Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
If someone is foolish enough to give them the money, and they are foolish enough to build it, then they will own it all. It will lose them, or their investors a fortune, but they will own it.
Labovitch calls for independent ACL valuation (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter SimonGilbert
- Start date
If someone is foolish enough to give them the money, and they are foolish enough to build it, then they will own it all. It will lose them, or their investors a fortune, but they will own it.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Be careful what you say. Come out with what you see as the truth and it is seen by some as SISU bashing.
Labo is on a big drive to get the fans on his side and to paint the Ricoh as valueless. Just as they tried to show the Higgs share as valueless in court. But the judge saw straight through it. He also noted that Deering had a selective memory and only knew facts that might help SISU. Whenever there was a hard question to answer she knew nothing.
Everyone but RFC on here wants our club back at the Ricoh. Yet if you see the plan of attack from SISU failing you are seen as being anti CCFC. What a load of crap. If you see the plan of attack from SISU and what looks like could easily happen in the near future being of a detrimental effect to our club you are seen as being anti CCFC. This is also a load of crap.
Yes we need to unite our club and the arena that was built for our club. But we also need to be careful in what way it is done. What have SISU ever done to gain our trust? Don't everyone shout their truthful replies at the same time
We all know that they are in it to make money. They are not in it for what is best for CCFC. They are not in it for what is best for us supporters. I think we can honestly and truthfully say this is a fact from what has gone on previously. What we need to remember is that at the moment we have a stadium that can become our permanent home. It should be our home now. Who saw it coming that we would move away before it was announced? Yes our club does need to be united with the arena, but it needs to be done so it stays that way. Not held under a different name. Not wondering how much rent our club will have to find. Not wondering if our club would be liquidated once they get hold of the arena and surrounded land or even our club offloaded once they get it. Some say this won't happen. The problem is it might. If it could be shown that they could be united and our club is safe I will be behind it 100%. But until then I will be very cautious. Only a fool would jump into bed with SISU with their eyes closed.
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
We can all say its one big game of poker and ccfc need the stadium and ML calling for valuations that are not applicable anyone but at the end of the day amongst the thousands of posts and threads and debates surely Otium just want the Ricoh for next to nothing and then sell on the club as a package to either get their lost money back and break even or make the odd million here or there in profit.
Isnt it as simple as this? I agree with the above poster that if we think sisu getting hold of the ricoh solves our problems then that's just your mistake as it wont. There is a massively simple solution and that's renting. People can say and have said well that's proved it doesn't work but actually it did work as its been pointed out. 1.3 million a year was high but still made a profit on it due to 10k plus crowds over 5 years of sisus tenure and people have concluded wages were a lot higher and interest was also higher so actually the rent was a side issue high or not.
I actually think the rent was too high especially since relegation and we all agree on this but the latest offers of 150k in league 1 and 400k in the championship the last known offer was is cheaper than Northampton or the same and fits in perfectly. From what I know this included some f and b money also or access to it. Renting therefore does work and would work at 150k plus costs a year easily and this could be done tomorrow but Otium and TF+ML give off all this bs and spin about how we need to own the stadium and it just isn't true. FACT and also fact is 90% of league clubs rent of a council or landlord as it keeps maintenance costs and all that at nil. 90% of clubs cant be wrong.
The reasons for Otium are as described above to make money and at the fans and people of Coventrys expense. This is fair enough for them as I get they want to make money but we want a successful football club and the two just don't go hand in hand. Football League clubs don't make money that's just how it is. Owners do it for the passion and pride and if they get a promotion like a Yeovil then enjoy it as next year likely to be relegated so rightly so they haven't overspent and in trouble now.
They could even just own the leasehold currently ACL which apparently is worth 14m. I don't believe this but if ccfc/otium don't put in an offer then acl haven't got a decision to make. Offer say 8million and see where it gets you because obviously ACL would accept less than 14m. But with bad blood and hatred now then a deal will never be reached and then this brings me to the JR which for me it all hangs on. Its catch 22 as far as I see it and we (the fans) will lose inevitably. If CCC win then its as you were and nothing has changed so Northampton for at least another 2 years and of Sisu win they probably get access into the ricoh somehow and then at least we move back home but same morons own us although the hope would be then they have a reason to sell up and this would be my hope. So im not sure what I want for ccfc to come back home on sisus terms and fuck off or ccc to win which they will and we are still stranded. ]
I still every day cant believe its come to this but its all money at the end of the day whatever way you look at it. Its money and money its evil and greed and that's what we have here. Shame but I guess that's life.
Isnt it as simple as this? I agree with the above poster that if we think sisu getting hold of the ricoh solves our problems then that's just your mistake as it wont. There is a massively simple solution and that's renting. People can say and have said well that's proved it doesn't work but actually it did work as its been pointed out. 1.3 million a year was high but still made a profit on it due to 10k plus crowds over 5 years of sisus tenure and people have concluded wages were a lot higher and interest was also higher so actually the rent was a side issue high or not.
I actually think the rent was too high especially since relegation and we all agree on this but the latest offers of 150k in league 1 and 400k in the championship the last known offer was is cheaper than Northampton or the same and fits in perfectly. From what I know this included some f and b money also or access to it. Renting therefore does work and would work at 150k plus costs a year easily and this could be done tomorrow but Otium and TF+ML give off all this bs and spin about how we need to own the stadium and it just isn't true. FACT and also fact is 90% of league clubs rent of a council or landlord as it keeps maintenance costs and all that at nil. 90% of clubs cant be wrong.
The reasons for Otium are as described above to make money and at the fans and people of Coventrys expense. This is fair enough for them as I get they want to make money but we want a successful football club and the two just don't go hand in hand. Football League clubs don't make money that's just how it is. Owners do it for the passion and pride and if they get a promotion like a Yeovil then enjoy it as next year likely to be relegated so rightly so they haven't overspent and in trouble now.
They could even just own the leasehold currently ACL which apparently is worth 14m. I don't believe this but if ccfc/otium don't put in an offer then acl haven't got a decision to make. Offer say 8million and see where it gets you because obviously ACL would accept less than 14m. But with bad blood and hatred now then a deal will never be reached and then this brings me to the JR which for me it all hangs on. Its catch 22 as far as I see it and we (the fans) will lose inevitably. If CCC win then its as you were and nothing has changed so Northampton for at least another 2 years and of Sisu win they probably get access into the ricoh somehow and then at least we move back home but same morons own us although the hope would be then they have a reason to sell up and this would be my hope. So im not sure what I want for ccfc to come back home on sisus terms and fuck off or ccc to win which they will and we are still stranded. ]
I still every day cant believe its come to this but its all money at the end of the day whatever way you look at it. Its money and money its evil and greed and that's what we have here. Shame but I guess that's life.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
@ Godiva....They never have charged "Management fees eh!".........................CCFC Ltd shows a total income in the year to 31 May 2011 of £10,267,7089 (2010, £9,291,108) an increase of just under £1 Million on the previous year, with Sponsorship, advertising, club shop & promotions contributing £6,341,808 (2010, £4,930,590) and match day receipts of £3,925,900 (2010, £4,360,518). CCFC Holdings Ltd has a total income in the year to 31 May 2011 of £4,478,157 (2010, £4,432,954), which is a small increase on the previous year, with sponsorship, advertising, club shop & promotions contributing £1,791,315 (2010, £1,663,196) and charging management fees of £2,686,842 (2010, £2,769,758). Who these management fees are paid to is not disclosed. Both companies share an income header ‘Sponsorship, advertising, club shop & promotions’. Why the income is split between two linked companies is not disclosed. TV rights are most likely to included in the higher figures reported by CCFC Ltd. SBSL Ltd publish consolidated accounts, which includes all the data from subsidiaries in the group whilst excluding inter-company activity. SBSL Ltd owns CCFC Holdings Ltd, who in turn own CCFC Ltd. SBSL Ltd has a group annual income of £16,021,046, which is an additional £1.2 million than that shown in the accounts of the two subsidiaries combined but includes £3,962,023 (2010, £3,179,589) for sports analysis work conducted by the subsidiary Prozone Sports Ltd.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Hello Ian...*knock knock*...Ian...*knock knock*...........I'm waitng for your reply, and I'm interested in Your reply Godiva!
