Razzle Dazzle Dean Gordon
Well-Known Member
I don't doubt that Wasps have got the Ricoh at a good rate, I just don't see that convincing the Council to help SISU (and by extension CCFC) out to any great extent.
But the initial finance to buy the stadium was in place - the Council rolled over the loan until WASPs raised their own
This was a sweet deal that trebled the value ( allegedly ) to enable WASPS finance to find £36m of Bondholders. The monies raised provided funds to clear the initial debt, the Chairmans Loan account plus some change to pay the Bond interest back to the Holders with their own money.
You can't see why they wouldn't give things up like that BEFORE any talks even start? Where the council and wasps could then do whatever?
They have said they are willing to drop, of course it's not gospel but we won't find out
Do “whatever”? I’m asking what they could do.
Do you think they wouldn’t offer a sensible deal? All your theories seem to start from the idea what Wasps don’t want us in the ground. Why?
A question for you. In what way would we be worse off if Wasps and the council agreed to engage with the club?I’m asking what they could do.
We you talk of naivety.Are you being purposely naive again? Why won't sisu drop the legals before any talks?
They could refuse to talk, they could still try and take the piss for starters, they could just laugh and say nice one.
That's why they go into discussions to see if they been meet in the middle to get a deal for ccfc and hopefully the legals gone.
It really is that simple, people are not going to drop their hand before even beginning talks.
Thats the opposite of calling their bluff. Calling their bluff would be to say great, lets get a meeting sorted and get things moving on the new stadium.Their bluff is be called by Drop the legals or NO ltalking.
How are sisu fucked? This is the sort of thing people like you and the trust were getting excited about when Haskell was about. Its ccfc who are fucked.We you talk of naivety.
Look Sisu know they are fucked they are trying to save face by saying we will drop the levels IF.
Their bluff is be called by Drop the legals or NO ltalking.
Easy really just have to see who is the second one to blink.
It’s a bargaining chip. It depends what a sensible deal is. To Wasps it might be something different to what the club feels.Do “whatever”? I’m asking what they could do.
Do you think they wouldn’t offer a sensible deal? All your theories seem to start from the idea what Wasps don’t want us in the ground. Why?
Exactly. Its common sense.It’s a bargaining chip. It depends what a sensible deal is. To Wasps it might be something different to what the club feels.
SISU have one bargaining chip, they give that up then they’re open to wasps charging what they want on whatever terms they want
Yep, they've leveraged the stadium to buy it out presumably with the approval of the council.But the initial finance to buy the stadium was in place - the Council rolled over the loan until WASPs raised their own
This was a sweet deal that trebled the value ( allegedly ) to enable WASPS finance to find £36m of Bondholders. The monies raised provided funds to clear the initial debt, the Chairmans Loan account plus some change to pay the Bond interest back to the Holders with their own money.
Are you being purposely naive again? Why won't sisu drop the legals before any talks?
They could refuse to talk, they could still try and take the piss for starters, they could just laugh and say nice one.
That's why they go into discussions to see if they been meet in the middle to get a deal for ccfc and hopefully the legals gone.
It really is that simple, people are not going to drop their hand before even beginning talks.
It’s a bargaining chip. It depends what a sensible deal is. To Wasps it might be something different to what the club feels.
SISU have one bargaining chip, they give that up then they’re open to wasps charging what they want on whatever terms they want
I’ve said before, agree a deal conditional on The legal action being dropped
I also think it’s been agreed. Someone said last week it had.Sisus bargaining chip should be their rental payments and ancillary benefits.
Agree with your last line though. Seems like a perfect solution. Make the deal contingent on that and the ball is in Sisus court.
Does make you wonder why the government, West Midlands Combined Authority, the EFL and CCC couldn’t suggest that yesterday.
Because nobody with any clout from ccc turned up.Sisus bargaining chip should be their rental payments and ancillary benefits.
Agree with your last line though. Seems like a perfect solution. Make the deal contingent on that and the ball is in Sisus court.
Does make you wonder why the government, West Midlands Combined Authority, the EFL and CCC couldn’t suggest that yesterday.
I wonder if that will happen anyway, as the last home game is after the EFL meeting which could vote CCFC out of existence?We could take the seats from the Ricoh and then London Wasps can put their own in.
Cost saving already.
Yep, they've leveraged the stadium to buy it out presumably with the approval of the council.
But if ccfc dies, that will have the same, potentially greater, negative impact on the Ricoh leading to failure. And if wasps did go under, a prominent white elephant for all to see. Scandalous.I suppose my point/fear is that just because it's none of CCFC's concern doesn't mean that it will attract the Council's support because they will be looking at the interests of the City as a whole (which wouldn't be served by a failed Ricoh, brought on by CCFC moving away). Hopefully i'm wrong, the parties can prove that it's viable and we end up with a proper home. I think the bigger problem is probably that the Joy Seppala Memorial Stadium will only ever get built if SISU can get somebody else to pay for it.
The under value of the lease is part of the Sisu argument for JR2 that has been rejected in court several times already. Comparing apples and pears in their words. The leverage doesn't prove sale at under value at all.
Date of sale there is no sporting lease tenant other than a four year agreement with Ccfc who said they are not staying. Value in accounts 18m
The key is, the lease is an ACL asset and ACL is a separate company owned by the wasps group so in group accounts it becomes a wasps asset but is always owned by acl. It is use of the group situation to create value.
If ACL who own the lease give wasps rugby a 50 year lease at say 500k per annum then that increases the value of the lease in ACL. At a net present value of say 3% that alone adds 13m to the lease value. Of course the rent can be set at anything they choose because the money remains in the wasps holdings group its just a question of where. Call the rent 750k and with the other agreements and incomes it is not difficult to get to 48m of the first valuation
In those circumstances then the under valuation at date of sale is? Just because the value changes under different ownership doesn't mean the sale was under valued. Especially if new sub leases are created after the date of sale. And no you do not include the effect of being under wasps ownership in the sale value... no one would pay a third party for their own brand, for anyone to suggest they should or would is complete nonsense
Between a rock & hard place.But if ccfc dies, that will have the same, potentially greater, negative impact on the Ricoh leading to failure. And if wasps did go under, a prominent white elephant for all to see. Scandalous.
The under value of the lease is part of the Sisu argument for JR2 that has been rejected in court several times already. Comparing apples and pears in their words. The leverage doesn't prove sale at under value at all.
Date of sale there is no sporting lease tenant other than a four year agreement with Ccfc who said they are not staying. Value in accounts 18m
The key is, the lease is an ACL asset and ACL is a separate company owned by the wasps group so in group accounts it becomes a wasps asset but is always owned by acl. It is use of the group situation to create value.
If ACL who own the lease give wasps rugby a 50 year lease at say 500k per annum then that increases the value of the lease in ACL. At a net present value of say 3% that alone adds 13m to the lease value. Of course the rent can be set at anything they choose because the money remains in the wasps holdings group its just a question of where. Call the rent 750k and with the other agreements and incomes it is not difficult to get to 48m of the first valuation
In those circumstances then the under valuation at date of sale is? Just because the value changes under different ownership doesn't mean the sale was under valued. Especially if new sub leases are created after the date of sale. And no you do not include the effect of being under wasps ownership in the sale value... no one would pay a third party for their own brand, for anyone to suggest they should or would is complete nonsense
Another area where SISU's court cases do damage to public opinion. The narrow points if law don't necessarily say who's 'right' or 'wrong' in a subjective sense... but they do influence it by offering some thing to point to.Annoyimg people come on and say so and so fact proves validity of such and such claim when the original claims have been through the courts and examined in great detail by High Court Judges an dismissed. Purely emotional responses to a legal matter. You may reasoably think it is not fair or right but it isn't contrary to civil & commercial law.
It is also annoying that this or that action that took place in the past gets dragged up. Currently the situation that exists needs to be solved, that can only happen by agreement between Wasps and SISU.
I was with Moz (and no I’m not a SBT member and never have been) yesterday and I can say that those of us that know him will know that he is a genuine City fan like the rest of us who is trying to do his bit, that’s all. I can tell you he is sick of it like the rest of us and just wants to support his team. There is no agenda. I don’t know CJ or any of the others so cannot/will not comment on them.
Ha if I was making 9 you wouldn't be so desperate all the time and wouldn't have tried to make another account to back yourself up.Most of that stuff comes from Nick, he sees stuff on the internet, puts 2 & 2 together and makes 9.
Its somewhat ridiculous, if there was a far reaching campaign like he thinks do you think it would be so ham fisted.
I'm sure there is still a Hoffman consortium out there but all the interested parties with real money are awaiting developments and hoping SISU trigger an exit strategy game sooner rather than later.
Its just that the fans have become polarized because there are issues that threaten the continuing existance of the club.You get strong views expressed pithily on social media, its so easy to do.
Roll on the day we can all get back to arguing about little but team selection and whether the manager should be replaced.
Why was the Sisu offer for the Higgs share refused then? ACL was worthless without CCFC. Sisu offered 2 million, a little less than the share was sold for. Why were the club being told to pay more than a London rugby club? Why after paying circa 10 million in rent, were we told to pay more?
People will say there was a formula price but surely we should have paid what it’s worth?
Not sure how any of that changes why the lease value can change under different ownership. The lease value to acl under ccc/charity can easily be increased in a short period of time in the hands of wasps simply by creating new long term lease tenants
Yes, but only £1m.Something I don't fully understand (not a comment on your previous explanations!) is that the stadium was sold at a value and with a lease of 50 years (or whatever was left of 50 years was it?). Not too long after that sale the lease was extended massively, which then enabled Wasps to add value to the overall asset. What I'm not sure of is why the initial deal for the stadium wasn't on the basis of the extended lease? Did Wasps pay for the extended lease?
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?