Maths (1 Viewer)

chiefdave · Mar 2, 2014

Godiva said:
The sentence in bold ... that's what I believe they've done. They want to buy at a price found by two consultants each doing a full due diligence.
What is the answer from CCC? Anybody know?

I wasn't aware of a formal offer being submitted by SISU. Do you know how much they offered? I believe if, as you suggest, an offer has been made it has to go to a full council vote, the results of which would be available for us to examine. It is not for Ann Lucas, or anyone else involved for that matter, to dismiss an offer without following the correct process.

Have to say I welcome this move from SISU. They have repeatedly stated that the council refuse to sell without much in the way of evidence to back it up, making a formal offer will force the council into making a formal response.

DazzleTommyDazzle · Mar 2, 2014

Godiva said:
Surely the ccc's accounts show the real value of ACL? Otherwise you are accusing them of ... ehm ...creative bookkeeping. In any case - if their books shows a false value it should be corrected independently of any outside circumstances!

Depends what you mean by "real value".

The figure in the accounts will be the cost of the investment (subject to any diminution test) - this may or may not bear any resemblance to realiseable value.

Astute · Mar 2, 2014

Godiva said:
Ann Lucas never offered an olive branch, did she? A new rental agreement is out of the question if we want to return to top flight football. A new rental agreement is all Ann Lucas has ever suggested.

I think it is unlikely sisu can distress ACL. Even if ACL need to replace their £14m loan it should be possible - at a higher interest yes, but nothing that should endanger the profitability. Of course the presumption is based on ACL telling truth about being able to live and thrive without the club.

But I think it is beside the point and also quite out of our hands. What is the point is how the club can get back to the top flight in our lifetime.

And why is this? Would love an explanation. The majority of football clubs rent their ground. Does this mean that the majority of football clubs won't get into the Prem?

So they could have had rent free this season and 100k the next two. This would have given SISU at least an extra 5m. They could have sorted out our defence and got backup for the strike force with some of this money. This would have got us promoted which is said to be worth about 5m a season. We would get 12k to 15k in the Championship. And maybe much more if we played like we did until we lost our strikers and were winning and near the playoffs.

stupot07 · Mar 2, 2014

Astute said:
And why is this? Would love an explanation. The majority of football clubs rent their ground. Does this mean that the majority of football clubs won't get into the Prem?

So they could have had rent free this season and 100k the next two. This would have given SISU at least an extra 5m. They could have sorted out our defence and got backup for the strike force with some of this money. This would have got us promoted which is said to be worth about 5m a season. We would get 12k to 15k in the Championship. And maybe much more if we played like we did until we lost our strikers and were winning and near the playoffs.

How would it have given sisu an extra £5m? Our ticket revenue with 16.5k + cup games was only £3.7m.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Astute · Mar 2, 2014

stupot07 said:
How would it have given sisu an extra £5m? Our ticket revenue with 16.5k + cup games was only £3.7m.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Rent free for half a season and two seasons at 100k. Gates of 10k upwards against gates of about 2k and rent said to be 200k.

Jack Griffin · Mar 2, 2014

Godiva said:
It seems pretty clear we can't force sisu out. Every trick in the book has been tested - and sisu are still here.

I'd rather we returned to the Ricoh owning ACL and start moving back to top level football.

The key issues here are time, profit or loss and what the football league will allow, Otium will certainly hang out at Sixfields for 3 more years if loses are not great, in that time I fully expect the cub to go down to division 4 because that may allow it to be run at break even and they are not going to put in any more money than required.

After 3 years there comes a pinch point and the football league have to take a position. Till then I don't think there will be a land deal, just talk about one. But if there is any land deal it may or may not be for a development that includes a stadium, land will be bought for more than just a stadium, it has to be or a stadium project is not viable. A 60acre site would include lots of other stuff, only 15-20 of it is needed for a stadium.

I can't see either party giving in or the Ricoh not remaining a possibility before 3 years are up, after that who knows, could go either way.

Jack Griffin · Mar 2, 2014

Godiva said:
To make an offer you need a valuation. To find a valuation you need access to the full and present accounts as well as contracts and other legal obligations ... a due diligence. That require acceptance from ACL.

