Back in 2017 (1 Viewer)

singers_pore · Aug 16, 2022

Back in 2017 I pointed out that Wasps revaluation of the arena was sheer fantasy. I also predicted that Wasps would be unable to repay the bond in 2022. Those predictions were made FIVE years ago and have turned out to be 100% accurate.

I received a lot of ill-informed *feedback* which is why I haven't posted for a few years. Now I have been vindicated maybe I'll come back ... or maybe not?

skybluepm2 · Aug 16, 2022

No-one likes a smarty pants

Welcome back Sir!

skybluetony176 · Aug 16, 2022

tskezz · Aug 16, 2022

singers_pore said:
Now I have been vindicated maybe I'll come back ... or maybe not?

I wouldn't bother mate, it's been fine without you. Anyway have a good life.

Torquay Sky Blue · Aug 16, 2022

We've got five years , what a surprise
We've got five years ,stuck on my eyes
We've got five years, my brain hurts a lot
Five years, that's all we got.

fernandopartridge · Aug 16, 2022

I see your five years and i raise you seven years since the bond was issued

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Nick · Aug 16, 2022

A fair few people have said that all along?

1ccfc · Aug 16, 2022

Nick said:
A fair few people have said that all along?

Yep, I was one of those. I just never posted it because I was that sure and no one likes a show-off.

SIR ERNIE · Aug 16, 2022

Nick said:
A fair few people have said that all along?

Not everyone got a 'like' from martcov though.
That's what he's really proud of.

stupot07 · Aug 16, 2022

Nick said:
A fair few people have said that all along?

Yeah, I was one.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

fatso · Aug 16, 2022

singers_pore said:
Back in 2017 I pointed out that Wasps revaluation of the arena was sheer fantasy. I also predicted that Wasps would be unable to repay the bond in 2022. Those predictions were made FIVE years ago and have turned out to be 100% accurate.

I received a lot of ill-informed *feedback* which is why I haven't posted for a few years. Now I have been vindicated maybe I'll come back ... or maybe not?

View attachment 25835

Trying to educate people about valuations is proving to be onious.

In reality there is only 1 valuation that actually matters, and that's the price a buyer is willing to pay.

Accountants very often deliberately over value business assets to balance the books in a companies accounts.
It's considered a bit naughty, but they know that unless an asset is up for sale, it's valuation is irrelevant, and as such can be "adjusted" to show profit or loss and reduce a tax liability.

Estate agents used to regularly over value a property, just to get it onto their books, and then 2 months down the line, convince the seller to drop the price to a more realistic level. But this would prevent other estate agents from securing the sale.

People suggesting that the Ricoh was sold on the cheap, fail to realise that when there's only 1 buyer in town, that buyer sets the price. The valuation becomes irrelevant.

Anyone who thinks other potential buyers were precluded or kept in the dark about the availability of the Arena are quite clearly living in a fantasy.
Everyone knew it was available, a number of potential suites looked at it, (the NEC for one) but ultimately there was only 1 party actually ready and willing to commit.

The council wanted the massive financial burden off their books, and snapped Wasps hand off.

An empty arena would of cost the coventry council tax payers hundreds of thousands of pounds a year, it was hemorrhaging money every week at a time when local funding was already stretched to breaking point and key services where being cut.

There's no doubt that the council's decision to sell to Wasps was a massive blow to CCFC, but given the behaviour of SISU, it was the only sound decision available at the time.

People are arguing if CCC could of got more money, but that is basically accepting that the decision to sell was correct, just the price being the issue.

HuckerbyDublinWhelan · Aug 16, 2022

fatso said:
Trying to educate people about valuations is proving to be onious.

In reality there is only 1 valuation that actually matters, and that's the price a buyer is willing to pay.

Accountants very often deliberately over value business assets to balance the books in a companies accounts.
It's considered a bit naughty, but they know that unless an asset is up for sale, it's valuation is irrelevant, and as such can be "adjusted" to show profit or loss and reduce a tax liability.

Estate agents used to regularly over value a property, just to get it onto their books, and then 2 months down the line, convince the seller to drop the price to a more realistic level. But this would prevent other estate agents from securing the sale.

People suggesting that the Ricoh was sold on the cheap, fail to realise that when there's only 1 buyer in town, that buyer sets the price. The valuation becomes irrelevant.

Anyone who thinks other potential buyers were precluded or kept in the dark about the availability of the Arena are quite clearly living in a fantasy.
Everyone knew it was available, a number of potential suites looked at it, (the NEC for one) but ultimately there was only 1 party actually ready and willing to commit.

