Rumour from the boardroom (1 Viewer)

[The coventrian]

There is no court action, it's a complaint to the EC, just like if you were to put in a complaint to the financial ombudsman about insurance dispute. We all think they should have halted it after the last defeat.

Who says I'm not bothered? I'd prefer us to be at the Ricoh but with Brums pitch, I've only managed to get to 4-5 games due to other commitments. I wouldnt have missed a game at the ricoh.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Semantics.

 

---

[The coventrian]

You have a real problem with people living just outside Coventry supporting Coventry dont you?
No I was just stooping to your childish level. Just because I don't foam at the mouth about wasps you accused me of being a plastic wasps fan. Your not from cov but support my city's football club so I returned the insult by calling you a plastic cov fan. I know who the more plastic one is out of the 2 of us.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[The coventrian]

Ummm, Pete, have you just been rumbled? Two usernames?

View attachment 13752

No surely not. It's only people with an agenda that do that according to some on here?

 

[The coventrian]

If nothing bad happened in 2013, we’d probably be out of business now thanks to the amount of rent we were being charged.

It didn’t help that the incompetent Ranson advised SISU not to purchase a share in the stadium though when they first arrived.

So the rent was to high but we had a wage bill of 7 million? Yeah ok. I guess the rent was to much but we signed up to it didn't we.
Stop blaming everyone else. Nobody owes us anything.

 

[SkyBlueZack]

How can anyone question the rent being too high? £1.3 million for 23 days part use is unbelievable, irrelevant of how much the wage bill was. Two wrongs don’t make a right and all that.

 

[The coventrian]

How can anyone question the rent being too high? £1.3 million for 23 days part use is unbelievable, irrelevant of how much the wage bill was. Two wrongs don’t make a right and all that.

I don't think anyone is. Who was it that agreed to it? Was it fletcher?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Semantics.

I don’t think you can get away with just saying semantics to that. It’s very different. I genuinely only want to understand it’s not about thinking you’re wrong and I’m right or vice versa. Would you let you’re club go out of business purely over semantics?

 

[SkyBlueZack]

I don't think anyone is. Who was it that agreed to it? Was it fletcher?

You do. You insinuate the rent amount was ok because we were over paying in wages.

£1.3 million divided by 23 is £56,521 per game day. All that got us was a football pitch with stands. We still had things to pay on top too. We had no right to the income generated while we were paying to use the stadium. It was a shocking deal, one that should never have been agreed to, one that Sisu should have challenged as soon as they arrived. To make out the rent deal wasn’t a problem because we had a high wage bill is nonsense. They were both a problem and both had to be addressed.

 

[MalcSB]

I agree. And what if they don't go bust? What if they can manage without us? Exactly how much income were they creaming off us including f&b? The worry is if wasps can manage without us and they do actually close the door completely even if this eu case gets kicked out. What then?

Stadium naming rights is their biggest loss without us.

 

[MalcSB]

I don't think anyone is. Who was it that agreed to it? Was it fletcher?

At the time the rent was set, wasn’t Fletcher on ACL side of the table. Oh, and we were n the Prem. and then itv digital went bust the year we fell to the championship. A completely different environment, which the landlords refused to recognise.

 

[PurpleBin]

I think there is some truth in this...before the start of the season the club released all home tickets for sale for every game right up until Lincoln (last home of the year)

If you look now you can only buy home tickets up to and including the 25th January. Why would they only release home tickets for up to 4 weeks in advance?

 

[HuckerbyDublinWhelan]

So the rent was to high but we had a wage bill of 7 million? Yeah ok. I guess the rent was to much but we signed up to it didn't we.
Stop blaming everyone else. Nobody owes us anything.

And I’ve told you this before - the wage bill was too high. Hence why SISU then took drastic measures to reduce the wage bill. It was at that time relegation to league one occurred and the SISU OUT protests started.

read the whole history of the land purchase, we were completely mugged off, then used as a profit mule for the council.

The £1.3 million was agreed when the council said it was either that and we sell our 50% stake or we’d go into administration .
Something at the time McGinnity at al were loath to do

 

[Sick Boy]

So the rent was to high but we had a wage bill of 7 million? Yeah ok. I guess the rent was to much but we signed up to it didn't we.
Stop blaming everyone else. Nobody owes us anything.

Well, what other choice did we have?

Even pre-SISU the club tried to get it down but was denied.

Paying over 20% of your wage bill on rent for a stadium we got no revenue from was the club being well and truly screwed over.

Reducing our wage bill to ensure we could pay it would have led to relegation and even more financial trouble.

 

[Corrado]

Ummm, Pete, have you just been rumbled? Two usernames?

View attachment 13752

Ha ha I don’t know how but the coventrian somehow quoted me saying something I didn’t say

 

[Grendel]

I don't think anyone is. Who was it that agreed to it? Was it fletcher?

Mcginnity agreed to it.

The initial concept was that the club would take a return on revenues back so would actually make a profit on the deal

Then having had the ACL shares valued at £26 million dear old Mike gave them to Higgs for £2 million. Then also clogged the F and B rights I think for £1 million

The club then tried after this to reduce the rent. Council refused.

 

[oscillatewildly]

Jesus christ.

Unavailable - I've just checked.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Mcginnity agreed to it.

The initial concept was that the club would take a return on revenues back so would actually make a profit on the deal

Then having had the ACL shares valued at £26 million dear old Mike gave them to Higgs for £2 million. Then also clogged the F and B rights I think for £1 million

The club then tried after this to reduce the rent. Council refused.

Then Mike blew a chunk of the proceeds on a new badge

 

[HuckerbyDublinWhelan]

Then Mike blew a chunk of the proceeds on a new badge

Aah I remember that disaster lol

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

The comment about SISU (or whoever on the CCFC side) having a plan to "starve Wasps out" is clearly bollocks! While it would be lovely to see them being the masters of their own misfortune, the FACT (as far as we know) is that Wasps have not dropped the demand for CCFC to indemnify them against the financial losses incurred by an EC ruling demanding them to pay back the shortfall in the purchase of the Ricoh. Until and unless Wasps make a POSITIVE decision to reverse that demand, CCFC will not come back to the table, and rightly so - it would be unpredictable and suicidal.

But if and when we do come back (which i hope we do under the right circumstances), you can bet your bottom dollar it will be the same as the return from Sixfields - 27,306 for the Gillingham match, and back down to 11,085 just a week later against Yeovil.

 

[Speedies_Chips]

The comment about SISU (or whoever on the CCFC side) having a plan to "starve Wasps out" is clearly bollocks! While it would be lovely to see them being the masters of their own misfortune, the FACT (as far as we know) is that Wasps have not dropped the demand for CCFC to indemnify them against the financial losses incurred by an EC ruling demanding them to pay back the shortfall in the purchase of the Ricoh. Until and unless Wasps make a POSITIVE decision to reverse that demand, CCFC will not come back to the table, and rightly so - it would be unpredictable and suicidal.

But if and when we do come back (which i hope we do under the right circumstances), you can bet your bottom dollar it will be the same as the return from Sixfields - 27,306 for the Gillingham match, and back down to 11,085 just a week later against Yeovil.

Sadly I don’t think we would get anywhere near 27K on our first game back this time. I reckon too many people will now be out of the habit of going to matches and will continue with whatever over activities they have taken up. 18K tops, then back to 13K despite being in a play off challenging situation.

 

[The coventrian]

You do. You insinuate the rent amount was ok because we were over paying in wages.

£1.3 million divided by 23 is £56,521 per game day. All that got us was a football pitch with stands. We still had things to pay on top too. We had no right to the income generated while we were paying to use the stadium. It was a shocking deal, one that should never have been agreed to, one that Sisu should have challenged as soon as they arrived. To make out the rent deal wasn’t a problem because we had a high wage bill is nonsense. They were both a problem and both had to be addressed.

Lies.
Show me a post of mine where I said the rent was ok.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Sadly I don’t think we would get anywhere near 27K on our first game back this time. I reckon too many people will now be out of the habit of going to matches and will continue with whatever over activities they have taken up. 18K tops, then back to 13K despite being in a play off challenging situation.

Yep and people would only come back slowly. Fully supportive and all that

 

[The coventrian]

Stadium naming rights is their biggest loss without us.

And exactly how much pull do you think a 3rd division club has when it comes to naming rights?

 

[The coventrian]

Mcginnity agreed to it.

The initial concept was that the club would take a return on revenues back so would actually make a profit on the deal

Then having had the ACL shares valued at £26 million dear old Mike gave them to Higgs for £2 million. Then also clogged the F and B rights I think for £1 million

The club then tried after this to reduce the rent. Council refused.

Mcginnity was an absolute clown. I know this wont go down well on here but in hindsight I' wish we'd of stuck with Richardson.

 

[HuckerbyDublinWhelan]

And exactly how much pull do you think a 3rd division club has when it comes to naming rights?

I’d say a lot more than premier league rugby club. Ultimately we’re front and central whatever league we’re in on Sky sports every Saturday.

football is the worlds biggest sport, the name Coventry City alone still resonates in England.

Wasps have overestimated their appeal, weve fallen from grace - but we are and always will be a bigger deal than wasps

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Aah I remember that disaster lol

He really should have been nowhere near the board, always looked like he had a meatball for a nose

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Mcginnity was an absolute clown. I know this wont go down well on here but in hindsight I' wish we'd of stuck with Richardson.

Couldn’t afford him

 

[clint van damme]

Sadly I don’t think we would get anywhere near 27K on our first game back this time. I reckon too many people will now be out of the habit of going to matches and will continue with whatever over activities they have taken up. 18K tops, then back to 13K despite being in a play off challenging situation.

And we won't get them back in to the habit unless we're back in Cov which is why we need to get back even though the Ricoh is shit and the landlords are scum.

 

[MalcSB]

A

And exactly how much pull do you think a 3rd division club has when it comes to naming rights?

A damn sight more than a prem league, hopefully potentially championship, rugby club.

 

[better days]

How can anyone question the rent being too high? £1.3 million for 23 days part use is unbelievable, irrelevant of how much the wage bill was. Two wrongs don’t make a right and all that.

For comparison West Ham pay £2.5m for the London stadium
The operating company take most of the F&B income and have athletics and concert income
The operating company still make a huge loss but I think that's mainly due to the cost of converting for athletics
Of course the London stadium has around twice the capacity of the Ricoh

 

[MalcSB]

For comparison West Ham pay £2.5m for the London stadium
The operating company take most of the F&B income and have athletics and concert income
The operating company still make a huge loss but I think that's mainly due to the cost of converting for athletics
Of course the London stadium has around twice the capacity of the Ricoh

And West Ham’s income will be how many multiples of what ours was in the championship?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

For comparison West Ham pay £2.5m for the London stadium
The operating company take most of the F&B income and have athletics and concert income
The operating company still make a huge loss but I think that's mainly due to the cost of converting for athletics
Of course the London stadium has around twice the capacity of the Ricoh

Moving out of Upton Park was the stupidist thing they could have done. Should have downscaled the stadium and let Orient have it.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

For comparison West Ham pay £2.5m for the London stadium
The operating company take most of the F&B income and have athletics and concert income
The operating company still make a huge loss but I think that's mainly due to the cost of converting for athletics
Of course the London stadium has around twice the capacity of the Ricoh

West Ham rake in £100 million from TV money alone. Our Championship turnover was about £10 million in 2011/12

 

[mark82]

And West Ham’s income will be how many multiples of what ours was in the championship?

Exactly, the circumstances are very different. It's in London for a start.

 

[chiefdave]

For comparison West Ham pay £2.5m for the London stadium
The operating company take most of the F&B income and have athletics and concert income
The operating company still make a huge loss but I think that's mainly due to the cost of converting for athletics
Of course the London stadium has around twice the capacity of the Ricoh

There's some subtle differences. West Ham don't pay a penny in match day costs, its all included, and get a share of revenues. The rent also goes down if they are relegated. We were paying over £400K a year match day costs on top of the rent and got no revenues.

LLDC will take on all of the running costs from the corner flags to the stewards in return for £2.5m a year in rent (reduced by half in the event of relegation) and a one-off payment of £15m.

West Ham keep all their ticket revenue while other income streams are shared. Over the first two decades of the stadium’s life, the LLDC will pocket the first £4m of any naming rights deal on the iconic stadium and share anything over that 50-50 with West Ham.

In the small print, it also emerges that West Ham will get a 40% reduction in their rental terms after 20 years if they choose to forego their share of naming rights revenue. Alternatively, they can stick with the existing agreement. As elsewhere, the dice seem loaded in West Ham’s favour.

In fact they are paying so little towards the cost of the stadium the company running it is doing about as well as ACL.

West Ham’s rental agreement to use the London Stadium has been described as “the elephant in the room” behind the venue’s cash problems.

The claim was made by London Legacy Development Corporation chief executive Lyn Garner who revealed West Ham’s rent does not even cover the cost of staging matches.

West Ham secured the stadium for an annual rental fee of £2.5million in 2013 and moved in at the start of the 2016/17 season.

Stadium operator E20 recorded operating losses of around £22million for the last financial year and faces the possibility of being dissolved.

Garner, who became chief executive of the LLDC in February, told the London Assembly: “What is really driving the problems here are the low rents paid by the concessionaires, particularly West Ham.

“I’ve got to say the elephant in the room is the fee that they pay us in the usage cost does not cover the event-day costs and that’s before we go anywhere near a commercial advantage, it simply does not cover the costs of running the events on a day-to-day basis.”