James Smith
Well-Known Member
I want our club back in Coventry, it doesn't have to be the Ricoh, and with Sisu in charge it probably won't be - hence the need for the new stadium.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
We've been told that ACL had increased turnover inspite of the club not paying rent. Are you calling MKH a liar?
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
they are building it, its coming.....
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Excellent post Astute..
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
Be careful what you say. Come out with what you see as the truth and it is seen by some as SISU bashing.
Labo is on a big drive to get the fans on his side and to paint the Ricoh as valueless. Just as they tried to show the Higgs share as valueless in court. But the judge saw straight through it. He also noted that Deering had a selective memory and only knew facts that might help SISU. Whenever there was a hard question to answer she knew nothing.
Everyone but RFC on here wants our club back at the Ricoh. Yet if you see the plan of attack from SISU failing you are seen as being anti CCFC. What a load of crap. If you see the plan of attack from SISU and what looks like could easily happen in the near future being of a detrimental effect to our club you are seen as being anti CCFC. This is also a load of crap.
Yes we need to unite our club and the arena that was built for our club. But we also need to be careful in what way it is done. What have SISU ever done to gain our trust? Don't everyone shout their truthful replies at the same time
What we need to remember is that at the moment we have a stadium that can become our permanent home. It should be our home now. Who saw it coming that we would move away before it was announced? Yes our club does need to be united with the arena, but it needs to be done so it stays that way. Not held under a different name. Not wondering how much rent our club will have to find. Not wondering if our club would be liquidated once they get hold of the arena and surrounded land or even our club offloaded once they get it. Some say this won't happen. The problem is it might. If it could be shown that they could be united and our club is safe I will be behind it 100%. But until then I will be very cautious. Only a fool would jump into bed with SISU with their eyes closed.
Sums it up perfectly really. I don't understand why the Sisu secret meeting society members don't get it !!
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
not a fan of labo, he makes things worse usually.
but in this case he is spot on, it shows that council do not want to do a deal, it would not matter who the clubs owners were.
but in this case he is spot on, it shows that council do not want to do a deal, it would not matter who the clubs owners were.
Astute
Well-Known Member
SISU come up with the road map. CCFC and Higgs go along with it. SISU change their minds.
SISU want a lower rent. ACL offer a lower rent. SISU change their minds.
SISU ask for F+B. ACL offer lower rent and F+B. SISU change their minds.
SISU say they are only interested in the unencumbered freehold. This would mean that CCC would have to put millions in of taxpayers money in to let SISU get what they want whilst doing the JR, which is saying that using taxpayers money is unlawful :thinking about: By law it also looks like it would have to go on the open market.
So are you saying that SISU have done their best to get this mess sorted out and CCC have done nothing?
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
course i am not.
but perfect example of how crazy you are to assume anyone who thinks council are to blame too must be a sisu lover.
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
Lol !!!
Where is the article evidence you seem to have regarding CCC not prepared to do a deal with future potential owners ????
Or is this just your normal bullshit make it up as you go along ???
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Great. In 40 years when the Ricoh is "out of contract" well get an independent valuation.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Who called you a SISU lover?
I just asked you a question about the post you made. You were blaming CCC for the situation. You are also saying they will always be at fault. But there is evidence to show the opposite of what you said.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
i said they should make the valuation public, the reason they are in no rush to is because they do not want to sell imo
before sisu took over there were always soundbytes coming from council about reluctance to sell.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Have you got some references for that?
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
Lmfao !!!
They had it all the time !!
Why haven't Sisu made this document public then ???
They had it all the time !!
Why haven't Sisu made this document public then ???
