The Freehold at the Ricoh (1 Viewer)

oldskyblue58 · Sep 20, 2013

Straight questions why is it absolutely essential for the CLUB to own the freehold of the Ricoh site? What does it achieve for CCFC?

sky blue john · Sep 20, 2013

not necessary for Ccfc to own it but Ccfc need the revenue the ricoh generates !!!
Sisu need the 118million they could borrow against the freehold for their investors !!!

fernandopartridge · Sep 20, 2013

I don't see it as necessary, the only minor benefit would be to rid the club and the site of the interfering Council.

covcity4life · Sep 20, 2013

Right on Fernando

Nice trolling osb

fernandopartridge · Sep 20, 2013

sky blue john said:
not necessary for Ccfc to own it but Ccfc need the revenue the ricoh generates !!!
Sisu need the 118million they could borrow against the freehold for their investors !!!

The Ricoh does not generate revenue. The events that take place there generate revenue.

oldskyblue58 · Sep 20, 2013

no trolling about it cc4l........... too many people on here and other sites blindly state CCFC must own the site/freehold ...... i just want people to think and understand why? or why not ?

I have never thought that they needed to

So where is the convincing arguement that i have misssed that we must

torchomatic · Sep 20, 2013

Exactly. Which is why I don't see a bright future for the Ricoh (and therefore ACL) without the football club. Or should I say a sports club.

fernandopartridge said:
The Ricoh does not generate revenue. The events that take place there generate revenue.

Brighton Sky Blue · Sep 20, 2013

What OSB is saying is that we don't need the freehold to profit from the stadium-we need ACL's stake (80%) in the company that gets the revenues, IEC.

sky blue john · Sep 20, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
The Ricoh does not generate revenue. The events that take place there generate revenue.

So which events generate the stadium sponsorship and naming rights revenue ?

Paxman II · Sep 20, 2013

They don't need to (as I answered elsewhere many, many times) In fact it could be a disadvantage in so many ways. A leasehold interest has so many advantages.
Just for the record, I personally would not like to see a Hedge fund backed football club own the freehold of the stadium. If they ever go ahead and build one we would have no choice! Currently we have a choice, if only the warring factions would see that.

Godiva · Sep 20, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
no trolling about it cc4l........... too many people on here and other sites blindly state CCFC must own the site/freehold ...... i just want people to think and understand why? or why not ?

I have never thought that they needed to

Maybe a few still can't tell the difference between the freehold and ACL?

mark82 · Sep 20, 2013

I don't see the benefit of freehold but think we need control of the stadium and revenue from all events held there.

The Reverend Skyblue · Sep 20, 2013

covcity4life said:
Right on Fernando

Nice trolling osb

This ignorant poster calls OSB ,one of the best and NEUTRAL posters on this site, "a troll".

What a terrible waste of oxygen

torchomatic · Sep 20, 2013

Neutral?! Cough, cough

The Reverend Skyblue said:
This ignorant poster calls OSB ,one of the best and NEUTRAL posters on this site, "a troll".

What a terrible waste of oxygen

fernandopartridge · Sep 20, 2013

sky blue john said:
So which events generate the stadium sponsorship and naming rights revenue ?

Every event. There would be absolutely no point in naming the stadium if nothing took place there.

The Reverend Skyblue · Sep 20, 2013

torchomatic said:
Neutral?! Cough, cough

Ok Torch ,fairly neutral, with an emphasis on the word fairly.

That ccfc4l gets my goat, everything he says winds me up

skyblueexile · Sep 20, 2013

wouldn't they get all the development land around as well!!!!!!!!!

torchomatic · Sep 20, 2013

Could we settle on neutralish?

The Reverend Skyblue said:
Ok Torch ,fairly neutral, with an emphasis on the word fairly.

That ccfc4l gets my goat, everything he says winds me up

fernandopartridge · Sep 20, 2013

The 'development' land really is a bit of a funny one. If it's so ripe for development why has it remained undeveloped for 10 years? It's got the infrastructure around it now.

How is this 'development' land valued?

Godiva · Sep 20, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
The 'development' land really is a bit of a funny one. If it's so ripe for development why has it remained undeveloped for 10 years? It's got the infrastructure around it now.

How is this 'development' land valued?

Maybe the financial crisis have had some influence?

oldskyblue58 · Sep 20, 2013

am allowed to have an opinion in amongst all the explanations guys :laugh: .............. even if apparently i work for two charities, a stadium management company, a local council, and of late according to another site seen the light and seeking employment at a not so local football team and a hedge fund...............:laugh:

just to be clear I work for none of the above

fernandopartridge · Sep 20, 2013

Godiva said:
Maybe the financial crisis have had some influence?

Possibly - although my own view is that the strange piece of land between the Arena Shopping Park and the railway line is just not very attractive.

oldskyblue58 · Sep 20, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
The 'development' land really is a bit of a funny one. If it's so ripe for development why has it remained undeveloped for 10 years? It's got the infrastructure around it now.

How is this 'development' land valued?

Think the development land was ear marked for hotel development ......... not been a great demand in the area for such development in the recession years. As to valuation its going to in part depend on the planning consents attached. But its never an easy valuation, it almost depends on how bad someone wants it developed or how much someone wants it

oldskyblue58 · Sep 20, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
Possibly - although my own view is that the strange piece of land between the Arena Shopping Park and the railway line is just not very attractive.

Wont that be where the station will go? Car park C was due to be developed I think

AJB1983 · Sep 20, 2013

OSB58...I agree they don't have to own it...it's about maximising the revenues they get from being anchor tenant, but as we know CCFC couldn't afford to build it themselves so signed away the rights to this long ago, in any other business they wouldn't be expected to be given it back for nothing, especially with the shenanigans over the past 18 months.
Owning the freehold and running of the stadium surely is more of a burden than renting it....CCFC only had to worry about football matches....anything else was left to acl.
Now if sisu wanted to bring in AEG it suggests that they don't want the current ACL team in place.
From what I can see to get Olympics and events of a high calibre as they have over the years they haven't done too bad a job of it.
Sisu had the option to buy the Higgs share but they passed, probably hoping that this day would come if they played by their usual hardball tactics

fernandopartridge · Sep 20, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
Wont that be where the station will go? Car park C was due to be developed I think

You could be right. I remember some plans were submitted to build a hotel on the site of the Rowleys Green scrapyard a few years ago, nothing came of them. I don't believe the demand for hotel rooms is there, the Novotel nearby is rarely full.

mark82 · Sep 20, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
am allowed to have an opinion in amongst all the explanations guys :laugh: .............. even if apparently i work for two charities, a stadium management company, a local council, and of late according to another site seen the light and seeking employment at a not so local football team and a hedge fund...............:laugh:

just to be clear I work for none of the above

At the moment....

oldskyblue58 · Sep 20, 2013

mark82 said:
At the moment....

wouldnt pay me enough ....... quite happy with my own business, keeps me busy enough

bigfatronssba · Sep 20, 2013

Presumably if ccfc owned the Ricoh freehold Acl would still exist, and be legally entitled to the income streams?

oldskyblue58 · Sep 20, 2013

bigfatronssba said:
Presumably if ccfc owned the Ricoh freehold Acl would still exist, and be legally entitled to the income streams?

Well unless the club buy out the lease then yes to both

Danceswithhorses · Sep 20, 2013

torchomatic said:
Neutral?! Cough, cough

ok - more neutral than you

Deleted member 5849 · Sep 20, 2013

Generally I'd agree the freehold in itself is irrelevant. Indeed, it seems SISU might too, gifven one of the claims in the judicial review is they were seeking an extension of the lease to 125 years to add value...

It does of course depend what the constraints of leasing are however. Swindon, for example, keep threatening to move from the County Ground because redeveloping it comes up against buffers, because it's not theirs.

As an aside, giving hope for the future, here's what Swindon said back in 2007:

We are fortunate that we are working with a very enlightened and community orientated leader of Swindon Borough Council, Cllr Roderick Bluh, Deputy Leader Fionuala Foley, Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture & Recreation Justin Tomlinson and Chief Executive Gavin Jones. Both the club and the council recognise that what has happened in the past between the two organisations is water under the bridge and irrelevant - none of us can rewrite history. What matters is the present and the future and I can assure all fans of the club that we now enjoy an open, friendly and constructive relationship with the Borough Council. We have met with Rod and Gavin in the first couple of weeks at my time at the club, showed and talked them through the three possible scenarios for the County Ground development and were very warmly received. I remain optimistic that the football club can do business with this new Swindon Borough Council administration.

The balance to that opf course, is Swindon are still waiting for a promised redevelopment...

So, set the deal right, and freehold not needed. Probably helps the football stadium remain a football stadium if it's held elsewhere In fact, long lease peppercorn rent from football club, and freehold owned by council could be the ideal way to ensure the football club's interests are the priority at the football stadium...

However, you might want the freehold to add even more value than a long lease adds, to aid an exit sale strategy.

You might of course also want the freehold to borrow against, and take a wild punt at reaching the top flight, a free card for shit or bust...

SkyblueBazza · Sep 20, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
Straight questions why is it absolutely essential for the CLUB to own the freehold of the Ricoh site? What does it achieve for CCFC?

If the club rents the Ricoh...it is conceivable the revenue generated on match days would benefit us under FFP rules. Owning the Ricoh means increased costs in mainaining it & employing those that make it work, BUT profit from concerts conferences etc would also be classified as revenue for the club & could therefore be put to use for future success on the pitch.

Deleted member 5849 · Sep 20, 2013

That#'s back to how a lease is structured though.

If the club gets a nice laissez-faire lease for plenty of time, in effect they 'own' the property and can do what they like with it.

But of course can't change the fundamentals about what it is, for both better or worse, without consulting the freeholder.

oldskyblue58 · Sep 20, 2013

SkyblueBazza said:
If the club rents the Ricoh...it is conceivable the revenue generated on match days would benefit us under FFP rules. Owning the Ricoh means increased costs in mainaining it & employing those that make it work, BUT profit from concerts conferences etc would also be classified as revenue for the club & could therefore be put to use for future success on the pitch.

You dont need to own the Ricoh to own those income streams and take advantage of the turnover for FFP though. The income from those events sits in IEC Experience Limited which is owned 77% by ACL and 23% by Compass. Take a long lease at low rent and buy the 77% shares and you achieve exactly the same and probably at less cost. So owning the Ricoh is not essential to CCFC on that basis

The Freehold at the Ricoh (1 Viewer)

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

CCFC Finance Director

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency