As Nick says they did try before withholding rent. That forced ACL to negotiate.
And? Why would ACL negotiate? they were on to a good thing with that sort of ridiculous rent. Furthermore, why SHOULD they negotiate? there seems to be this myth that ACL, an independent business, somehow has a duty of care or responsibility towards the club and that they should have charged lower rents than they were able to achieve. WHY?
The bottom line in my view is the rent should have been negotiated to a sensible figure when purchasing the club, it wasn't, SISU signed the lease and then refused to pay for the service as it no longer suited them and we now find ourselves in this crazy situation. Poor, poor, poor.
Says the ACL spokesperson on a fans football forum.
Easy question, if you were a landlord and could get, say £600pm, would you charge less?
Not at all, but a quick fact.....
At Ricoh..........£15 a ticket x 10,000 x 23 (home games) = £3.45 million
At Sixfields......£15 a ticket x 2000 x 23 (home games) = £690k
Even if the Ricoh were charging £2 million a year, we would still be better off than we are this season !
Easy question, if you were a landlord and could get, say £600pm, would you charge less?
We averaged £10 a ticket at the Ricoh.
There getting £0 a month aren't they?
Easy question, if you were a landlord and could get, say £600pm, would you charge less?
Well yes, SISU fucked them over, refused to pay rent and moved to Northampton - this all happened months ago. Please keep up.
Easy question, if you were a landlord and could get, say £600pm, would you charge less?
The rent cost analogy works well in certain arguments, but remember this is a cost that helps generate income, and sometimes a higher cost may well generate substantially more income.
Grendel, what rent figure do you think would be fair to charge for the use of the Ricoh?
I believe we overpaid by £4 million during our tenure at least - we should have it free for a decade at least and when I say free I mean free not a quarter of a million plus match costs.
I believe we overpaid by £4 million during our tenure at least - we should have it free for a decade at least and when I say free I mean free not a quarter of a million plus match costs.
Thanks, so presumably the £4m over 10 years means that after this period you believe £400k per year to be a fair charge?
No he is saying they will fund the loses over the short term.
What he is not admitting is that this is in order to keep the Ricoh empty to try and get it cheap. Which is the only logical explanation for not taking up the free rent offer.
What he is saying us the long term financial driver is building our own stadium.
What he is not explaining and no one pushes him on. Is how dies that financially compare to signing a long term rent deal.
Also why they don't offer the full cost of this for the Ricoh which will be better than the proposed new stadium and is inside Coventry and would see the club back in 6 months not a year?
Well yes, SISU fucked them over, refused to pay rent and moved to Northampton - this all happened months ago. Please keep up.
Over paid ?
If anything, compared to this season, we have made too much profit...
At Ricoh..........£10 a ticket x 10,000 x 23 (home games) = £2.30 million
At Sixfields......£15 a ticket x 2000 x 23 (home games) = £690k
Take off the £1.2 million "rent" and thats £1.1 million profit from the Ricoh
:thinking about:
Sorry bit in your simplistic analysis you said would you charge less if you get £600 a month but they can't if they live in a house no one else wants and the tenant suddenly wakes up to the fact can they? Tenant suddenly offers 1 pence and because Sally is already booked I think they'd except the deal. I know your not the brightest in here but even you can see that can't you? Or is 82 really your IQ?
Your not very bright are you? Fact is unless the club owns the stadium or at least the management company it will never, ever be more than at best a struggling Championship club. It will be at a huge disadvantage and your ABC maths expose your ignorance.
Perhaps you should stick to the Portsmout thread -- its more your thing.
No then we should be allowed to buy it for the cost of the outstanding mortgage
Do you think the council should write off its £10million equity investment in the stadium?
Pretty sure the council been fully reimbursed for what they invested in cash terms in the build, when ACL paid the £20m upfront for the 50 year lease.
Pretty sure the council been fully reimbursed for what they invested in cash terms in the build, when ACL paid the £20m upfront for the 50 year lease.
So the £21m paid for the fit out (est £7m in final completion report) and to repay the £10m equity?
Thanks Wingy, now spotted it in the report.No Stu Shortfall on Construction costs £31m. £21M. Lease +£10M. council Equity.
So the £21m paid for the fit out (est £7m in final completion report) and to repay the £10m equity?
Sorry Stu, I should have double checked the details, the £21m loan taken out by ACL repaid £21m of borrowing taken out by the council to meet the funding gap for the stadium (not fit out costs as I incorrectly recalled). But I was correct that the £21m did not pay off the £10m equity investment. But you'll know that if you're read the completion report: http://moderngov.coventry.gov.uk/Da...08 - Arena Construction Completion Report.pdf
Edit: Which I can see you have while I was posting that!
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?