stupot07
Well-Known Member
£4m per annum rent and 0.5% revenues.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Would have been interesting to see what rent we would have been charged by a Sisu related company and what % of revenues came our way and to the Sisu related company
Regardless of how Wasps operate, he's reaffirming the point that CCFC would rent via SISU - despite Fisher, Lab et all always saying the club must own its own stadium.
Would have been interesting to see what rent we would have been charged by a Sisu related company and what % of revenues came our way and to the Sisu related company
£4m per annum rent and 0.5% revenues.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
If the 50% revenues are true then the club need to get this for the long term.
There is no way then that a new stadium would be any better.
Then we can to start to get other commercial incomes built up although in this league who's interested?
But hey lets not do any of that and just continue with the JR and concentrate our efforts on a new stadium.
I would imagine £300 million a year and would get the price of one balti pie a season as extra revenue.
Thank God for the Malta based hedge fund.
So despite us being told we need to own our stadium (which I think is right) , no-one has the slightest idea what a deal under a Sisu related company would be compared to the one we have now. Also, weren't we told that once we are making profit the loans have to be re-paid? What would that cost us?
I know that a new stadium makes sense but would Sisu sell once we had one or would they keep bleeding everything they could for a few more years to come?
They have always send a separate holding company would own the stadium as would any company - what are you on about?
Thanks. Are you still CCFC's number 1 stay away fan?
How could they bleed anyone with a stadium in the sticks? No revenue to be gained is there?
Please define "always". Its only recently that Fisher has confirmed that CCFC would rent any new stadium. You need to re-address that question to Fisher and Lab, who have on umpteen occasions over the last year or so stated that the Club must own its own stadium.
If people had stayed away as much as I have over the last 40 years we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
If you have stayed away for the last 40years why the hell are you on this board? Serious question.If people had stayed away as much as I have over the last 40 years we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
If you have stayed away for the last 40years why the hell are you on this board? Serious question.
So despite us being told we need to own our stadium (which I think is right) , no-one has the slightest idea what a deal under a Sisu related company would be compared to the one we have now. Also, weren't we told that once we are making profit the loans have to be re-paid? What would that cost us?
I know that a new stadium makes sense but would Sisu sell once we had one or would they keep bleeding everything they could for a few more years to come?
£5.6M to Appleton, lost revenue (on-going because an unknown amount of fans are sticking firm to. NOPM) from the Sixfields piss take, their own ongoing legal bill, the councils on going legal bill, the cost of employing consultants in the building development industry to maintain the charade of the new ground. They're fucking idiots. Talk about biting your nose of to spite your face. Fuck me, forget buying the Ricoh. By the time these idiots are finished racking up bills in the pursuit of god knows what it is they want now they could have bought the Ricoh and funded us back to premier league status.
They have to go before they bury us with themselves.
I agree. We need to see a proper business plan with all costs, income forecasts, rent/revenue agreements, future plans, company structure, exit strategies, etc without it we can't really back or bin the stadium idea. We're just in the dark not believing it's going to happen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
But surely if they were serious about a new stadium and believed in their own words about the need for it, then we would of had more than just a shitty picture in 2 years. You see, If I was desperate for something to start making me money, I would do it in a heartbeat, as would any person who was serious.
No, Appelton didn't receive £5.6m. 'Administration cost' is not only the cost of the administration case, it includes overheads, insurances, travel, office costs etc. But it is extraordinary high as it includes a write of of Goodwill by some £2m+. I am not even sure that Appeltons Fee is in there - it could well be part of the total amount Otium paid for the assets in CCFC ltd, and in that case it would be a cost that was within the total Goodwill posted in the accounts as an asset (from where a hefty amount was subsequently written off).
Fair enough. I was clearly generalising too much between Appleton and the process. I stand by everything else though. They would have got better odds by blowing all the money thrown away on lottery tickets.
So because we blew the chance of access to all streams, then this is the best deal we can get for the long term (say 10 years)?
No, Appelton didn't receive £5.6m. 'Administration cost' is not only the cost of the administration case, it includes overheads, insurances, travel, office costs etc. But it is extraordinary high as it includes a write of of Goodwill by some £2m+. I am not even sure that Appeltons Fee is in there - it could well be part of the total amount Otium paid for the assets in CCFC ltd, and in that case it would be a cost that was within the total Goodwill posted in the accounts as an asset (from where a hefty amount was subsequently written off).
Edit: The administration cost also include the £460k to ACL as dictated by the FL.
I agree the legal fees could have been better used elsewhere - but please remember it takes two to fight.
Unbelievable that Accountancy Age confused 'administration costs' of the company with the cost of the administration(which is clearly set out in the returns Appleton has to file at Companies House). I guess the goodwill write off will include whatever Otium paid to the administrator to buy the business of CCFC-again this will be set out in his return to Companies House.
Personally speaking, I'd say no. I would, quite honestly, sit tight.
However, let's say that you did decide to do a deal with Wasps along these lines - if I was negotiating, I'd start along the lines that without CCFC playing, there is no matchday income at the Ricoh. However having the club here generates footfall (good for naming rights etc,), and more importantly goodwill.
Do us a good deal (I'd say were I Fisher) and we'll plug you at every opportunity as helpful partners, and actively encourage our fans to cross over and support you too. Get your lads in to do crossbar challenges and penalties at half-time, maybe even do a deal on combined tickets, that sort of thing.
Stitch us up, and we'll make it known to every one of our fans that supporting Wasps goes against CCFC's best interests.
I'd start by asking for some of the 24/7/365 revenue to do this, and then negotiate from there. I certainly wouldn't settle for 50% of match day revenue, and I wouldn't want to pay £100k/p.a. to rent either.
Don't think the article says that we only get 50% of "matchday", revenue. Think that the 50% is related to F&B and possibly parking.Personally speaking, I'd say no. I would, quite honestly, sit tight.
However, let's say that you did decide to do a deal with Wasps along these lines - if I was negotiating, I'd start along the lines that without CCFC playing, there is no matchday income at the Ricoh. However having the club here generates footfall (good for naming rights etc,), and more importantly goodwill.
Do us a good deal (I'd say were I Fisher) and we'll plug you at every opportunity as helpful partners, and actively encourage our fans to cross over and support you too. Get your lads in to do crossbar challenges and penalties at half-time, maybe even do a deal on combined tickets, that sort of thing.
Stitch us up, and we'll make it known to every one of our fans that supporting Wasps goes against CCFC's best interests.
I'd start by asking for some of the 24/7/365 revenue to do this, and then negotiate from there. I certainly wouldn't settle for 50% of match day revenue, and I wouldn't want to pay £100k/p.a. to rent either.
Don't think the article says that we only get 50% of "matchday", revenue. Think that the 50% is related to F&B and possibly parking.
No they haven't - they said they need to own access to all the revenues.
That's OK but unlike you I think that negotiating now would be better than waiting. The reason I say that is that Wasps have yet to fully assess their investment and there must be some doubts as to its profitability so, "strike while the iron is hot", as it were.Yep, sorry Tony, was paraphrasing. I'm sure we get 100% of the ticket sales - I meant the ancillary stuff like F&B and parking. Stuff that only comes if we're playing at the Ricoh.
This is what I mean and you're right about us being in a position of some strength(as I said in an earlier post) . Wasps already know that Sisu would piss off at a moments notice and that would be a chunk out of their money.
You say some good points and I would also be saying that if we had a better partnership, anything extra that CCFC brought to the Ricoh would get a good slice of and would just give Wasps say a 10% management fee because if we didn't bring it, it wouldn't be there.
As Italia mentions, it's not the best situation and deal in the world but it could be a lot worse (Sixfields) and with good negotiating it could turn out in our favour and start getting us a foot in the door a bit more.
That's OK but unlike you I think that negotiating now would be better than waiting. The reason I say that is that Wasps have yet to fully assess their investment and there must be some doubts as to its profitability so, "strike while the iron is hot", as it were.
If they've done a U turn and now its OK to rent as long (from SISU of course!) as they get the revenues, that's fine. But don't pretend they've always led us to believe this is the case.
Why on Earth shouldn't we get all of it?
Pretty much all clubs will rent as it makes sense to have the stadium management separate to the club so I don't think we can really take SISU to task for suggesting that sort of setup. The key is what exactly we are paying and what we get in return. For example if they said £100K a year for the stadium lease meaning we get all revenues generated by the stadium we've got a good deal, on the other hand if it's £1m a year and limited matchday revenues we're even worse off.
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?