Nick
Administrator
The thing is, if they can legally then they will probably try their best. I am no law expert but if they have broken any laws why are they still trading? I think they work very close to the line and know how to play the game.
Maybe they would, but they can't just take over any company they want.
So it's about cashflow, in that case we can go back to saying that we should rent the Ricoh from ACL at the cheap rent (plus match day costs), that will generate a lot of positive cashflow, especially compared to Sixfields. Excellent.
Unless of course it's got nothing to do with cashflow. Damn.
I do try to have a serious debate with you. Please leave out the cheap wise cracks and sarcasm.
Cashflow is relevant if the investors is to see a return on their investments. The only other possibility is selling the investment with a profit.
Returning to the Ricoh as tenant seems very unlikely as that constellation has already shown its weaknesses. Its impossible to have a meaningful and successful construction involving politicians, a charity and a failing football club owned by investors. It all has to be under the same owner to really work.
You cannot compare rent at the Ricoh with rent at sixfields. It is clearly more expensive for the cub overall to be playing at sixfields, but the owners seem happy to pay that price.
I wonder what would have happened if ACL had accepted the clubs asking for new rent terms first time asked?
Selling the investment with a profit, interesting point
Please explain how SISU will do this in order to recoup some 80 million with the new stadium?
The thing is, if they can legally then they will probably try their best. I am no law expert but if they have broken any laws why are they still trading? I think they work very close to the line and know how to play the game.
A stadium would cost more than 20m plus of course the land.
Any commercial rent would be unaffordable by the Club. No calculator needed to work that one out.
if the money to buy and build a new stadium mostly comes from interest free investments then a peppercorn rent (match day cost) is likely.
So the business plan for the new stadium is SISU use investors money, the investors get no short term return at all, SISU take no rental payment and all the club pays is match day costs (although why we'd be paying those when Fisher keeps moaning about it being unreasonable to have to pay them at the Ricoh I'm not sure). Then at some point in the future a L1 club with a cheap 12K capacity stadium in the middle of nowhere is going to be sold for £60m plus to make the investors their money back?
Good luck with that.
If a new stadium is build we should at least pressure sisu to keep ownership within the SBS&L umbrella ... but I would imagine that is their plan anyway.
I see no problem in having a seperate prop-co but it makes no sense to have it outside the group.
We didn't own it before? People want us to go back and rent it from the council and that is ok but to rent it from anywhere else?
I don't understand
Who will actually own the new stadium? Will it be Otium Entertainment Group, SBS&L or some other SISU company and then SISU charge the club a rent but do allow the club access to the other revenue streams?
This is surely a question that needs to be asked at the open forum or for the media to pose this question directly to the club.
I won't be allowed to the forum as I was the (now ex) employee who challenged the PAYE arrangements at the club.
It's all about making the Club sustainable - better to have within the Club group of companies then elsewhere.
Yes you can spend a fortune and try to get promoted like Bristol City a few years ago, now they are paying the penalty, and Bolton will go the same way in the future.
And who would own the Ricoh say if we moved back there and were bought out by someone else? Would CCFC own it?
That has always been my question.so what will happen to us? if they build new ground we could be 100 million in debt in the same division having lost thousands of supporters for ever... Do you call that sustainable? all the other clubs that are struggling mostly own their own grounds take all the pie and parking money.
Well - anytime you invest in a company you 'hope' to get a return at some point in the future. It's up to sisu to get the best terms for the cub and best terms would be equity capital. If they can't get that then a loan with low interest (not from banks) convertible to equity will have to do.
Why do you assume we will stay in League 1? I thought the general consensus was we are now competing for promotion? Maybe next season starting on equal points to the rest?
so what will happen to us? if they build new ground we could be 100 million in debt in the same division having lost thousands of supporters for ever... Do you call that sustainable? all the other clubs that are struggling mostly own their own grounds take all the pie and parking money.
I addressed this in another thead.
The current investment is around £40m.
A new stadium would cost around £20m but also add the same amount of assets, so the net debt would not increase.
But club and stadium combined stand a much better chance of generating a profit and would eventually be easier to sell on with a return for the investors.
A new stadium would cost around £20m but also add the same amount of assets, so the net debt would not increase.
So if the new stadium is worth £20M then what is the Ricoh worth?
I don't know - is it relevant?
It's not for sale and is said to do better now we've left.
I addressed this in another thead.
The current investment is around £40m.
A new stadium would cost around £20m but also add the same amount of assets, so the net debt would not increase.
But club and stadium combined stand a much better chance of generating a profit and would eventually be easier to sell on with a return for the investors.
But the debt would be running up interest, that we wouldn't be paying off. So surely the net debt would increase? Unless it's increasing in value at the same rate.
20m is for the construction, and sounds low.
Then there is the land etc etc.
40m may be the investment sic, how much is that investment worth now?
Well - anytime you invest in a company you 'hope' to get a return at some point in the future. It's up to sisu to get the best terms for the cub and best terms would be equity capital. If they can't get that then a loan with low interest (not from banks) convertible to equity will have to do.
Why do you assume we will stay in League 1? I thought the general consensus was we are now competing for promotion? Maybe next season starting on equal points to the rest?
I do try to have a serious debate with you. Please leave out the cheap wise cracks and sarcasm.
Cashflow is relevant if the investors is to see a return on their investments. The only other possibility is selling the investment with a profit.
Returning to the Ricoh as tenant seems very unlikely as that constellation has already shown its weaknesses. Its impossible to have a meaningful and successful construction involving politicians, a charity and a failing football club owned by investors. It all has to be under the same owner to really work.
You cannot compare rent at the Ricoh with rent at sixfields. It is clearly more expensive for the cub overall to be playing at sixfields, but the owners seem happy to pay that price.
I wonder what would have happened if ACL had accepted the clubs asking for new rent terms first time asked?
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?