D
I do not see why Wasps would want to
His main concern is the money in his pocket.
His main concern is the money in his pocket.
Money has never been a problem.
In fact life's one big breeze.
Sent from my Gold Apple Watch in Monte Carlo.
Park it where ya like, as long as you pay your fiver.Perhaps we should just park this line of debate then?
Same principle as when SISU bought us. Get us cheap, attempt to improve our profile to a position where something without value has a value. To that extent, you risk losing everything for the something.
In this case, you've got the proper hedge that you've taken over the main competitor for Wasps support (like it or not, they and we *are* fighting for the leisure time of people) so either, if they come to us, they still put cash into the main company, or you can ensure a lack of direct competition. You could even use CCFC to boost Waps' profile... and also that of the stadium. Even though we're at a low level naming, sponsorship... general awareness is easier with a football team.
Plus there's the psycholical angle. Wasps need to embed. Owning a traditional Coventry sporting team can help them do that. They care about the city, see, they are part of the city and it then becomes natural that Wasps are there.
Associate Wasps with CCFC and you also add extra hurdles to the traditional rgby team being able to cast its very long shadow.
Plus you've separated them all out, so if football team or Wasps goes bust, it doesn't affect the other... but if one goes bust, you still have the other for the stadium.
I think there is funding behind it, but if there is Council money involved we should challenge it, why should one sport be favoured?
I suggest someone writes a FOI request to CCC to ask about sports funding budgets.
Think this is pretty much spot on. The prospect of CCFC and CRC playing at the same location does seem to have spooked them a tad. I don't it's a coincidence that the Wasps PR campaign has coincided with the BPA talks announcement/leak.
Park it where ya like, as long as you pay your fiver.
I bet they are quaking in their boots that Sisu are 'talking' about a plan that has no chance of getting planning permission based on just existing planning rules.
In fact I bet you now, that the 'actual' Sisu plan is for temporary stands and 8,000 capacity. Playing right into Wasps hands.
Exactly how I see it.Same principle as when SISU bought us. Get us cheap, attempt to improve our profile to a position where something without value has a value. To that extent, you risk losing everything for the something.
In this case, you've got the proper hedge that you've taken over the main competitor for Wasps support (like it or not, they and we *are* fighting for the leisure time of people) so either, if they come to us, they still put cash into the main company, or you can ensure a lack of direct competition. You could even use CCFC to boost Waps' profile... and also that of the stadium. Even though we're at a low level naming, sponsorship... general awareness is easier with a football team.
Plus there's the psycholical angle. Wasps need to embed. Owning a traditional Coventry sporting team can help them do that. They care about the city, see, they are part of the city and it then becomes natural that Wasps are there.
Associate Wasps with CCFC and you also add extra hurdles to the traditional rgby team being able to cast its very long shadow.
Plus you've separated them all out, so if football team or Wasps goes bust, it doesn't affect the other... but if one goes bust, you still have the other for the stadium.
In fact I bet you now, that the 'actual' Sisu plan is for temporary stands and 8,000 capacity. Playing right into Wasps hands.
With the golden share under threat the value of CCFC would plummet. Going to be interesting I reckon !
the Football League rules demand a minimum 10 year concrete plan on where you play to qualify for the golden share to enable to compete in the FL
With the golden share under threat the value of CCFC would plummet
I bet they are quaking in their boots that Sisu are 'talking' about a plan that has no chance of getting planning permission based on just existing planning rules.
In fact I bet you now, that the 'actual' Sisu plan is for temporary stands and 8,000 capacity. Playing right into Wasps hands.
What basics are they? A worthless white elephant that was sold well under value when nearly 50m of debt was secured against it?
Oh sorry that was you.
£40 million of debt hasn't been secured against it - have you read the bond prospectus?
Was this before the rent strike, after the rent strike started or even when they moved us to Northampton? Or when you wouldn't admit that it wasn't the white elephant like you hoped it was.Furthermore any comments made by me have been based on the original lease.