Rob S
Well-Known Member
AFAIK, the document is part of disclosures pertaining to the upcoming JR so they can't be made public by anyone except the owners (e.g. CCC, ACL, Higgs) until they are attached to the skeleton argument / used as evidence.
Obviously ML knows the valuation but can't disclose publicly without falling foul of the law so is trying to get it in the public domain by other means.
Ultimately this is the crux of the whole dispute. ACL's value is lessened without a tenant and CCFC's value is lessened without a lease / asset.
If only there was a way of working this out...
Last edited:
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
It doesn't need to be made public for SISU to make a bid based on its contents. They have been saying they can't place a bid as they don't know the value yet they have their own report showing the value so why have they not submitted a bid? If their report says its only worth £1 then put in an official bid for £1. If and when the council reject that bid the onus is on the council to explain why they have rejected a bid made at market value.
Well I don't think getting a failed local politician who is also a Spurs fan is the answer ;-)
AFAIK, the document is part of disclosures pertaining to the upcoming JR so they can't be made public by anyone except the owners (e.g. CCC, ACL, Higgs) until they are attached to the skeleton argument / used as evidence.
Obviously ML knows the valuation but can't disclose publicly without falling foul of the law so is trying to get it in the public domain by other means.
Ultimately this is the crux of the whole dispute. ACL's value is lessened without a tenant and CCFC's value is lessened without a lease / asset.
If only there was a way of working this out...
AFAIK, the document is part of disclosures pertaining to the upcoming JR so they can't be made public by anyone except the owners (e.g. CCC, ACL, Higgs) until they are attached to the skeleton argument / used as evidence.
Obviously ML knows the valuation but can't disclose publicly without falling foul of the law so is trying to get it in the public domain by other means.
Ultimately this is the crux of the whole dispute. ACL's value is lessened without a tenant and CCFC's value is lessened without a lease / asset.
If only there was a way of working this out...
No. The crux of the matter is whether CCC acted unlawfully. That must be decided on the Information available at the time of the loan. SISU's commisioned valuation was at a later date and is invalid for that ( JR. ) purpose. It could therefore be released now. SISU own the valuation. This JR has prevented any negotiation with CCC. When it is over I hope you will hold SISU to account for the damage caused to CCFC and the sheer waste of time and money this senseless pursuit of a JR decision has cost.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Couldn't have put it better myself.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
AFAIK, the document is part of disclosures pertaining to the upcoming JR so they can't be made public by anyone except the owners (e.g. CCC, ACL, Higgs) until they are attached to the skeleton argument / used as evidence.
Obviously ML knows the valuation but can't disclose publicly without falling foul of the law so is trying to get it in the public domain by other means.
Ultimately this is the crux of the whole dispute. ACL's value is lessened without a tenant and CCFC's value is lessened without a lease / asset.
If only there was a way of working this out...
There you go, Rob Stevens, working closely with SISU to bash the council & ACL, it doesn't sound to me like he is supporting the football club or acting in their best interests. Just trying to help SISU grab the Arena & surrounding land.
Rob S
Well-Known Member
I was replying to sky blue john. I've edited my post accordingly.
Rob S
Well-Known Member
No it hasn't. It would be perfectly sensible to make dropping all or part of the JR part of the conditions for negotiating.
How do I know this? Because that is exactly what a third party has been trying to do. There have also been offers for talks from Sisu which have been turned down by the council.
Astute
Well-Known Member
AFAIK, the document is part of disclosures pertaining to the upcoming JR so they can't be made public by anyone except the owners (e.g. CCC, ACL, Higgs) until they are attached to the skeleton argument / used as evidence.
Obviously ML knows the valuation but can't disclose publicly without falling foul of the law so is trying to get it in the public domain by other means.
Ultimately this is the crux of the whole dispute. ACL's value is lessened without a tenant and CCFC's value is lessened without a lease / asset.
If only there was a way of working this out...
SISU being willing to negotiate would be a good start instead of wasting millions on litigation, millions on interest payments and losing millions on having our club playing in Northampton.
Or are you going to make out that they haven't had good offers already to return?
Rob S
Well-Known Member
I don't think purposely misrepresenting my actions or views are particularly helpful but I will refer the learned gentleman to an answer I made a few minutes ago in another thread
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...han-we-realise?p=704108&viewfull=1#post704108
Astute
Well-Known Member
For the freehold yes. Unencumbered. We know about it. Nothing else though.
Rob S
Well-Known Member
You're wrong. More recently.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I've heard a whisper that both valuations are going to be made public in 3weeks. Remember, you heard it here 1st
Rob S
Well-Known Member
This is from a recent reply in another thread. Feel free to take it as 'the Get Cov Back to the Ricoh position'.
Look, we can spend another endless round of chat arguing who did what and apportioning the correct amount of blame and all agreeing that this is a terrible situation and how bad everything is and so on & so forth.
Or...we can work on the actual solution so that we can see our club playing football in Coventry in the Ricoh.
Sisu don't need to build a new stadium and they can't seriously think that they can get the Ricoh all to themselves at a knock-down price. Conversely, the council can't expect a football club to have any kind of future when they are just paying rent.
The compromise has to be somewhere along the lines of CCFC taking over a decent leasehold on the arena based on proper valuations and some pretty major negotiations so that all other parties involved (Higgs, Compass, other linked businesses) have some satisfaction & recompense.
The freehold remains with the city so the asset is protected, the club have a chance at rebuilding from what looks like a decent start (young local talent, brilliant manager, community-minded development officer etc.) and Sisu can look at moving their investment on. A good side issue would be positioning fan ownership / representation into a future sale.
This would take compromise from all sides, working on trust issues and some pressure will need to be applied and co-ordinated as required.
Otherwise, as long as we are watching the courts more than we are watching the pitch, this will keep dragging on and on and on and on and on and on...you get the picture.
So maybe the word for the day needs to be compromise so that unity can follow..?
[Source: #77]
Look, we can spend another endless round of chat arguing who did what and apportioning the correct amount of blame and all agreeing that this is a terrible situation and how bad everything is and so on & so forth.
Or...we can work on the actual solution so that we can see our club playing football in Coventry in the Ricoh.
Sisu don't need to build a new stadium and they can't seriously think that they can get the Ricoh all to themselves at a knock-down price. Conversely, the council can't expect a football club to have any kind of future when they are just paying rent.
The compromise has to be somewhere along the lines of CCFC taking over a decent leasehold on the arena based on proper valuations and some pretty major negotiations so that all other parties involved (Higgs, Compass, other linked businesses) have some satisfaction & recompense.
The freehold remains with the city so the asset is protected, the club have a chance at rebuilding from what looks like a decent start (young local talent, brilliant manager, community-minded development officer etc.) and Sisu can look at moving their investment on. A good side issue would be positioning fan ownership / representation into a future sale.
This would take compromise from all sides, working on trust issues and some pressure will need to be applied and co-ordinated as required.
Otherwise, as long as we are watching the courts more than we are watching the pitch, this will keep dragging on and on and on and on and on and on...you get the picture.
So maybe the word for the day needs to be compromise so that unity can follow..?
[Source: #77]
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
So have they finally submitted a bid to purchase the lease?
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
I don't think purposely misrepresenting my actions or views are particularly helpful but I will refer the learned gentleman to an answer I made a few minutes ago in another thread
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...han-we-realise?p=704108&viewfull=1#post704108
I expressed an opinion, I still hold it, it is irrelevant if you think you are doing something else, you are not, what i see is that you are supporting SISU & attacking the council/ACL.
I also think it would be very bad indeed for SISU to get hold of the Arena & surrounding land, another owner who will finance development is OK, but SISU are unsuitable.
It would be best for SISU to write off their loses and sell up to someone who wants to run a football club.
Any negotiation which results in SISU still owning the club isn't an outcome I would like to see.
Also, compromise doesn't seem to be a word that is in Joy Seppala's dictionary.
Last edited by a moderator: