Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
It was nominal, which is 50-100k it is officially undisclosed but believed to be 100k.
Chaps hearing the ricoh deal is done.. (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter wal3590
- Start date
It was nominal, which is 50-100k it is officially undisclosed but believed to be 100k.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
From why I've been told, the deal only needs a signature, and works out for both parties, I take rumours with handfuls of salt (I know it's a pinch, btw) but if it's true...
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
A sensible comment, it just peeves me off when I see people arguing totally against lowering the rent and believe we should continue to pay 1.2 million
Read what i originally said
cloughie
Well-Known Member
Would be good but the timing of these rumours makes me think it BS as its a holidfay period and would have been delivered before the break as Christmas good news and we would not have got joys queens speech.
she would have surely waited to give a new years good news speech to glorify herself as the saviour.
CJparker
New Member
The problem for me is that you accept there is no evidence but still insist on asserting TF's line about the rent being "unaffordable"
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It is unaffordable as it unjustifiable. Looks like ACL will be slimming down after Christmas or finding some alternate revenue schemes.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
True, but the deadline is tomorrow, so time isn't on our side.
cloughie
Well-Known Member
Yet SBT constantly provides ‘evidence’ provided by Fisher and joy yet no one can find evidence of this on the Football League website or anywhere else regarding average rents other than from fisher and joy
No body is sure of the facts
CJparker
New Member
It isn't unaffordable if SISU continue to bankroll the club, as they have an obligation to do.
It is a perfectly justifiable sum for a Premier League standard ground (which is what the the Ricoh is, before you try to rebut that Grendel), and for a club with a potentially PL-support base.
It shouldn't be up to ACL to accept a lower rent based on "we've cocked up and got ourselves relegated so we cant afford to pay" - L1 status is neither here nor there. Their business plan depends on CCFC meeting its commitments and not unilaterally reneging on payments due.
There is no evidence that the rent is too high.
None
Nothing
No evidence
Get that into your thick head
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
I've done some independent research, I found 5 teams who pay rent, average of 213k, Joy said 6 times over market value. 1.28m divided by 6 = 213.3333333333333... Apologies welcome.
However, there may be more teams who rent.
kg82
Well-Known Member
Ooooo, thick head! Calm down now!
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I do love how SISU are emerging as the good guys in this. So ludicrous it's unreal.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
I have said "there are no good guys in this", don't believe me? Look through my posts (I doubt you'll waste your time).
CJparker
New Member
Do they all play in Premier League facilities that were heavily paid for by a local authority, who had to take out loans to cover this development (and the loans need to be repaid)?
Also, do you know the unique circumstances of each club which have come together to set their own rental figures?
What are the notional rental values of the grounds which are fully owned by their clubs?
I won't consider any argument that goes along the lines of "we should pay on the same basis as other League One teams"...because we are not an average League One team and our circumstances demand that we pay what is due. L1 status is totally irrelevant to the argument. The Ricoh was built for us as a PL ground wand we should be paying for it as such. You really can't argue against the principle of this. The practicabilities and the realpolitik, maybe, but not the flawed "L1 average" argument...it doesn't wash because it's SISU's fault were in L1, not ACL's.
CJparker
New Member
Err, what about ACL?
Someone remind me what they did wrong, other than to enter into an agreement in good faith with a tenant who reneged when the terms no longer suited them?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Sisu are not obliged to bankroll the club they could legitimately refuse to invest anymore.
The rent is obscene by virtually every measurement and we have no hope of attracting interested investors to the club.
If the tactics deployed have worked then the ends clearly justify the means. Lets hope the rent is down to £300,000 which is still a very generous offer.
Really we should as fans me demanding a refund from previous years.
This is a victory if true for common sense and fairness and will ultimately benefit the club.
You should if true be celebrating. This is a victory for decency and ACL can now start to do a job and find some other revenue steams. Should be a piece of cake with this excellent facilities should it? No need to bleed its main tenant dry. Time to a act like real business people now.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Charge us too much rent and now the club are facing a winding up order from... ACL!
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Which is why I said we should pay average Champ rent, quoted at 240k, which is likely as the average I have for 2 teams is 17.5k.
Walsall get ripped off by their own owner as rent money goes straight to his pension, think SISU are bad? The guy is a c**t. Also distorts the average a bit as well.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
You do understand that the club would be part of ACL were it not for McGinnity selling the share? Blame him or Richardson for this, not the charity and council.
CJparker
New Member
Yes, SISU can fuck off (I hope they do) but if they aim to run us then they have to fund us
The rent isn't obscene - I have seen no evidence to suggest this so please stop asserting it
Investors will be deterred by the cost of buying the Ricoh, taking on the debt to SISU's creditors, funding losses and paying for a competitive playing squad - a huge investment for a club in L1. This is all down to CCFC and its owners though, nothing to do with the rent situation which is only a fraction of the overall losses run by CCFC.
So do they ends always justify the means? In any situation? Not paying your obligations because you want to re-negoatite is never supportable IMO, whatever the outcome. Again, a rash assertion that "getting what is good for CCFC is all that matters"
There is no basis for claiming we have over-paid the rent. I am so sick of typing this. We agreed to the rent when it suited us (when we thought we'd soon be PL), so it is hypocritcal to now invoke the "league status" argument.
If SISU win the reduced rent it will be a victory for brinkmanship and bullying. No doubt a hard-headed individual like yourself will be well pleased to see a local authority and charity take a huge income hit to subsidise the losses of a millionaire Mayfair hedge fund.
To be quite honest I don't see that anyone is being persuaded in this debate - we are going round in circles. You are only interested in what suits CCFC,/SISU, fuck everyone else, and are happy to advance any assertion, however spurious, that pupports to back-up the indefensible tactics of CCFC. For my part, I can't defend an agreement which will just help to mitigate SISU's losses with probably no real financial benefit to CCFC.
CJparker
New Member
How was the £240k calculated?
Why not a PL rent, as that is essentially what the Ricoh is...a PL stadium.
CJparker
New Member
So demanding what they are contractually due, which has been unjustifiably withheld, makes ACL a bad guy?
If SISU had run CCFC successfully they would now be in a position where the rent was totally affordable, so it's hard to blame ACL for charging too much rent.
It's clearly up to SISU to pay up the rent or just fuck off.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Its one thing to negotiatw, its another to just stop paying! If you stop paying your landlord- you'll be on the street in 3-4 months! SiSU used the exact same tactics to get the shares for free. They waited till 30 minutes to admin to ensure Cov agreed to their (SiSU) demands! Saved the club? bollox - they held a gun to their head!
They claim they have "spent" £34 million in 5 years, and when they started they stated the debts were cleared. If both these statements are true, considering the current debt level they just equitised is around 50-60 million. This means they have lost around 17 mill / year at least! If they had bought the ricoh then their figures just don't add up!
They mortgaged Ryton for at least £1 mil on top of this! Not just that, but I specifically recall SiSU stating that the rent was not an issue a while ago, because at the time the fans were concerned about the club going into admin, and SiSU stated that the rent was manageable.
So when it suits them SiSU say the rent was affordable, yet when they want to stiff a charity, all of a sudden the rent is a factor!
Its lies upon lies from SiSU. There are so many boycotting the Ricoh while SiSU are there (hence the large away following). They aggressively suppress any opposition be it by ripping down protest banners, or trolling on fans forums (The Telegraph forum is the worst for this!
It will be a truly sad day if ACL spinelessly caved over this. What worries next is who SiSU will try and strong arm next. My guess they will threaten to leave if the council don't give them a massive discount on the stadium.
I'm beginning to wonder if cov wouldn't have been better off going into admin instead of inviting SiSU. At least back then owners could have come in without the fair play rules. If true it is the worst possible news!
