It is unrealistic but... Own the Ricoh (at least half of it at least) or Build a new stadium at Warwick Uni? (1 Viewer)

[oldskyblue58]

I think ccfc fans have got to take in and understand that wasps are not even considering a disposal of part of their interest in the stadium. They are certainly not going to do it on the basis of a 10 year deal with a 7 year break clause. Would sisu even pay sufficient to achieve it , I think we all know they wouldn't.

A minority interest doesn't work for ccfc and 50:50 creates stalemate, that works for no one. To expect wasps to be willing to give up/sell 50 %+ the controlling stake is a nonsense

The best we can hope for is some short term stability and better access to income. Which is what we appear to have achieved

 

---

[Gregbant]

I think ccfc fans have got to take in and understand that wasps are not even considering a disposal of part of their interest in the stadium. They are certainly not going to do it on the basis of a 10 year deal with a 7 year break clause. Would sisu even pay sufficient to achieve it , I think we all know they wouldn't.

A minority interest doesn't work for ccfc and 50:50 creates stalemate, that works for no one. To expect wasps to be willing to give up/sell 50 %+ the controlling stake is a nonsense

The best we can hope for is some short term stability and better access to income. Which is what we appear to have achieved

Do you think a 10 year deal with better access to revenues, makes the prospect of SISU selling a greater possibility?

 

[oldskyblue58]

Do you think a 10 year deal with better access to revenues, makes the prospect of SISU selling a greater possibility?

Not really. Certainly not in the next five years or so.

I can only guess at their plan based on what I might do to achieve an investment in their shoes and past behaviour so might be miles out. Pure speculation

I reckon the idea was that we would build for another year or so in L1, get the fans excited about promotion- which would generate interest and income. Back the academy and essentially player trade as we have to create a pot to operate from but some leeway to pay down some of the existing debt & interest owing. Operating costs being lower in L1 so more available. I think they would have expected more to go to Birmingham, certainly had the season run it's course perhaps more would have. In the 2019 financial statements they drew down a net £1m+ so I think the process had started.

The move to Birmingham year was in my opinion quite deliberate. One indicator was that accounts signed off by directors and Auditors as clean & going concern couldn't do that without a plan for 12 months+ ahead.

Of course there were other things going on, other reactions that fed in to that. Not going to get in to that because it isnt answering your question

Two things I think have changed the plan. Firstly we got promoted a year or more too early. The second being the Covid19 crisis. All of a sudden when they were in a rocky position with wasps the cost base has gone up because it is more expensive in the championship and the income has crashed. In addition the transfer market has changed due to covid - less sales more loans, less activity - got to harm our model. Start of the season we had money set aside from some decent player sales previous season I doubt we do now. I dont think I need to explain that all more

The objective remains the same for sisu. Draw down the loans and interest, then I think they will look to sell. That is going to take time - the amount to repay is 13m+ from memory. The reason I think they need to pay down is that to maximise return they know no one would buy the company only the assets so the sale price would apply to the loans debt first then repay the shares not simply be a capital gain on the shares.

Moving back to the Ricoh just as things are opening up again at probably a lower rent, more access to income and the increased attendances was a needed and no brain decision

The decision to return might also cushion the financial risk were we to be relegated better than being at st Andrews. Reasonable to expect attendance to be better in Coventry than Birmingham in those circumstances

So I think they will be here a while yet - in my opinion

The above is also why I remain sceptical about the new stadium. Building that and creating pressure on finances, asset value as far as we know isn't going to exceed the loans as there is no starting asset to invest, adding loan debt that costs interest etc, it doesn't seem to add up and to match the objectives. Sisu first and foremost are not football club owners they are hard nosed investment managers.

So I expect them to be here at least another 5 years. Best I hope for is that they stay in the background, don't revert to legals, let the operational side of ccfc get on with it, step in if we need a little to stay afloat as they do now. Promotion, relegation, league stability are just part of football so can we just focus on football not the owners for the next few years

Also if the objectives were to simply sell up, why big up a new stadium at all, just agree a longer lease at the ricoh which would add millions to value of the club balance sheet immediately ? Why spend millions on a new site that has value in 5 or 10 years time but has cost millions in interest etc to fund ?

Like I said it only speculation on my part

 

[Gregbant]

Not really. Certainly not in the next five years or so.

I can only guess at their plan based on what I might do to achieve an investment in their shoes and past behaviour so might be miles out. Pure speculation

I reckon the idea was that we would build for another year or so in L1, get the fans excited about promotion- which would generate interest and income. Back the academy and essentially player trade as we have to create a pot to operate from but some leeway to pay down some of the existing debt & interest owing. Operating costs being lower in L1 so more available. I think they would have expected more to go to Birmingham, certainly had the season run it's course perhaps more would have. In the 2019 financial statements they drew down a net £1m+ so I think the process had started.

The move to Birmingham year was in my opinion quite deliberate. One indicator was that accounts signed off by directors and Auditors as clean & going concern couldn't do that without a plan for 12 months+ ahead.

Of course there were other things going on, other reactions that fed in to that. Not going to get in to that because it isnt answering your question

Two things I think have changed the plan. Firstly we got promoted a year or more too early. The second being the Covid19 crisis. All of a sudden when they were in a rocky position with wasps the cost base has gone up because it is more expensive in the championship and the income has crashed. In addition the transfer market has changed due to covid - less sales more loans, less activity - got to harm our model. Start of the season we had money set aside from some decent player sales previous season I doubt we do now. I dont think I need to explain that all more

The objective remains the same for sisu. Draw down the loans and interest, then I think they will look to sell. That is going to take time - the amount to repay is 13m+ from memory. The reason I think they need to pay down is that to maximise return they know no one would buy the company only the assets so the sale price would apply to the loans debt first then repay the shares not simply be a capital gain on the shares.

Moving back to the Ricoh just as things are opening up again at probably a lower rent, more access to income and the increased attendances was a needed and no brain decision

The decision to return might also cushion the financial risk were we to be relegated better than being at st Andrews. Reasonable to expect attendance to be better in Coventry than Birmingham in those circumstances

So I think they will be here a while yet - in my opinion

The above is also why I remain sceptical about the new stadium. Building that and creating pressure on finances, asset value as far as we know isn't going to exceed the loans as there is no starting asset to invest, adding loan debt that costs interest etc, it doesn't seem to add up and to match the objectives. Sisu first and foremost are not football club owners they are hard nosed investment managers.

So I expect them to be here at least another 5 years. Best I hope for is that they stay in the background, don't revert to legals, let the operational side of ccfc get on with it, step in if we need a little to stay afloat as they do now. Promotion, relegation, league stability are just part of football so can we just focus on football not the owners for the next few years

Also if the objectives were to simply sell up, why big up a new stadium at all, just agree a longer lease at the ricoh which would add millions to value of the club balance sheet immediately ? Why spend millions on a new site that has value in 5 or 10 years time but has cost millions in interest etc to fund ?

Like I said it only speculation on my part

That's a really well informed answer, disappointing to hear. Unfortunately what you say makes total sense in relation to the loans. Yes there was a definite shock from Mr Fisher when discussing the promotion saying it came ahead of the plan. I always found that a strange remark. I have never given the new stadium idea much consideration, it simply can't happen, so it isn't worth wasting energy on. It is muted for other reasons. I also hope the EU complaint gets sorted soon and that is the end of the legal stuff. I can't think of one single positive that has come out of the legal actions. I can think of plenty of negative outcomes. So the best we can hope is Mr Fisher keeps his head down, SISU don't sue anybody and we develop some serious talent from signings or the academy. Speak to you in ten years .
Thank you for the detailed answer I really appreciate it