Some financial matters (1 Viewer)

[clint van damme]

Does anyone think sisu actually want to build on the land as opposed to just getting planning permission to increase it's value?
And if it's only planning permission they're after would putting Venus on the board really help that much?

 

---

[Captain Dart]

Does anyone think sisu actually want to build on the land as opposed to just getting planning permission to increase it's value?
And if it's only planning permission they're after would putting Venus on the board really help that much?

SISU have never built a thing. They're enhancing value.

 

[clint van damme]

SISU have never built a thing. They're enhancing value.

That was my thinking, so is putting venus on the board going to help gain planning permission or are people reading too much into this due to his construction company?

 

[Nick]

That was my thinking, so is putting venus on the board going to help gain planning permission or are people reading too much into this due to his construction company?

You would think their agents would know more than an ex footballer though surely?

 

[oldskyblue58]

Didn't it get paid back at one point? Might have been mortgaged again since then of course. OSB to the thread please!

The property was secured specifically against a loan a few years ago( well before administration) but that charge was cleared (before admin). That was a mortgage in the conventional sense. Had Ryton been sold then the mortgage gets paid from the proceeds before anything else

The situation we have now is that ARVO have a debenture (security) over all assets of Otium and SBS&L of which the Ryton property forms part. What that means is that no CCFC asset can be sold without gaining the permission of ARVO who might say that the sale reduces their security and therefore ARVO takes the proceeds, but they may allow the sale and not take the proceeds leaving their debenture still in place

 

[oldskyblue58]

I think people might be putting 2+2 together and making 5 about Venus. He might have a property company that doesn't mean he is developing Ryton

I think his appointment might have been simpler than that. It could have been known that CA was thinking of leaving so they got someone in to cover the possibility - which allowed a little bit of spin to be done about how things were progressing at the club. Not sure the relationship CA had with TF was that good and I think CA got himself a little isolated at CCFC. Just an opinion but I think he found his view on the way forward for CCFC blocked by other priorities and was ultimately left with an untenable position

MV now finds himself in a position that might mean having to decide on the future of his mate TM. I would also think he will be finding out how it is to be at the sharp end with Seppala

 

[Captain Dart]

MV now finds himself in a position that might mean having to decide on the future of his mate TM. I would also think he will be finding out how it is to be at the sharp end with Seppala

Snog, marry, avoid.. ermmm... avoid I think.

 

[SkyBlueScottie]

Based on the events of last season ( Maddison being sold) rumours of Mowbray leaving in the Summer I think Venus was promoted to the board to try and assure Mowbray that the board / owners would not be allowed to interfere with the football side of things. Its also not beyond the re,lams of possibility that Venus could be involved with any plans to increase the value of Ryton, hence his comments in the Summer about being here for the long haul whether Mowbray remains or not.

 

[dongonzalos]

I found a couple of interesting things at Companies House today:

1. As well as being a director of Otium, Mark Venus is also a director of Dedham Vale Homes Ltd whose business is "Development of building projects". Does this have any connection with the plans to sell off Ryton for housing? I wonder whether MV is really on the Otium board to strengthen the football side or is he there to sell off the club's only remaining asset?

2. The latest set of accounts for SISU Capital in 2015 show turnover of just GBP1.1 million which is almost half the turnover it got in 2014 (2.0 million). Moreover, in 2015 SISU made a loss of 400K. I realize that SISU only manages the investors' funds and does not directly own the club. Nevertheless, it does appear that SISU are struggling financially because their management fees have declined due to their poorly performing investments. Maybe Joy is not as rich as some people on here seem to suggest? And maybe CCFC is a lot more important to SISU's financial performance than some people think?

There was suggestion about lower management fees and investors pulling their money out in 2013....
In 2013,they were making a small profit and the article suggests people were still withdrawing their funding. You have them down as making a loss in 2015.

Coventry owner climbs into black
SISU Capital, the hedge fund that owns struggling Coventry City Football Club, has climbed back into the black with a £96,367 profit according to its latest set of accounts.
By GEOFF HO
00:00, Sun, Aug 18, 2013

Sisu acquired Coventry City in 2007

The results for the 12 months to March 31 show that Sisu, which is under pressure from Coventry fans to sell the club, made a profit due to cost cutting. Last year it recorded a £18,665 loss.

The accounts show that turnover fell 19.9 per cent to £1.7 million, due to investors pulling their money out if its funds. The withdrawals led to a fall in the amount of fees it could charge for managing people’s money.

 

[singers_pore]

Yes, their financial position worsened significantly from 2013 to 2015.

 

[zuni]

Is our supporting the reason they are back in the black? The reason they won't sell? If numbers fall next season ( which I expect) are they in trouble again meaning they sell more players (rinse and repeat)

 

[Hobo]

You would think their agents would know more than an ex footballer though surely?

Joy is a real estate expert according to herself, she studied it at university. However a Crown Court Judge has,also questioned the accuracy of her memory.

 

[rupert_bear]

Getting at the sisu business model and as much adverse publicity as legally possible is the best way I believe to get them out and away from our club. cost them money, cost them new business, their published accounts would hardly satisfy Sepalla's lavish legal bill let alone financially back a professional football club.

Do we know what other assets they, sisu that is, have or what other pies they have their fingers in. ?

 

[SkyblueBazza]

Getting at the sisu business model and as much adverse publicity as legally possible is the best way I believe to get them out and away from our club. cost them money, cost them new business, their published accounts would hardly satisfy Sepalla's lavish legal bill let alone financially back a professional football club.

Do we know what other assets they, sisu that is, have or what other pies they have their fingers in. ?

I thought one of their major issues was that they don't have any pies?

...onwards & upwards PUSB

 

[fernandopartridge]

Getting at the sisu business model and as much adverse publicity as legally possible is the best way I believe to get them out and away from our club. cost them money, cost them new business, their published accounts would hardly satisfy Sepalla's lavish legal bill let alone financially back a professional football club.

Do we know what other assets they, sisu that is, have or what other pies they have their fingers in. ?

You sound quite clued up, lets be honest, the way SISU sorts of people operate, companies listed at Companies House are fronts only and don't really tell you all that about their performance.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

SISU have never built a thing. They're enhancing value.

True.
If Sisu were in the building trade the would be the demolition experts

 

[rupert_bear]

Didn't Fisher beating his chest a little mention in his phone call conversation with the SCG we, who are we ? are due to announce a profit sure he quoted £700k+ about the figure quoted earlier in this thread, looks to me this wasn't solely football related profit but company profit I suggest that's hardly worth crowing about.

 

[georgehudson]

All interesting information, not much of a come back from JS & TF's obsequious buddies
PUSB

 

[dongonzalos]

If CCFC were operating at break even. Then sold an academy player for say 5 million. With the crazy way that football is heading.
If the club was self funded (without relying on player sales).
Could that 5 million ultimately show as SISU or related companies running in the black?

 

[Astute]

If CCFC were operating at break even. Then sold an academy player for say 5 million. With the crazy way that football is heading.
If the club was self funded (without relying on player sales).
Could that 5 million ultimately show as SISU or related companies running in the black?

Would most probably mean that the fund which we are a part of makes a profit. The more of their funds that make money the more people invest in them. The more money invested in their funds the more money SISU make.