Rent - Want the best for CCFC = quick agreement (1 Viewer)

[dongonzalos]

The idea that if you want the best for CCFC you will want SISU to get their own way regarding this negotiation, does not seem correct to me.

I think if you want the best for CCFC you will just want the club to come to an agreement as quick as possible. SISU staunchly refusing to compromise will not achieve that.
SISU say they can afford the rent. So if they do compromise above 200k this will have little adverse affect on CCFC.
If it is true and correct that if ACL fall below 400k they will become insolvent. This could adversley affect CCFC as they may issue a winding up order to avoid becoming insolvent itself.

I think if you want the best for CCFC as a fan you will want a deal to be struck.

I think the greatest chance of a deal getting struck is if SISU now compromise. This is what normally happens in business deals. Two people have an expectation both compromise somewhat and a deal is struck.

If it is correct that ACL can't move any further, then the quickest way this will get resolved is by SISU forgoing the extra £16000 a month they think they can save.
Accept that they have done well to save £100000 a month from what they have previously saved and accept the deal on the table.

I think if you want what for best for Coventry City Football club. Then promotion this season is best. This needs no off field disruptions or transfer embargo's, winding up statements. The club having to remove half season ticket deals, etc.....

It needs a feel good factor agreement the perception from the outside we are a financially secure happy club.

So as a fan of CCFC, putting CCFC first I want a quick deal struck.

SISU please accept the deal and do what is best for CCFC.
Focus on trying to remove deadwood from the squad that may also provide us with the 16k a month and put is in a much healthier position for the FFP conditions.

 

---

[kg82]

I know this is an on-going debate but couldn't this have been put in one of the many other threads currently going?

 

[dongonzalos]

I know this is an on-going debate but couldn't this have been put in one of the many other threads currently going?

The other ones have transcended into a pro SISU, Anti SISU Farce, Ray Ranson etc etc

I just wanted a thread discussing the rent and the how this should get resolved the quickest and for it to stay on topic

 

[kg82]

And this will do exactly the same.

 

[dongonzalos]

And this will do exactly the same.

Probably, worth a try though

Hopefully we will discuss just the rent and not ray ransons dogs name.

Do think the quickest solution now and probably the easiest to happen would be for SISU to compromise.

 

[lordsummerisle]

I used to really like Hot Shot Hamish when i was a kid.

 

[kg82]

To be honest, I've not taken much interest in this side of the club recently because I read about it on here, and these threads have ended up becoming a farce, as you said. So I've taken to ignoring them! I want it to get sorted, of course. I don't want it to jeopardise our season and the sooner it's sorted the better. I'm not in to this whole "sides" thing either. The only side I support is CCFC.

 

[blueflint]

i support the sky blues but cant condone the actions of sisu nobody i ever dealt with negotiated the way they do

 

[dongonzalos]

I used to really like Hot Shot Hamish when i was a kid.

And me to be honest.
However stop side tracking the thread.

Do you think the quickest way this would get sorted is if SISU now compromised.

 

[Grendel]

And me to be honest.
However stop side tracking the thread.

Do you think the quickest way this would get sorted is if SISU now compromised.

Of course it would be the quickest. Would it be the best? Have to see and judge after the event.

 

[Tank Top]

Nice Post Dongo
There's a certain ammount of Moral high ground here, and for my own part, I can still tell right from wrong. Its wrong for sIsu to agree to the rent at takeover time and then refuse to pay it five years later, there's no doubt that the rent is too high for our status, ACL have recognised this and offered a large reduction and certain other bits and pieces, but SISU have rejected the offer, and it is now a case of the tenant Dictating the rent to the landlord, any reduction should be agreed, and it appears that ACL are flexible but not SISU, its almost as if they are daring ACL into a court Action, they have pre planned something or other in order to embarrass the financial integrity of ACL, perhaps some one could enlighten me, i can't work it out, other than to say it looks as if SISU are trying to Draw ACL into a situation that would damage the club, with ACL taking the blame, with some posters turning away from ACL, its worth remembering that it was only the intervention of The Council and the Higgs trust that got the stadium Built, wher'e would we be without them, not at Highfield Road, that was already sold.
How can anyone align their loyalty, with A financial Pirate ship, And turn against the local council and a Childrens Charity, who took a considerable Gamble on Bailing out the Foundering Stadium Project, a little loyalty wouldn't go amiss.