Isn't that what sisu is asking?
Let two independent consultants one appointed by sisu and one by CCC/ACL each perform a due diligence and calculate the value. Make their findings public. Let the average of the two valuations be the selling price.

Sounds fair to me.

But CCC won't have it.
That's why we're no closer to home.

Will SISU allow the same process to take place on Sky Blue Sports & Leisure group of companies so that prospective buyers willing to bring back the club to the Ricoh on a rental agreement can make an offer for the club?

What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

chiefdave · Mar 2, 2014

stupot07 said:
How would it have given sisu an extra £5m? Our ticket revenue with 16.5k + cup games was only £3.7m.

Hard to know an exact figure but an addional 14-15K (based off your 16.5K figure) for 23 league games + addional revenues (increased merchandise sales, program sales, that sort of thing) + corporate (not much in the way of corporate facilities at Sixfields) + advertising & sponsorship (both of which are pretty much non existent at Sixfields) - increased matchday costs is going to equal a pretty significant increase I would have thought.

stupot07 · Mar 2, 2014

Astute said:
Rent free for half a season and two seasons at 100k. Gates of 10k upwards against gates of about 2k and rent said to be 200k.

Apologies, thought you meant one season.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

stupot07 · Mar 2, 2014

chiefdave said:
Hard to know an exact figure but an addional 14-15K (based off your 16.5K figure) for 23 league games + addional revenues (increased merchandise sales, program sales, that sort of thing) + corporate (not much in the way of corporate facilities at Sixfields) + advertising & sponsorship (both of which are pretty much non existent at Sixfields) - increased matchday costs is going to equal a pretty significant increase I would have thought.

We wouldn't be getting 16-17k back at the Ricoh in league one, more like the 10-11k maybe 12k.

No one can argue against the short term finances, we would be significantly better off in the short term under a short term rental deal.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

torchomatic · Mar 2, 2014

If it was the semi-final of the JPT with a chance of a Wembley appearance then they'd come out of the woodwork and start queuing round the block.

rupert_bear said:
Yep I can see the likes of Stevenage, Crawley, Shrewsbury, Crewe, Carlisle all being sell outs. Queuing round the block I reckon

ohitsaidwalker king power · Mar 2, 2014

stupot07 said:
We wouldn't be getting 16-17k back at the Ricoh in league one, more like the 10-11k maybe 12k.

No one can argue against the short term finances, we would be significantly better off in the short term under a short term rental deal.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Some do though Stu...

dongonzalos · Mar 2, 2014

torchomatic said:
If it was the semi-final of the JPT with a chance of a Wembley appearance then they'd come out of the woodwork and start queuing round the block.

Not one who normally does this but even I have to

Yawn..........

DazzleTommyDazzle · Mar 2, 2014

torchomatic said:
If it was the semi-final of the JPT with a chance of a Wembley appearance then they'd come out of the woodwork and start queuing round the block.

Can this be the same Torchomatic who posted "you're a stuck record" on another thread this afternoon?

dongonzalos · Mar 2, 2014

DazzleTommyDazzle said:
Can this be the same Torchomatic who posted "you're a stuck record" on another thread this afternoon?

You are kidding me.

DazzleTommyDazzle · Mar 2, 2014

dongonzalos said:
You are kidding me.

Match thread - page 2

wingy · Mar 2, 2014

wingy said:
Winkleman supposed to be minted Isn't he?
He's either putting In as equity or loading in as loan, I'guess at the latter ,you're right about the ffp bit.

bigfatronssba said:
Our debt free club effectively owe money to Arvo.

dongonzalos said:
The real value is a combination of what the item is worth and what someone is prepared to pay and just as importantly what a person is prepared to sell it for.

A house maybe worth 50000.

A property developer may need it as the final piece to finish their project.

The owner may have been considering selling it and invited offers.

The developer then may have met the owner looked like they were going to buy it for 60000.
Then they started playing games. They do not see the deal through.

In the meantime by flattening all the other houses and building a factory an independent estate agent would say the property is now only worth 30000 because of the surroundings have changed.

This upsets the owner and animosity between the two ensues.

Now the owner who did previously consider going is of the mindset I don't want to sell to them. Yet no one else is bidding. The owner is not desperate to move but in an ideal world they would. However after the little spat with the property developers it will take something decent to thaw the hostility.

For the property developers they either pay a bit above the current lowed value (due to their actions).

Or they start again and buy more land and build a new factory.

So maybe instead of paying a million elsewhere. They will have to go back to Mr Smith and offer the at least the original price for his house before they started playing games and trying to get it off him on the cheap?

shmmeee said:
Has anyone got the figures from the last accounts?

Did some figures with BSB Simone of the Business/Board threads last year that are taken down now where we thought Turnover would have been £6.5 -£7M with a player budget of around £4M for this season. Not scientific of course but extrapolated from an extrapolation from the last books available, sure OSB could forensically project from those.

Huckerby · Mar 2, 2014

i like maths

wingy · Mar 2, 2014

wingy said:
Winkleman supposed to be minted Isn't he?
He's either putting In as equity or loading in as loan, I'guess at the latter ,you're right about the ffp bit.

bigfatronssba said:
Our debt free club effectively owe money to Arvo.

dongonzalos said:
The real value is a combination of what the item is worth and what someone is prepared to pay and just as importantly what a person is prepared to sell it for.

A house maybe worth 50000.

A property developer may need it as the final piece to finish their project.

The owner may have been considering selling it and invited offers.

The developer then may have met the owner looked like they were going to buy it for 60000.
Then they started playing games. They do not see the deal through.

In the meantime by flattening all the other houses and building a factory an independent estate agent would say the property is now only worth 30000 because of the surroundings have changed.

This upsets the owner and animosity between the two ensues.

Now the owner who did previously consider going is of the mindset I don't want to sell to them. Yet no one else is bidding. The owner is not desperate to move but in an ideal world they would. However after the little spat with the property developers it will take something decent to thaw the hostility.

For the property developers they either pay a bit above the current lowed value (due to their actions).

Or they start again and buy more land and build a new factory.

So maybe instead of paying a million elsewhere. They will have to go back to Mr Smith and offer the at least the original price for his house before they started playing games and trying to get it off him on the cheap?

wingy said:
Did some figures with BSB Simone of the Business/Board threads last year that are taken down now where we thought Turnover would have been £6.5 -£7M with a player budget of around £4M for this season. Not scientific of course but extrapolated from an extrapolation from the last books available, sure OSB could forensically project from those.

Edit. Response to scchhmmee

shmmeee · Mar 2, 2014

wingy said:
Did some figures with BSB Simone of the Business/Board threads last year that are taken down now where we thought Turnover would have been £6.5 -£7M with a player budget of around £4M for this season. Not scientific of course but extrapolated from an extrapolation from the last books available, sure OSB could forensically project from those.

Is that assuming playing at The Ricoh this season on a 10k crowd?

wingy · Mar 2, 2014

wingy said:
Winkleman supposed to be minted Isn't he?
He's either putting In as equity or loading in as loan, I'guess at the latter ,you're right about the ffp bit.

bigfatronssba said:
Our debt free club effectively owe money to Arvo.

dongonzalos said:
The real value is a combination of what the item is worth and what someone is prepared to pay and just as importantly what a person is prepared to sell it for.

A house maybe worth 50000.

A property developer may need it as the final piece to finish their project.

The owner may have been considering selling it and invited offers.

The developer then may have met the owner looked like they were going to buy it for 60000.
Then they started playing games. They do not see the deal through.

In the meantime by flattening all the other houses and building a factory an independent estate agent would say the property is now only worth 30000 because of the surroundings have changed.

This upsets the owner and animosity between the two ensues.

Now the owner who did previously consider going is of the mindset I don't want to sell to them. Yet no one else is bidding. The owner is not desperate to move but in an ideal world they would. However after the little spat with the property developers it will take something decent to thaw the hostility.

For the property developers they either pay a bit above the current lowed value (due to their actions).

Or they start again and buy more land and build a new factory.

So maybe instead of paying a million elsewhere. They will have to go back to Mr Smith and offer the at least the original price for his house before they started playing games and trying to get it off him on the cheap?

shmmeee said:
Is that assuming playing at The Ricoh this season on a 10k crowd?

Yes. an estimation based on the last published accounts which are what two years old now, projected down from gates relative to those books which would have been based on crowds of circa 15K
The difference I had with OSB at the time was he correctly thought overheads were higher, I thought we were much closer to break even,that is how I came to the conclusion we are £3M worse off turnover wise this season.

shmmeee · Mar 2, 2014

wingy said:
Yes. an estimation based on the last published accounts which are what two years old now, projected down from gates relative to those books which would have been based on crowds of circa 15K
The difference I had with OSB at the time was he correctly thought overheads were higher, I thought we were much closer to break even,that is how I came to the conclusion we are £3M worse off turnover wise this season.

Thing is a lower gate would mean lower everything else, less advertising money, less merchandise, less corporate. We could easily be at half the figure for 15k even if we were back in three years, which isn't looking likely.

wingy · Mar 2, 2014

wingy said:
Winkleman supposed to be minted Isn't he?
He's either putting In as equity or loading in as loan, I'guess at the latter ,you're right about the ffp bit.

bigfatronssba said:
Our debt free club effectively owe money to Arvo.

dongonzalos said:
The real value is a combination of what the item is worth and what someone is prepared to pay and just as importantly what a person is prepared to sell it for.

A house maybe worth 50000.

A property developer may need it as the final piece to finish their project.

The owner may have been considering selling it and invited offers.

The developer then may have met the owner looked like they were going to buy it for 60000.
Then they started playing games. They do not see the deal through.

In the meantime by flattening all the other houses and building a factory an independent estate agent would say the property is now only worth 30000 because of the surroundings have changed.

This upsets the owner and animosity between the two ensues.

Now the owner who did previously consider going is of the mindset I don't want to sell to them. Yet no one else is bidding. The owner is not desperate to move but in an ideal world they would. However after the little spat with the property developers it will take something decent to thaw the hostility.

For the property developers they either pay a bit above the current lowed value (due to their actions).

Or they start again and buy more land and build a new factory.

So maybe instead of paying a million elsewhere. They will have to go back to Mr Smith and offer the at least the original price for his house before they started playing games and trying to get it off him on the cheap?

shmmeee said:
Thing is a lower gate would mean lower everything else, less advertising money, less merchandise, less corporate. We could easily be at half the figure for 15k even if we were back in three years, which isn't looking likely.

What was the last published Turnover £14-£15M?
Relegation +drop off. of 5000 led me to. Circa £8M reduction fairly crude, yes.

dongonzalos · Mar 2, 2014

So am I right at the conclusion of the thread the general feeling is.
SISU will not get a return for their investors by building a stadium and selling it and the club in the future.
Also it would take over 100 years for SISU to clear the debts via profit made on a year by year basis that may come as a result of owning your own stadium?

Why the bloody hell have the FL or this consultation group not asked for an explanation for this then

martcov · Mar 2, 2014

Godiva said:
To make an offer you need a valuation. To find a valuation you need access to the full and present accounts as well as contracts and other legal obligations ... a due diligence. That require acceptance from ACL.

Isn't that what sisu is asking?
Let two independent consultants one appointed by sisu and one by CCC/ACL each perform a due diligence and calculate the value. Make their findings public. Let the average of the two valuations be the selling price.

Sounds fair to me.

But CCC won't have it.
That's why we're no closer to home.

Why? Joy must have an idea. She majored in real estate. CCC have an idea - they have people on the Board at ACL. Joy is playing a waiting game. She is not interested in soccer and her priorities are family and investors. She has to make a bid. CCC are not obliged to sell anything.

stupot07 · Mar 2, 2014

wingy said:
What was the last published Turnover £14-£15M?
Relegation +drop off. of 5000 led me to. Circa £8M reduction fairly crude, yes.

The administrators report said £9.5m for the relegation season, but I'm sure OSB said it was about £10.3m not long ago.

Can't find that post but did find this:

He shows turnover figures for the year ending 31 May 2011 as £10.267m. In the sentence underneath it states "Management accounts for the year ended 31 May 2012 disclose that the Company's turnover for the year amounted £9,407,018, net of VAT,

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Maths (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Huckerby

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency