Ricoh Arena 'very profitable' even without Sky Blues (3 Viewers)

Forums New posts
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
skybluehugh said:
As I plainly said I will say again I do believe not all the posters on here have the good of the club in their hearts. people like yourself and I may disagree on what or how is best for the club but that is because we do care about what happens to it. It was in no way a dig at people who have supported the club since being kids or later. it is the ones on here who are on here trying to back up what their bosses want said or planted on this site. can you really tell me people like True Sky Blue are real CCFC fans.
Click to expand...

Real sky blue? No I don't think he is.

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
 
torchomatic

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
I'd forgotten all about CJ. Wonder what happened to him?

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
 
Paxman II

Paxman II

Well-Known Member
lewys33 said:
How can people suddenly change allegiance and start arguing that the council/ACL are not doing enough to get CCFC back at the Ricoh. Have people really forgotten the whole story who the real enemy is here?? Im not going to claim ACL/council are angels because of course they are not. But offering them to play for free at the Ricoh - Why on earth would anyone do that?! They offered them the Ricoh for £150,000 a year ........ how is that not acceptable??

I also cannot see how the Ricoh is not profitable :S a basic look at things show that they made £1mill profit when Coventry paid "nearly" the full amount of £1.3mill rent. Now obviously they are not getting the rent, however there are now no costs for matchdays (there are none!) and the council has bought the mortgage and reduced the payments. So how can it not be profitable?
Click to expand...

Because the headline "150k" rent was not the deal in reality. They had conditions unacceptable to the football clubs owners within that offer. the free rental offer was merely a control point while in admin (very short term only)

Also please folks remember the stadium is the freehold property of the council not ACL/Higgs. They have a lease. The premium for that lease (40 years?) was achieved by a loan which the council have now taken over with lower terms for ACL (pretty convenient) Without that SISU had them on the ropes you might say.
The offer of half the stadium is no such thing. It's merely 50% of the shares that Higgs have. No access to income streams comes with that. If you don't understand the basics then you can't argue the facts.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
torchomatic said:
I'd forgotten all about CJ. Wonder what happened to him?

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

He changed his name by deed poll to Hugh.
 
Paxman II

Paxman II

Well-Known Member
skybluehugh said:
It just beggars belief that after all these Hedge Fund BASTARDS have done to our club, people STILL feel we should just rollover and give these so called people the very thing they have been after all along. I am sorry I love my club as much as any genuine Sky Blues on this board (I do believe there on owner plants on here) but I would rather see the so called owners loss every penny they can in NT. That is the only way we are going to get rid of them and get OUR club back
Click to expand...

SISU have expressed on many occasions they will fund the play away necessity of Northampton in the big picture they are undertaking so why would you think Boycotting Northampton will have any effect?
 
S

skybluehugh

New Member
Paxman II said:
SISU have expressed on many occasions they will fund the play away necessity of Northampton in the big picture they are undertaking so why would you think Boycotting Northampton will have any effect?
Click to expand...

We shall see won't we. I personally will take any statement from them with a very large pinch of salt.
 
L

longjohnskyblue

Guest
Interesting the sisu evening telegraph ask for accounts to be publicised - why aren't they asking the same openness and honesty from sisu? Could it be that sisu are financially involved with trinity mirror group (owners of telegraph)? I was led to believe their is a link, but of course the telegraph could open its books and prove me wrong!
 
tisza

tisza

Well-Known Member
QUOTE=Paxman II;515723]SISU have expressed on many occasions they will fund the play away necessity of Northampton in the big picture they are undertaking so why would you think Boycotting Northampton will have any effect?[/QUOTE]
how does that work with FFP?
 
James Smith

James Smith

Well-Known Member
longjohnskyblue said:
Interesting the sisu evening telegraph ask for accounts to be publicised - why aren't they asking the same openness and honesty from sisu? Could it be that sisu are financially involved with trinity mirror group (owners of telegraph)? I was led to believe their is a link, but of course the telegraph could open its books and prove me wrong!
Click to expand...

I wonder if they've received threatening letters from Lawyers. We know Nick hasn't but do you think they have, might explain why seemingly innocent comments critical of SISU on the site were removed.
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Noggin said:
It wasn't really a bailout, they still owe the exact same amount of money just to someone else and on better terms. That said I don't believe the Ricoh is "Very Profitable" either and whilst I support the Telegraph calling her out I really don't feel they have demanded the same for the CCFC books.
Click to expand...

It is a bail out. They were heading for insolvency due to being owed rent. If it wasn't a bail out the court case that has just been thrown out may have been successful.
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
longjohnskyblue said:
Interesting the sisu evening telegraph ask for accounts to be publicised - why aren't they asking the same openness and honesty from sisu? Could it be that sisu are financially involved with trinity mirror group (owners of telegraph)? I was led to believe their is a link, but of course the telegraph could open its books and prove me wrong!
Click to expand...
Ask Hoffman, he's on the Mirror group board.

It'll be interesting to see the ACL accounts to May 2013.
 
James Smith

James Smith

Well-Known Member
fernandopartridge said:
It is a bail out. They were heading for insolvency due to being owed rent. If it wasn't a bail out the court case that has just been thrown out may have been successful.
Click to expand...

Even if it was a bailout due to the lack of agreed rent being paid, it didn't need a high court judge to see that SISU were just distressing ACL by withholding the rent. I'm very glad though that a high court judge did see that SISU were doing that and threw out the Judicial Review.

:blue:
 
ESB

ESB

New Member
They were heading for insolvency because a tenant was attempting to put them there (i think a Judge will back me on that).
 
James Smith

James Smith

Well-Known Member
fernandopartridge said:
Ask Hoffman, he's on the Mirror group board.

It'll be interesting to see the ACL accounts to May 2013.
Click to expand...

Far more likely that some lawyers are involved as any shareholding over a certain percentage has to be disclosed to the city and anyone who has a controlling interest also has to be disclosed. Could be through some Cayman subsidiary but someone clever could probably trace it back.
 
J

Jack Griffin

Guest
Paxman II said:
SISU have expressed on many occasions they will fund the play away necessity of Northampton in the big picture they are undertaking so why would you think Boycotting Northampton will have any effect?
Click to expand...

They say a lot of things, like we have no debt etc.

Lets see what happens when the reality of low low crowds dawns. NOPM
 
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
Paxman II said:
SISU have expressed on many occasions they will fund the play away necessity of Northampton in the big picture they are undertaking so why would you think Boycotting Northampton will have any effect?
Click to expand...

tisza said:
how does that work with FFP?
Click to expand...

If they fund the losses through equity increase it will count as revenue in the FFP calculation.
 
italiahorse

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
Paxman II said:
Because the headline "150k" rent was not the deal in reality. They had conditions unacceptable to the football clubs owners within that offer. the free rental offer was merely a control point while in admin (very short term only)

Also please folks remember the stadium is the freehold property of the council not ACL/Higgs. They have a lease. The premium for that lease (40 years?) was achieved by a loan which the council have now taken over with lower terms for ACL (pretty convenient) Without that SISU had them on the ropes you might say.
The offer of half the stadium is no such thing. It's merely 50% of the shares that Higgs have. No access to income streams comes with that. If you don't understand the basics then you can't argue the facts.
Click to expand...

Were you at the forum? Were you the fat bloke at the front looking down on the fans?
 
K

kmj5000

Member
Paxman II said:
SISU have expressed on many occasions they will fund the play away necessity of Northampton in the big picture they are undertaking so why would you think Boycotting Northampton will have any effect?
Click to expand...

They have expressed bullshit on lots of occasions so why would you believe them on this occasion? They are on ropes and will throw in the towel before Christmas!
Or, using Timmy's analogy, they are on the cliff edge and the weight of ill-feeling will eventually tip them over when they find that the "big picture" turns out to be a black hole.
 
ESB

ESB

New Member
Debt and equity are different, equity means giving away ownership. In this case it would need to be for money.
 
G

Godiva

Well-Known Member
ESB said:
Debt and equity are different, equity means giving away ownership. In this case it would need to be for money.
Click to expand...

I am not sure I understand what you mean. If they increase the equity they do it by putting in money - if most cases buying shares. That's increasing their ownership (only they already own 100% of the shares in Otium).

As the club generate losses and not profit, the owners will in any case have to put in money. They can choose to put in money as equity or as loans.
If they believe the club is no longer exposed to a hostile takeover they don't need the loan-wall and it would be more beneficial to increase the equity and decrease the loans.
 
ESB

ESB

New Member
Debt or loans mean you promise to repay, equity is about ownership.

A mortgage is debt, it's a charge against a property that doesn't offer title. Whereas giving equity dilutes ownership. Simple test is who shares profit or losses on a sale, in the mortgage situation the debt is paid off, profits stay with the owners.

Debt is often used by hedge funds to leverage their assets, they hate giving away equity.
 
B

Buster

Well-Known Member
In the right hands the funds generated by owning and using theRicoh as equity will help us climb the leagues and build a quality ,consistent side . In the wrong hands the asset would be sucked out to fund profits for the parent company . Indisputable ! Who ,in their right minds ,seeing what has gone on in the past 6 years , thinks that sisu , otium, sky blue leisure , whatever their name is this year, is the right hands . The argument is over and the vast majority realise these parasites must go. The few left fighting their corner have given up defending the indefensible and now turn their ire on ACL and the council. ACL will survive for as long as is needed . When the time comes they will sell and we can move on .
 
R

ricohman

New Member
Interesting that the telegraph has asked acl to open their books as proof, yet i cant remember them taking this stance with sisu
 
Sisued

Sisued

New Member
Mothball the Ground until someone buys the club out. Screw SISU they don't deserve a handout and they dont deserve any financial support from us fans. NOPM!
 
N

Noggin

New Member
ricohman said:
Interesting that the telegraph has asked acl to open their books as proof, yet i cant remember them taking this stance with sisu
Click to expand...

I sent the same in a tweet to Les reid, he has been getting pretty annoyed with me really even though I said I supported their request to ann but should do the same to sisu.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Top