The council wanted the massive financial burden off their books, and snapped Wasps hand off.

An empty arena would of cost the coventry council tax payers hundreds of thousands of pounds a year, it was hemorrhaging money every week at a time when local funding was already stretched to breaking point and key services where being cut.

There's no doubt that the council's decision to sell to Wasps was a massive blow to CCFC, but given the behaviour of SISU, it was the only sound decision available at the time.

People are arguing if CCC could of got more money, but that is basically accepting that the decision to sell was correct, just the price being the issue.

The council should have sold the Ricoh to the club… the club it was built for, instead they sold it to spite a company that won’t be here in 20 years.

the club were never offered the same deal. In fact they were offered half for twice the price.

The Manhattan group pulled out because the council wanted to milk the club for more money rather than sell the stadium,

SISU are here because the council refused to deal with other parties who wanted to buy the Arena.

a lot of the councils shenanigans pre-date SISU.

no_loyalty · Aug 16, 2022

singers_pore said:
Back in 2017 I pointed out that Wasps revaluation of the arena was sheer fantasy. I also predicted that Wasps would be unable to repay the bond in 2022. Those predictions were made FIVE years ago and have turned out to be 100% accurate.

I received a lot of ill-informed *feedback* which is why I haven't posted for a few years. Now I have been vindicated maybe I'll come back ... or maybe not?

View attachment 25835

Good news we are no longer a league two club, we are in the Championship these days .

fatso · Aug 16, 2022

HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:
The council should have sold the Ricoh to the club… the club it was built for, instead they sold it to spite a company that won’t be here in 20 years.

the club were never offered the same deal. In fact they were offered half for twice the price.

The Manhattan group pulled out because the council wanted to milk the club for more money rather than sell the stadium,

SISU are here because the council refused to deal with other parties who wanted to buy the Arena.

a lot of the councils shenanigans pre-date SISU.

No party comes out of this smelling of Roses. We are all aware of the acrimony between Joy and Ann.

Should of, could of, would of, it's all academic now. At least the council arnt directly involved anymore, buy ironically the future of the Arena is once again a hot topic now that Wasps are teetering on the brink of insolvency.

Nick · Aug 16, 2022

fatso said:
People are arguing if CCC could of got more money, but that is basically accepting that the decision to sell was correct, just the price being the issue.

Are you back on the crack pipe today?

HuckerbyDublinWhelan · Aug 16, 2022

fatso said:
No party comes out of this smelling of Roses. We are all aware of the acrimony between Joy and Ann.

Should of, could of, would of, it's all academic now. At least the council arnt directly involved anymore, buy ironically the future of the Arena is once again a hot topic now that Wasps are teetering on the brink of insolvency.

So the due diligence in to wasps plan was a roaring success then….. you’ve been defending the sale of a public asset, regardless of your thoughts on SISU. This has been a balls up of the highest order.

that’s solely on the council

MalcSB · Aug 16, 2022

fatso said:
Trying to educate people about valuations is proving to be onious.

In reality there is only 1 valuation that actually matters, and that's the price a buyer is willing to pay.

Accountants very often deliberately over value business assets to balance the books in a companies accounts.
It's considered a bit naughty, but they know that unless an asset is up for sale, it's valuation is irrelevant, and as such can be "adjusted" to show profit or loss and reduce a tax liability.

Estate agents used to regularly over value a property, just to get it onto their books, and then 2 months down the line, convince the seller to drop the price to a more realistic level. But this would prevent other estate agents from securing the sale.

People suggesting that the Ricoh was sold on the cheap, fail to realise that when there's only 1 buyer in town, that buyer sets the price. The valuation becomes irrelevant.

Anyone who thinks other potential buyers were precluded or kept in the dark about the availability of the Arena are quite clearly living in a fantasy.
Everyone knew it was available, a number of potential suites looked at it, (the NEC for one) but ultimately there was only 1 party actually ready and willing to commit.

The council wanted the massive financial burden off their books, and snapped Wasps hand off.

An empty arena would of cost the coventry council tax payers hundreds of thousands of pounds a year, it was hemorrhaging money every week at a time when local funding was already stretched to breaking point and key services where being cut.

There's no doubt that the council's decision to sell to Wasps was a massive blow to CCFC, but given the behaviour of SISU, it was the only sound decision available at the time.

People are arguing if CCC could of got more money, but that is basically accepting that the decision to sell was correct, just the price being the issue.

The decision to sell was correct, the process by which it was achieved was incorrect. If the deal that Wasps were offered behind closed doors had been made available on the open market, who knows what price might have been achieved. NEC might have been interested in 250 year lease, CCFC almost certainly would have been.

If you are asking peanuts for a property, you will get your arm bitten off.

fatso · Aug 16, 2022

HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:
So the due diligence in to wasps plan was a roaring success then….. you’ve been defending the sale of a public asset, regardless of your thoughts on SISU. This has been a balls up of the highest order.

that’s solely on the council

It's certainly been a balls up of the highest order, but to suggest the council are solely to blame is rediculous.
But that chapter has closed now, we have other pressing issues to face.

chiefdave · Aug 16, 2022

fatso said:
Anyone who thinks other potential buyers were precluded or kept in the dark about the availability of the Arena are quite clearly living in a fantasy.
Everyone knew it was available, a number of potential suites looked at it, (the NEC for one) but ultimately there was only 1 party actually ready and willing to commit.

Where has this come from, I've never heard any mention of the NEC Group being offered the complex on similar terms to Wasps.

fatso · Aug 16, 2022

chiefdave said:
Where has this come from, I've never heard any mention of the NEC Group being offered the complex on similar terms to Wasps.

They were mentioned back in the day as having an interest, I think mainly due to the hotel and conferencing facility.
Obviously they never persued it.

chiefdave · Aug 16, 2022

fatso said:
They were mentioned back in the day as having an interest, I think mainly due to the hotel and conferencing facility.
Obviously they never persued it.

Will have to look into that, know a couple of people who work for NEC Group, I'll see what they know. Not that it really matters I guess, we're just going round in circles again.

fernandopartridge · Aug 16, 2022

fatso said:
Trying to educate people about valuations is proving to be onious.

In reality there is only 1 valuation that actually matters, and that's the price a buyer is willing to pay.

Accountants very often deliberately over value business assets to balance the books in a companies accounts.
It's considered a bit naughty, but they know that unless an asset is up for sale, it's valuation is irrelevant, and as such can be "adjusted" to show profit or loss and reduce a tax liability.

Estate agents used to regularly over value a property, just to get it onto their books, and then 2 months down the line, convince the seller to drop the price to a more realistic level. But this would prevent other estate agents from securing the sale.

People suggesting that the Ricoh was sold on the cheap, fail to realise that when there's only 1 buyer in town, that buyer sets the price. The valuation becomes irrelevant.

Anyone who thinks other potential buyers were precluded or kept in the dark about the availability of the Arena are quite clearly living in a fantasy.
Everyone knew it was available, a number of potential suites looked at it, (the NEC for one) but ultimately there was only 1 party actually ready and willing to commit.

The council wanted the massive financial burden off their books, and snapped Wasps hand off.

An empty arena would of cost the coventry council tax payers hundreds of thousands of pounds a year, it was hemorrhaging money every week at a time when local funding was already stretched to breaking point and key services where being cut.

There's no doubt that the council's decision to sell to Wasps was a massive blow to CCFC, but given the behaviour of SISU, it was the only sound decision available at the time.

People are arguing if CCC could of got more money, but that is basically accepting that the decision to sell was correct, just the price being the issue.

From a legal perspective there is always a notional market value.

fatso · Aug 16, 2022

chiefdave said:
Will have to look into that, know a couple of people who work for NEC Group, I'll see what they know. Not that it really matters I guess, we're just going round in circles again.

Ask them if they've got a 100m x 60m stretch of turf available while your at it.

skyblueinBaku · Aug 16, 2022

fatso said:
No party comes out of this smelling of Roses. We are all aware of the acrimony between Joy and Ann.

Should of, could of, would of, it's all academic now. At least the council arnt directly involved anymore, buy ironically the future of the Arena is once again a hot topic now that Wasps are teetering on the brink of insolvency.

Should of, could of, would of, it's all academic now. Should have, could have, would have. FFS, it's not difficult!

jimmyhillsfanclub · Aug 16, 2022

Meh...thats nothing.....I made my prediction of administration + further relegations back on the opening day of 2001/02 after bouncing around Edgeley Park.......

Smartarse Factifuckingmundo.

singers_pore · Aug 17, 2022

Nick said:
A fair few people have said that all along?

No, I don't think so. Of course, you could prove me wrong by posting a quote from 2017 or earlier.

Nick · Aug 17, 2022

singers_pore said:
No, I don't think so. Of course, you could prove me wrong by posting a quote from 2017 or earlier.

What from people saying Wasps won't work? They moved here in 2014, plenty before you said it years before.

Back in 2017 (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency