Search results

As interests are being accrued to the debts/converted to shares it makes sense to look at profit before interests as this in reality means cash flow result. How much they charge in interest is not really an issue as it's accrued to the debts or converted to shares - and the value of those will...

He says break even before interests and tax. As interests are being accrued to the debts/converted to shares and tax is zero, in reality he means break even cash-flow wise. In other words no more money from ARVO. It does mean no more loans and no more debts. That seems to be the plan.

And I could say you don't want it to work. One thing is certain though - it definitely doesn't work where we are. We can't even win a football match there.

Look, I used the figures as an example - it was not the final figures from Fishers calculations. Why try ridiculing the numbers when the concept is the essential part? The stadium cannot be the only business there, so the land spot must be large enough to house additional buildings. That also...

It won't add up if the club is the only business there.

I know you wouldn't do it - but Cayman investors with little knowledge of the actual details surrounding the club? Rich people, investors, usually divide their investments into several segments. They have some for high risk - so maybe already placed a part at Neil Woodford - some for long term...

It wasn't when the council owned 50% of ACL and protected their own interest. But now?

Buy into the revenue streams? How could they do that? Would Wasps not need those revenues themselves - especially when you look at the losses they (and ACL) make. How much would they have to pay? Would it even remotely be a good business for the club? I don't think it's realistic.

Isn't that unlawful state aid?

Yes, but in the prospect the long lease is already sold to the club. So effectively it's no risk investment.

No, the killer blow will be if they leave us without a home we own.

While they are here they own the club - if they can't pay the mortgage to themselves it's their problem. When they sell I expect the new owners buy out that mortgage. Didn't I say that clearly? (I think I even added that I was amazed Wasps didn't buy out the council mortgage).

Not really. A new CCFC stadium won't be anything like the Ricoh, so comparison is waste of time. What we really need is to see Fishers Excel sheet with his projections.

I think you compare apples with bananas. The stadium is a property, and current mortgage rates are well under 4%. It has nothing to do with stocks or business loans or IPO's - it's a property investment.

If sisu can't pay sisu?

Did I say that? I would expect a new owner to buy out that loan when they take over. Just like I would have expected Wasps to buy out the council loan to the council. That didn't happen and indicate Wasps owners don't really have too much financial backing power. Anyway, would you prefer the...

Why keep bringing up Wasps? It's not like they are our new best friends, is it? We can't buy ACL now, so that ship has sailed. We need a new home (and hopefully one where we can actually win a game or two). Even if the final price is £25m for a perfectly suitable 16.000 seater the principle will...

Try this: If they build a stadium for say £18m (including ground purchase), add a couple of millions for themselves and sell a long lease for £20m to the stadium management club, then they have made a nice little £2m profit right there. They also lend the stadium management company the £20m...

Maybe the club won't be the only business there?

Why would they even sell the stadium? The plan seem to be to build the stadium owned by their investors. Then have the club establish a stadium management company buying a long lease (sisu investors are probably happy to provide a loan to buy the lease). Finally they can sell the club and...