Wasps current finances & hope (3 Viewers)

[Mild-Mannered Janitor]

Just my view on this about the tactics and what I believe is really happening here and to do that.

Firstly, the argument SISU are pushing is that the stadium was sold at a value lower than it should have been and Wasps then had immediately valued higher by Strutt&Parker at a higher level and launched the bonds.

Similar to SISU who lost their first case because they were losing money then magically turned the finances around to show a profit and therefore they were losing out on something, Wasps are now role reversal of this.

If the bonds are successful and the value of the stadium is a lot higher then this gives SISU a stronger chance to challenge the under valuation of the sale by the council so you have a very devious and calculated tactic now to say that it’s not viable, crash the bond price and make a strong defence.
It’s all about a story and one that is not true, I would have though Les would have realised this by now and dug a little deeper.

Wasps are not going anywhere and this is completely viable and a huge success for them but they are having to create a false situation and then won’t it be amazing when the bonds value suddenly increases and it’s all ok after the hearing.

 

---

[wingy]

Basic points from a quick glance

Good (for wasps)

• Turnover (sales) across all group companies activities up 8.5% to £33.6m
• The Ricoh went up in value by £11.5m and is now worth £60m as valued by a 3rd party independent valuer
• They made reduced loss compared with previous year of £3.8m v £6.3m
• The directors having taken legal advice don’t think sisu,s claim against them has any merit

Bad

• Having admit to issue with providing falsified documents to the auditors to try and make sales higher in the accounts. When corrected this led them to break criteria re bonds, which meant they had to get bond holder approval to change rules , which they got with no problem
• They have no cash in hand left. 2 years ago they had £12m cash in bank, last year £279k as of June 17 they had a £1.5m bank overdraft and a £0.5bank loan repayable over next 3 years. Richardson is now owed £12.9m up from £9.1m last year.
• They have drawn down £33.8m of the £35m raised . They are paying interest at 6.5% p.a. On this loan and like a interest only mortgage they need to pay back the balance in full by 2022. Can’t see how this will be possible without another bond issue. How likely is another bond issue to attract enough subscribers? Good question, I’ve no idea, is the answer
• The bond price went down around 11% today. This means people with bonds have been selling them as concerned of wasps ability to repay the bond when mature in 2022
• Current assets total £7.8 this is basically stock they hold or amounts due to be paid to them within 12months. But current liabilities are £15.6m ie amounts they are due to pay in next 12months
• Based on the fact they are making losses year on year and the above they are only being allowed to carry on trading due to support from the shareholders. (Basically richardson, bit like with ccfc sisu promising to cover funding shortfallls to keep the business running
• Without the revaluation on the Ricoh they would have a negative balance sheet , which means they have more liabilities than assets
• They incurred £300k of costs investigating the audit evidence issue, and legal costs re the court case from sisu

To sum up, they increased sales, so could argue are growing as a business but still making losses. Cash flow must start to be an issue as no longer have and cash in hand and rely on overdraft bank loans and owner putting money in. The major question mark is what happens in 2022 regarding how they repay the bonds.

A point I've been querying is 'If' a bit of disaster they get to the point where the bond becomes toxic to punters but attractive to pick up themselves.
Obviously this would take money, does he have it?

 

[lordsummerisle]

Just my view on this about the tactics and what I believe is really happening here and to do that.

Firstly, the argument SISU are pushing is that the stadium was sold at a value lower than it should have been and Wasps then had immediately valued higher by Strutt&Parker at a higher level and launched the bonds.

Similar to SISU who lost their first case because they were losing money then magically turned the finances around to show a profit and therefore they were losing out on something, Wasps are now role reversal of this.

If the bonds are successful and the value of the stadium is a lot higher then this gives SISU a stronger chance to challenge the under valuation of the sale by the council so you have a very devious and calculated tactic now to say that it’s not viable, crash the bond price and make a strong defence.
It’s all about a story and one that is not true, I would have though Les would have realised this by now and dug a little deeper.

Wasps are not going anywhere and this is completely viable and a huge success for them but they are having to create a false situation and then won’t it be amazing when the bonds value suddenly increases and it’s all ok after the hearing.

Jesus Tittyfucking Christ!

 

[clint van damme]

Jesus Tittyfucking Christ!

I don't understand what you're driving at with that exclamation but I've given you a like because it's a beauty.

 

[Nick]

Just my view on this about the tactics and what I believe is really happening here and to do that.

Firstly, the argument SISU are pushing is that the stadium was sold at a value lower than it should have been and Wasps then had immediately valued higher by Strutt&Parker at a higher level and launched the bonds.

Similar to SISU who lost their first case because they were losing money then magically turned the finances around to show a profit and therefore they were losing out on something, Wasps are now role reversal of this.

If the bonds are successful and the value of the stadium is a lot higher then this gives SISU a stronger chance to challenge the under valuation of the sale by the council so you have a very devious and calculated tactic now to say that it’s not viable, crash the bond price and make a strong defence.
It’s all about a story and one that is not true, I would have though Les would have realised this by now and dug a little deeper.

Wasps are not going anywhere and this is completely viable and a huge success for them but they are having to create a false situation and then won’t it be amazing when the bonds value suddenly increases and it’s all ok after the hearing.

So they have submitted fake accounts?

What part of those accounts is a huge success for them?

 

[speedie87]

The way I think bonds works is they start off with a par value so think it was £100 for a bond (you actually had to buy £2000) to get one at the start, this bond then entitles you to 6.5% p.a. Interest on your bond and the full £100 back at the bond maturity date in this case 2022. The bonds are publically listed however so people can buy and sell them.

The bond price will go up and down based on things like actual interest rates, Risk and just basic supply , demand. In theory a bond price would get closer to its par value just before its maturity as if you buy it at that point that’s all you’d get back. When the bond price is trading below its par value someone can effectively buy a bond and get more than 6.5% return , as you could say only pay £90 for it yet still get the same interest paid as someone who paid £100 at the start. Therefore it’s all a question of risk, if people who had bonds at the start sell now at £85 they will lose £15 a bond so say they had the minimum £2000, at the start they would lose £300.

They therefore have weigh up the odds of not actually getting the £100 they are due in 2022 back and giving up on the interest they are due between now and then. Based on £2,000 investment they could earn about £520 of interest and their £2,000 back in 2022. So people selling now at a loss obviously aren’t too confident in getting their £2,000 backin 2022

How wasps plan to find the £35m , to repay the loans is the £35m question. They aren’t seemingly going to suddenly make £35m of profit between now and then, so refinancing ie issues more bonds to repay the current ones looks like an option. But if they still aren’t making profit how many people would want those bonds.

The bonds are secured bonds and I see a couple of queries today about the bonds being secured against the Ricoh lease....... I haven’t worked out exactly what would happen to the lease if they default on the bond repayments.

 

[martcov]

Tim Fisher said at the time he wouldn’t have taken the deal Wasps got. Although he made a half hearted bid, just for the record.

The downside would be if Wasps unwittingly proved that Grendel‘s white elephant claim was correct.

The point of CCFC owning it’s own stadium would be to have increased revenue through stadium profits. If Wasps fail because the stadium doesn’t generate enough profits, that sort of puts an end to that dream. The stadium maintenance was always going to be a problem ( according to me ). A disadvantage for ownership. The stadium has to generate enough to keep it in top shape at the very least. A successful City would increase footfall no end and the value of naming rights.

I don’t know what Wasps get for naming rights at the moment in limbo land, but a good contract for naming rights would take the pressure off.

Would think that would help City‘s Hand in future negotiations. City in League 2, potentially Championship would make the naming rights more attractive.

Hope we go up through the playoffs. That, plus a reborn CRFC, keeps the pressure on.

 

[ccfcway]

Just my view on this about the tactics and what I believe is really happening here and to do that.

Firstly, the argument SISU are pushing is that the stadium was sold at a value lower than it should have been and Wasps then had immediately valued higher by Strutt&Parker at a higher level and launched the bonds.

Similar to SISU who lost their first case because they were losing money then magically turned the finances around to show a profit and therefore they were losing out on something, Wasps are now role reversal of this.

If the bonds are successful and the value of the stadium is a lot higher then this gives SISU a stronger chance to challenge the under valuation of the sale by the council so you have a very devious and calculated tactic now to say that it’s not viable, crash the bond price and make a strong defence.
It’s all about a story and one that is not true, I would have though Les would have realised this by now and dug a little deeper.

