No idea, probably not really "yes" to any of those.
What's why I have constantly said we should go back on a rent-only deal. All these "matchday revenues" and "arena management" issues are nothing to do with the club, it doesn't hurt us not to have these. What does hurt us, is not having 10k+ for home games in League 1. That is the biggest difference between success and failure.
But the share we are told is worth £6.5 million. For that there must be some benefits - what?
But the share we are told is worth £6.5 million. For that there must be some benefits - what?
Probably at least half of what we would get for the speculated £40m cost of building the stadium of Joy. Sounds like a good deal when you put it like that. Shame they didn't cough up £5.5m when they had the opportunity. The thing you can't put a price on is that the ricoh is in Coventry. The stadium of Joy on the other hand? *
Aside from playing in Coventry you mean. Out of interest how much do you estimate the club has lost in revenue at suxfields this season?
I've asked a few times but if CCFC purchase the share what do they get?
Food revenues - do they get these revenues? I thought that ACL own only a percentage and compass the rest. Do they just get half of less than 50%
Do they get half the revenue from all non football related events?
Will they have equal say with the council on future policy decisions?
Will they take on and be responsible for half of the outstanding mortgage?
So you is think the club should be held to hostage and pay £6.5 million just for the privelege of playing in Coventry.
Jesus Christ.
is the 6.5 million for ACL's share? what was Higgs share worth again?
Higgs share is £6.5 million - its a sizeable investment - what do you get?
Tony with respect that hasn't answered any of my questions.
Do you know any of the answers?
So you is think the club should be held to hostage and pay £6.5 million just for the privelege of playing in Coventry.
Jesus Christ.
With respect. As sisu are reluctant to tell us exactly or even roughly what benefits playing at a sisu owned stadium will have for the club how is anyone supposed to know? I think my answer is as best as you're going to get.
If sisu purchase the higgs half share I would expect us to get half of the benefit sisu would allow us to have at a sisu 100% owned stadium. That's as much detail as anyone possible could give you until our owners are kind enough to tell us exactly what sisu ownership means for the club. Not a difficult task you would think.
The only measurable bonus is the fact that we'll be playing home games at home.
So you is think the club should be held to hostage
Whilst I know what your saying, I think he's just talking about the Ricoh, and the benefits. No "sisu's superbowl".
To be fair IMO, the higgs share doesn't have much revenues in it. as a charity, they are by law, not meant to be a profit making company, so I imagine ACL pay back Higgs investment and not much else.
Maybe someone with more facts can speculate for us?
I have no idea to the answers on any of the questions but I am am pretty sure CCFC won't be buying it will be one of the Sisu companies and then leased/rented back to CCFC, if I really thought that the owners would be CCFC and could only remain as CCFC and not be saddled with any debts or mortgaged in any way I would be happy to let them have the whole lot as that would benefit the team and really at the end of it all that is what matters not Sisu investors.
I've asked a few times but if CCFC purchase the share what do they get?
Food revenues - do they get these revenues? I thought that ACL own only a percentage and compass the rest. Do they just get half of less than 50%
Do they get half the revenue from all non football related events?
Will they have equal say with the council on future policy decisions?
Will they take on and be responsible for half of the outstanding mortgage?
many would say this is a paranoid opinion of sisu, but it's a relevant concernimagine being a businessman/woman, and having a company to sink all debts into with the only consequence being the football club goes out of business? I'm sure most would be tempted.
but on the flip side, let's hope sisu ARE looking to make CCFC and the Ricoh a successful project and are just going about things the wrong way ATM
On the basis that we get back what was in the share we sold to Higgs then the club would get:
50% of all non matchday revenues (or at least the share ACL receives as part of the joint venture which is just under 80% I think)
100% of all matchday revenues (as above)
50% stake in ACL so you would assume equal say of future policy decisions. It would be a lot easy for the club to obtain the type of deal they want if they had a 50% stake in the company that deal was being made with
50% liability on outstanding mortgage. No idea how the security of the mortgage is setup so not sure what happens if ACL were to go bust. Would the club become liable? I would think it most likely the lease would revert to the council.
That would seem the most obvious scenario of what a sisu owned company would get. What's not clear is, is that company going to be either otium or SBS&L or (as I think was suggested by TF himself) another sisu company not connected to the club. If the latter surely it would be prudent to seek reassurances from sisu of what this would mean for the club otherwise the club could have been better off under the original rental deal at the ricoh, who knows.
You would want ownership under the same holding company as the football club but it doesn't necessarily have to be owned directly by the club. There are legitimate company structures where they club don't directly own the stake in ACL but get all the benefit from it.
I thought all profits made at the ricoh are being reinvested back into the ricoh. So neither CCC or Higgs are pocketing any profit? Obviously that would all change once sisu get involved, should that ever happen.
Would you trust them with it?
One big plus would be reducing the number of parties in the dispute. CCC and SISU would be working together and sharing revenue. It would be easier to deal with any potential CCFC rental agreement if SISUwere getting half of the Rent back as a 50 50 Partner in ACL.
I'd agree with this, ACL/CCC are one party in a way, and if Higgs were out of the equation, it's a simple ACL and CCFC
Even better would be Higgs selling up, then ACL being bought out - only leaving CCFC and CCC
would that mean CCC own the bricks and mortar, and CCFC run the Ricoh for them?
CCFC would need to buy the Higgs 50% and CCC 50% and then you'd be in that situation. CCC would own the freehold, CCFC would hold the lease. For me this is the best way forward and something that all sides should work towards. Once in that position the club are free to renegotiate any contracts with Ricoh tenants as needed and the lease can be extended, preferably on a peppercorn rent.
CCC retain security, CCFC take effective ownership.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?