dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
For ACL ? I thought that was for the Ricoh?
Maths (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter dongonzalos
- Start date
For ACL ? I thought that was for the Ricoh?
Como
Well-Known Member
You do need to posses a calculator or have access to the accounts to work out that impossibility.
It only works if you have a source of investment that is not looking for a real return, a Hedge Fund is not an obvious contender.
I think they have taken the initiative. A valuation require a due diligence. For that you need access to the accounts, contracts and everything legal.
As no part trust the other a valuation should be made by independent consultants. preferably by two independent consultants - one appointed by each.
CCC says no.
A price the parties can agree.
If they buy the shares in ACL and get a 99yr long lease it's practical the same as owning the Ricoh ... only the bricks and mortar is still owned by CCC.
But the club and stadium will be united under the same owner (SBS&L) and all revenue 360 days/yr will belong to the club and count towards the FFP.
Two things -
1) Forget the 120m building cost. What the club need is owning the revenue generated at the Ricoh. Owning ACL will accomplish this. So the club need to buy the shares in ACL. Then they need a very long lease (99yr or even 120yr). The real sticking point is what price CCC will set on their shares in ACL and the price they will ask for the long lease.
2) We have established the club need the revenue and profit from the stadium. We have established building a new stadium is not the best solution. That leaves the ONLY long term viable solution - ACL owned by SBS&L.
So the question is - do we accept CCC's objection to the only long term solution that will see the club have a shot of returning to Premier league?
Or should blind hate to the current owners condemn us to forever play in the next best leagues.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
So why is Joy saying freehold only?
I think that is posturing. She is taking an extreme position giving room for negotiation.
She is in no hurry - she is not too concerned about us playing at Sixfields.
She is counting on the upcoming JR - if they win her position will be much stronger.
It shouldn't really be the outcome of the JR that determines the future of our club.
So CCC needs to enter into negotiation, agree to sell their shares in ACL and to extend the lease to 99yr or more. All at a fair price set by independent valuation.
Then maybe(!) one condition CCC could push through is sisu dropping the JR.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
It is costing her every month though.
In addition ACL are trying desperately to get other business. If they succeed or SISU lose the JR. That is expensive posturing.
Not sure when AL came in JS did not take the olive branch then and do the deal if that us what she wanted.
Can't help but think that was never in the cards and distressing ACL was always and is always the only plan
Good.
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.
covmark
Well-Known Member
Where do you get a loyalty to sisu from?? Who says the Ricoh should be given to sisu??
As for your last comment, well I suppose staying at sixfields is what you would prefer??
Read his reply's. Never a bad word for sisu. All this bollocks about buying acl and that lucas never offered an olive branch.
The Ricoh isn't for sale to sisu and thank god for that.
Why should everything go sisu's way?
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.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Keep hearing this but no one ever explains why.
Also, I would take 3rd tier football in Coventry over top flight football somewhere out in the sticks every time.
You've never tried to get them out.
Get to the top level? You're having a laugh right?
That requires investment. Something sisu will never do.
According to our resident forensic accountant they have secured investment of some £30m+ till now.
Returning to top level football require a competitive FFP level. That is only possible with the club owning the revenue of ACL.
They've had over 6 years to do something about it.
Sisu are up the creek without a paddle. Tough shit.
They won't get their investment back. Ever.
Fine. I think we can all live with that.
But what about our club?
We need ACL as part of the club - no matter who owns the club.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
I would be delighted if the club purchased acl. Why don't they put in an offer?
And by offer I mean a fair market price done properly and professionally. Not the normal. blackmail and intimidation that we have seen from sisu.
And for me that's the major part of why i can't stand them. Sisu seem to think they have the divine right to anything. They don't care who or what gets in the way.
They disgust me.
Hopefully sisu will throw the towel in after they lose the judicial review. The new owner can then treat other partieswith respect and gain acl and the stadium.
Sisu are a busted flush in Coventry. Nobody apart from the traitor garlick will do business with them.
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.
Who do you think will be the new owner if sisu decides to walk should they lose the JR?
My favourite (I don't mean they are my preferred new owners, but the most likely!) is ARVO - will that make you any happier?
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Sisu had all that in the palm of their hand. Higgs wanted to sell and the club had an agreed formula to buy it.
Unfortunately someone then decided to liquidate the club, losing the automatic right to that agreed formula.
As for getting a valuation, what if the valuation doesn't meet what the council value the Ricoh at in their accounts?
Selling below that would mean a loss from the councils point of view. Should public funds be used to correct the mistakes of an incompetent hedge fund?
thaiskyblue
New Member
who are Arvo ?, is it another sisu disguise ?
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Our debt free club effectively owe money to Arvo.
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!
The club is not debt free and haven't been for a few years. We owe around £10m to an external creditor - ARVO - who hold a charge over all assets.
ARVO could well be controlled by sisu, but we don't know.
In any case - my point is that if sisu walks, they will most likely be replaced by ARVO - who could actually be sisu or partly sisu.
What then? Are we then any happier? Will the world look any brighter?
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Are you saying every valuation of a business is always the same? If that's the case why is there a need for two valuations?
Oh I am pretty sure the results will be very much the same.
But nobody trust sisu - certainly ccc do not trust sisu - and so nobody would give any credence to a valuation made by sisu's appointed expert.
I am sure sisu don't trust ccc either - so a call for two valuations is not bad in my opinion.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
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?
Last edited:
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
You can do a valuation without access to all of that, happens all the time. You make an offer based on what you believe it is worth but make the offer conditional based on the results of due diligence being satisfactoty and / or any other conditions you want to put in.
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?
