SkyBlueDom26
Well-Known Member
How can you prove either will happen
Boddy CWR (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Saddlebrains
- Start date
pastythegreat
Well-Known Member
Is it as simple as that though??
Before we went to sixfields we were paying £1.3m a year in rent. When we came back we were paying £300k. Now, did we come back from sixfields because we couldn't afford it? Or was it because the move had the desired outcome?
Now, if the desired outcome for moving to SA is to distress w**ps, they'll I'll happily keep the club ticking over whilst that happens.
Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk
Before we went to sixfields we were paying £1.3m a year in rent. When we came back we were paying £300k. Now, did we come back from sixfields because we couldn't afford it? Or was it because the move had the desired outcome?
Now, if the desired outcome for moving to SA is to distress w**ps, they'll I'll happily keep the club ticking over whilst that happens.
Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk
IrishSkyBlue
Facebook User
tim fisher quote with jim white, seriously tim what about the new stadium last 5 fucking years and you still going on about it and he says this some cheek:
“Do I want to give the fans hope that we will get back to Coventry? Of course I do but Jim you know me, I never bluster or mislead.
“I just tell it as it is and at the moment we are playing our games at Birmingham for the foreseeable. But, things change.”
“Do I want to give the fans hope that we will get back to Coventry? Of course I do but Jim you know me, I never bluster or mislead.
“I just tell it as it is and at the moment we are playing our games at Birmingham for the foreseeable. But, things change.”
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
I can't. It's more likely than not we'll play at StAns and not get promoted. It could be that the pitch there also deteriorates over the season and doesn't support our style of play long term. It's also possible we could come back and get promoted. But I do definitely feel that the Ricoh pitch would be more likely to deteriorate and have a detrimental effect on our style of play as the season progressed, which would have an affect on the mood of the crowd and therefore our chances of promotion are probably greater at StAns than the Ricoh.
It was purely a hypothetical exercise of what would people prefer if they had to choose. Some would choose to play in Coventry regardless, I'd prefer promotion.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I find it hard to believe people would swing behind the Trust TBH, they’re a bit of a busted flush in that respect.
They are a good legal vehicle to have ready should fan ownership need to be considered like it was a few years ago, right now there’s not much point to them. There’s nothing to stop other people from doing it, there’s no rules to this.
Frankly I think the issue is the fan base is divided, confused, and exhausted and just wants it sorted/to watch the games and that’s why we haven’t had mass protests. I think blaming the Trust for you not doing something is a pretty poor excuse and belies the fact that in all honesty, you just like having a pop at the one group of people to have got off their arses.
Very telling that Nick, who has as many members, won’t do anything and Grendel when asked to put his money where his mouth was did a Brave Sir Robin and ran away.
Local media are desperate for news and several competing fan groups have very quickly had the ear of the Observer or CWR. Are you seriously telling me you need the Trust for PR after Dale Evans managed what he did with a Facebook account and a copy of MS Paint?
Personally I think it’s all a waste of time as I did when we were at Sixfields. I’m gonna focus on the footy and hope for the best. I went on the March, as I felt it was worthwhile to express our love for the club at that point. Now? Meh.
Last edited:
SkyBlueDom26
Well-Known Member
Promotion at the ricoh would be the perfect outcome
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I don’t see the correlation but playing at the Ricoh clearly. The analogy with Biamou is stupid
The real question is who you’d keep when you know Godden is on a two year contract that is twice our revenue and will result in liquidation
What’s the answer then?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
What does that even mean?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Stay at Stans all season until we are one game from winning promotion. Then back to the Ricoh for the promotion party.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Hence why I was talking specifically about this season and the potential disruption to a winning team. I wasn't talking about future seasons and as I put in the original post for medium to long term sustainability we have to come back.
I also mentioned about the increase in TV revenue from going up to the Championship v the extra gate revenue from the Ricoh and which would be greater?
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
The fan base is divided you’re right. The trust is the vehicle that arranged two well received marches
I could arrange a protest against wasps, but how do I get the BBC to put me on their shows, the fanbase Is not going to listen to Huckerbydublinwhelan
They have all these contacts, but are only happy to have a pop at sisu. The fans need an official direction.
I was on the marches. They arranged two good days out. Why can’t they do the same against wasps? Or why won’t they - a lot of fans opinion comes from what the trust tells them.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Staying at St Andrews would be a disaster if we were promoted - we’d get much higher crowds in Coventry and would have to spend massively to be competitive
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
Not saying we should play at the Ricoh, but a few more pros
It’s very easy to get to for those not living in Coventry
The casino is great for after game drinks / gambling
Nick
Administrator
Do you think it has something to do with both the Trust and Wasps being involved with Hoffman trying to take over?
Seems a bit strange how you have CJ coming on here saying one thing about Wasps and the Trust clearly ignoring him.
Irish Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
There is no guarantee for either of these scenarios. The ideal situation would be a return to the Ricoh and get promoted. That isn’t guaranteed either. We had an average attendance of 12 k last season. Surely with the results we have had, crowds would now be pushing the 15k mark. Both times we have been behind at St Andrews there has been lots of negative comments and calls from some of the crowd.Where I sit the players were being castigated for continuing to play it out from the back after Wash’s mistake even though we have played this way very successfully all season. Some football fans really act like they are brainless. I honestly haven’t noticed any difference in this between the Ricoh and St Andrews. Surely better to play in front of 15k mostly sky blues than 6 k mostly sky blues?
RegTheDonk
Well-Known Member
They are quick enough to (rightly) issue tons of statments, pages of condemnation of our owners.
They were quick enough to (rightly) organise a mass march and demo against the owners to bring us home from Northampton.
Why can they not
Issue tons of statments, pages of condemnation of Wasps' refusal to deal without holding an indemnify gun to CCFC's head.
Organise a mass march and demo against Wasps who are refsusing to deal without holding an indemnify gun to CCFC's head.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Once again, I was talking about THIS season and our current form. As far as I'm aware they don't do mid-season promotions.
Nick
Administrator
It's a great question and I doubt anybody from the Trust can or will answer it.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So it was a stupid hypothesis and you also then muttered something about championship TV money exceeded Ricoh extra revenue so I assume it wasn’t just this one season
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
No, because we could complete the season at StAns and get promoted and thus the money for Championship football is secured with that promotion.
Then we could start next season potentially at the Ricoh.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Why would promotion influence a move to the Ricoh? It’s just a stupid sound byte
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
If you take the 'distress' factor out of it, the income stream would increase greatly in the Championship, although we would struggle to compete without increasing expenditure significantly. We would, though, potentially be more attractive to Wasps/sponsors as a championship team at The Ricoh?
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
It wouldn't! FFS. You said that I must be talking about longer than one season because I mentioned about getting Championship level TV money. I then pointed out that that the money would be secured upon promotion THIS SEASON. We could then start the Championship season at either stadium but the TV money wouldn't be dependent on it.
I can't make out if you're again deliberately deflecting or just lack comprehension.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
I saw Team Fiat at Wembley Arena when I was at school, they were a pro Basketball team from Coventry.
No, stay at SA and see how many turn up - for the promotion party.
richnrg
Well-Known Member
surely only Coventry could have a stadium (the Ricoh), that was in Coventry, but was easier for people who live outside Coventry to get to than it was for those who live in Coventry?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Not really sure why a basketball team who were only in the city for 3 or 4 years before having to move to get sponsorship is a good comparison to our situation. Would have thought something like Brighton or Bristol Rovers was better.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
You’ve made a fool of yourself
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
I've done a few quick sums on the more profitable option.
First, I've done the money you'd get from going up to the Championship.
The TV deal of c. £590m over 5 seasons (or £118m per season) is split up equally between the clubs in each division. Championship teams get something between 66.66% - 71.15%, L1 teams between 17.16% - 20%.
EFL clubs discuss potential new distribution model from 2019/20 onwards
So from this Championship teams should get between £3.27m and £3.5m each per season, L1 teams between £843k and £983k. So lets for arguments sake say it's £3.4m and £915k, a difference of roughly £2.5m per season
There are also the PL solidarity payments which are 30% for FLC and 4.5% for L1. Leeds' solidarity payment from a year or so ago was £4.5m according to a newspaper article I found, so from this a L1 solidarity payment would be 675k, a difference of £3.825m
There is of course the money for each game shown on tv, which is between £100-140k per home game in Championship and £30k in L1, with £10k for an away team in both. However, as these are variable I won't include them (although there is more likelihood of a tv game in FLC companred to L1)
Therefore the difference in income from being in the Championship to L1 is around £6.3m per season from tv deals/solidarity payments.
Let's compare that to potential missed income from smaller crowds at the Ricoh. I'm ignoring F&B sales/parking sales because I've no idea how much, if any, of these are passed onto the club at either stadium.
At St Andrews we're getting an average of 6.2k attendances at the moment, whether this will increase due to good form go down due to the poorer weather about to set in or a loss of form is impossible to say, so we'll use that as the average.
Last five years we've had average attendances of 12,363, 9,255, 9,111, 12,570 and 9,332 with variances due to form, league etc. As we're playing well at the moment and the fact we'd be going 'home' let's assume the crowd would be a bit above this and for ease of the maths lets say attendances went up 10k to an average of 16.2k.
With a matchday price of £20 (not taking into account concessions/complimentaries/corporate) that'd be extra revenue of £3.6m for the remaining 18 home games assuming we went back immediately.
But from that increased income next season from promotion would be around £6.3m + extra from games shown on tv. Loss of potential income from the remainder of this season by staying at StAns is c.£3.6m (and diminishing with each game played there).
So promotion would increases revenues by c.£2.7m more than in comparison to the lost revenue from the Ricoh this season. (The 'breakeven' attendance would be around 23.5k)
Now I know thesea re not mutually exclusive and someone will say, well we could have both - extra income from Ricoh and FLC promotion. Others will point out that with the promotion we would then almost certainly need a bigger budget to pay better players at that level anyway (although that is a discretionary choice of the clubs owners who could also tell MR to work within the budget restrictions he has now, as unlikely as that would be). These are all valid points.
First, I've done the money you'd get from going up to the Championship.
The TV deal of c. £590m over 5 seasons (or £118m per season) is split up equally between the clubs in each division. Championship teams get something between 66.66% - 71.15%, L1 teams between 17.16% - 20%.
EFL clubs discuss potential new distribution model from 2019/20 onwards
So from this Championship teams should get between £3.27m and £3.5m each per season, L1 teams between £843k and £983k. So lets for arguments sake say it's £3.4m and £915k, a difference of roughly £2.5m per season
There are also the PL solidarity payments which are 30% for FLC and 4.5% for L1. Leeds' solidarity payment from a year or so ago was £4.5m according to a newspaper article I found, so from this a L1 solidarity payment would be 675k, a difference of £3.825m
There is of course the money for each game shown on tv, which is between £100-140k per home game in Championship and £30k in L1, with £10k for an away team in both. However, as these are variable I won't include them (although there is more likelihood of a tv game in FLC companred to L1)
Therefore the difference in income from being in the Championship to L1 is around £6.3m per season from tv deals/solidarity payments.
Let's compare that to potential missed income from smaller crowds at the Ricoh. I'm ignoring F&B sales/parking sales because I've no idea how much, if any, of these are passed onto the club at either stadium.
At St Andrews we're getting an average of 6.2k attendances at the moment, whether this will increase due to good form go down due to the poorer weather about to set in or a loss of form is impossible to say, so we'll use that as the average.
Last five years we've had average attendances of 12,363, 9,255, 9,111, 12,570 and 9,332 with variances due to form, league etc. As we're playing well at the moment and the fact we'd be going 'home' let's assume the crowd would be a bit above this and for ease of the maths lets say attendances went up 10k to an average of 16.2k.
With a matchday price of £20 (not taking into account concessions/complimentaries/corporate) that'd be extra revenue of £3.6m for the remaining 18 home games assuming we went back immediately.
But from that increased income next season from promotion would be around £6.3m + extra from games shown on tv. Loss of potential income from the remainder of this season by staying at StAns is c.£3.6m (and diminishing with each game played there).
So promotion would increases revenues by c.£2.7m more than in comparison to the lost revenue from the Ricoh this season. (The 'breakeven' attendance would be around 23.5k)
Now I know thesea re not mutually exclusive and someone will say, well we could have both - extra income from Ricoh and FLC promotion. Others will point out that with the promotion we would then almost certainly need a bigger budget to pay better players at that level anyway (although that is a discretionary choice of the clubs owners who could also tell MR to work within the budget restrictions he has now, as unlikely as that would be). These are all valid points.
Last edited:
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
No, I really haven't, although I'm intrigued to be enlightened why you think so. :emoji_popcorn:
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
There are no St. Andrews fans
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Orca
Well-Known Member
Is it not the case that it wouldn't have any effect on their stance? They made it very clear there would be no deal whilst there were legals. There are still legals (which were hidden by SISU and now can't be stopped). I think the indemnity is stupid, but I can see why Wasps put it in.
BTW, anyone who chooses to come back with "they're not legals", go and read/listen to what Boddy and Fisher have both said. Called them "legals", so that "argument" is finally put to bed.
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
He’s getting somewhere but 4 paragraph should of stadium requests followed by - “wasps it makes sense to have us at the Ricoh”
Why not, SISU - Prove you’re building a new stadium
Wasps - why won’t you drop your indemnity request?
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
Right - they’re legals. Can’t be stopped though.
Wasps need to stop saying “stop the legals” knowing damn well they can’t be.
The indemnity clause is always ignored by the trust and wasps.
Drop the stupid clause - the losses only occur if there is something wrong with the deal.
