D
Deleted member 2477
Guest
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/sport-opinion/it-could-been-us-leicester-11276295#rlabs=1%20p$4
D
Deleted member 2477
Guest
Seems a misleading article with no substance. 99% of the article is about patting leicester on the back and just one line sugesting the owners looked around the ricoh with no more detail.
not really what the headline sugests. Another dig at the club by the cet
not really what the headline sugests. Another dig at the club by the cet
Nick
Administrator
But you don't know when they looked around do you? That's the thing, it is just an off the bat remark.
They could have looked at the same time SISU were looking.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
I bet they were stumbling over themselves to buy a club who didn't own their own ground. Despite the popular myth on here that a team doesn't need to own a ground I think any perspective investor wants bricks and mortar as well as a team name and some players.
skybluebeduff
Well-Known Member
If Andy or Simon have wrote it, then it's best left unclicked.
skybluebeduff
Well-Known Member
Like Cellino did with Leeds, oh wait a minute..
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
It could of been us, in the same way I could have married Beyoncé instead of Jay Z.
Moff
Well-Known Member
I was thinking in the same persepctive.
Perhaps Andy Turner or Simon Gilbert should write it could of been us IF
We owned our own ground, had different owners who invested eleventy billion pounds in the team, had successive promotions, we won more games than other teams etc yadda yadda yadda.
It could have been any team in the right circumstances, its just lazy journalism on a slow news day.
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Why did they buy Leicester then?
Nick
Administrator
Genuine Question as I don't know, when they bought the stadium was that 100% freehold or was it just a lease etc?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Because they knew they could buy it and own it, which they did. Obviously, not much chance of that with CCC.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
The £37 million cost of the new stadium, combined with relegation from the Premiership, the collapse of the English transfer market due to the introduction of the transfer window and the collapse of ITV Digital meant that Leicester went into receivership shortly after moving to the new stadium. Birse Construction who had built the stadium therefore lost a large part of their fee, and they withdrew from any further football ground construction. The main losers from this were Leicester's local rivals Coventry City, who were in negotiations with Birse to build their own new stadium.
As part of the deal which brought the club out of receivership, the ownership of the stadium reverted to American academic retirement fund TIAA–CREF, who had supplied £28 million via a bond scheme towards the stadium's construction, with the club taking a long-term lease while the bond repayments were made.
On 1 March 2013, Leicester City's Thai owners King Power bought the ground through their company K Power Holdings Co, Ltd.[SUP][1][/SUP]
As part of the deal which brought the club out of receivership, the ownership of the stadium reverted to American academic retirement fund TIAA–CREF, who had supplied £28 million via a bond scheme towards the stadium's construction, with the club taking a long-term lease while the bond repayments were made.
On 1 March 2013, Leicester City's Thai owners King Power bought the ground through their company K Power Holdings Co, Ltd.[SUP][1][/SUP]
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
My dear Torch virtually everything has a price so can be bought,just like now you could buy the Ricoh ACL whatever if you wanted to and had the money
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
As well as the usual moronic stuff there are a few well thought out responses on the comments with that article.
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Yes in other words they did not own the ground
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
1. Because Leicester have far better support than Coventry City, a greater chance of a return.
2. LCFC had a long term lease on the stadium, they weren't tenants to a 50 year leaseholder like CCFC were at the time.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
True. Ah well, maybe we'll get a crack at the Ricoh in 248 years. Can't wait.
Do you really think they wouldn't have sold to a big hitter with money to burn ??............ Or was it perhaps they didn't want to sell to a hedge fund with all the reputation that comes with that part of the finance industry and particularly one who was starting to threaten individuals at CCC with court action ? .............The Council acted out of spite without doubt, but provoked ? Yes I think quite a bit ?!
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Will that be when the last of the court cases is over?
Nick
Administrator
What about before sisu and any court cases?
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
We had even less money than SISU then proper debt
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
Well yeah if you had a spare 24 million rattling round for income rights? Everything has a price. Even if it may be a bit exaggerated and unfair. It's business. Ruthless world so it is
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
No, I don't. Didn't Manhattan bail out as they couldn't deal with the Council?
They certainly were provoked, but "spite" really doesn't cover selling a 250 lease to an out of town franchise. That really is spiteful. After all, SISU won't be here forever. Thanks to the Council, Wasps will.
They certainly were provoked, but "spite" really doesn't cover selling a 250 lease to an out of town franchise. That really is spiteful. After all, SISU won't be here forever. Thanks to the Council, Wasps will.
Moff
Well-Known Member
Only 500 more days or so and we are down to the 90,000 day countdown. Its getting closer
Nick
Administrator
Of course, everything has a price.
They bought a whole stadium (I assume freehold?) for £17m, we were offered just income rights to our own matches for £24m.
Even if you are a billionaire, which one makes more sense?
We had a group want to take over us, but the council pretty much dismissed it straight off because they wanted to buy into the stadium and get a bit of land.
Imagine how different it could have been if they had owned us now and the club and the Ricoh were together?
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Easy buy ACL go into admin on your own terms bingo income rights gone
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
Ah yes but the ricoh has other facilities. Casino. Hotel. Exhibition space. Have you not been? ;-)
skybluedan
Well-Known Member
If my aunty had any bollocks then she would be me uncle
shit from the ct again
shit from the ct again
I'm with you on the council, that is for sure, it was an appalling decision for the football club, all their pretence of being City supporters was nauseating. As much as this deal will shaft City possibly for good in terms of attracting new wealthy owners I suppose if I put all loyalty aside and put on my business head, the stadium being used more by two successful clubs makes sense. Surely a decent owner could buy into half of Wasps deal on the lease and then divide all revenue streams according to who generates them ? Surely sponsors and advertisers would be more interested in a stadium that hosts circa 38 'Events' ?!
Thing is I don't think SISU really want to pay good money for a share, they never have, it was all a cover for their legal ambitions .
Brylowes
Well-Known Member
.
The thought they wouldn't sell the Ricoh to CCFC is ludicrous, the thought they wouldn't sell
to SISU is understandable.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Brylowes
Well-Known Member
Agree,but there owners hadn't been giving them the runaround for years, agree price,
due-diligence, do deal, no messing, and at the same time pulling the rug from under
SISU.