Message from Seppala (4 Viewers)

So, £800,000 rather than £400,000. Interesting.

Appreciate the message, but most of it is fluff and happy photos, with a little bit of stuff that we knew already.
Not that I was expecting anything else really.

And on her first set of bullet points;

3) Develop stronger links with the community.


Well, all I can say on that is, that moving out of Coventry would be totally reneging on that promise.



She does sound bullish and if all true does appear to have a point. Now of course we need to see the counter argument from ACL.

1nilandwe... said:

Appreciate the message, but most of it is fluff and happy photos, with a little bit of stuff that we knew already.
Not that I was expecting anything else really.

Click to expand...

'The latest reduced offer from Arena Coventry Limited (ACL) quoted at £400,000, but with the additional business rates and match day costs took the actual cost to over £800,000, shows that ACL are thankfully changing their view on the rent. They are realising that the current rental cost of £1.3 million plus £170,000 in rates are unrealistic for a Football Club now.'


This bit's all new though isn't it. The arguments raging on here have been about Sisu accepting the £400,000 offer. Not in considering the cost to actually be £800,000.

As I say, I await ACL's response.

Very well put across to be honest..nothing wrong with what she said .

Cheers for the heads up. Is this going to sour my tea?

Matchday costs are going to be there whether we own the ground or not.

Does she want acl to pay ccfc for playing there?

Seems fair enough to me and it's staggering to think we are paying six times the average rent! Also interesting that Doncaster local authority reduced the rent from £1M to £17K a year.

All the speculation on here was totally inaccurate it seems. Let's hope they can reach an amicable agreement.

Think the point is though that £400,000 is way beyond our means and that in turn means that £800,000 is just so way out there that there is never ever going to be any way forwards for the club.


We do have to remember though that these kind of people are hard-nosed businessmen and women and are highly skilled at putting out statements trying to assure people that they are in the right.

Nowt wrong in what she has said, just that it is only one side of the story.

A well timed message of joy & happiness received on Christmas Eve (well it is here in Australia), that gives ACL little time before the Boxing Day deadline to muster a response! Well played Joy in a PR sense. ACL will look worse if they close us down now.

I think this is the first time I have ever seen any response from joy. Like the queen a Christmas message to all here loyal subjects

Oh, I agree. I think the CT must have known this and obviously ACL did too. So, for ACL is was good for everyone to think it was an £800K reduction when it now seems it wasn't.

Otis said:

Think the point is though that £400,000 is way beyond our means and that in turn means that £800,000 is just so way out there that there is never ever going to be any way forwards for the club.


We do have to remember though that these kind of people are hard-nosed businessmen and women and are highly skilled at putting out statements trying to assure people that they are in the right.

Nowt wrong in what she has said, just that it is only one side of the story.

Click to expand...

Fair point Torch.

As i say, all the talk on here has been about it costing us £400,000 not £800,000.

Neither are sustainable of course, but £800,000 is just so astronomical and is going to kill the club and very soon too.

Clever words to present the figures in a different manner.

But what is included in ' other match day costs' of £400K ?

Police?
Heating?
Lighting?
Stewards?

Rent is rent.....putting food on the table is not the landlord's responsibility.... Can we have a breakdown of these 'additional costs' please Joy?

Well, fair enough Burbage, but at the end of the day the club need to look at the costs of running this club, not just the rent.

We need to get all costs down to a manageable level.

Very much want to hear the response from ACL so as to balance the arguments.

Even if she did then people on here would be saying "Nah, it doesn't cost that much for policing, etc".

Let's see if ACL deny it.

As Otis pointed out £800K is way to expensive and way beyond our means.

BurbageSkyBlues said:

Rent is rent.....putting food on the table is not the landlord's responsibility.... Can we have a breakdown of these 'additional costs' please Joy?

Click to expand...

TasmanSeaSkyBlue said:

A well timed message of joy & happiness received on Christmas Eve (well it is here in Australia), that gives ACL little time before the Boxing Day deadline to muster a response! Well played Joy in a PR sense. ACL will look worse if they close us down now.

Click to expand...

This mirrored my thoughts. She's laying on the optimism to show how hopeful the future looked before ACL took legal action to enforce the rental agreement. I hope I'm wrong, but I fear administration is more likely after reading that message than before.

Block19 said:

I think this is the first time I have ever seen any response from joy. Like the queen a Christmas message to all here loyal subjects

Click to expand...

Haha yeah, the Queens Speech!

Otis said:

'The latest reduced offer from Arena Coventry Limited (ACL) quoted at £400,000, but with the additional business rates and match day costs took the actual cost to over £800,000, shows that ACL are thankfully changing their view on the rent. They are realising that the current rental cost of £1.3 million plus £170,000 in rates are unrealistic for a Football Club now.'


This bit's all new though isn't it. The arguments raging on here have been about Sisu accepting the £400,000 offer. Not in considering the cost to actually be £800,000.

As I say, I await ACL's response.

Click to expand...

Indeed, amongst the many posts on this sublect I have always said the devil is in the detail, so the rent comes down but other costs go up, that crucially was not reported by the Telegraph, either they were aware and chose not to report it or were not aware and have had their pants pulled down a bit. Either way, the dramatic poll they ran where a majority of fans urged the club to accept the deal is now totally worthless. I wonder what the result of that poll would now fans know a little more?

coundonskyblue said:

Matchday costs are going to be there whether we own the ground or not.

Does she want acl to pay ccfc for playing there?

Click to expand...

it does not sound like that at all, we are still currently paying the matchday costs, however its a point worth making as many on here thought the reduction to 400 k was a good deal, on the face of it it was, however with a bit more detail thrown in its not quite so good.

Interestingly for me is this part, "Recent discussions with the Chairman of Doncaster Rovers revealed that following negotiations with their Council they have now agreed to pay £10,000 a year rent for their stadium and £7,000 for their training complex over the next ten years. No business rates are charged as both facilities are Council owned."

Not so much the reduction thats been agreed by Donny. Its more that Sepalla highlights that they pay no business rates as the stadium and training ground are owned by the council.......

Has anyone seen this Football League rent publication Seppala refers to? I can't find it in the publications section of the Football League's website. I'm trawling google search results and the Football League's news section for a mention of it but I've had no joy (if you'll excuse the pun) so far.

Interesting Doncaster is mentioned. Earlier this season the Doncaster Council signed a 99 year lease for Donny rovers to play at there stadium, which they now run (i.e. Doncaster Rovers are sorta the football club and ACL in one) The difference to our case is the fact we have more than a football stadium, you have the hall as well as the hotel casino etc. I might be going mad here but i get the feeling Joy is trying to ask the question, Can the football club take control of the football side of ACL, leaving ACL to look after there other priorities? It would probably mean the club would still pay a rent, i.e. similar to Doncaster and Forest (who have a very similar agreement) But run the football stadium for Coventry City events. The only problem i see with it is the fact the Council built a very expensive stadium that needs paying off, reading between the lines mentioning trust and keeping promises and mentioning Doncaster as an example it seems to me thats the hint shes giving out!

For reference heres an article on Doncasters agreement http://www.stadia-magazine.com/news.php?NewsID=42390

thing is is she telling the truth ? they never have done before so why should we think this christmas message is true ?

The problem here is all of sisus making. If i took a lesser paid job should i expect my landlord to lower my rent. They are money people and he they resolve this problem the next one will be just around the corner. We need them to go

'thanks for your support during the bleakest period in the clubs history and Happy Christmas' might have been a nice addition......out of touch

Joy: Doncaster pay £10,000 rent.
What you also need to know: The council basically wanted to give it away as they were going to have to budget for a £300,000 loss. Who takes that on? If, as seems likely, it is the club you can add another £300,000 to the sum the club is having to find to run the stadium.
Not so cheap now eh?

Sources:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-18084129
And
http://www.southyorkshiretimes.co.u...rovers-score-keepmoat-stadium-lease-1-4880576

Lord_Nampil said:

Interesting Doncaster is mentioned. Earlier this season the Doncaster Council signed a 99 year lease for Donny rovers to play at there stadium, which they now run (i.e. Doncaster Rovers are sorta the football club and ACL in one) The difference to our case is the fact we have more than a football stadium, you have the hall as well as the hotel casino etc. I might be going mad here but i get the feeling Joy is trying to ask the question, Can the football club take control of the football side of ACL, leaving ACL to look after there other priorities? It would probably mean the club would still pay a rent, i.e. similar to Doncaster and Forest (who have a very similar agreement) But run the football stadium for Coventry City events. The only problem i see with it is the fact the Council built a very expensive stadium that needs paying off, reading between the lines mentioning trust and keeping promises and mentioning Doncaster as an example it seems to me thats the hint shes giving out!

For reference heres an article on Doncasters agreement http://www.stadia-magazine.com/news.php?NewsID=42390

Click to expand...

Be interesting if they can separate the two. Trouble is, the money is to be made from the other ventures not from the football side of things.

Joy (The american),, this has always worried me and then when i hear TF callling the club a Brand/Franchise is another problem for me.. These people don't have any problem with moving clubs to different locations and don't care if fans are left behind... If SISU don't get what they want they will be off and without a care or thought for a fresh faced sky blue or long standing fan.

And while Sisu have deliberately mismanaged to get to this bargaining point and some still believe they are right and can be trusted.. Getting the best deal for the club in SISU'S eyes might not mean in this city!!!, so be careful what you wish for. As for Joy coming out,, i could sit next to her and not know who she was, but she wants me to believe her... No chance and will never agree that SISU are right and have been good for this club.....

First off i welcome that JS has decided to communicate for a change.

Doesnt change what is actually going on - but you can choose which you believe

Think we all want the rent lower. A lower rent has been on offer for months. JS chooses to keep challenging it as is her right. I actually do not have a problem with that. Still maintain there is more to it than that though

Rates - rates reductions for football clubs are generally given based on regular community usage of the facilities concerned. The criteria under which such reductions are given are set down. The council i assume could make special cases but they have to trust that the rate payer. Have heard no reports of Doncaster witholding rent payments, and interestingly they were paying £1m for a 15k seater stadium, i suspect there is more to the Doncaster deal than just the facts here, should imagine there are other commitments given that will cost them.

Other match day costs - well whether they pay it as tenant or owner then they will pay it - continued reference to it onlt muddies the waters.

First team funding - cant argue new players havent been brought in, cant argue MR hasnt got them playing. Has that player budget been well spent and managed ?

Funding for the academy - the finances have been arranged to gain the benefit of £500k football grant i would guess, having been involved in grant applications a lot of it is about how you allocate costs to it, it doesnt necessarily mean new finance provided. But there might be new finance we will never actually know for sure

links to the community - the fans feel more linked to the club because we are winning, that to any fan is the most important thing. The other links have been by SBITC which is a charity established 2008 with no significant funding from CCFC. Make your own minds up

Will we get a response from ACL - you know what I wouldnt respond. No need to it only ramps up the word of words. I also thought the club said they would be conducting negotiations in private from now on :thinking about:Joys message will die quicker for ACL if they ignore it. It doesnt actually change the actions that ACL have to make a decision on so why say anything

I know this comes over as anti SISU - it isnt trying to be as such. There are two sides to every arguement. Just pointing to another way of looking at it.

We all want the rent down....... but i am still of the opinion that it isnt what is actually going on here. This is just more PR

Finally Happy Christmas JS ....... nice of you to wish us the same in your "Christmas message" ...... oh my mistake you didnt

Sky Blues said:

Joy: Doncaster pay £10,000 rent.
What you also need to know: The council basically wanted to give it away as they were going to have to budget for a £300,000 loss. Who takes that on? If, as seems likely, it is the club you can add another £300,000 to the sum the club is having to find to run the stadium.
Not so cheap now eh?

Sources:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-18084129
And
http://www.southyorkshiretimes.co.u...rovers-score-keepmoat-stadium-lease-1-4880576

Click to expand...

Yes it's much cheaper. Doncaster for taking it on see then given fu rights to benefit from any additional profits.

Joyless now tells us match day costs are £400k - Fisher made a great play of telling us the club was generously paying 10k a game to cover match day costs eg £230k - does that mean in effect the ACL have been covering the shortfall and in effect paying for CCFC to play at the Ricoh?

Sounds like more smoke and mirrors from SISU - guess some things don't change. Just admit what the real game is Joy and lets then debate whether it would be good for the stadium complex to be in the hands of a hedgefund. I know honesty and openness are words you'll probably have to look up to discover their meaning but try it might be refreshing for you - you talk about new starts, there is one for you.

oldskyblue58 said:

Funding for the academy - the finances have been arranged to gain the benefit of £500k football grant i would guess, having been involved in grant applications a lot of it is about how you allocate costs to it, it doesnt necessarily mean new finance provided. But there might be new finance we will never actually know for sure

Click to expand...

Didn't they say this summer that £500,000 from the sale of Bigi was going to the getting the Academy category 2 status, as well as the grant?

Grendel said:

Yes it's much cheaper. Doncaster for taking it on see then given fu rights to benefit from any additional profits.

Click to expand...

I know what you're saying, but I was just picking out one little detail Joy overlooked to illustrate that not everything is as clear cut as she makes out. Unless we have the two complete reports of incomings and outgoings we can't make a fair comparison.

Otis said:

And on her first set of bullet points;

3) Develop stronger links with the community.


Well, all I can say on that is, that moving out of Coventry would be totally reneging on that promise.

Click to expand...

To be fair they never said which community