CCFC & The Ricoh (2 Viewers)

[Grendel]

Thanks Grendal. So, £10 x 10,900 x 23 = £2.5 million. Minus the £1.5 million rent is £1 million profit

That correct ?

So a football club has no expenses other than rent - wow.

 

---

[shmmeee]

Apaprently they will play for free at the Ricoh, so the answer appears to be yes.

I'll go slow because you're not getting this.

The question was are we viable at the Ricoh?

The implication being that the only variable that would change between the two scenarios is the ground.

Therefore the only variables we're looking at are the ones that change when we change grounds.

Still with me?

Sponsorship/corporate opportunities, gate receipts, rent paid. These are all stadium related costs.

Player wages are not a stadium related cost.

Therefore there is no place for them in this particular discussion.

That simple enough?

If you want to talk about viability of the club as a whole, then we're not fucking viable anywhere we play. Which is why that's not what we're talking about. Unless we're a bit of a dick who cannot let a thread pass without some attempt to prove that we're oh so fucking clever.

 

[shmmeee]

So a football club has no expenses other than rent - wow.

See my last post.

FFS. This isn't hard.

 

[will am i]

The reason I ask Andreas is because I don't believe CCFC were viable now this isn't down solely to the rent, player wages, attedances figures and lack of matchday revenue, but from taking a quick scribble of last season based on the variables I mentioned CCFC would have been -£137,920 overall, before paying company salaries and so forth, hence the point I am really trying to make here everyone wants CCFC to return to the Ricoh (this much is obvious) the last rental deal on offer would have made CCFC finacially viable, but only slightly. To be competitive CCFC need to increase there revenue this much is obvious, but how can CCFC do that at the Ricoh if rent deals are only what ACL/CCC are to offer?

But shouldnt SISU have tried to but out the rights to other revenues? they were sold by the club and have a value. It seems they wanted these for £0. Why would the owners of the rights give these away?

 

[italiahorse]

So £10 x 10,000 x 25 equals £2.5M
minus rent at £400K minus players wages at £2M equals a profit of £100K ?

oops ...... forgot the £1M+ management fee which takes us into a loss.

Sisu ..... even you know the Ricoh is cheaper to rent.

 

[edgy]

 

[shmmeee]

but shouldnt sisu have tried to but out the rights to other revenues? They were sold by the club and have a value. It seems they wanted these for £0. Why would the owners of the rights give these away?

becoz da council screwed dem innit!

 

[Grendel]

So £10 x 10,000 x 25 equals £2.5M
minus rent at £400K minus players wages at £2M equals a profit of £100K ?

oops ...... forgot the £1M+ management fee which takes us into a loss.

Sisu ..... even you know the Ricoh is cheaper to rent.

So we have training ground costs, travel costs, non player wage costs - oh ok

 

[lordsummerisle]

IUnless we're a bit of a dick who cannot let a thread pass without some attempt to prove that we're oh so fucking clever.

Is that the Royal We?

Your attempts inevitably fail though, you'd probably best give it up.

I was answering where somebodys figures that stated that we would have £800,000 profit.

Those figures based on a crowd on 10,000 a game at the Ricoh.

I suspect that crowds would be considerably less than that getting lumped every week by not paying for any players to play there.

If you're going to have a thread about profit/loss at either the Ricoh or Sixfields, then it can't be done in isolation.

I know you struggle sometimes, but please try to keep up.

 

[ccfcway]

I was answering where somebodys figures that stated that we would have £800,000 profit.

any chance you can put your numbers up then ?

 

[ccfcway]

So we have training ground costs, travel costs, non player wage costs - oh ok

or income from sponsorship, cup games etc, oh ok

wheres your numbers grendal ?

 

[ollyservetta]

no,no money ,or not enough to re-invest in the team ,then saying that,we never will have being owned by a hedge fund ..

 

[Grendel]

or income from sponsorship, cup games etc, oh ok

wheres your numbers grendal ?

Given you had just said we'd make a profit of ticket sakes exceeded rent id seriously quit while your behind.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Also, what about money in for things like Leon Clarke? no outgoings on other players with loans and frees. The wages will be less after the bomb squad scenario and you can bet your bottom dollar that the recent loans are not on anything like Leon was on.

With refernece to Leon I assume you mean his sale, in what respect does that have to do with anything??

 

[covcity4life]

no not viable at ricoh orginally

yes better off at ricoh than sixfields

they have only left to drive permanent change going forwards(hopefully at ricoh) they have not moved us cos its a profit maker.

its that simple.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

But shouldnt SISU have tried to but out the rights to other revenues? they were sold by the club and have a value. It seems they wanted these for £0. Why would the owners of the rights give these away?

I agree that Sisu should have done this from the beginning, beggers belief as to why they didn't.

 

[fernandopartridge]

No, but they weren't financially viable at Highfield Road either.

Football is not a financially viable industry full stop. The players' wages are completely out of kilter with what clubs earn.

In our particular case, the issue is exacerbated further by pretty mediocre home support (when compared with clubs on a similar ilk e.g. Leicester, Derby)

 

[italiahorse]

So we have training ground costs, travel costs, non player wage costs - oh ok

You don't seem to grasp the concept that they are the same costs wherever they play.

 

[ccfcway]

Given you had just said we'd make a profit of ticket sakes exceeded rent id seriously quit while your behind.

so your now saying ticket sales - rent we were losing money ?

Never actually answer the question do you, wheres your numbers ?

 

[Grendel]

So £10 x 10,000 x 25 equals £2.5M
minus rent at £400K minus players wages at £2M equals a profit of £100K ?

oops ...... forgot the £1M+ management fee which takes us into a loss.

Sisu ..... even you know the Ricoh is cheaper to rent.

You don't seem to grasp the concept that they are the same costs wherever they play.

You don't seem to grasp the meaning of the word profit.

 

[ccfcway]

some people are happy to argue but not actually put an alternative case fwd !

 

[RoboCCFC90]

or income from sponsorship, cup games etc, oh ok

wheres your numbers grendal ?

Based on the 08/09 Season

(Attendance Average - 17,407) (Average Ticket Cost PP - £20) Ticket Revenue £8,007,220
* Merchandise Sales - £406,140
* TV Right's £1.5m

* Match Day Costs - -£230,000
Ricoh Rent - -£1.3m
Player Wages - -£7,592,000

------------------------------------------

Margain £1,021,130

Not sustainable or viable. Yes it's a profit but when you start taking costs of the Club's employee's and Managerial Staff it doesn't become that much at all, it certainly doesn't make us competitive, however add F&B Revenues of:

£5PP x Average Attendance x Fixtures played = £2,001,805 + £1,021,130 = £3,022,935

It looks slghtly better, this Club needs to be functional on the revenues it generates which it has always been at a disadvantage of because ACL have been pocketing the F&B Revenues.

 

[Grendel]

so your now saying ticket sales - rent we were losing money ?

Never actually answer the question do you, wheres your numbers ?

What are you on about? Why just argue for the sake of it.

Financial viability has to be measured in lime with competitiveness. So evaluate the revenue we had in the first couple of seasons and then calculate the rent and see the rent as a percentage of the revenue. Then look at other clubs and compare the rent as a percentage. Then you evaluate competitiveness.

Our rent against revenue was cripplingly high.

 

[skyblue1991]

Simple really: If CCFC were financially viable we would not be where we are now.

End of discussion. Thank you Messers Richardson and Robinson. Also a massive thanks to ACL and CCC.

 

[ccfcway]

Financial viability has to be measured in lime.

About the most sense you have ever made

 

[lordsummerisle]

any chance you can put your numbers up then ?

What numbers?

You've already started out about £300,000 down on the costs at the Ricoh until you were told that matchday costs weren't included in the rent.

 

[italiahorse]

You don't seem to grasp the meaning of the word profit.

I thought we were comparing venues?
Profit ? The bigger income less the same costs puts the Ricoh way out in front.

 

[Grendel]

So £10 x 10,000 x 25 equals £2.5M
minus rent at £400K minus players wages at £2M equals a profit of £100K ?

oops ...... forgot the £1M+ management fee which takes us into a loss.

Sisu ..... even you know the Ricoh is cheaper to rent.

I thought we were comparing venues?
Profit ? The bigger income less the same costs puts the Ricoh way out in front.

So I'm imagining things? You don't say profit?

 

[James Smith]

I agree that Sisu should have done this from the beginning, beggers belief as to why they didn't.

I agree they should have bought ACL when they acquired our club, would have been cheaper then too. :facepalm: None of this joint venture stuff with Compass, or DeVere etc. Much easier.

 

[sbvet]

simply maths (which RFC has disagreed with, but not said why)

Ricoh - 23 games x 10,000 fans x £15 per ticket = £3.45 million. Take off the £1.3 million rent and that = £2.15 million
Sixfields - 23 games x 3000 fans x £15 per ticket = £1.04 million. Lets say its rent free at Sixfields = £1.04 million.

Even at the crazy rental costs, the club would have made far in excess of £1 million extra by staying at the Ricoh, this season alone !

Of course we will never know for sure, but I would make a guess gates would exceed 10k by a country mile considering the results up until recently

 

[Grendel]

I agree they should have bought ACL when they acquired our club, would have been cheaper then too. :facepalm: None of this joint venture stuff with Compass, or DeVere etc. Much easier.

Buy them? They should have just refused to pay rent on day one and they'd have been stuffed. Bit like the old roll the tanks into Russia line after World War Two - should have been ruthless and got the prize.

 

[italiahorse]

So I'm imagining things? You don't say profit?

Can you please string words together that make sense ?

 

[will am i]

I agree they should have bought ACL when they acquired our club, would have been cheaper then too. :facepalm: None of this joint venture stuff with Compass, or DeVere etc. Much easier.

So why is it impossible to buy these rights and negotiate the rent now instead? Is there anyone with a sensible answer to that?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

So why is it impossible to buy these rights and negotiate the rent now instead? Is there anyone with a sensible answer to that?

Me and Noggin were discussing similar recently the issue is that all trust has gone between the two parties and there is no longer a chance that either party can sit and reasonably negotiate with each other.

 

[italiahorse]

I agree they should have bought ACL when they acquired our club, would have been cheaper then too. :facepalm: None of this joint venture stuff with Compass, or DeVere etc. Much easier.

If they had bought ACL they would have access to the income streams. Love to know what stopped them.