Wasps are not going anywhere and this is completely viable and a huge success for them but they are having to create a false situation and then won’t it be amazing when the bonds value suddenly increases and it’s all ok after the hearing.

brilliant. gotta love this place.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Tim Fisher said at the time he wouldn’t have taken the deal Wasps got. Although he made a half hearted bid, just for the record.

The downside would be if Wasps unwittingly proved that Grendel‘s white elephant claim was correct.

The point of CCFC owning it’s own stadium would be to have increased revenue through stadium profits. If Wasps fail because the stadium doesn’t generate enough profits, that sort of puts an end to that dream. The stadium maintenance was always going to be a problem ( according to me ). A disadvantage for ownership. The stadium has to generate enough to keep it in top shape at the very least. A successful City would increase footfall no end and the value of naming rights.

I don’t know what Wasps get for naming rights at the moment in limbo land, but a good contract for naming rights would take the pressure off.

Would think that would help City‘s Hand in future negotiations. City in League 2, potentially Championship would make the naming rights more attractive.

Hope we go up through the playoffs. That, plus a reborn CRFC, keeps the pressure on.

The issue with the Ricoh from day one was the Yorkshire Bank loan, it hamstrung it then and the subsequent refinancing has carried it on

 

[Astute]

Just my view on this about the tactics and what I believe is really happening here and to do that.

Firstly, the argument SISU are pushing is that the stadium was sold at a value lower than it should have been and Wasps then had immediately valued higher by Strutt&Parker at a higher level and launched the bonds.

Similar to SISU who lost their first case because they were losing money then magically turned the finances around to show a profit and therefore they were losing out on something, Wasps are now role reversal of this.

If the bonds are successful and the value of the stadium is a lot higher then this gives SISU a stronger chance to challenge the under valuation of the sale by the council so you have a very devious and calculated tactic now to say that it’s not viable, crash the bond price and make a strong defence.
It’s all about a story and one that is not true, I would have though Les would have realised this by now and dug a little deeper.

Wasps are not going anywhere and this is completely viable and a huge success for them but they are having to create a false situation and then won’t it be amazing when the bonds value suddenly increases and it’s all ok after the hearing.

I can't see anything here that I agree with.

Isn't it amazing how differently 2 people can see the same thing.

And whilst on the subject there is hardly any chance of SISU winning the impending case. How can you compare the value of a sporting stadium without any clubs playing there and make out it is the same value as when two sporting clubs are using it?

So how can that affect the present value of the bonds?

 

[Mild-Mannered Janitor]

Final piece of the tactic I forgot to add is the double bluff to SISU from Wasps when they say, ok, not making money, bonds have crashed, it is only worth £x so you can now buy it off us SISU, won’t look good if they don’t then buy in at that reduced price.

 

[stupot07]

Final piece of the tactic I forgot to add is the double bluff to SISU from Wasps when they say, ok, not making money, bonds have crashed, it is only worth £x so you can now buy it off us SISU, won’t look good if they don’t then buy in at that reduced price.

Lol. this is priceless

Bonkers




Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[CCFC54321]

Another thing to chuck into the equation is Land Rover won’t be taking over the Ricoh sponsorship and not 100% sure when the Land Rover sponsorship finishes but I doubt that will be renewed again. There’s nothing in it for JLR as Wasps get very small coverage and with there future more than uncertain no way will they continue when the current deals up.

The naughty behaviour of the wasps board by falsely reporting there financial position will also be taken into account. JLR won’t want to associated with these chancers.

With the cost cutting on there playing squad I predict next year they will struggle with relegation or be at best mid table. Quite simply, the Coventry public didn’t take to the Wasps move as well as they thought and after the initial ‘interest’ in there arrival it’s all died a death.

I’m ashamed to say I know a few people who have been to wasps games but only when they receive a free ticket. They simply don’t have enough interest in them to pay to watch Wasps.

I give them 2 years in Coventry before they head back to London. There on life support and they know it and now have a huge decision to make that will either ensure Wasps survive in some form or cease to exist.

I doubt they will be a Rugby club with the amount of debt they carry. I personally think there dreams over.

 

[Astute]

Final piece of the tactic I forgot to add is the double bluff to SISU from Wasps when they say, ok, not making money, bonds have crashed, it is only worth £x so you can now buy it off us SISU, won’t look good if they don’t then buy in at that reduced price.

You haven't learned much about SISU in their time with us.

Why do you think that they have refused to sign us up to a longer contract to play at the arena?

And if they had a friendly agreement between themselves why are SISU at their throats trying to waste time and money for Wasps?

I have only got one thing wrong in the SISU saga so far. I didn't think that they would take us to Northampton. That taught me to expect the unexpected.

What I see happening this time is Wasps going tits up over the bond repayments. Not sure if it will be because the club is finished or they move back to where they should be. But when the bonds were released I gave them until 2019. The reason for this was a part of the money raised was to pay back bond holders their interest until the end of 2017 IIRC.

To me it is unclear what will happen to the arena when there is a default on the bonds. It could well end up in court. It looks like it could be the wording of one contract against another.

But do you really think that SISU would buy the bonds up when they have crashed because that is what they agreed?

It will be down to SISU. I would guess it will be down to the old routine. We will be building our own stadium. We will move out of the arena. We will never be playing there again. The value of the arena will nosedive.

The only other way I could see it is if the bonds go so low that SISU bought them up at a very low price then asked Wasps for the 35m. But trading would be suspended before it reached very low. They would be looking at taking ownership of the arena so it could be sold. It is the sort of thing hedge funds buy into to make a quick profit.

But we should still expect the unexpected.

 

[Astute]

I doubt they will be a Rugby club with the amount of debt they carry. I personally think there dreams over.

It is a general problem with sporting teams. There always seems to be someone with more money than sense ready to take over. If they move back where they belong they should be OK. But it won't be easy. Or they find someone who is willing to throw away as many millions on a rugger club that would get them a half decent football club.

 

[italiahorse]

my irony metre just blew up!
You do know that slating wasps isn't an endorsement of sisu?
There is no one on here who has their colours nailed as firmly to a club relocating, carpet bagging mast as you.

Could it be considered as endorsing Sisu by not challenging them ?
Seems Wasps are getting the flack on here and Sisu very little, if any now.
Can understand it being on hold at the moment but lets not forget.

I can live with both if they can come to some long term arrangement and move on.
However, Wasps need to allow CCFC to work its way to equal partner over time as it will help both survive.

 

[Astute]

Could it be considered as endorsing Sisu by not challenging them ?
Seems Wasps are getting the flack on here and Sisu very little, if any now.
Can understand it being on hold at the moment but lets not forget.

I can live with both if they can come to some long term arrangement and move on.
However, Wasps need to allow CCFC to work its way to equal partner over time as it will help both survive.

SISU getting an easy time? Everything has been done to death with SISU. Nothing new has just come out. So we have nothing to have a go about.

And then we have Wasps.....

 

[Nick]

Could it be considered as endorsing Sisu by not challenging them ?
Seems Wasps are getting the flack on here and Sisu very little, if any now.
Can understand it being on hold at the moment but lets not forget.

I can live with both if they can come to some long term arrangement and move on.
However, Wasps need to allow CCFC to work its way to equal partner over time as it will help both survive.

So wasps need ccfc to take on half their debts?

I thought ccfc needed to die to let wasps save us?

Your deflection attempts are awful. Just the same as when you demanded everybody backed sisu.

 

[italiahorse]

So wasps need ccfc to take on half their debts?

I thought ccfc needed to die to let wasps save us?

Your deflection attempts are awful. Just the same as when you demanded everybody backed sisu.

You keep peddling the Sisu stuff.
You do realise that Sisu started okay then messed us up. I was one of many that thought saving us from administration was just great.
Should I stick with them when they did the unforgivable when they took us Northampton ? No

Wasps can manage the debt and I don’t expect CCFC to buy into it, yet. They can’t.
But if CCFC want to be part of the Ricoh set up (or any setup) and benefit from it they will at some time need to buy into it.

We won’t always be at this level and as we go up the leagues are value to Wasps will increase. The clever bit from Sisu is to use that as leverage in a long term deal.
Who knows if we ever get to the PL Wasps might become the minor party in the set up.
Again Sisu need to build trust with all involved (CCC and Wasps) or they will prevent this happening.
We are miles away from that particularly with the court cases but all above could happen in time.
Don’t see Wasps going as an answer to CCFC problems.
Just need to wait but keep applying pressure if we can on all parties.

 

[Nick]

You keep peddling the Sisu stuff.
You do realise that Sisu started okay then messed us up. I was one of many that thought saving us from administration was just great.
Should I stick with them when they did the unforgivable when they took us Northampton ? No

Wasps can manage the debt and I don’t expect CCFC to buy into it, yet. They can’t.
But if CCFC want to be part of the Ricoh set up (or any setup) and benefit from it they will at some time need to buy into it.

We won’t always be at this level and as we go up the leagues are value to Wasps will increase. The clever bit from Sisu is to use that as leverage in a long term deal.
Who knows if we ever get to the PL Wasps might become the minor party in the set up.
Again Sisu need to build trust with all involved (CCC and Wasps) or they will prevent this happening.
We are miles away from that particularly with the court cases but all above could happen in time.
Don’t see Wasps going as an answer to CCFC problems.
Just need to wait but keep applying pressure if we can on all parties.

Point me to where I am peddling any SISU stuff? Point me to where I have said anything a quarter as pro SISU as your outbursts demanding people back them? Why do you keep trying to pull that?

You told us we need to die and let Wasps pick up the pieces and save us, but now we need to be equal?

Get some consistency.

 

[clint van damme]

Could it be considered as endorsing Sisu by not challenging them ?
Seems Wasps are getting the flack on here and Sisu very little, if any now.
Can understand it being on hold at the moment but lets not forget.

I can live with both if they can come to some long term arrangement and move on.
However, Wasps need to allow CCFC to work its way to equal partner over time as it will help both survive.

I want them both gone. They're toxic.

 

[italiahorse]

Point me to where I am peddling any SISU stuff? Point me to where I have said anything a quarter as pro SISU as your outbursts demanding people back them? Why do you keep trying to pull that?

You told us we need to die and let Wasps pick up the pieces and save us, but now we need to be equal?

Get some consistency.

Never said you have been peddling Sisu stuff. Keep up.
But by not saying boo to them, supporting them in Northampton you are not with the majority of fans.

I still think we need to force the club away from Sisu by any means we can.
Otherwise this nonsense will drag on for another 10 years.
Wasps won't pick up CCFC it will go to someone who cares and will work with Wasps.
In fact the deal has probably already been done.Just need to wait and hope those involved don't loose interest.

 

[italiahorse]

I want them both gone. They're toxic.

Fair enough. But IMHO CCFC won't survive at the Ricoh.

 

[Nick]

Make up your mind, your story keeps changing.

I've watched every game this season and heard sisu out maybe a handful of times, I'd say you were in the minority trying to chat so much nonsense. You were in the minority shouting about sisu when they came in weren't you?

 

[Captain Dart]

I want them both gone. They're toxic.

Search as hard as you like but not a single scruple will be found.

 

[SBAndy]

You keep peddling the Sisu stuff.

Point me to where I am peddling any SISU stuff?

Never said you have been peddling Sisu stuff.

Fucking hell mate.

 

[Mild-Mannered Janitor]

You haven't learned much about SISU in their time with us.

Why do you think that they have refused to sign us up to a longer contract to play at the arena?

And if they had a friendly agreement between themselves why are SISU at their throats trying to waste time and money for Wasps?

I have only got one thing wrong in the SISU saga so far. I didn't think that they would take us to Northampton. That taught me to expect the unexpected.

What I see happening this time is Wasps going tits up over the bond repayments. Not sure if it will be because the club is finished or they move back to where they should be. But when the bonds were released I gave them until 2019. The reason for this was a part of the money raised was to pay back bond holders their interest until the end of 2017 IIRC.

To me it is unclear what will happen to the arena when there is a default on the bonds. It could well end up in court. It looks like it could be the wording of one contract against another.

But do you really think that SISU would buy the bonds up when they have crashed because that is what they agreed?

It will be down to SISU. I would guess it will be down to the old routine. We will be building our own stadium. We will move out of the arena. We will never be playing there again. The value of the arena will nosedive.

The only other way I could see it is if the bonds go so low that SISU bought them up at a very low price then asked Wasps for the 35m. But trading would be suspended before it reached very low. They would be looking at taking ownership of the arena so it could be sold. It is the sort of thing hedge funds buy into to make a quick profit.

But we should still expect the unexpected.

All about opinions, I think there is a lot of double bluffing and brinkmanship, my company are appointed as an expert to help KPMG and Wasps around how best to justify the values etc

Not saying you’re wrong or I’m right, just offering that Wasps are either deeply in the shit and will default or that it’s a game to justify a now lower valuation on the Ricoh etc to win the appeal. Just like SISU not signing up to a long lease as that would provide collateral an guarantees for Wasps.
This is all about them playing games to break each other’s financial models, neither is winning in this. Personally, I think the city and for the stadium now it needs both. Makes more financial sense.

 

[Captain Dart]

All about opinions, I think there is a lot of double bluffing and brinkmanship, my company are appointed as an expert to help KPMG and Wasps around how best to justify the values etc

Not saying you’re wrong or I’m right, just offering that Wasps are either deeply in the shit and will default or that it’s a game to justify a now lower valuation on the Ricoh etc to win the appeal. Just like SISU not signing up to a long lease as that would provide collateral an guarantees for Wasps.
This is all about them playing games to break each other’s financial models, neither is winning in this. Personally, I think the city and for the stadium now it needs both. Makes more financial sense.

Business red in tooth and claw.

 

[Nick]

Bluffing submitted accounts?

 

[fernandopartridge]

Why would they lower the value of the Ricoh? They'd breach the bond covenant and it'd end repossessed

All about opinions, I think there is a lot of double bluffing and brinkmanship, my company are appointed as an expert to help KPMG and Wasps around how best to justify the values etc

Not saying you’re wrong or I’m right, just offering that Wasps are either deeply in the shit and will default or that it’s a game to justify a now lower valuation on the Ricoh etc to win the appeal. Just like SISU not signing up to a long lease as that would provide collateral an guarantees for Wasps.
This is all about them playing games to break each other’s financial models, neither is winning in this. Personally, I think the city and for the stadium now it needs both. Makes more financial sense.

 

[Astute]

All about opinions, I think there is a lot of double bluffing and brinkmanship, my company are appointed as an expert to help KPMG and Wasps around how best to justify the values etc

Not saying you’re wrong or I’m right, just offering that Wasps are either deeply in the shit and will default or that it’s a game to justify a now lower valuation on the Ricoh etc to win the appeal. Just like SISU not signing up to a long lease as that would provide collateral an guarantees for Wasps.
This is all about them playing games to break each other’s financial models, neither is winning in this. Personally, I think the city and for the stadium now it needs both. Makes more financial sense.

I never mentioned the arena values as part of any game. I mentioned it as why SISU won't win in court. The value will be at the time of the sale and not a later Wasps valuation.

Of course it is all about gameplay. But only one side has to find a couple of milliin a year and 35m in 4 years.

And I never have r never will defend SISU

 

[stupot07]

Bluffing submitted accounts?

You couldn't make it up....well actually, evidently you can...

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[fernandopartridge]

Looks like IEC are watching the pennies, nearly 16k there yet half the bars closed.

 

[italiahorse]

Fucking hell mate.

The Sisu stuff I’m talking about here is the fact he keeps bringing up that I once supported them and can’t get over the fact I’ve moved on since Northampton.
He seems to read that as he’s peddling Pro Sisu stuff on here and I’m saying that’s not what I said. It’s all in the context.
Yes like a lot of people on here I supported Sisu at the start as I thought administration was the end.
But Northampton to get the Ricoh on the cheap finished my support.
It just clouds the issue as every time I have a go at Sisu he’s says I support them.
Frustrating but he’s obviously got more time than me.

 

[Nick]

The Sisu stuff I’m talking about here is the fact he keeps bringing up that I once supported them and can’t get over the fact I’ve moved on since Northampton.
He seems to read that as he’s peddling Pro Sisu stuff on here and I’m saying that’s not what I said. It’s all in the context.
Yes like a lot of people on here I supported Sisu at the start as I thought administration was the end.
But Northampton to get the Ricoh on the cheap finished my support.
It just clouds the issue as every time I have a go at Sisu he’s says I support them.
Frustrating but he’s obviously got more time than me.

You aren't having a go at anybody. I'm just using examples of all the times you have been wrong. I ask you to show me where I support sisu (not ccfc) and use your examples of supporting sisu

Read back through this thread, you get tied up in knots