Not many will agree with me, but :- (1 Viewer)

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Frankly I'll be much happier if the Arena ownership and Club are kept separate, that situation doesn't exclude the club from getting a share of match day income but it does prevent another Bryan Richardson type figure emerging and "taking a punt" with it.

I would be happiest with ACL breaking even, and no more; continuing to develop other income streams to bring additional revenue to the table and to reinvest this back into their portfolio. If the council's involvement helps this, then that's fine by me. Rather a return to the council's coffers than a commercial bank's shareholders.

I would then like to see a fair rental applied to the football club; this being consummate with the percentage of the costs incurred for their tenancy of the complex. So, the more successful ACL are, the better revenues they generate and the less CCFC pay for the use of the stadium on match-days. Such would be a true spirit of cooperation. Match-day income, wherever possible, should also be shared with the football club; thereby increasing turnover and helping the ravishes of the Financial Fair Play rulings.

It could be - and should be - a win:win:win situation.

However, a couple of comments. Whoever runs the club; be that SISU or anyone else for that matter, needs to get the finances in check. To have this fall out over the rent of the whole stadium, whilst allegedly offering McGoldrick £500K+ per annum as a loss-making third-tier club, just shows how removed football finances in many instances fall from reality.

The second comment being that the above being reached via mutually respectful, open and cooperative negotiation. Not that which has prevailed in recent times

 

---

[italiahorse]

If I bought a £40M business with money I had and the business was failing. If it was costing me £10M a year to keep it going I would put into place the following 10 year Business plan.

- Write off the initial investment and liquidate. If possible write off the initial investment against other profits in the business, essentially saving paying tax on the profitable side of the business.
- At that point I would be saving £10M every year.
- In 10 years time I have saved £100M.

Simple

 

[Black6Osprey]

I think its
a: carry on as now, cost cutting and bumping along and hoping by some miracle that MR can get promotion on a shoestring that will get even thinner
b: refuse to pay rent and be forced into liquidation by ACL and get their ARVO money (not more than £1m)
c: sell up at a price above liquidation but well below what they have invested. Maybe £2m-£5m

You say carry on cost cutting and bumping along. What would be different if someone else took over? Our wage budget is currently just about the max we can get away with due to the FFP rules and we still wouldn't own anything.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I think its
a: carry on as now, cost cutting and bumping along and hoping by some miracle that MR can get promotion on a shoestring that will get even thinner
b: refuse to pay rent and be forced into liquidation by ACL and get their ARVO money (not more than £1m)
c: sell up at a price above liquidation but well below what they have invested. Maybe £2m-£5m

Shoestring budget!? We have one of the biggest in the league...

 

[Bill Glazier]

Why does Sisu have no chance of buying the half share? This is what PKBH of Higgs has to say: 'Some of you may even feel that this would be a sensible time for Sisu to make a realistic offer to assume the Charity’s share.

Again our position is unchanged. The trustees are proud to be part of ACL and we’re committed to the Arena for as long as it takes. We won’t be bullied or harassed by anyone trying to take our share in the business for less than its true value. But, if any third party makes a sensible and realistic offer, then we will of course give it the consideration it merits.'

Sounds like they're more than happy to do business with Sisu, but only if Seppala behaves nicely.