Covstu
Well-Known Member
They know as well as we all do that their prospects are slim so i think it is niave to think that this is that last throw of the dice. They are here long term.
Once the JR is out the way Sisu have no other reason to stay.
They will have no other way of getting there money back.
Hopefully they will put the club up for sale and lets see what happens.
Should SISU decide to walk away I think the outcome will depend on what will give them the best return. So you have to hope someone will come in with an offer for the club that is better than them dismantling things and selling off what few assets we have.
I think the Golden share is our biggest assett and that will be worth nothing if they liquidate.
You can't expect a buyer to service the SISU/AVRO debt when there is nothing on the other side of the balance sheet.
At least ACL has a 250 year lease and with little if any rental payments to offset the loan.
If the club goes up for sale it will be the value of the quantifiable assets not the debt.
If anybody pays above that it will be in good will.
I would say the whole point of the JR is to get compensation from CCC for loss of business.
PRobably the same time we hear your news you promised?
I wonder what kind of new owners would be acceptable? Somehow I have the feeling that only a sugar daddy will be acceptable and I fear there are not too many around.
Don't want to sound unkind but I followed the AFC Wimbledon story closely and their fans just seemed to have more wherewithal than Covs, for whatever reason.
How would you suggest a fan base of under 10K raises £50m or more to buy out SISU? That's before you even consider the amount needed to purchase a stake in the Ricoh or build a new stadium.
The OP is probably correct.
Until the supporters own a big chunk/all of the club, you will continue ''to have things done to you'' rather than influencing events.
Don't want to sound unkind but I followed the AFC Wimbledon story closely and their fans just seemed to have more wherewithal than Covs, for whatever reason.
I think the Portsmouth fans have a lot of wherewithal and they really have improved their lot haven't they?
If you mean they're still in existance then yes they have.
Well no they haven't - how has fan involvement actually improved their situation? They are by far the biggest team in that league and are drifting to relegation.
If you apply your logic sisu have kept this club in business and have a stronger position in the leagues so I guess they are heroes to you Tony.
I think they would sell for a lot less, they need to cut losses ASAP.
We have a stadium that's our home, do long term rental agreement. Show them we can be run properly and find some people who can run a football team, the fans do need to be involved even if only percentage.
Would there have been a Portsmouth if the fans hadn't stepped in? I don't think so, so that's an improvement over non existance isn't it.
I know you like to turn all of your post in to a defence of SISU and twist any other post into a defence of SISU but dont insult me suggeting it's my logic or what they mean to me.
The measure of SISU is how they have improved our position since their arrival. They haven't, unless you can tell me otherwise. Unlike the Portsmouth fans who have improved their situation by keeping the club and dream alive.
They're also 1 place higher in their league than we are in ours plus they have a game in hand on the teams below them unlike most of the teams below us who have a game in hand over us. Not forgeting its only the bottom 2 in league 2 that go down not 4. So currently they look safer than us.
Great a long term rental deal, just like before. How do you run the club properly and "show ambition" when your access to revenues are so limited?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
FFP doesn't apply in league one does it?
has anyone (including SISU) actually done the homework of how much the non matchday revenues are off set by the 365day a year cost of running a stadium? To pay out theres Gas, Electricity, Rates, Cleaning, General maintenance, Repairs etc. etc. If we get the right long term rent deal how much worse of our we actually going to end up being without the burden of paying to run a stadium on top of the debt from building it?
I know someone is going to quote FFP but thats only a cap on what you can spend not what you actually have available to spend.
FFP doesn't apply in league one does it?
Which is why I'd like to see the business case before righting off the new stadium. My (less than) ideal would be for us to purchase 50% of the ricoh, which isn't going to happen. But we had a long term rent deal, with little not access to revenues, we've been paying our utilities, cleaning, contribution to repairs (matchday costs).
A long term rent deal is just more of the same, wasps will certainly expect more than the £100k we're currently paying.
At the end of the day we need to figures in order to inform a decision, my guessing is that it will come down to which is the "least worse" option.
Rock < ccfc > hard place
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I think he's trying to say if you got £5m income, FFP says you can spend £3m on wages, but if your running costs before players wages are more than 40% say 50%, then actual cash you only have £2.5m to spend on players, so would need to borrow/make a loss of £500k to max out the allowance.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
But if it's a red herring for Sisu, it's a red herring for every league one and two club. There must have been some analysis done by the FL to conclude 55-60% should be disposable income.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
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?