CCFC & The Ricoh (6 Viewers)

[RoboCCFC90]

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 not ACL they should have definitely had a look at the rent and the financial impact. It is obvious what there tactic was when they came in, just poorly executed, it's what happens when you employ Ray Ranson.

 

---

[RoboCCFC90]

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

I'd go out on a limb and say Ray Ranson but I wouldn't ask you to hold me to it.

 

[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.

Can you please string words together that make sense ?

Ok read this slowly.

Look at your first post here and you say PROFIT. Your simple (rather chikdish) analysis does not factor in any other expenses or revenues. It is not a statement that therefore should include the term PROFIT.

I'm just glad I don't have to encounter people like you in real life.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Isn't the poll a little mischievous?

No CCFC weren't financially viable at the Ricoh, nor were they at Highfield Road in its final 6-7 years, nor are they at Sixfields.

Its worth remembering that the greatest amount of debt accumulated in the history of the club was during the Highfield Road years.

As so many like to point out that "the damage was done long before sisu", using the same argument then the damage was done long before moving to the Ricoh.

 

[will am i]

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.

sisu just buy the rights to other income from the stadium instead of expecting everything for free. You are using half the argument by focusing on the rent. Compass etc would sell if SISU bothered to sit down and negotiate a sale. Its called business.Why didnt they do it? Rent became more unsustainable because of the inept management of the club which included the appointment of Ken Dulieu (do you really want an organisation who thought Ken was a good idea running your club?)

 

[Rusty Trombone]

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

I think it's because they need a big return for their investors, they don't want to be in the football business longer than they need to be. Buying the rights, and getting the rent down will help the club, maybe we could even break even (although I doubt it). This is not going to get SISU £30m-£60m back. Winning the JR and claiming for losses might though.

 

[italiahorse]

Ok read this slowly.

Look at your first post here and you say PROFIT. Your simple (rather chikdish) analysis does not factor in any other expenses or revenues. It is not a statement that therefore should include the term PROFIT.

I'm just glad I don't have to encounter people like you in real life.

But those costs are the same for both locations so in a comparison of venues are irrelevant.

You must meet people like me in real life, they are called cleverer people. They are all around you.

 

[Astute]

£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.

So we are to believe that we pay less than a tenner on average to get in by what some say on here but would pay an average of a fiver each day on F+B........and then you seem to have put it all down to profit :thinking about:

ACL have been pocketing the F+B? Can you let us know what you really mean?

 

[will am i]

I think it's because they need a big return for their investors, they don't want to be in the football business longer than they need to be. Buying the rights, and getting the rent down will help the club, maybe we could even break even (although I doubt it). This is not going to get SISU £30m-£60m back. Winning the JR and claiming for losses might though.

Sounds spot on to me. Can someone now explain why anyone defends sisu and thinks the rent is the cause of all of our problems. Is it roughly £7m of rent has caused roughly £70m of debt. I need an accountant to explain how this is possible

 

[RoboCCFC90]

So we are to believe that we pay less than a tenner on average to get in by what some say on here but would pay an average of a fiver each day on F+B........and then you seem to have put it all down to profit :thinking about:

ACL have been pocketing the F+B? Can you let us know what you really mean?

We don't pay less then a tenner IMO, it's not something I have said anyways, the average must be around £20 I would of guessed.

What I really mean is that Football related revenues which someone at the Club stupidly sold off a long time ago has never been seen by the Club under Sisu's reign.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

Sounds spot on to me. Can someone now explain why anyone defends sisu and thinks the rent is the cause of all of our problems. Is it roughly £7m of rent has caused roughly £70m of debt. I need an accountant to explain how this is possible

If we had been given the ground for free for the last 6 years we'd be £7m better off, I think this still means we'd be massively in debt, so the rent is not the cause of all our problems.

 

[Astute]

The average ticket revenue averaged £10 per ticket sold so that's nonsense.

There you go Robo.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

There you go Robo.

Thanks Astute, I saw an article earlier in the season that said differently, I will try and dig it out..

 

[The Gentleman]

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

Does it not get included in incomings or buying players go as outgoings, if you are trying to calculate numbers then surely you would add everything in to give an honest picture, otherwise what is the point in writing all of those numbers you wrote before if you are only going to give the info you want to give and not the whole picture. To me it just highlights what naive and silly thread you started when all you could have said (and wanted to say)was "the rent was too high, ACL/CCC were slowly killing us". But because you have flogged that dead horse to death you thought you might try a different tact. The problem is that with the more recent offers ACL/CCC have put on the table blows your original theory up, because under the right terms, CCFC could be financially viable and be playing at the Ricoh under Sisu/Otium. It is just because they don't want to and they want to shaft all in their way, even at a detriment to CCFC. So will your next poll have something to do with Sisu/Otium?

 

[Rusty Trombone]

I think it is true that the last set of accounts showed that £10 per person is the correct figure. You have to take into account the amount of free tickets, childrens and oap discounts, VAT etc. Think about all the adults that used to go in with child season tickets as well, there were plenty of them.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Does it not get included in incomings or buying players go as outgoings, if you are trying to calculate numbers then surely you would add everything in to give an honest picture, otherwise what is the point in writing all of those numbers you wrote before if you are only going to give the info you want to give and not the whole picture. To me it just highlights what naive and silly thread you started when all you could have said (and wanted to say)was "the rent was too high, ACL/CCC were slowly killing us". But because you have flogged that dead horse to death you thought you might try a different tact. The problem is that with the more recent offers ACL/CCC have put on the table blows your original theory up, because under the right terms, CCFC could be financially viable and be playing at the Ricoh under Sisu/Otium. It is just because they don't want to and they want to shaft all in their way, even at a detriment to CCFC. So will your next poll have something to do with Sisu/Otium?

F&B Revenues will neeed to be included for CCFC to ever be viable at the Ricoh.

 

[Rusty Trombone]

F&B Revenues will neeed to be included for CCFC to ever be viable at the Ricoh.

How much would this give the club per season? How much should the club pay to get them back? I think they sold the rights for £5m, is that a fair price to pay?

 

[Astute]

We don't pay less then a tenner IMO, it's not something I have said anyways, the average must be around £20 I would of guessed.

What I really mean is that Football related revenues which someone at the Club stupidly sold off a long time ago has never been seen by the Club under Sisu's reign.

I fully agree with you there Robo. Some like to say that the average price was less than the cheapest ticket though. That must mean that we have a lot of kids going in. Our kids must have very deep voices.

ACL have not taken a penny out. So to me they haven't pocketed any money. All money has been reinvested or used to pay the debt down.

One main point I do think is that we need to stop blaming others for our club selling the part of the Ricoh they were given and blaming CCC for milking our club. It is frequently said but no proof is ever provided.

 

[RoboCCFC90]

How much would this give the club per season? How much should the club pay to get them back? I think they sold the rights for £5m, is that a fair price to pay?

I would say £5m would be a good price.

 

[Ashdown1]

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.

I don't know why you waste your time with them, there are a handful of fools who think that the rent paid by the club to ACL is the one and only damning factor in the clubs demise ! Pathetic !

 

[duffer]

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.

I'm not sure your figures are quite right, but ACL weren't 'pocketing' those F&B revenues, they were sold them. By the club. And if they were making a huge, excessive profit out of the club, where is this reflected in ACL's books?

I think you might have also missed out interest payments and management fees to the owners, which aren't insignificant as I recall.

Where this all falls down for me is you look at your figures, which show £7.5m in player wages compared to £1.2m in rent, and say that the reason that the club isn't viable is the rent.

 

[lordsummerisle]

I don't know why you waste your time with them, there are a handful of fools who think that the rent paid by the club to ACL is the one and only damning factor in the clubs demise ! Pathetic !

It wasn't me who was ignoring player wages.

They're what's cost the club, and have done since the start of the Premier League.

 

[Astute]

F&B Revenues will neeed to be included for CCFC to ever be viable at the Ricoh.

I would say that no more stupid contracts given out to players would help our club more.

I know that our club has been offered a lot lower rent and also had a F+B offer, but lets call the rent 250k. Attendance of 12k a game. 23 games a season so we won't count any cup games or any other revenue. That would make an attendance of 276,000. So the rent would be less than a quid a person.

 

[Astute]

It wasn't me who was ignoring player wages.

They're what's cost the club, and have done since the start of the Premier League.

So as you don't ignore the players wages you will agree that our clubs problem wasn't the rent but the wages being paid that was our clubs main financial problem.

 

[Ashdown1]

It wasn't me who was ignoring player wages.

They're what's cost the club, and have done since the start of the Premier League.

Absolutely spot on, I can't quite understand all the wet knickers over all the other factors apart from perhaps where some of the proceeds from player sales actually went !

 

[lordsummerisle]

So as you don't ignore the players wages you will agree that our clubs problem wasn't the rent but the wages being paid that was our clubs main financial problem.

Always has been as I've stated.

Doesn't mean that other costs should be ignored though.

 

[kmj5000]

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?

They could offer to purchase the catering rights instead of paying out £20m+ to build a stadium that nobody wants to go to!

 

[The Gentleman]

F&B Revenues will neeed to be included for CCFC to ever be viable at the Ricoh.

Some things go right over your head. You only see the things you want to see and ignore the rest. But as you've kindly highlighted that part for us all (and nothing else I said), wasn't the 400k a year deal that was offered attached to some of the revenue streams at the Ricoh (don't know which ones before someone starts jumping all over me). You do know that all of this mess is not about the F & B's, don't you?

 

[RoboCCFC90]

Some things go right over your head. You only see the things you want to see and ignore the rest. But as you've kindly highlighted that part for us all (and nothing else I said), wasn't the 400k a year deal that was offered attached to some of the revenue streams at the Ricoh (don't know which ones before someone starts jumping all over me). You do know that all of this mess is not about the F & B's, don't you?

Nothing went over my head and I read all your post, not just parts I chose to read, however I picked that part out because I believe my response needed to be said, I am sorry I didn't respond to your full post.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ccfc92]

I'm going with yes.

Purely down to the 1.2 million per year rent, is 100k per month.

10,000(average attendance) x £18 (average price) = £180,000 x 23 = £4,140,000 per season in gate receipts.

So the rent is just 29% of the gate receipts.

Then say our average wage was 2,000 PW last season for the first team (of 18 players) : £1,872,000 per year (if players get payed for a full year, not sure what happens on close season?)

So the Gate Receipts minus the rent = £2,940,000. Then minus wages equals £1,068,000 left over.




I'm not an accountant nor a mathematician, but without including sponsorship, merchandise, FA CUP/League Cup games etc, (then taking off matchday costs etc), I make that a profit of £1,068,000?

 

[torchomatic]

What about other staff, travel costs and all the other associated costs. That would eat into your £1068000, wouldn't it?

I'm going with yes.

Purely down to the 1.2 million per year rent, is 100k per month.

10,000(average attendance) x £18 (average price) = £180,000 x 23 = £4,140,000 per season in gate receipts.

So the rent is just 29% of the gate receipts.

Then say our average wage was 2,000 PW last season for the first team (of 18 players) : £1,872,000 per year (if players get payed for a full year, not sure what happens on close season?)

So the Gate Receipts minus the rent = £2,940,000. Then minus wages equals £1,068,000 left over.




I'm not an accountant nor a mathematician, but without including sponsorship, merchandise, FA CUP/League Cup games etc, (then taking off matchday costs etc), I make that a profit of £1,068,000?

 

[ccfc92]

What about other staff, travel costs and all the other associated costs. That would eat into your £1068000, wouldn't it?

yes agreed. But im sure the "but without including sponsorship, merchandise, FA CUP/League Cup games etc, (then taking off matchday costs etc), I make that a profit of £1,068,000?"
would balance out?

 

[Ashdown1]

Always has been as I've stated.

Doesn't mean that other costs should be ignored though.

The SISU propaganda machine worked a treat though didn't it, they fucked everything else up, paid out ridiculous amounts for chocolate fireguards like Kevin Kyle and a glut of other twats and let Chris Coleman, Ray Ranson and many others trash the club before deciding right, forget all that we've been paying too much rent, that's why the club is failing. Tell you what why don't we refuse to pay that and load £2.5million per annum management charges instead whilst all the mugs are looking the other way !

 

[Grendel]

So as you don't ignore the players wages you will agree that our clubs problem wasn't the rent but the wages being paid that was our clubs main financial problem.

So you say we should have been paying less wages?

Do you think there is a correlation between wages and league position?

 

[Grendel]

The SISU propaganda machine worked a treat though didn't it, they fucked everything else up, paid out ridiculous amounts for chocolate fireguards like Kevin Kyle and a glut of other twats and let Chris Coleman, Ray Ranson and many others trash the club before deciding right, forget all that we've been paying too much rent, that's why the club is failing. Tell you what why don't we refuse to pay that and load £2.5million per annum management charges instead whilst all the mugs are looking the other way !

So you are saying sisu invested hugely in the playing squad compared to our competitors? And that's a bad thing, yes?