How does this compare to other clubs who rent? Is it the going rate or are we getting properly shafted? And if the latter, is it because FG have us over a barrel as we have no real alternative, or is it the best they can get away with at this time (perhaps part of a longer term plan)? Sorry for so many questions.Its significantly worse than the previous deal with wasps
We don't get any of the pie money either
No coincidence the prem package is a five year thing, and the stadium deal is a 5 year thing
So question is: a decade later, was the rent strike worth it?
Pros:
- Broke £1.2m lease
- Ultimately did bust ACL/Wasps
- Arguable bunker mentality has helped
- Anything else?
Cons:
- Fan split
- Reduced income/increased rent while away
- Lost chance at 50% share
- Not likely to ever bust Frasers
- Lease > Licence
the initial lease wasn’t tangible for anyone
The actual cost was £1.5m with no access other than matchdays no revenues from match related activity
The other problem was ACl was made up from a woefully inadequate council and an egotistical fool - they also only had a lease that from day one was worthless do the whole management company - and therefore the football club - was totally unsustainable and not saleable
Neither would have survived
So you’re saying it was a success?
Im saying the original lease was a dumb lease that would have bankrupted ACl and also the football club.
Setting a 50 year lease was the most stupid idea imaginable
Cool, so in answer to my question, was the rent strike worth it?
It’s ll not cool it’s a fact - I can see why the council gave it that lease as it made it unsalable. If you define success as still existing as a club then yea it was as it got rid of the morons at the council and forced them to offer a commercial leased a buyer could fund against
I’ll put you down as undecided.
So question is: a decade later, was the rent strike worth it?
Pros:
- Broke £1.2m lease
- Ultimately did bust ACL/Wasps
- Arguable bunker mentality has helped
- Anything else?
Cons:
- Fan split
- Reduced income/increased rent while away
- Lost chance at 50% share
- Not likely to ever bust Frasers
- Lease > Licence
... and could have bought back half the 1.2m rent by buying back the Higgs shares.We’re probably paying more than £1.2m now anyway and if we hadn’t bust ACL then there never would’ve been a Wasps or Frasers.
And the massive debt... and could have bought back half the 1.2m rent by buying back the Higgs shares.
Add up all the costs of not buying the stadium (lost revenues, the rent we paid to blues, the rent we paid to wasps, the rent we are paying to FG... would it have been much different in the long run. Especially when you consider that ACL were prepared to offer reduced terms before we eventually did break the lease.And the massive debt
Yeah, and not a great lease length. Nobody bought at that deal for a reason.And the massive debt
Is it possible that the increase in cost of the corporate boxes is because Frasers have increased how much they charge us for access to them?
Yeah, and not a great lease length. Nobody bought at that deal for a reason.
Yeah but that is where Fisher made a tit of himself.
When Wasps bought the ground he said like a sulky child that he wouldn’t want the ground under those terms.
Next minute he’s claiming Wasps underpaid.
Both those statements couldn’t be correct
It was 2 argumentsYeah but that is where Fisher made a tit of himself.
When Wasps bought the ground he said like a sulky child that he wouldn’t want the ground under those terms.
Next minute he’s claiming Wasps underpaid.
Both those statements couldn’t be correct
That's because wasps didn't buy it under those terms.
It was 2 arguments
The 50 year lease - shit terms
When the council extended it to a 250 year lease - they’d grossly underpaid
Wasps couldn’t run a piss up in a brewery - this is why they were destroyed, they did underpay for a 250 year leaseThe fact that it basically destroyed Wasps suggests they didn’t underpay
Wasps couldn’t run a piss up in a brewery - this is why they were destroyed, they did underpay for a 250 year lease
They paid 17m for assets out of administration.So presumably Frasers underpaid as well?
They paid 17m for assets out of administration.
wasps paid 6.5 from a local authority
Look on the SBT mythbusting pageWasps didn’t pay £6.5m
If they did they would still exist now!
Look on the SBT mythbusting page
Myth Busting - Facts about SISU, Ricoh, CCC etc etc
SBT - Fact or Fiction, Myth or Truth (Part 1) - Coventry MAD I am the first to moan, so I want to be the first to say fair play! It just keeps the things there in black and white and to the point to clear up a few of them and then some facts to back them up! It's how it should be. Just things...www.skybluestalk.co.uk
- The sale was two separate purchases of roughly £2.77m each. The cost of purchasing a company is the cost of purchasing the voting shares.
- That put the sale value of the shares in ACL at £5.54m at that time
They then paid £1m to extend the lease to 250 years
Didn’t have to - they paid 6.5m. They bought a company for 6.5m with a loan on itYou’re not including the debt in that
...and then to clear the debt cost another 14m... so the total marketable value of the asset was in the region of 20m unencumbered...Look on the SBT mythbusting page
Myth Busting - Facts about SISU, Ricoh, CCC etc etc
SBT - Fact or Fiction, Myth or Truth (Part 1) - Coventry MAD I am the first to moan, so I want to be the first to say fair play! It just keeps the things there in black and white and to the point to clear up a few of them and then some facts to back them up! It's how it should be. Just things...www.skybluestalk.co.uk
- The sale was two separate purchases of roughly £2.77m each. The cost of purchasing a company is the cost of purchasing the voting shares.
- That put the sale value of the shares in ACL at £5.54m at that time
They then paid £1m to extend the lease to 250 years
But that wasn’t the question - Wasps bought a 250 year lease for 6.5m...and then to clear the debt cost another 14m... so the total marketable value of the asset was in the region of 20m unencumbered...
Didn’t have to - they paid 6.5m. They bought a company for 6.5m with a loan on it
Not if you already plan to not pay £100m to others….The one I always remember was Fisher saying that Wasps had overpaid for the ground. He was actually right on that.
you asked what they paid for it it was £6.5m they used the value of ACL (50m) to sell bonds in it. And loaded it with 35m debt. If anything using your analogy they re-mortgaged it. They didn’t pay the 35m back. So yeah they paid 6.5mThat’s like saying you can buy a house for £10k
Yes you’ll have £200k mortgage, but you’ve bought a house with £10k
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?