Can someone explain the 150K offer to me? (10 Viewers)

[Godiva]

They could pay the whole years rent with one matches takings.
Match day costs will be the same regardless where we are.
F&B is miniscule in the whole picture.
I just can't understand SISIU logic.

Look at it this way:
If sisu have decided to build a new stadium then the only question was where to play in the building period. ACL said they would only accept a minimum 10 year lease, but as the building will only take 3 to 5 years sisu could not agree to a 10 year lease no matter what additional income they were offered.
The sixfields agreement is only lasting until the new stadium is finished.

 

---

[italiahorse]

You're right, they have but what Godiva is saying is still correct. If the offer is as how Godiva says it is, then if you're in SISU and 'want' to bring the club and the stadium together, this wouldn't allow you to do so for 10 years. No point from their side.

WM

Well their plan is a 10 year plan anyway according to TF at forum.

In 10 years SISU could

Own the Ricoh with all income streams and in the interim benefit from income streams based on 10,000 fans and 150K a year rent.

or ...

Own a stadium of <20,000 with all the income streams but considerable debt based on poor crowds, building a new stadium and a whole lotta problems due to Fair Play rules that will see us out of the FL system.

 

[Godiva]

Okay we know from the ACL statement* that allegedly Joy wanted the freehold at her price

I've snipped out the relevant paragraph and it is my bolding.

Her price could be anything from £200m to £5-10m through to a half tube of toothpaste and a bag of day old doughnuts. I don't see how anyone can negotiate with someone like that, and makes it obvious, if true, that she isn't interested in a rent deal at the Ricoh at all and is just using our club as a bargaining chip for the freehold.

*which hasn't been denied by SISU although they may have said nothing due to contempt of court if they are appealing.

I think both sides are at such a 'state' that they should not be allowed in the same room without proper police protection and standby ambulance service!

 

[SonOfSnoz]

Bad enough with Acl v CCFC Ltd
never mind bringing in HOLDINGS/Arvo/SBS&L/Otium etc....

 

[Godiva]

Well their plan is a 10 year plan anyway according to TF at forum.

In 10 years SISU could

Own the Ricoh with all income streams and in the interim benefit from income streams based on 10,000 fans and 150K a year rent.

or ...

Own a stadium of <20,000 with all the income streams but considerable debt based on poor crowds, building a new stadium and a whole lotta problems due to Fair Play rules that will see us out of the FL system.

Sisu owning all or part of the Ricoh is not going to happen according to leading ccc members.

When they build a new stadium they start by purchasing a large land site. They then gain planning permissions to build the stadium. At that point the land value increase greatly by the potential of regular punters coming to the future stadium. Sisu then start selling off leases to new businesses that can see the opportunities in setting up shop next to a stadium. Now sisu will have recouped some (maybe even all) of the investment tho buy the site and build the stadium. The debts to the club will not increase by the full cost of the project.

And in 4 or 5 years much has changed. People will go. The crowd will mainly be decided by the teams position in the league.

 

[davebart]

But Sixfields is apparantly only an interim venue while building a new stadium. Income while there will be peanuts and the owners will surely have calculated their budgets accordingly.

I like your optimism

 

[James Smith]

They could pay the whole years rent with one matches takings.
Match day costs will be the same regardless where we are.
F&B is miniscule in the whole picture.
I just can't understand SISIU logic.

If the ACL statement is correct then what I think is that SISU hoped that the council would lose the judicial review, causing problems for the council and ACL. They'd then be in a more receptive mood to offers and possibly look to offload their distressed debt to someone. SISU would then have been in a perfect position to pick up that debt at a firesale price, possibly wth freehold demands attached and the threat of more legal action if they didn't comply. As I posted in another thread there is no sensible business case for moving to Northampton and the only possible reason that I can see is to try and distress ACL further.

 

[SonOfSnoz]

Sisu owning all or part of the Ricoh is not going to happen according to leading ccc members.

