to be promoted - then Season 2 would see rent increase to £300K - all other terms stay the same.

Now although it may seem that ACL are giving a bit more here - we are told that they have a sustainable business, yet they don't receive any money from any of these sources as things currently stand. So there would be no loss to them - and they would gain money through rental income and sponsorship outside of the stadium bowl by a returning football team.

ACL could also benefit by being able to secure a better deal for the stadium sponsorship which needs renewing next year.

The revenue streams that SISU want are the non-matchday revenue that is associated with the stadium (and as it shares the same location as the club then it can be taken for FFP calculations)

So they either use the short term deal to negotiate a position to buy out ACL in full at a fair price (meaning the council have to play ball) or use the time in the short term deal to build 'New Highfield Road' at which point they can generate their own.


Thoughts?

It's not a million miles away, that. I think there might be a bit of arm-wrestling over the F&B, because as mentioned that belongs to the company set up with Compass. But as you say, they're getting nothing at the moment. This is the key to negotiation though, everyone has to give a bit, no one gets exactly what they want.

 

[sky blue john]

You can forget about the f&b its peanuts. What Sisu really want is the wonga for stadium naming rights and non football related revenue !!

 

[Bennets Afro]

You can forget about the f&b its peanuts. What Sisu really want is the wonga for stadium naming rights and non football related revenue !!

I can't see how they can ask for them on a short term rent deal

 

[sky blue john]

I can't see how they can ask for them on a short term rent deal

Exactly they can't its all about breaking Acl.

 

[Bennets Afro]

What do people think would be an acceptable % of match day revenues the club should get out of intrest.

I would say 100%, but that won't be on offer I don't think

 

[Monners]

What do people think would be an acceptable % of match day revenues the club should get out of intrest.

I would say 100%, but that won't be on offer I don't think

Lets not run before we can walk

 

[sky blue john]

What do people think would be an acceptable % of match day revenues the club should get out of intrest.

I would say 100%, but that won't be on offer I don't think

Yes 100% but impossible with some of the contracts in place and Sisu's unwillingness to purchase them back !!

 

[shmmeee]

Seems a fair enough start to me, though I'd have lower rent/licence TBH, as match day costs will be higher than Sixfields as there isn't already a team there (they'd have to hire stewards/ball boys for example).

I'd also expect a payment to ACL in return for those revenues, not sure what CCFC has done to deserve them for free TBH. Not loads, but a recognition that the club isn't a charity (and the Higgs charity is). Maybe a couple of hundred thousand. CCFC will be better off at the Ricoh while they build a new ground than Sixfields, so the revenues shouldn't be a kicker in the short term.

Long term, I think it needs to be someone other than Sisu, someone who can put a sensible business plan together for the club and the arena. Currently, the last people I'd want running an entertainment complex are Sisu, they have proven incompetent both themselves and in the people they hire in, time and time again.

As much as I'm suspicious of him, Byng might actually have a plan that could work. I'd like to hear what he has to say.

 

[oldskyblue58]

This is what I think would be a fair deal for the club to return to Ricoh on short term deal.

SISU pay ACL rent figure that matches Sixfields deal - which IIRC is about £175K

SISU pay match day costs as per normal arrangements.

SISU responsible for stadium pitch and football facilities maintenance, and share other stadium maintenance with ACL.

ACL give CCFC 100% of all parking revenue, F&B sales and all football related sponsorship within the stadium bowl.

If CCFC were to be promoted - then Season 2 would see rent increase to £300K - all other terms stay the same.

Now although it may seem that ACL are giving a bit more here - we are told that they have a sustainable business, yet they don't receive any money from any of these sources as things currently stand. So there would be no loss to them - and they would gain money through rental income and sponsorship outside of the stadium bowl by a returning football team.

ACL could also benefit by being able to secure a better deal for the stadium sponsorship which needs renewing next year.

The revenue streams that SISU want are the non-matchday revenue that is associated with the stadium (and as it shares the same location as the club then it can be taken for FFP calculations)

So they either use the short term deal to negotiate a position to buy out ACL in full at a fair price (meaning the council have to play ball) or use the time in the short term deal to build 'New Highfield Road' at which point they can generate their own.


Thoughts?

Not unreasonable Ian although I do not see it being that simple (that's not to say I do not wish it was)

Couple of comments and I am not trying to be deliberately negative, more highlighting some potential sticking points

- you say no loss to ACL from the stadium bowl being CCFC's but wont the football usage require the hotel rooms to be closed on match days for example? What about events already booked?
- where does the "bowl" stop and the rest of the complex start? for instance they share the same Atrium and by definition costs but what split?
- what are normal matchday costs? The club has repeatedly said they dispute how much they were paying
- define football facilities as opposed to stadium facilities.
- wont ACL have to calculate what they gain or lose in each area and surely they will not want to be below breakeven on that calculation?
- Sponsorship - what is football related and what is not?
- if the club only rent the stadium bowl do they actually share the same location as the other income streams?
- wont ACL require some form of security eg rental deposit?
- If ACL give CCFC the parking revenue etc who picks up the costs of those income streams?
- IEC Experience operate the stadium by using Compass any change would affect their agreements wouldn't it?
- why £300k in the Championship is that the going rate?
- Just because there is a sustainable business plan at ACL is not a justification to give income sources away. I think the angle you are driving at is that everyone gains which I agree and understand seems sensible - would need to be proven that is the case.
- it isn't just about CCFC bringing in own staff there would be insurance, licence and health & safety issues.
- who pays the legal fees?
- what stops a similar situation to 2012/13 happening again?
- The assumption is that CCC and Charity want to sell - do we know that?


Not saying that all that can not be overcome, understand the direction you are coming from but there are a lot more hurdles than it might at first seem. That said I think ACL would be interested in taking a deal something like that forward even just short term. CCC well unless it is about the freehold they don't actually get the decision on rent (yes they of course influence) - the freehold is not available. SISU, well I have this feeling they would play lip service to this because their goals have not changed and are certainly not influenced by the increasing desperation/frustration of the fans - I might be wrong on that but .......

On a positive note it would seem a reasonable deal for CCFC

 

[Ian1779]

Not unreasonable Ian although I do not see it being that simple (that's not to say I do not wish it was)

Couple of comments and I am not trying to be deliberately negative, more highlighting some potential sticking points

- you say no loss to ACL from the stadium bowl being CCFC's but wont the football usage require the hotel rooms to be closed on match days for example? What about events already booked?
- where does the "bowl" stop and the rest of the complex start? for instance they share the same Atrium and by definition costs but what split?
- what are normal matchday costs? The club has repeatedly said they dispute how much they were paying
- define football facilities as opposed to stadium facilities.
- wont ACL have to calculate what they gain or lose in each area and surely they will not want to be below breakeven on that calculation?
- Sponsorship - what is football related and what is not?
- if the club only rent the stadium bowl do they actually share the same location as the other income streams?
- wont ACL require some form of security eg rental deposit?
- If ACL give CCFC the parking revenue etc who picks up the costs of those income streams?
- IEC Experience operate the stadium by using Compass any change would affect their agreements wouldn't it?
- why £300k in the Championship is that the going rate?
- Just because there is a sustainable business plan at ACL is not a justification to give income sources away. I think the angle you are driving at is that everyone gains which I agree and understand seems sensible - would need to be proven that is the case.
- it isn't just about CCFC bringing in own staff there would be insurance, licence and health & safety issues.
- who pays the legal fees?
- what stops a similar situation to 2012/13 happening again?
- The assumption is that CCC and Charity want to sell - do we know that?


Not saying that all that can not be overcome, understand the direction you are coming from but there are a lot more hurdles than it might at first seem. That said I think ACL would be interested in taking a deal something like that forward even just short term. CCC well unless it is about the freehold they don't actually get the decision on rent (yes they of course influence) - the freehold is not available. SISU, well I have this feeling they would play lip service to this because their goals have not changed and are certainly not influenced by the increasing desperation/frustration of the fans - I might be wrong on that but .......

On a positive note it would seem a reasonable deal for CCFC

I think what you've highlighted are fair points and there would need to be some clear definitions set in regards to each. It actually highlights the complexities that would exist in this kind of relationship, even if things were all fine between the parties.
Perhaps if CCFC/ACL could get some kind of skeleton deal together, they could sit down with an independent advisor to guide them through a deal where the club can maximise it's FFP revenue, whilst ACL get their optimum return also.

Personally, I think it all lends to the fact that in an ideal situation and putting all the dispute aside - CCFC should be the owners of ACL.

That is light years away right now.. but if they have any sense that has to be the end goal (rather than this new stadium nonsense), as everything will be encompassed within the single entity.

Purchasing the freehold is clearly now not going to happen. But if they bought ACL out then as good as owning it IMO. Will the council agree to it? If the money is right (including Higgs) can you see a reasonable reason to reject a buy out?

If the club are intent on building a new stadium then they would be in control of all these anyway - but it would seem a much bigger waste of money than buying out ACL for eventually a scenario that won't be a great deal different.

 

[Jack Griffin]

Ian, you are wasting your time working out details like that, and as OSB points out in his kindly way it is a topic which you don't really have a detailed understanding of.

The bottom line is that unless both parties want to talk nothing will happen.

 

[Ian1779]

Ian, you are wasting your time working out details like that, and as OSB points out in his kindly way it is a topic which you don't really have a detailed understanding of.

The bottom line is that unless both parties want to talk nothing will happen.

It's an idea - not claiming to be a perfect one either. Clearly you don't agree - just come out and say so.