Wasps going into admin & the impact on CCFC (4 Viewers)

[Nuskyblue]

Reported at 42m

Thanks.

Seeing as they come with a stadium I can't see anyone going north of 30m for us.

 

---

[Danceswithhorses]

Reported at 42m

Sunderland - £42m stadium included.
Which madman would pay £60m for an Indebted CCFC with no stadium ?

 

[Senior Vick from Alicante]

What the fuck is filibustered?

Its a polite way of saying your talking for the sake of it, the vernacular in Coventry would be "a load of bollocks"

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

176 to go folks - come on @Nick Keep your eyes on the prize.

 

[cowboy1850]

Maybe it was a mistake to return to the Ricoh a 2nd time. We are like the abused partner that won't walk away, just keep coming back.

Sisu had plenty of time to look for somewhere to move us to. Were their plans ever genuine..!?

 

[The Philosopher]

Sunderland - £42m stadium included.
Which madman would pay £60m for an Indebted CCFC with no stadium ?

Who knows what debt attached and if they have playing staff worth a black cat.

Plus, I thought there was an offer of £42m turned down. Not sure of actual sale. Link anyone?

 

[Danceswithhorses]

Imho, Oldskyblue58 is the antithesis of a filibusterer.
It's refreshing to have someone on this forum who speaks without bias and can explain things in layman's terms.

 

[ccfcchris]

If ifs and ands were pots and pans, there'd be no work for tinkers' hands.". If Joy blows this her investment is virtually worthless without the stadium.
Who in their right mind would pay the money she's assumed to be asking?

 

[The Philosopher]

Imho, Oldskyblue58 is the antithesis of a filibusterer.
It's refreshing to have someone on this forum who speaks without bias and can explain things in layman's terms.

I agree, he’s a good account analyst.

Just curious to know his guess - perfectly reasonable question

 

[CCFCSteve]

It's not about what she wants anymore if she wants out. Sisu are in a hole with limited options. Everyone knows that.

Anyone looking at buying the club will purchase the following not the shares.

The right to play golden share
The playing squad
The training ground on a current use basis not development basis.
The trademark
The website rights
Fixtures fittings and equipment.

There isn't much else. There is no stadium and whatever is left on the current lease or licence hasnt got a huge value and could even be circumvented in any case.

I do not see 60m in that list to be honest

Any buyer simply won't be interested in her investment losses. No buyer needs to look at how much she has " put in"

Sisu will use the losses across the portfolio. A very big chunk of which they have manufactured by clever use of group accounts in any case.

If she wants to sell, I doubt it will cover the losses in the group accounts. Certainly no one needs to purchase sbs&l

A buyer doesn't even need to buy otium or pay off the approx 20 m or so of loans in that company. In deed why would anyone buy a company withthe huge liabilities that sisu have built up( loans & pref shares)

Joy should have sold last season

I thought that at the start of the summer but was there any credible buyers ?! As soon as the stadium looked like it might be up for grabs I’m surprised more didnt move for us

What’s wrong with us ?!

 

[Nuskyblue]

Who knows what debt attached and if they have playing staff worth a black cat.

Plus, I thought there was an offer of £42m turned down. Not sure of actual sale. Link anyone?

I remember the old owner saying that he'd take 37m for it, as for debt, I'm sure there was >15m. I think they did something devious with parachute payments... something that got the maccems riled at any rate

 

[djr8369]

It's not about what she wants anymore if she wants out. Sisu are in a hole with limited options. Everyone knows that.

Anyone looking at buying the club will purchase the following not the shares.

The right to play golden share
The playing squad
The training ground on a current use basis not development basis.
The trademark
The website rights
Fixtures fittings and equipment.

There isn't much else. There is no stadium and whatever is left on the current lease or licence hasnt got a huge value and could even be circumvented in any case.

I do not see 60m in that list to be honest

Any buyer simply won't be interested in her investment losses. No buyer needs to look at how much she has " put in"

Sisu will use the losses across the portfolio. A very big chunk of which they have manufactured by clever use of group accounts in any case.

If she wants to sell, I doubt it will cover the losses in the group accounts. Certainly no one needs to purchase sbs&l

A buyer doesn't even need to buy otium or pay off the approx 20 m or so of loans in that company. In deed why would anyone buy a company withthe huge liabilities that sisu have built up( loans & pref shares)

Joy should have sold last season

I guess those loses show up as debtors on SISUs accounts and so effectively an asset? Would that be why they’d manufacture “losses” and hang around, it inflates their balance sheet? Or have I got that all wrong…

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I thought that at the start of the summer but was there any credible buyers ?! As soon as the stadium looked like it might be up for grabs I’m surprised more didnt move

What’s wrong with us ?!

There was never really any interest in going for the stadium with more than minimum debt attached.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

I don't care what her top and bottom figure is if she does indeed want out. It's not the important figure is it.

Personally I wouldn't pay more than 30m tops for the assets listed. But I would never buy a football club in the first place.

Of course it is an important figure. If no one is willing to pay what she wants for the business, it won't get sold. No matter how obscure her valuation may be.

Will you be going to Wasps games in championship out of interest? How about if there is a re-birth in London?

 

[Razzle Dazzle Dean Gordon]

Maybe it was a mistake to return to the Ricoh a 2nd time. We are like the abused partner that won't walk away, just keep coming back.

Sisu had plenty of time to look for somewhere to move us to. Were their plans ever genuine..!?

In a word, no.

 

[The Philosopher]

I remember the old owner saying that he'd take 37m for it, as for debt, I'm sure there was >15m. I think they did something devious with parachute payments... something that got the maccems riled at any rate

Yes there was some messing with parachute payments.

All irrelevant - it appears that there was no “£42 million sale” just one shareholder increasing their shares.

 

[SkyblueDad]

Sunderland - £42m stadium included.
Which madman would pay £60m for an Indebted CCFC with no stadium ?

Me if I win the £150million on the Euro lottery tomorrow.

 

[oldskyblue58]

I guess those loses show up as debtors on SISUs accounts and so effectively an asset? Would that be why they’d manufacture “losses” and hang around, it inflates their balance sheet? Or have I got that all wrong…

Won't show up on the sisu capital Ltd accounts, they are part of an investment funds for their clients

 

[Grendel]

Of course it is an important figure. If no one is willing to pay what she wants for the business, it won't get sold. No matter how obscure her valuation may be.

Will you be going to Wasps games in championship out of interest? How about if there is a re-birth in London?

He said “if she wants out” - so the top end valuation is irrelevant as it’s a figure no one will pay

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

He said “if she wants out” - so the top end valuation is irrelevant as it’s a figure no one will pay

He isn't going to shag you...

 

[hill83]

He isn't going to shag you...

He’s also not going to answer your question

 

[The Philosopher]

Of course it is an important figure. If no one is willing to pay what she wants for the business, it won't get sold. No matter how obscure her valuation may be.

Will you be going to Wasps games in championship out of interest? How about if there is a re-birth in London?

Correct.

And regardless of the “value” that others may claim it’s whether SISU can afford to crystallise their debt at a loss or not. They will no longer be able to say that they have investments in fund A or B of £“X”m for CCFC if they’ve sold for 20. They’ll have to show a loss.

I’ve read a lot of twaddle on here from people I thought understood real world business better.

And also Grendel who I knew didn’t to start with.

I find it interesting - the strategy and risks involved between SISU / Wasps and now MA.

It’s like a game of Poker, Wasps have gone all in and lost, SISU have all their chips in the middle and MA has just come to the table with a great big bag of big chips.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Correct.

And regardless of the “value” that others may claim it’s whether SISU can afford to crystallise their debt at a loss or not. They will no longer be able to say that they have investments in fund A or B of £“X”m for CCFC if they’ve sold for 20. They’ll have to show a loss.

I’ve read a lot of twaddle on here from people I thought understood real world business better.

And also Grendel who I knew didn’t to start with.

I find it interesting - the strategy and risks involved between SISU / Wasps and now MA.

It’s like a game of Poker, Wasps have gone all in and lost, SISU have all their chips in the middle and MA has just come to the table with a great big bag of big chips.

No, as said before this is a straight up choice.

Continue either subbing the club money or extracting insignificant amounts for decades more, or try to seal a big one off payment to also be shot of an entity they never really wanted and where any avenue to getting the ground on the cheap is permanently closed off.

My concern is they decide to cash in on all the players worth anything in January then go for a sale half a season before relegation.

 

[Grendel]

Correct.

And regardless of the “value” that others may claim it’s whether SISU can afford to crystallise their debt at a loss or not. They will no longer be able to say that they have investments in fund A or B of £“X”m for CCFC if they’ve sold for 20. They’ll have to show a loss.

I’ve read a lot of twaddle on here from people I thought understood real world business better.

And also Grendel who I knew didn’t to start with.

I find it interesting - the strategy and risks involved between SISU / Wasps and now MA.

It’s like a game of Poker, Wasps have gone all in and lost, SISU have all their chips in the middle and MA has just come to the table with a great big bag of big chips.

Lets put your financial acumen into context

Two days ago you stated that Ccfc paid its staff between £3 and £4 million a year

Yes you claim to have an accounting background and you actually put in writing championship Coventry City with championship players we’re paying all staff (not just players) a grand total of £3 to £4 million a year

 

[The Philosopher]

No, as said before this is a straight up choice.

Continue either subbing the club money or extracting insignificant amounts for decades more, or try to seal a big one off payment to also be shot of an entity they never really wanted and where any avenue to getting the ground on the cheap is permanently closed off.

My concern is they decide to cash in on all the players worth anything in January then go for a sale half a season before relegation.

I don’t agree.

They are a hedge fund.

Definition:

A hedge fund is a limited partnership of private investors whose money is managed by professional fund managers who use a wide range of strategies, including leveraging or trading of non-traditional assets, to earn above-average investment returns.

——

So long as SISU shows its investors that the value of their investment increases then that’s all dandy.

The various “funds” show that the money in CCFC is earning £2m per year in interest. On paper. That’s the key. On paper.

It looks to me that on paper SISU have CCFC at £60m.

Sell for less and they have a problem.

 

[SkyblueDad]

It’s reported we are paying two players half a million each and at the moment Vic perhaps our most valuable isn’t one of them. Doesn’t put a lot of the rest on much does it.

 

[skyblu3sk]

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I don’t agree.

They are a hedge fund.

Definition:

A hedge fund is a limited partnership of private investors whose money is managed by professional fund managers who use a wide range of strategies, including leveraging or trading of non-traditional assets, to earn above-average investment returns.

——

So long as SISU shows its investors that the value of their investment increases then that’s all dandy.

The various “funds” show that the money in CCFC is earning £2m per year in interest. On paper. That’s the key. On paper.

It looks to me that on paper SISU have CCFC at £60m.

Sell for less and they have a problem.

They can't extract £2m a year if the club is already losing money before that money comes out. As I said, they actually had to put in £4.5 million this year for that very reason.

If somebody offered them a way out for a respectable 8 figure sum they ought to take it.

 

[The Philosopher]

Lets put your financial acumen into context

Two days ago you stated that Ccfc paid its staff between £3 and £4 million a year

Yes you claim to have an accounting background and you actually put in writing championship Coventry City with championship players we’re paying all staff (not just players) a grand total of £3 to £4 million a year

Put the full post up.

….It was something like “quick google of “CCFC wage costs” was “—-whatever——”. Others have said 17m. Doesn’t matter, the point is….

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Put the full post up.

….It was something like “quick google of “CCFC wage costs” was “—-whatever——”. Others have said 17m. Doesn’t matter, the point is….

Yeah and you didn't question what was obviously years and years out of date.

 

[The Philosopher]

They can't extract £2m a year if the club is already losing money before that money comes out. As I said, they actually had to put in £4.5 million this year for that very reason.

If somebody offered them a way out for a respectable 8 figure sum they ought to take it.

That’s the whole point.

They can’t.

And it’s not SISU putting their money in, it’s using investor funds and then increasing the investor debt and showing increased “profits (interest)” which is then added to the “investment”

It’s not quite a PONZI. In the same way Sir Allen Stanford’s business model wasn’t.

 

[The Philosopher]

Yeah and you didn't question what was obviously years and years out of date.

It was the first two results and not the key point, unlike saying Sunderland was sold for £42m because that was the first Google article.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

That’s the whole point.

They can’t.

And it’s not SISU putting their money in, it’s using investor funds and then increasing the investor debt and showing increased “profits (interest)” which is then added to the “investment”

It’s not quite a PONZI. In the same way Sir Allen Stanford’s business model wasn’t.

Well by 'they put in £4.5 million' obviously yes that means they got it from investors. But carrying on as they are, they are never, ever going to get the total investment back. Not even close.

 

[The Philosopher]

Yeah and you didn't question what was obviously years and years out of date.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

View attachment 27022

Good grief.

Like I said, Paxman III