I was eleven in 87
Well-Known Member
This is quite a good and informative read, I couldn't copy and paste the lot so here is the link.....
NewsNow: Loading story...
NewsNow: Loading story...
Yeah, he was on with Fisher and Moz from the SBT. That was the chap who got Fisher to admit his £1M profit was EBIT (although unfortunately the relevance of that admission was not explored further on air).this is the guy that was on CWR with Fisher (after the Talksport interview)?
this is the guy that was on CWR with Fisher (after the Talksport interview)?
And that's the problem in a nutshell. If the campaign is for SISU to sell up and go then there needs to be an offer made to them which they deem acceptable.viable for who CD? because there would seem to be a big gap between what SISU would need to realise to go and what any rational purchaser would value their purchase at.
I'm not talking about detail but you can surely give a vague idea of what you are after. If you're saying new owners must be acceptable to the fans then don't you have to quantify that? Does the club run at break even or does the club run at a huge loss in the hope of being completive. We all know that even if we owned the stadium those would be the two options so what is deemed acceptable. New stadium or stay at the Ricoh is a similar issue. As we are always reminded football doesn't operate like a normal business. If the Trust or one of the campaign groups have a brilliant plan for how the club can increase revenues then why not make it known, we are all supposed to be pushing in the same direction.Until SISU are saying we want to sell then I am not sure why any negotiator would reveal their hand now, Trust or otherwise.
Frankly until proper due diligence is done then how do you get the information to set out a plan.
I think we'd struggle with raising funds at the best of times. In a scenario where you're asking fans to put in money in return for zero control IMO it will be near impossible.Fans ownership is not a hard and fast concept, yes there might be thought of fans control but it doesn't follow it will be.
That has to have limited possibilities. It's almost like the Crewe ALex model of previous years that proved to be unsustainableI think they will keep the club in a form of stasis in league one, trying to move to a position where they can run the club without investment and take out up to £1M p.a. by selling players year on year. If the conveyor belt of talent is continual then the income stream is built up and persists over 3-4 years as the (more likely) sold players bonus conditions are met.
SISU have stated that our club is not for sale. So why would they state what they want?And that's the problem in a nutshell. If the campaign is for SISU to sell up and go then there needs to be an offer made to them which they deem acceptable.
I'm not talking about detail but you can surely give a vague idea of what you are after. If you're saying new owners must be acceptable to the fans then don't you have to quantify that? Does the club run at break even or does the club run at a huge loss in the hope of being completive. We all know that even if we owned the stadium those would be the two options so what is deemed acceptable. New stadium or stay at the Ricoh is a similar issue. As we are always reminded football doesn't operate like a normal business. If the Trust or one of the campaign groups have a brilliant plan for how the club can increase revenues then why not make it known, we are all supposed to be pushing in the same direction.
I think we'd struggle with raising funds at the best of times. In a scenario where you're asking fans to put in money in return for zero control IMO it will be near impossible.
We are a much bigger club. And we have much more potential.That has to have limited possibilities. It's almost like the Crewe ALex model of previous years that proved to be unsustainable
I haven't suggested they state what they want. I have suggested that for them to leave an offer they deem acceptable needs to be made.SISU have stated that our club is not for sale. So why would they state what they want?
Exactly. So if you want SISU to sell what do you do? Sitting in after a game or running on the pitch will achieve nothing. You need to target SISU's business. If owning CCFC is having a negative impact on their ability to gain and retain clients they will look to offload it. Of course if you're going down that route you need to be sure there is someone waiting in the wings to takeover.If you were to make an offer for our club you would want to offer what it is worth. As in not a lot. SISU won't accept that.
Which is what Nick appears happy to settle for.:angelic:The alternative to starting the process (and this is only a start) is to sit back do nothing and accept what is
Which is what Nick appears happy to settle for.:angelic:
Excuse my ignorance- but how do you know they were contacting potential buyers 18 months ago? I hope this is true as it gives me personal hope that SISU are getting realistic.First off this is a step in the right direction. There needs to be dialogue on what happens if and when SISU go and what the desired end result of any campaign is.
That said, in my opinion, this piece raises more questions than it answers. Hopefully this is the start of an ongoing dialogue and the JHW will be prepared to engage, that is far preferable to the anyone who doesn't agree is wrong attitude we've seen in the past.
Few points that spring to mind:
It says JHW isn't a SISU out protest but rather they want SISU to put the club up for sale. I certainly don't think that message has been coming across and I suspect if you spoke to those who went on the pitch or staged the sit in most would be in the SISU out camp. The message needs to be clearer.
Making statements that the club is in danger of going out of business if we are relegated just takes away from the core message. It also plays into Fishers hands, he can bat comments like that away all day as there no evidence to back it up. Stick to a core message and don't bring anything that can't be backed up into it.
There's mention of the need for investment by a new owner. How are they proposing the club is run? Do they want to abandon the aim of having the club be self sustaining in favour of building up more debt? Is this new owner gifting the cost of a new stadium?
Fan ownership for CCFC is a total fantasy as far as I'm concerned. There's mention of Portsmouth 2,500 supporters donated (in any normal sense of the word they don't own a share) £1,000 each to acquire a minority interest in the club. Thats a team with well over 10K season ticket holders. They also attracted investors to assist in exchange for allowing their council to remove a planning restriction on the car park which is now a Tesco! Then add in they were still getting parachute payments and had a 7 figure loan from the local council and you can easily see the issues for us doing something similar.
I've said before the way to get rid of SISU is by giving them a viable exit strategy. I don't for a minute believe they don't want to go, especially as they were contacting potential buyers 18 months ago. Then there needs to be a viable plan to run the club when they leave. There's no reason that can't be put forward now. And of course if there are potential new owners waiting in the wings we need to hear from them. Not normally a fan of doing business in public but I feel this is an exception.
While it is a good article in the sense there's not a lot you can disagree with it the details that are lacking are key.
It may well end up being sold for £1 but the key will be what happens with the debt. Written off, pennies in the pound offer or carried over to the new owners.Personally I think I could put up a very good case for the Club as it stands being worth £1 - am sure the Trust could afford that but am equally sure SISU would reject it without blinking an eye
Ranson was pretty open about his plan when he came in and people have repeatedly asked for SISU's plan. Problem is you then get Fisher on the radio saying exactly what they plan is and people either don't believe him, which is understandable, or just choose to ignore what he says.It is interesting that the Trust or new owners must put out the details of the plan but we have had 9 years of owners who have steadfastly refused to disclose any real plan. Few football club owners or prospective ones actually put forward their plan in to the public domain to be fair though
Which to me is why it needs to proceed with caution. If the campaign pushes SISU to walk, unlikely but you never know, then there needs to be someone ready to step in.this is not going to be a quick process
Doris the tea lady told me :angelic:Excuse my ignorance- but how do you know they were contacting potential buyers 18 months ago?
Doris the tea lady told me :angelic:
From what I've been told they were looking in the region of £30m which clearly no one they approached even considered. Suspect their expectations will now be lowered but I think its a nonsense to assume any football club is not for sale.
LOL, that is more like the going rate for Birmingham City, who I presume own St Andrews.
Yes that's exactly what they will doI think they will keep the club in a form of stasis in league one, trying to move to a position where they can run the club without investment and take out up to £1M p.a. by selling players year on year. If the conveyor belt of talent is continual then the income stream is built up and persists over 3-4 years as the (more likely) sold players bonus conditions are met.
If what CD has heard is correct it's laughable. Wolves were only just sold for £45M and they own their own ground (something we don't), training ground (something we won't for much longer), CAT 1 status academy (something we don't have or ownthe facilities for), championship status (something we don't) and are they still receiving parachute payments? Not sure what the clubs debt is but even if it is as much or more than ours they have tangible assets to attach it to. £30M my arse.
Excuse my ignorance- but how do you know they were contacting potential buyers 18 months ago? I hope this is true as it gives me personal hope that SISU are getting realistic.
We understand that over the last few years there have been two enquires to buy the club, both met with JS and then walked away.
(Preston Haskell was not one of these, he never got to the stage of meeting with JS)
Just out of interest do you understand if these were individuals, consortiums, hedge funds etc?
To expect £30m for CCFC would seem on that basis hugely hopeful to the point of ridiculous
As far as the information we were given one was a individual the other a consortium.
But it probably sets a marker, assuming that is the first negotiating figure I would have thought Joyless wants to recover £15M, which pays off ARVO, the SISU funds I believe are written off and ARVO has preference over them.
point was they had a period where they were up down between League 1 & championship but always had to sell off promising young players to pay the bills and hope a new prospect would emerge through the youth ranks to repeat the cycle. talent dried up and ultimately ended up dropping into League 2.We are a much bigger club. And we have much more potential.
but the point remains can't sell Ryton until a new facility is in place - which would probably cost more than the Ryton income anyway.I suspect that would only happen after the sale of Ryton and ARVO have recovered their charges that they have against it.
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?