Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
Nope. It's plain speak acknowledging the age-old wisdom 'you can't educate pork'
2½ times our points deduction in the last 8 weeks. (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter dancers lance
- Start date
Nope. It's plain speak acknowledging the age-old wisdom 'you can't educate pork'
Grendel
Well-Known Member
No way to tallk about your former favourite manager.
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Swollen turnover indeed, reduced profits though.
The Olympics, as I think i said sometime ago when some were going on about how many millions that ACL would make of it, it appears ran at a loss.
The old business adage applies, Turnover for vanity, profit for sanity.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
Their first set of accounts without their 'anchor tenant' LS; and you're quibbling as the margins are squeezed? Can I remind you how many people on here danced with schoolgirlish delight at the prospect of a decimated set of accounts without CCFC? And imagine the 'total' worth of an entity with ACL's business, and CCFC's businesses combined. That's the point I was making, it's significantly higher now than once it would have been at the negiotiating table.
I agree on the latter, expect when you're growing a business horizontally. Increase turnover to get a better utilisation, which means you can attract subsequent business as your fixed costs are spread over a greater number of events. That'll produce subsequent profitability, as it should sit a year or so behind the turnover result
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Did they sell the casino for over £2 million? Is the proceeds of that sale in these figures?
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
That increased turnover though pretty much down to the one off event of the Olympics, imagine turnover for the following year will be much reduced, though hopefully their profit will have risen.
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Drew down £960,000 of the £2.7million for the Casino lease in those accounts.
Don't know how much left of that amount for the future though.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
They claim an element of swings and roundabouts with the issue of the accounts: 'Whilst the 2012 Olympics raised the profile of the Arena, city and region, it restricted normal trading for the three months between June and August 2012 significantly. Trading would have been even stronger if not for this constraint.'
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Really? Then surely in previous years(noting that no football between mid-May and Mid-August) the turnover should have been even higher than it was in the Olympic years accounts?
Got to say it doesn't sound that likely.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Do the accounts recognise that the raising of the Ricoh's profile may have lead to stronger trading post Olympics?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
What normal trading do they have in those periods? Is that normally a large percentage of turnover? I find this a dubious statement.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
The accounts just produced reflected the position ACL's management projected some time ago. What basis do you have for doubting their projections now? I am not saying they have always acted perfectly, but I can't see why you would cast aspersions upon their projections?
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Would have to say that their projections may have been more Astral based than on any reality.
Can you seriously think of anything during those months(again, months that in previous years had nothing to stop them), that would more than double their turnover?
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
Not that i noticed in OSB's dissection of them, merely that the Olympics restricted normal trading for 3 months.
Can you please stop talking about ACL and the Arena . We have moved on and building our new stadium Sisu not me
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Does that mean you accept the motives for the move to Northampton?
Astute
Well-Known Member
Most of us accept the motives. We have no choice. I accept they are all for the wrong reasons.
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
I don't understand why people keep coming out with that "We have moved on rubbish" didn't Labovich say not a couple of weeks ago that the Ricoh was the "Preferred Option" does that sound like they have moved on to you?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
And round we go again!
The point is, if it's the preferred option, make a fucking bid!
Honestly, I think most are just sick of it all. We want the Ricoh, Sisu won't pay for it so let's move on. We've got better things to do.
Astute
Well-Known Member
The problem is we have heard so many times that they have moved on. And we also know that Labo struggles with the truth. But there again we all know everything is about the Ricoh. There needs to be a time when they tell us the truth. Then we can stop taking the piss out of what they say and take them seriously.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Exactly this, if the preferred option is to move back to the Ricoh make a bloody bid and stop spouting off on the radio.
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
I agree with your sentiment however I am in no position to make a bid for the Arena why don't you ask the Club or better yet get the Trust too!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
you are right of course, but Tim says we have moved on the other clueless twat says we want the Ricoh, then Tim is building his new stadium. I wonder why its difficult to believe anything any more. If they want the Ricoh make a bloody offer instead of going round and round with all this legal bollocks. Fucking imbeciles. Its so bad Im saying Id take relegation to get rid of them. Cant believe it myself that Id say such a thing. But I would take to offer like a shot. How much longer do you think people will put up with this charade - and for what - because two groups of idiots cant manage a conversation without falling out. The football has become an irrelevant sideshow - and still some defend the fuckwits involved in this.
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
I don't disagree with that I am not sure anyone is defending Sisu, the point of my post was that quite a few people use the quote "We've moved on" in a petulant manner and for what reason other than to be petulant?
