OLD OLD OLD OLD OLD NEWS : CET: Deal struck for half of the stadium with Higgs Trust (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter skyblu3sk
- Start date
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
didnt realise we were league 2. I did sleep well last night.
Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2
I'm with Rich 87 on this one.
Despite Recent assertions by Fisher and Waggot regarding Sisus new found commitment to the sky Blues, I'm afraid I still dont trust their motives, I remain convinced that their main Intention is to get their Hands on the Real Estate connected to the Ownership of the Football club.
This would be fine "If" The cash generated from ownership of the "Stadium" was used to Bolster the well Being of the Football Club.
I, like Rich, am concerned that that this deal, would make it possible for Sisu to pull the rug from under CCFC, and then dispose of the Stadium shares at their Convenience.
Lets nor forget that these are Ruthless people, and not in any way commited benefactors of the Football Club.
Sisu remain in my eyes, Wolves in Wolves clothing.
If future events prove me wrong, I'll be more than Happy to retract this post.
Moff
Well-Known Member
Rich as you stated they need the ground to be full to maximise income and that means a decent team on the pitch ....as I dont think they would ever have made the same income on Onye Igwes suggestion of starting a Sky Blue wedding car service to cover the losses :facepalm:
You'll all be crying in 12 months. They had money for the arena but nothing for rent or players. Sisu wanted the arena,they don't give a shit about the football club this has been proven. People saying the revenue streams will make ua stronger on the pitch,no it won't because none of it will go on the pitch.
Black6Osprey
New Member
This is really positive news. Without this deal we are only heading one way. I wish Mutton would piss off though he has no interest in the club only in the councils investment and seeing how they pocketed the land sale money to help with there own budget problems they've done alright out of it.
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
As long as the legal side is sorted and the stadium belongs and can only be sold with the football club its a good thing. Also needs tk work both ways that the football club can't be sold without the stadium share.
hill83
Well-Known Member
You say this with such authority, are you on the inside? Got any breaking news for us?
davebart
Active Member
In my opinion the only thing that was preventing SISU from putting the club in administration was the fact they didn't own the stadium. They would have lost a substantial portion of their £47m if they had done that.
Owning part of the stadium at least means they get their hands on what they wanted all along - the real estate - and no longer have to worry about keeping the club viable.
Owning part of the stadium at least means they get their hands on what they wanted all along - the real estate - and no longer have to worry about keeping the club viable.
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
I would like to know about the councillors vote on the subject. Out of the 54 councillors voting will they just need a majority ie 28.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
great news imo, but gotta feeling the council will veto
Evans020
New Member
Sisu stated they have learned from mistakes, they try buy the stadium and people still moan..they effectively cannot win
Black6Osprey
New Member
What's to cry over, a ground we get fuck all out of but a big bill.
We are doing so great at the moment to be honest its got to be worth the risk. Whether the team improves isn't the point as we are constantly losing money and so surely whatever additional revenue comes in will go towards stemming the leak. Would you rather we just disappeared and then in 12 months time you'd be crying?
Senior Vick from Alicante
Well-Known Member
If the purchase goes through and it is a big iff, the council still have the right to veto, so for those of you out their who think this is a land grab are way off the mark. If revenue is increased fo the club then this is a good thing if it converted to investment on the pitch. This is an opertunity if handled well to put real investment into that area of Coventry, hotels and may be a Cheshire oaks type shopping village would bring investment to the area as well as a jobs to the North of Coventry, increased rooms mean more income for the conferencing side of the business and an outlet type village would give wives and familys something to do on matchdays whilst supporters attend matches as well as bringing in shoppers to the city from places such as Birmingham and Leicester. As i say it needs to be handled correctly, but the other side of the coin is this, Sisu now have 2 choices. Investment could bring great financial rewards for them for their initial outlay but they would have to see it through from planning to fruition and get closer ties with both the people and the Council of the city, Joy Seppalla would have to come out of the shadows and start fronting up. The second choice is this, buying half of an 80 million business for what could be as little as 10 million is good comercial practice and will give her investers back their faith in SISU, they then have to decide wether they want to remain in the football business or sell up and move on as they have a much more saleable asset now. The council who also have a big say in this must do whats best for the city as a whole and not just the football club, they could make all this happen as long as politics dont get involved and common sence rules the day.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
ddint darlington go under?
stupot07
Well-Known Member
The problem is that the deadline on the deal that gives the club first option to buy the ground is approaching, if we don't act soon then then there would be nothing to stop Higgs selling their share to someone else and if that happens we'll never get a stake in the stadium.
johnniericoh
Member
Not sure if it was Ranson, Hoffman or both, but yep, Robins it was suggested was the man.
Hmmm,
1. Deal struck for stadium
2. Robins in as manager, the man Ranson wanted.
3. Ranson and Hoffman at game on Tuesday
4. Elliott and Hoffman raising glasses on Wednesday night.
Come on people, you just know it and you're thinking what I'm thinking!!!!
Sheer coincidence or the grass roots of something spectacular waiting in the wings - I'm with you Otis - get the champers out ??
sky blue john
Well-Known Member
We will be sold off next and the new owners will want to change the colour of our kit ti red !!!
Wink, smiley.
Wink, smiley.
Gaz
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure if I'm right in thinking this, but
I would have thought that it is now harder for someone to come in and buy the club rather than it being easier as Sisu wouldnt sell the 50% of the Ricoh for £10m.
So it would have been cheaper to buy the club before.
Could be wrong of course.
I would have thought that it is now harder for someone to come in and buy the club rather than it being easier as Sisu wouldnt sell the 50% of the Ricoh for £10m.
So it would have been cheaper to buy the club before.
Could be wrong of course.
skyblueman
New Member
Just a few points on this
SISU is buying the 50% share of ACL - this is a company that holds the lease for the stadium
So SISU aren't actually going to own half the stadium just half the lease on it
ACL is a stand-alone company - CCFC pay ACL to use the stadium that is all
How does owning half of ACL benefit the club finanically? ACL's profits won't go to the club but to the ACL shareholders and only if they declare a dividend for the shareholders
So ok a development but I don't really see how it benefits the club any
SISU is buying the 50% share of ACL - this is a company that holds the lease for the stadium
So SISU aren't actually going to own half the stadium just half the lease on it
ACL is a stand-alone company - CCFC pay ACL to use the stadium that is all
How does owning half of ACL benefit the club finanically? ACL's profits won't go to the club but to the ACL shareholders and only if they declare a dividend for the shareholders
So ok a development but I don't really see how it benefits the club any
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
1. Didnt get Ince cause they wouldnt offer him 3 years, then forced to offer Robins 3 years - speculation
2. Club "funded by SISU" for next 3 years, yet never told anyone until the fans forum, despite most fans thinking it was sh1te or bust this season
3. Onye's gone, did we not tell you ?
etc etc
They have learnt NOTHING !
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Not sure if it was Ranson, Hoffman or both, but yep, Robins it was suggested was the man.
Hmmm,
1. Deal struck for stadium
2. Robins in as manager, the man Ranson wanted.
3. Ranson and Hoffman at game on Tuesday
4. Elliott and Hoffman raising glasses on Wednesday night.
Come on people, you just know it and you're thinking what I'm thinking!!!!
Yes, they are all Alien Repliliods.
kg82
Well-Known Member
1. Didnt get Ince cause they wouldnt offer him 3 years, then forced to offer Robins 3 years - speculation
2. Club "funded by SISU" for next 3 years, yet never told anyone until the fans forum, despite most fans thinking it was sh1te or bust this season
3. Onye's gone, did we not tell you ?
etc etc
They have learnt NOTHING !
Seriously, what's the point in even putting number 1? You've even stated it's speculation.
skyblueman
New Member
Seriously I can't see why anyone would get excited about this from a CCFC perspective
ACL will make say £1Million a year profit this year
ACL will make a lot less if the rent goes down - maybe a loss
Even if they make £1M profit a year - every year - and even if CCFC own all the 50% shares of ACL and even if ACL dividend all the profit out every year (which they wouldn't) that would net CCFC £500k a year - ok it helps but when you're running at a £3M loss - it's not going to save you
Even if the club owned ALL of ACL it's still not enough to cover the huge losses
This is not our salvation -
ACL will make say £1Million a year profit this year
ACL will make a lot less if the rent goes down - maybe a loss
Even if they make £1M profit a year - every year - and even if CCFC own all the 50% shares of ACL and even if ACL dividend all the profit out every year (which they wouldn't) that would net CCFC £500k a year - ok it helps but when you're running at a £3M loss - it's not going to save you
Even if the club owned ALL of ACL it's still not enough to cover the huge losses
This is not our salvation -
TheParsonsHose
Member
As long as the ownership of the stadium is kept within the club then this is fine. Hopefully the legals stipulate this.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
The lease is a long one.. 50 years.. with 41 years still to go.. It'll have to be redeveloped before that expires..
Evans020
New Member
Yet they will pay for half the stadium..give it a rest.can't compare not offering ince a 3 year deal to paying 10 mill for an asset that will benefit the club..
1. Didnt get Ince cause they wouldnt offer him 3 years, then forced to offer Robins 3 years - speculation
2. Club "funded by SISU" for next 3 years, yet never told anyone until the fans forum, despite most fans thinking it was sh1te or bust this season
3. Onye's gone, did we not tell you ?
etc etc
They have learnt NOTHING !
It seems they've learned something