So what happens to the arena if they don't pay the bond back?
Was this before the rent strike, after the rent strike started or even when they moved us to Northampton? Or when you wouldn't admit that it wasn't the white elephant like you hoped it was.
Again you appear very confused.
I'm referring to the impact an extension of lease has on a property.
Sisu will tell us they have ploughed 60million+ since 2007 and want their money back should they sell, weakening their grip could be a tactic for a hostile takeover and ownership of this golden share crucialJust one question. How can a value of fuck all plummet?
But if it was a white elephant nobody would have wanted to extend the lease. You cheered SISU on all the way. You couldn't see that it could all go badly wrong. You made out that the value didn't go down because of the rent strike. You said it was always overvalued. Now you say that values change.
It isn't just business man Derek Richardson behind Wasps, there are others one of whom I am lead to believe in the super rich bracket.
Same principle as when SISU bought us. Get us cheap, attempt to improve our profile to a position where something without value has a value. To that extent, you risk losing everything for the something.
In this case, you've got the proper hedge that you've taken over the main competitor for Wasps support (like it or not, they and we *are* fighting for the leisure time of people) so either, if they come to us, they still put cash into the main company, or you can ensure a lack of direct competition. You could even use CCFC to boost Waps' profile... and also that of the stadium. Even though we're at a low level naming, sponsorship... general awareness is easier with a football team.
Plus there's the psycholical angle. Wasps need to embed. Owning a traditional Coventry sporting team can help them do that. They care about the city, see, they are part of the city and it then becomes natural that Wasps are there.
Associate Wasps with CCFC and you also add extra hurdles to the traditional rgby team being able to cast its very long shadow.
Plus you've separated them all out, so if football team or Wasps goes bust, it doesn't affect the other... but if one goes bust, you still have the other for the stadium.
That leaves CCFC with hard and costly choices to make now for alternatives that will not come to fruition for 4,5 or 6 years. During which time Wasps will have the ground, the training facilities, the community programs, the infiltration of the local community, all financed and in place
Just one question. How can a value of fuck all plummet?
And the whole of Coventry will be forced to think it was all down to Tim Fisher!
Poor Tim. Diddums.
and hard nosed you let CCFC go bust and that takes out CRFC too as competition.
If one is super rich, why raise £32m in bonds when there's a risk of repayment?
Because that's what rich business men do, and stay rich look at the Glazers at Man.UtdIf one is super rich, why raise £32m in bonds when there's a risk of repayment?
Obviously values change at the extension of a lease.But if it was a white elephant nobody would have wanted to extend the lease. You cheered SISU on all the way. You couldn't see that it could all go badly wrong. You made out that the value didn't go down because of the rent strike. You said it was always overvalued. Now you say that values change.
So you disagree that the white elephant remarks were not aimed at nobody but CCFC being interested in the arena?Surely extending the leases changes the whole white elephant thing as they effectively have freehold now? The lease extension was agreed the same time as the council's sale of shares so would have been a condition of the sale I think.
Why is it that you won't answer questions with answers but just ask more questions?Obviously values change at the extension of a lease.
The football club were offered a formula agreement which was £10
Million for half on 42 year remaining lease. At best the amount Higgs were prepared to deal seems over £6 million.
An offer of over £5 million was made which Mr West admitted was "well over market value"
The Higgs share in isolation was, as wasps identified, worthless - that's why the council purchase was made first. This is due to the power and influence held by owning the half share - in Higgs case nothing.
The club were at best expected initially before any lease extension was discussed to pay £6 million for half - or put it another way - £285,000 a year for the remaining lease if the total amount was £12 million.
Wasps paid £43,000 a year.
That's why leasehold extension matters.
I keep asking you why do you think the lease was never extended when ACL was founded as it would, as I've tried to explain in very basic terms, have made life a lot easier for all concerned.
Cough up - it already has planning for 13000
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?