I don't doubt that Sisu and the Club consider the Ricoh first choice, they'd be stupid otherwise, why won't they make an offer is it pending on the JR? Perhaps, the Club has previously discussed the chances of getting two independent valuations done to determine a price, has this been looked into? Has anyone spoken to ACL regarding it? Is anyone from the Council or ACL even willing to consider it?
It's not a defence of Sisu but there are a lot of questions to answer, but maybe Sisu should go out and bid what they feel the Ricoh is worth and then when it gets rejected because it's nowhere nears CCC/ACL's valuations some on here can cream themselves over the fact that Sisu were trying to purchase the Ricoh on the cheap or that they bid so low that they knew ACL/CCC would reject, (any reason you want please insert here).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Not sure the Trust fighting fund runs into the tens of millions to be honest
Sorry, was talking to the club for that sentence.
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
Not sure the Trust fighting fund runs into the tens of millions to be honest
Sorry, was talking to the club for that sentence.
You never know what is between the cushion of the sofa
But during the next SCG Meeting they need to push the Independent Valuation avenue, find out what the Club are willing to do.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
The thing is. The time for "two independent valuations" was before you spoil relations by stopping paying rent and dragging every bugger on the other side (and several on no side at all) through the media and legal mud.
Time does not reset. Their options are limited by their actions in the past. Maybe they feel it's not fair, but guess what: life's hard, get a helmet.
spider_ricoh
New Member
The difficulty about "independent valuations" is that the Ricoh is far more valuable to CCFC/SISU than any other bidder, because of the combined value of club and ground. So the value depends on who you are and who you ask.
Given SISU's excellent record in appointing independent advice (Hi Mr Appleton), expect the valuation from their "independent" source to be about £2.50. Meanwhile ACL will point to the value of the mortgage or thereabouts, so £14m. SISU will then go in for less than half the difference, which is about where Joy's alleged £4m came from.
We've already heard various CCFC sources describe ACL as "worthless" so this isn't just supposition - the theory on the Ricoh being more valuable to them than anyone else explains why Joy is happy to pay £34m for an asset she considers "worthless".
Given SISU's excellent record in appointing independent advice (Hi Mr Appleton), expect the valuation from their "independent" source to be about £2.50. Meanwhile ACL will point to the value of the mortgage or thereabouts, so £14m. SISU will then go in for less than half the difference, which is about where Joy's alleged £4m came from.
We've already heard various CCFC sources describe ACL as "worthless" so this isn't just supposition - the theory on the Ricoh being more valuable to them than anyone else explains why Joy is happy to pay £34m for an asset she considers "worthless".
I wasnt accusing you of defending SISU - you seem pretty balanced in your views and are at least willing to argue a point. The JR doesnt have to proceed - up to SISU. Independent valuations is nonsense from the SISU script - they must have a clue what its worth and have had opportunities in the past to buy their share, so make that offer. Already pissed a few million away this year that could have gone towards it
If SISU had approached the council et al about valuations they would be shouting about it as they are obsessed with everyone else to deflect attention from themselves. Council would have to consider any offer although they may not accept it. The only way forward is for SISU to go as they have lost too many supporters
As for the weve moved on quotes surely that is just mocking Tim (I dont posture) Fisher He clearly does posture and has made himself unbelievable and now we have Labo - really did you hear his interview and think he was the sort of man you would have confidence in
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Rights and wrongs of it all aside. I think this is an important point. Even if they do pull it around somehow, there's a significant portion of our fan base for whom they're spoiled goods. There's always going to be that drag to any positive work they can do compared to other potential owners.
spider_ricoh
New Member
The best that can be said for SISU is that they came in, gave it a go, trusted the wrong people to run the club and then took the wrong approach to dealing with ACL - their tactics must work in other walks of life but they've managed to toally alienate fans and other stakeholders. They've wedged themselves into a corner and it's hard to see how they can ever come back.
They may win the JR and take us back to the Ricoh but for most fans the day they leave cannot come soon enough.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
But they are not simply being petulant, are they? Can I quote Tim Fisher to you - SISU's appointed CEO: 'the club has now moved on and is making its plans to play in its wholly-owned stadium'
So, surely, people are quoting directly from one of the main protagonists in this farce?
spider_ricoh
New Member
Exactly. "We've moved on..." - translated, "if we don't get the Ricoh for a song we'll be off, so we'll hold the club hostage in Northampton bluffing ACL about a phantom new ground for long enough to bankrupt them"
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
True enough but I am not sure many say it on here while trying to influence the debate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk