Grendel
Well-Known Member
Yes if this was sisu imagine the CET story - "cash strapped Mayfair hedge fund asking its own fans to pay for signings" - under a headline Would you Gamble your money?" Oh and a picture of Tim with a begging bowl.
No, the former. And to be honest it no more biased that any of Simon's articles of Wasps, which are...well...incredibly biased.
And some fans think that wasps would want to buy and fund our football club......
They haven't got a pot to.....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Worth £6m with just CCFC now worth £48m with WASPS and a professional management team. CCFC are not big time anymore get over it.
Remember all the "don't sell to SISU as they will borrow against it" scare stories? I wonder if those same posters will feel a little uncomfortable this morning?
Is that one of the comments, Nick?
Remember all the "don't sell to SISU as they will borrow against it" scare stories? I wonder if those same posters will feel a little uncomfortable this morning?
Its all about perception the WASPS PR machine has been excellent. SISU have given us Joy who only recently agreed to give interviews, Igne, Ken Diddleydoo, Brody a whole catalogue of jokers. There may be financial chaos behinds the scene but doesn't seem to effect the on field product. 7 and a bit years of SISU and we are a shambles.
Its all about perception the WASPS PR machine has been excellent.
Thats not standard process at all, the lease is an asset of acl (their primary asset) and would be sold if acl go bust. We own multiple flats long leasehold, if we went bankrupt they would be sold to repay the mortgages, they certainly wouldn't return to the freeholder, the freehold for the property our flats are in is worth about 10 grand, the flats are worth a couple of mill (not suggesting I have millions in flats if thats how it reads, thats the total value of the flats in the building)
I haven't actually said it's a poor deal, I'm not equipped to properly evaluate something like this, nore have I bothered to read the prospectus to even be fully informed.
But at the end of the day if they are both dodgy as fuck behind the scenes does it make it ok if they are bullshitting to the press every 5 minutes?
I'm afraid to him and many others it does. It's almost as if the PR excuses them from any scrutiny.
you are trying to have an argument where none is needed, I had already said how lending to wasps is a massively higher risk than lending to the government, I was trying to explain his misconception that wasps were going to need a profit of 5mill a year in order to pay back these bonds which certainly won't be the plan, even if they did make that profit it's extremely unlikely they would just run up a bank account up to 35mill to pay people back. They will invest the money, build the business and then borrow again in 7 years at a lower rate if things go well and higher if they don't or they will go bust.
IAgain, to me, this highlights how much of a risk Wasps are as a company.
However Wasps are committed to paying 6.5% interest a year on the bonds - £2.3m every year if the whole offering is taken, just to service the debt. Given they haven't turned a profit yet and have relied entirely on one person to keep going, I think that's a lot of extra money to find each season.
PR doesn't excuse scrutiny but WASPS have done it well compared to us, its about winning hearts and minds not about being morally right or wrong. WASPS are seen as being well run with a good on pitch product matched by a clear financial policy. Cov are seen as a shambles. Look no further than the in stadium merchandising - a table with virtually no products for sale.
PR doesn't excuse scrutiny but WASPS have done it well compared to us, its about winning hearts and minds not about being morally right or wrong.
And of course why the rate is high.
I'll stick with my Cov Building Society ISA
PR doesn't excuse scrutiny but WASPS have done it well compared to us, its about winning hearts and minds not about being morally right or wrong. WASPS are seen as being well run with a good on pitch product matched by a clear financial policy. Cov are seen as a shambles. Look no further than the in stadium merchandising - a table with virtually no products for sale.
I note the original page is down at the moment - http://www.wasps.co.uk/the-club/bonds - insert own conspiracy theory here, but if I was from the council I wouldn't have been overly happy with the initial claim on that page that the bond was secured against the Ricoh Arena. That's not really true.
6.5% with no security against a company who have very nearly gone to the wall once, and are currently reliant on the whim of an individual owner to survive, isn't high enough for me.
In fairness to Simon, I think he is on his honeymoon rather than hiding before anybody says anything!
Looking at the Wasps forum they are all eager to get their money out.
Nor me. But then it's the balance that make it stupidly high, and people *really* start asking questions.
What happens if they don't raise the cash, anyway?
What is worrying is people who suddenly have access to there pension pots see headline rates of 6.5% which is more than double high street rates .. And put there money in not realising they could loose it all .. They are not covered like high street banks .. Does anyone know of any upcoming stadium concerts .. As they make a big thing about the venue being used
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I thought it was all about morals and strong spines etc? How has it changed?
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?