PhilWasn'tBabb
New Member
There must be 60 plus teams at anyone time that believe they have a divine right to be in the premiership Cov being one of them. There are 20 places in the premiership, that means a lot of clubs arent going to make there goal of being there, Coventry are one of those clubs, sisu are partly to blame for this, they did give it a go when they first arrived, but given the numbers there are always going to be more teams that fail. Currently we are a very average league one team, just because we have a couple of thousand more supports each week doesn't change that. The club have cut the quality of the playing staff, why should the rent be any different.
We currently find ourselves in the third tier of English football, this means we can we can't afford premiership strikers..... Why should we pay premiership rent. All the figures which have been banded about would suggest the the ACL have taken great advantage of the financial incompetence who signed up to the rent. Yes the tatic of with holding the rent is not ideal but I'm sure SISU didn't take that decision lightly, there must have been a reason, perhaps the ACL weren't prepared consider the issue of the rent, it's not so long since ACL were saying they didn't need ccfc. The withholding of the rent has been key in getting the ACL to the table with an offer to drop the rent 2/3, I'm sure they've not done that just because its Christmas, why would they drop so fair, so fast. Whilst SISU are hard noised money men I would say the same of the ACL, they have clearly been doing very nicely out of the money the club have paid them over the years.
I would love to see the back of SISU and the arrival of roman abramovich but until that happens ill support SISU in trying to get the club to be able to fund itself.
We currently find ourselves in the third tier of English football, this means we can we can't afford premiership strikers..... Why should we pay premiership rent. All the figures which have been banded about would suggest the the ACL have taken great advantage of the financial incompetence who signed up to the rent. Yes the tatic of with holding the rent is not ideal but I'm sure SISU didn't take that decision lightly, there must have been a reason, perhaps the ACL weren't prepared consider the issue of the rent, it's not so long since ACL were saying they didn't need ccfc. The withholding of the rent has been key in getting the ACL to the table with an offer to drop the rent 2/3, I'm sure they've not done that just because its Christmas, why would they drop so fair, so fast. Whilst SISU are hard noised money men I would say the same of the ACL, they have clearly been doing very nicely out of the money the club have paid them over the years.
I would love to see the back of SISU and the arrival of roman abramovich but until that happens ill support SISU in trying to get the club to be able to fund itself.
Astute
Well-Known Member
I have decided many of you are right.
I am going to sell my house. A nice house has just come up for rent near me. Only £1,800 a month. I will move in then withold the rent until they let me have it for the average rent for the area. Looks like it is just under £700 a month. It is only fair as I couldn't afford £1,800 a month and keep up with the lifestyle I am used to.
I am going to sell my house. A nice house has just come up for rent near me. Only £1,800 a month. I will move in then withold the rent until they let me have it for the average rent for the area. Looks like it is just under £700 a month. It is only fair as I couldn't afford £1,800 a month and keep up with the lifestyle I am used to.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
That's where it's interesting as although ccfc did indeed move to a new house with a big rent the owners have changed since.
Money used well is powerful, used badly or for greed causes most of the problems our world currently has
A nonsense analogy.
A non-paying house tenant can be evicted and replaced with another - the same could be said of the hotel and casino chains at the Ricoh. Who would they replace CCFC with? Rowleys Green Utd?
The stadium needs a football club to survive, any suggestions to the contrary are utter bilge. I work at Ricoh and happen to know they would pull out of the naming rights deal if the football club left. I don't imagine the catering company who have paid millions in advance would be too happy either, not to mention other Ricoh tenants and sponsors who reply on some of their income from football fans in one form or another.
A deal has to be done for both sides (and it will be) but SISU are completely right to stand their ground.
Astute
Well-Known Member
And right not to pay any rent until they get what they want?
I agree on a reduction. I don't agree on the way SISU do things. They have held a charity to ransom. How long will it be before they do something again that the fans know is wrong? Just because something is the best for our club it don't make it morally right.