When they build a new stadium they start by purchasing a large land site. They then gain planning permissions to build the stadium. At that point the land value increase greatly by the potential of regular punters coming to the future stadium. Sisu then start selling off leases to new businesses that can see the opportunities in setting up shop next to a stadium. Now sisu will have recouped some (maybe even all) of the investment tho buy the site and build the stadium. The debts to the club will not increase by the full cost of the project.

And in 4 or 5 years much has changed. People will go. The crowd will mainly be decided by the teams position in the league.

Reminds me of the Ricoh Arena! Great success job for CCFC & council that turned out!

 

[James Smith]

I think both sides are at such a 'state' that they should not be allowed in the same room without proper police protection and standby ambulance service!

I think as I've said before they need an independent moderator who keeps an accurate record of exactly what is said/offered to whom. But yes probably some form of minders to keep the peace wouldn't be a bad suggestion. Maybe we just need to contact Jerry Springer or Judge Judy!

 

[davebart]

The crowd will mainly be decided by the teams position in the league.

....and how many CCFC supporters are left

 

[SIR ERNIE]

I think both sides are at such a 'state' that they should not be allowed in the same room without proper police protection and standby ambulance service!

No, I dont think both sides are at such a state...I actually applaud ACL for standing up to this shower of devious, double dealing sharks. I don't pretend to be anywhere near as expert as some on here but I reckon I can smell a bunch of bad 'uns, and that's what SISU are in my opinion.

Be honest, this lot should never ever have been allowed anywhere near a football club and if the FL had been doing their job we wouldn't be in this state.

I say bloody well done ACL for doing everything possible to stop this lot from getting a £113m arena for peanuts. Anyone with any kind of a backbone would do exactly the same. I know I would.

Nope, ACL have fought fire with as much fire as they could muster and have effectively said

"It's you SISU, who are the custodians of the football team representing this city, not us...and if you are so devoid of moral scruples that you're prepared to take that team out of it's home city and possibly even see it fold after 130 years, then it'll be you who will be answerable to the people of Coventry"

That's how I see it and that's why I will give NOPM to SISU.

 

[RPHunt]

When they build a new stadium they start by purchasing a large land site. They then gain planning permissions to build the stadium. At that point the land value increase greatly by the potential of regular punters coming to the future stadium. Sisu then start selling off leases to new businesses that can see the opportunities in setting up shop next to a stadium. Now sisu will have recouped some (maybe even all) of the investment tho buy the site and build the stadium. The debts to the club will not increase by the full cost of the project.

Fisher gets paid to spout this sort of fantasy - what's your angle?

 

[James Smith]

I think you could point to an earlier game changer than that.

what about not paying any rent for 12 months, if I were a landlord that would certainly change my attitude to a lodger.

what about selling Juke, thus weakening an already weak team and getting us relegated - that was a bit of a game changer.

If the tenants at my flat don't pay the rent for two months they will be kicked out by the managing agent.

 

[Buster]

But Sixfields is apparantly only an interim venue while building a new stadium. Income while there will be peanuts and the owners will surely have calculated their budgets accordingly.

The income from the new "ficticious" stadium will be peanuts too!

 

[mrbluesky87]

If the tenants at my flat don't pay the rent for two months they will be kicked out by the managing agent.

And thats the crooks of it. We can all go in to this and that about who's wrong who's right but basically they did not pay the AGREED rent thus ACL got a little pissed and eventually they had to go legal like any landlord would do and eventually have them kicked out. Why should it be any different for a football club?? If SISU had just an ounce of business acumen they could have discussed the rent while still paying which would have gave them scope for a reduction.

 

[James Smith]

And thats the crooks of it. We can all go in to this and that about who's wrong who's right but basically they did not pay the AGREED rent thus ACL got a little pissed and eventually they had to go legal like any landlord would do and eventually have them kicked out. Why should it be any different for a football club?? If SISU had just an ounce of business acumen they could have discussed the rent while still paying which would have gave them scope for a reduction.

It may have been a Freudian slip or auto correct or spell check etc. but the correct word is crux not crooks. Anyway I think ACL didn't kick the club out they decided to go on their own.

 

[mrbluesky87]

It may have been a Freudian slip or auto correct or spell check etc. but the correct word is crux not crooks. Anyway I think ACL didn't kick the club out they decided to go on their own.

Auto correct, its been worse than that over the last few weeks trust me.

I agree they did walk, but how many people do walk when they owe money on property that they rent, majority by the looks of a programme I have watched recently.

 

[lordsummerisle]

And thats the crooks of it. We can all go in to this and that about who's wrong who's right but basically they did not pay the AGREED rent thus ACL got a little pissed and eventually they had to go legal like any landlord would do and eventually have them kicked out. Why should it be any different for a football club?? If SISU had just an ounce of business acumen they could have discussed the rent while still paying which would have gave them scope for a reduction.

That's where these endless house rental analogies fall down.

Somebody rents a very large house, though with the size of his family he really only needs one a third of the size, however at the time he took on the pace he was homeless and there was nowhere else to stay, so, even though the rent was a bit more than he could afford, he signed up to stay there.

About 8 years ago, realising the rent was a bit steep he tried to renogtiate the rent, but the landlord wouldn't have it, he tried again over three years ago, again the landlord wouldn't have it.

Despite pointing out that all his family and friends were coming round and spending money at the landlords own food and drink emporiums which was a considerable amount, and kicked out of the house every summer so that the landlord could get some of his foreign mates in and some blokes he knew from a couple of bands.

Eventually due to reduced circumstances(after selling off most of the furniture to try and keep afloat), he withheld his rent in order to try and get a better deal.

The landlord took him to court for it, and was still insisting he stay there for another 25 years or so.

Like any sensible tenant living in a place that was too big for him and more than he could afford, he found somewhere smaller and cheaper, it was a bit out of the area, but whilst there he could maybe save up to buy and own his own house, everybodys dream!

Unfortunately the landlord(who, remember, had refused to negotiate for many times over the years, until it was a bit too late), who had taken the tenant to court, then wanted to sue the tenants new landlord, despite saying for months that negotiations were at an end and there would be no further talking, followed by taking the tenant to court.

With this rental analogy, it the landlord would make Peter Rachman look like Landlord of the Year.

 

[SIR ERNIE]

That's where these endless house rental analogies fall down.

Somebody rents a very large house, though with the size of his family he really only needs one a third of the size, however at the time he took on the pace he was homeless and there was nowhere else to stay, so, even though the rent was a bit more than he could afford, he signed up to stay there.

About 8 years ago, realising the rent was a bit steep he tried to renogtiate the rent, but the landlord wouldn't have it, he tried again over three years ago, again the landlord wouldn't have it.

Despite pointing out that all his family and friends were coming round and spending money at the landlords own food and drink emporiums which was a considerable amount, and kicked out of the house every summer so that the landlord could get some of his foreign mates in and some blokes he knew from a couple of bands.

Eventually due to reduced circumstances(after selling off most of the furniture to try and keep afloat), he withheld his rent in order to try and get a better deal.

The landlord took him to court for it, and was still insisting he stay there for another 25 years or so.

Like any sensible tenant living in a place that was too big for him and more than he could afford, he found somewhere smaller and cheaper, it was a bit out of the area, but whilst there he could maybe save up to buy and own his own house, everybodys dream!

Unfortunately the landlord(who, remember, had refused to negotiate for many times over the years, until it was a bit too late), who had taken the tenant to court, then wanted to sue the tenants new landlord, despite saying for months that negotiations were at an end and there would be no further talking, followed by taking the tenant to court.

With this rental analogy, it the landlord would make Peter Rachman look like Landlord of the Year.

All well and good but you overlook the fact that the tenants in question are a bunch of devious, double dealing, sharks.

 

[lordsummerisle]

All well and good but you overlook the fact that the tenants in question are a bunch of devious, double dealing, lying sharks.

That they are, so why sue somebody else to try and get them back then?

Still doesn't mean that there isn't more than one type of shark in the ocean.

 

[James Smith]

That's where these endless house rental analogies fall down.

Somebody rents a very large house, though with the size of his family he really only needs one a third of the size, however at the time he took on the pace he was homeless and there was nowhere else to stay, so, even though the rent was a bit more than he could afford, he signed up to stay there.

About 8 years ago, realising the rent was a bit steep he tried to renogtiate the rent, but the landlord wouldn't have it, he tried again over three years ago, again the landlord wouldn't have it.

Despite pointing out that all his family and friends were coming round and spending money at the landlords own food and drink emporiums which was a considerable amount, and kicked out of the house every summer so that the landlord could get some of his foreign mates in and some blokes he knew from a couple of bands.

Eventually due to reduced circumstances(after selling off most of the furniture to try and keep afloat), he withheld his rent in order to try and get a better deal.

The landlord took him to court for it, and was still insisting he stay there for another 25 years or so.

Like any sensible tenant living in a place that was too big for him and more than he could afford, he found somewhere smaller and cheaper, it was a bit out of the area, but whilst there he could maybe save up to buy and own his own house, everybodys dream!

Unfortunately the landlord(who, remember, had refused to negotiate for many times over the years, until it was a bit too late), who had taken the tenant to court, then wanted to sue the tenants new landlord, despite saying for months that negotiations were at an end and there would be no further talking, followed by taking the tenant to court.

With this rental analogy, it the landlord would make Peter Rachman look like Landlord of the Year.

Where has it been written that SISU entered into any serious negotiations with ACL before starting the rent boycott?

From the Trust Q&A:

6: Before April 2012 did CCFC ever approach ACL to change the licence or rental value?

ACL: In 2004 and 2005 a proposal was made by Sir Derek Higgs that there should be different base rents for each League with escalators that would relate attendance to payment. He was a shareholder and director of CCFC and a director of ACL. This proposition was rejected by the then Board of CCFC, as although the base rents for the lower Leagues would have resulted in a reduction on the agreed rent, the rent in the Premiership would have been higher. Since SISU bought the club there have been one or two light touch discussions with SISU but nothing that amounted to a serious proposition.

CCFC: Not sure of historic negotiations

 

[Godiva]

Like any sensible tenant living in a place that was too big for him and more than he could afford, he found somewhere smaller and cheaper, it was a bit out of the area, but whilst there he could maybe save up to buy and own his own house, everybodys dream!

You left out a key part:
When the tenant refused to pay the rent (actually only paid for the costs of staying like heat, gas and electricity) all his friends got very upset and demanded he should pay the contractual agreed rent. When he moved to a cheaper house his friends became so angry that they refused to come over. He did invite them for the usual tea but they preferred to go to a BBQ party at his former landlord.
They still claim that they are and always will be his dearest friend.

 

[lordsummerisle]

Where has it been written that SISU entered into any serious negotiations with ACL before starting the rent boycott?

Here

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/red-button-ricoh-arena-chairman-5431948

You may remember this from a couple of weeks ago?

"Light touch discussions" would hardly need to involve the Chairman of the Arena to sound out getting in other clubs, and seeing if sponsors would wear it would they?

According to a source in the front row, the chairman of the Ricoh was preparing for just such an eventuality three years ago and had sounded out the stadium’s major sponsors.

David Allvey was apparently carrying out a loyalty-check to see if they would remain with the Ricoh if the star attraction left.
And he had a Plan B in mind if the City packed up and walked off with the ball – replace it with an oval one and bring in a top rugby side!
He didn’t need a crystal ball to see what was looming. The rent-row was getting increasing bitter and he correctly predicted there would be a parting of the ways.

 

[italiahorse]

Sisu owning all or part of the Ricoh is not going to happen according to leading ccc members.

When they build a new stadium they start by purchasing a large land site. They then gain planning permissions to build the stadium. At that point the land value increase greatly by the potential of regular punters coming to the future stadium. Sisu then start selling off leases to new businesses that can see the opportunities in setting up shop next to a stadium. Now sisu will have recouped some (maybe even all) of the investment tho buy the site and build the stadium. The debts to the club will not increase by the full cost of the project.

And in 4 or 5 years much has changed. People will go. The crowd will mainly be decided by the teams position in the league.

So why doesn't everybody do it ?
Green belt conversions to housing and industrial don't just happen they are part of long term strategies.
I own land in the green belt next to existing industrial but I can't get planning permission just like that.

 

[James Smith]

Here

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/red-button-ricoh-arena-chairman-5431948

You may remember this from a couple of weeks ago?

"Light touch discussions" would hardly need to involve the Chairman of the Arena to sound out getting in other clubs, and seeing if sponsors would wear it would they?

Forgive my poor eyesight but I don't see where it says in that article that SISU were negotiating with ACL over the rent, or that Mr Alvey was involved in the negotiations. That just says that ACL were preparing a plan in the event that CCFC left the stadium, that just sounds like prudent planning to safeguard the future of the business. I wouldn't be surprised if the bank had asked what would happen if we left the Ricoh and required a plan.

When I last saw the bank about my financial health they enquired as to the tenancy on my flat and whether I was happy that the agents would be able to find someone quickly to replace them if I lost my current tenants. They were worried that I wouldn't be able to keep up repayments to them [the bank] if that happened. The tenants at my flat have since left and the agents found someone shortly after the intention to leave was communicated to them and I lost about a weeks rent whilst cleaning and maintenance was done plus replacing an item of furniture which was worn out.

 

[Godiva]

So why doesn't everybody do it ?
Green belt conversions to housing and industrial don't just happen they are part of long term strategies.
I own land in the green belt next to existing industrial but I can't get planning permission just like that.

It's the mechanics as I understand sisu plans, but I haven't commented if it was easy hard or impossible. Every possible site will have restrictions that either must be accepted or renegotiated. The builders main leverage in negotiation with the local authorities will always be the job creation potential. How much is job creation worth? In this economic climate ... quite a lot.

 

[lordsummerisle]

Forgive my poor eyesight but I don't see where it says in that article that SISU were negotiating with ACL over the rent, or that Mr Alvey was involved in the negotiations. That just says that ACL were preparing a plan in the event that CCFC left the stadium, that just sounds like prudent planning to safeguard the future of the business. I wouldn't be surprised if the bank had asked what would happen if we left the Ricoh and required a plan.

When I last saw the bank about my financial health they enquired as to the tenancy on my flat and whether I was happy that the agents would be able to find someone quickly to replace them if I lost my current tenants. They were worried that I wouldn't be able to keep up repayments to them [the bank] if that happened. The tenants at my flat have since left and the agents found someone shortly after the intention to leave was communicated to them and I lost about a weeks rent whilst cleaning and maintenance was done plus replacing an item of furniture which was worn out.

It was "the rent row was getting increasingly bitter" part of the article that made me think that they were having some discussions with Sisu over the rent.

I may have been jumping to conclusions, maybe it was with the casino??

 

[James Smith]

It was "the rent row was getting increasingly bitter" part of the article that made me think that they were having some discussions with Sisu over the rent.

I may have been jumping to conclusions, maybe it was with the casino??

No it may well have been our club, I just don't think that there were any serious negotiations. I took that sentence with the word bitter in it as journalistic licence though especially given the mysterious source in the front row supplying the info. If they were looking to sound out other potential clubs then it would be the chairman or chief exec who'd do the first contact though wouldn't it not someone junior, you'd want gravitas and experience?