 

[Paxman II]

Nice to know SISU can always call on your expertise Dongonzalos?

 

[dongonzalos]

Nice to know SISU can always call on your expertise Dongonzalos?

If they did Paxman
The deal would be done tonight.

I would have a 5 year incentivised contract drawn up

Every year SISU achieve certain mutually agreed objectives.

They het the option to buy a percentage if the stadium at a discounted price.

Each year they do this the rent comes down.

 

[Grendel]

If they did Paxman
The deal would've done tonight.

I would have a 5 year incentivised contract drawn up

Every year SISU achieve certain mutually agreed objectives.

They het the option to buy a percentage if the stadium at a discounted price.

Each year they do this the rent comes down.

Thank god your not negotiating then. To even suggest a private organisation has to meet objectives agreed with the buffoons at the council is just laughable.

 

[dongonzalos]

Of course it would be the quickest. Would it be the best? Have to see and judge after the event.

If you take the stance you only care about CCFC

Then unless we can't survive without 16k a month.

Then a quick agreement has to be best

 

[dongonzalos]

Thank god your not negotiating then. To even suggest a private organisation has to meet objectives agreed with the buffoons at the council is just laughable.

They are already doing what you call laughable read Joy's last statement.

 

[WillieStanley]

In the past, I've always found that the best decisions are made in haste.

 

[mark82]

Does everyone understand why the stadium has become such an issue for SISU this year as opposed to 5 years ago... It's because financial fair play rules have come in to force this year. Not when they took over. Access to additional revenue streams will increase turnover and once we are back in the Championship we need to be working towards breaking even to meet FFP rules there.

Now will everyone stop saying "why didn't they do this when they took over?" Aside from the point above, the world was a very different place financially when they took over. I agree they should have looked to lower it sooner but don't disagree with them doing it now. If we don't we can start looking forward to conference football at the butts as a reformed club.

 

[TrueSkyBlueLiam]

400k per season, plus a cut of food, drink and car parking sales for a stadium that we dont even own whilst Palace are paying 280k for a shithole like Selhurst Park? Accept the bloody deal SISU and focus on transfers and the future of the club. If you're not happy with the deal, renegotiate it at a later date, but secure the future of club now

 

[Grendel]

400k per season, plus a cut of food, drink and car parking sales for a stadium that we dont even own whilst Palace are paying 280k for a shithole like Selhurst Park? Accept the bloody deal SISU and focus on transfers and the future of the club. If you're not happy with the deal, renegotiate it at a later date, but secure the future of club now

And pay back £1 million? I don't think so.

 

[Godiva]

400k per season, plus a cut of food, drink and car parking sales for a stadium that we dont even own whilst Palace are paying 280k for a shithole like Selhurst Park? Accept the bloody deal SISU and focus on transfers and the future of the club. If you're not happy with the deal, renegotiate it at a later date, but secure the future of club now

Ah, but it's not £400k/yr. That figure came from ACL but they forgot to mention all the extras adding up to another £400k/yr.
That's £800k/yr and when you consider our total income is down to about £5mio/yr it really does matter if the rent is £400k or £800k.

 

[mark82]

400k per season, plus a cut of food, drink and car parking sales for a stadium that we dont even own whilst Palace are paying 280k for a shithole like Selhurst Park? Accept the bloody deal SISU and focus on transfers and the future of the club. If you're not happy with the deal, renegotiate it at a later date, but secure the future of club now

Why would they agree to something they are not happy with?

And you do realise that Selhurst Park is in London don't you? You would expect London rent rates to be at least double a rate in Coventry. It is not much smaller than the Ricoh either at about 26k.

 

[dongonzalos]

Ah, but it's not £400k/yr. That figure came from ACL but they forgot to mention all the extras adding up to another £400k/yr.
That's £800k/yr and when you consider our total income is down to about £5mio/yr it really does matter if the rent is £400k or £800k.

It is 400k
SISU have talked about match day costs. Which is an entirely different matter.
I surprised they did not mention players wages!
If you talk about match day costs then you have to start considering ticket sales

 

[oldskyblue58]

It is £400k for the rent which is paid to ACL. The match day costs £240K would be there anyway whether the club own or rent the ground (including the directors bar bill which is included in match day costs but also (but not only) the costs of supplying staffing to the corporate & posh seats that CCFC sell on) The £160k is the rates and that is paid to the Council like any other business not to ACL, as such is not part of any deal to be struck with ACL.

you have to question what is said on both sides ...... not just accept things

 

[oldskyblue58]

The income sources have been an issue and fundamental to the survival of this club from day one. It isnt FFP that will kill this club it is the continued losses and ever increasing debt that will.

 

[Godiva]

It is £400k for the rent which is paid to ACL. The match day costs £240K would be there anyway whether the club own or rent the ground (including the directors bar bill which is included in match day costs but also (but not only) the costs of supplying staffing to the corporate & posh seats that CCFC sell on) The £160k is the rates and that is paid to the Council like any other business not to ACL, as such is not part of any deal to be struck with ACL.

you have to question what is said on both sides ...... not just accept things

Yes, but are the 'extras' not included in the current £1.28m/yr?
(I have asked if anybody know this a couple of times, but no reply so far).

 

[torchomatic]

"Focus on transfers and the future of the club", you say? Yet yesterday you were moaning and digging at SISU as they only sign players on free transfers. You can't have it all ways. If we have to pay a high rent then less money will be available for the squad. So which do you want?

400k per season, plus a cut of food, drink and car parking sales for a stadium that we dont even own whilst Palace are paying 280k for a shithole like Selhurst Park? Accept the bloody deal SISU and focus on transfers and the future of the club. If you're not happy with the deal, renegotiate it at a later date, but secure the future of club now

 

[oldskyblue58]

Yes, but are the 'extras' not included in the current £1.28m/yr?
(I have asked if anybody know this a couple of times, but no reply so far).

All i can tell you is that in the published accounts there is over £995k in direct costs which have the following explanation

"Direct operating costs include match expenses and the direct costs relating to playing activities"

I assume, and it is only an assumption but i think reasonable, that the match day expenses charged by ACL or the compass joint venture are included in that. That £995k is certainly not the rent

 

[TrueSkyBlueLiam]

And pay back £1 million? I don't think so.

We OWE them it by law. QWe have no choice. They've given us 10 years to pay it off. I think thats fair

 

[Wrenstreetcarpark]

John Clarke's £600 bar bill in the Director's Box can't be part of the rent but it does add up to c£14,000 per season and that is without his pies...

 

[dongonzalos]

"Focus on transfers and the future of the club", you say? Yet yesterday you were moaning and digging at SISU as they only sign players on free transfers. You can't have it all ways. If we have to pay a high rent then less money will be available for the squad. So which do you want?

I want them to agree on 400k, so this worry and shambles ends.

It is an extra 16k a month. I want that to come from gussets wages, rods, bells etc....

Also the increase in attendances followed by succee can raise an extra 180k a month if we average 20k

We can average 20k.

So personally I just want a quick end to this.

If it is true that if ACL drop any more they go outbid business.

The only non messy quick end is for SISU to accept the offer

 

[TrueSkyBlueLiam]

Why would they agree to something they are not happy with?

And you do realise that Selhurst Park is in London don't you? You would expect London rent rates to be at least double a rate in Coventry. It is not much smaller than the Ricoh either at about 26k.

You can deny Selhurst Park is a sh*thole. The Ricoh is much more modern and is bigger by 6k. It dont matter were it is. I'd rather have a mansion in Coventry rather than a flat in london

 

[TrueSkyBlueLiam]

"Focus on transfers and the future of the club", you say? Yet yesterday you were moaning and digging at SISU as they only sign players on free transfers. You can't have it all ways. If we have to pay a high rent then less money will be available for the squad. So which do you want?

Other clubs manage to pay their rent and find money for transfers, so why not us?

 

[TrueSkyBlueLiam]

Ah, but it's not £400k/yr. That figure came from ACL but they forgot to mention all the extras adding up to another £400k/yr.
That's £800k/yr and when you consider our total income is down to about £5mio/yr it really does matter if the rent is £400k or £800k.

Thats what SISU said. Are you really gonna believe something SISU said? They're nothing but liars and hypocrits and anyone who listens to SISU is a twit

 

[Godiva]

All i can tell you is that in the published accounts there is over £995k in direct costs which have the following explanation

"Direct operating costs include match expenses and the direct costs relating to playing activities"

I assume, and it is only an assumption but i think reasonable, that the match day expenses charged by ACL or the compass joint venture are included in that. That £995k is certainly not the rent

So in all fairness we still aren't sure if we should compare the current figure £1.2m to £400k or £800k?
Maybe the Trust can get the answer from the club?