Coventry Owner Climbs Back Into The Black (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter torchomatic
- Start date
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
if i hadn't paid 1.2million in rent I'd be in the black too
CarpyCov84
New Member
Haha investors withdrawing funds...
I like this bit
I like this bit
skybluebal
New Member
The article also says they were evicted. I wonder who gave them the update - Joy perhaps? still spinning!!
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Did you read the article? It states that Sisus income is down due to investors pulling money from the funds. Not a huge leap to assume its down to their highest profile investment going tits up.
It's old news ... OSB has already explained it in another thread.
deanocity3
New Member
Coventry Owner Climbs Back Into The Black........ hole where she came from
Cheshire Sky Blue
New Member
khj5000. You are so right. There are local businesses in Coventry that could challenge that figure easily. These guys are heavy handed in method and approach but lightweights in the world of commerce. Joy me ol bird, some women spend that on a boob and face lift!!
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Thanks. My comment wasn't meant to sound as confrontational as it did. I know you know your stuff with this stuff.
Edit: interesting that OSB makes the exact opposite claim about investors to the article author. GEEK FIGHT!
Last edited:
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
Ha ha, £96K profit, a single person operating alone as a s/w contractor could make that in a year/18months..
The real headline is SISU profits still depressed from high of £18M!
And this sentence is most significant!
PS the express copy proofing is shite, I spotted the mistake in above sentence immediately!
The real headline is SISU profits still depressed from high of £18M!
And this sentence is most significant!
PS the express copy proofing is shite, I spotted the mistake in above sentence immediately!
Last edited by a moderator:
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Put a summary up on another thread
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/35811-SISU-Capital-Ltd-accounts-2013
couple of comments though.
Yes the income is down but this sort of business can often be cyclical in nature but equally we do not know whether investors fund have been redeemed and say put in to ARVO or some other entity. This is a snap shot only of the SISU Capital Ltd part of the business run by Seppala
As pointed out above CCFC were never evicted from the Ricoh.
Assets under management at the end of the year had risen in value so that would imply a better 2014 financial report
SISU act as agents for their investors as such the not paying of the CCFC rent for example forms no part of the SISU Capital accounts.
The article fails to mention the charge on profits from minority interests that reduces the profit from £96K to a loss of £10k - down from a loss 2012 of £162k
This is only part of the web that Seppala controls therefore in reality when looked at in isolation does not tell us a lot
the CCFC H Group had 6m net assets in 2001 yes there were 60m gross debts but they had more assets. In 2007 gross debts of 51m when SISU took over of which over 35m was eventually written off net debt was written down to £8.6m
Bottom line is however these results have very little relevance to CCFC ...... it is what we cant see that is more relevant
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/35811-SISU-Capital-Ltd-accounts-2013
couple of comments though.
Yes the income is down but this sort of business can often be cyclical in nature but equally we do not know whether investors fund have been redeemed and say put in to ARVO or some other entity. This is a snap shot only of the SISU Capital Ltd part of the business run by Seppala
As pointed out above CCFC were never evicted from the Ricoh.
Assets under management at the end of the year had risen in value so that would imply a better 2014 financial report
SISU act as agents for their investors as such the not paying of the CCFC rent for example forms no part of the SISU Capital accounts.
The article fails to mention the charge on profits from minority interests that reduces the profit from £96K to a loss of £10k - down from a loss 2012 of £162k
This is only part of the web that Seppala controls therefore in reality when looked at in isolation does not tell us a lot
the CCFC H Group had 6m net assets in 2001 yes there were 60m gross debts but they had more assets. In 2007 gross debts of 51m when SISU took over of which over 35m was eventually written off net debt was written down to £8.6m
Bottom line is however these results have very little relevance to CCFC ...... it is what we cant see that is more relevant
jesus-wept
New Member
Doesn't alter our problem and that is our football team which alone isn't worth a bean basically is owned by sisu/otium/others ? We want them to sell, they know that, there are apparent interested parties, they know that too. So they are playing hardball for the best deal, no surprise there. SISU know that the team connected with the Ricoh is the value. Fisher keeps saying the club (team) isn't for sale, it is but I think sisu want the value of the team and Ricoh. Sooner rather than later one of the so called interested parties Heskell of Byng have to come to the trough or piss off altogether frankly.
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
we have got enough money to buy a new conference player then!
SkyBlueBlood
Member
SkyBlueBlood
Member
How can they claim to have a turnover of £1.7 million when they are charging CCFC an admin fee of over £2 million a year?
Are they really?
Or are the administration fees a way to distribute cost between Holdings and Limited?
Usually hedge funds get paid by the investing funds ... not the company they administrate.
GaryPendrysEyes
Well-Known Member
You missed the kisses at the end. Xxx
L
longjohnskyblue
Guest
Its so obvious now why they need to keep hold of CCFC - they are using it as a sink hole for their bad debts! Lost money on an investment? no probs just say you made a loss on the sale of a player - that way a loss will appear on the clubs books rather than on the hedge fund, the hedge fund looks tickety boo and people will pour money into it!
Thing is though if their profits are £100k, how are they going to afford this mythical ground? Even if it's £30 million (which it won't be), @£100k/year, it would take 300 years to get the money together. Of course they could mortgage the profits of the team for the next 5-10 years, but it would assume they make it into the premiership! Oh wait, that would mean investing in the team. And how can they do that under FFP?
My guess is the FFP will be ignored by any club with ambition.
Thing is though if their profits are £100k, how are they going to afford this mythical ground? Even if it's £30 million (which it won't be), @£100k/year, it would take 300 years to get the money together. Of course they could mortgage the profits of the team for the next 5-10 years, but it would assume they make it into the premiership! Oh wait, that would mean investing in the team. And how can they do that under FFP?
My guess is the FFP will be ignored by any club with ambition.
L
longjohnskyblue
Guest
It's called telling fibs!