different view (1 Viewer)

aviles · Mar 22, 2013

Im guessing this is probably going to get some abuse for this outrageous post.

......BUT the way im looking at this is sisu have been in charge for what 6 years ? in those 6 years when have they ever done anything to put themselves in a bad situation financially (apart from buying the club)

I would like to think they know what they are doing and they have a plan to avoid this point deduction get promoted this season claw some of there money back and sell up next season.

Because lets be honest without investment we would be back in league one within a season !

wishful thinking ? i think so. But a boy can dream :facepalm:

mattylad · Mar 22, 2013

aviles said:
Im guessing this is probably going to get some abuse for this outrageous post.

......BUT the way im looking at this is sisu have been in charge for what 6 years ? in those 6 years when have they ever done anything to put themselves in a bad situation financially (apart from buying the club)

I would like to think they know what they are doing and they have a plan to avoid this point deduction get promoted this season claw some of there money back and sell up next season.

Because lets be honest without investment we would be back in league one within a season !

wishful thinking ? i think so. But a boy can dream :facepalm:

no doubt that they are very intelligent people and those who underestimate them need to think again

Otis · Mar 22, 2013

Intelligent, yes.

Ruthless and unscrupulous, most certainly.

big nellie · Mar 22, 2013

Who says they will not try to liquidate the club in the summer. They have no morals or love for our club.

Godiva · Mar 22, 2013

Otis said:
Intelligent, yes.

Ruthless and unscrupulous, most certainly.

In short: Doing what is necessary.

Godiva · Mar 22, 2013

big nellie said:
Who says they will not try to liquidate the club in the summer. They have no morals or love for our club.

If they wanted out they wouldn't have made their latest move. They would just let the administration proces go along. They wouldn't have made sure the team can play at Wallsall.
They are going nowhere.

CCFCDan87 · Mar 22, 2013

mattylad said:
no doubt that they are very intelligent people and those who underestimate them need to think again

Intelligent? Are you sure? They spend millions on advisory fees and management. I wouldn't class that as intelligent.

Sky Blue Pete · Mar 22, 2013

And that is good Godiva?? Must be a wonderful place you're dreamworlds

Mucca Mad Boys · Mar 22, 2013

big nellie said:
Who says they will not try to liquidate the club in the summer. They have no morals or love for our club.

I doubt SISU would do that, because this latest twist at least shows they have a mid-term plan for the club.

Mucca Mad Boys · Mar 22, 2013

Sky Blue Pete said:
And that is good Godiva?? Must be a wonderful place you're dreamworlds

... Would it be good if ACL put us into admin and another season in L1 is guaranteed? The general consensus seems to be it would be good, what dream world are most people in? Who actually wants us to have another season in L1!?

Godiva · Mar 22, 2013

Sky Blue Pete said:
And that is good Godiva?? Must be a wonderful place you're dreamworlds

In my dream the stadium is operated by the club and all income from it benefits the club.

CCFCDan87 · Mar 22, 2013

SkyBlue_Taylor said:
... Would it be good if ACL put us into admin and another season in L1 is guaranteed? The general consensus seems to be it would be good, what dream world are most people in? Who actually wants us to have another season in L1!?

The way your talking were already up. Regardless of points reduction. We will not get in the playoffs this year so stop this claptrap about ACL stopping Cov getting promoted. It's bullshit

CCFCDan87 · Mar 22, 2013

Godiva said:
In my dream the stadium is operated by the club and all income from it benefits the club.

That could have been reality if SISU wanted to. 6 years here and not once made any effort to purchase the ground. Actions speak louder than words

Sky Blue Pete · Mar 22, 2013

Godiva said:
In my dream the stadium is operated by the club and all income from it benefits the club.

But with owners that we can't trust and appear to have no interest in a successful football club

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Mar 22, 2013

Godiva said:
In my dream the stadium is operated by the club and all income from it benefits the club.

Haven't SISU already agreed to buy the Highs share, giving them half ownership? Bit having agreed a deal, done nothing with an open option until 2015?

aviles · Mar 22, 2013

CCFCDan87 said:
The way your talking were already up. Regardless of points reduction. We will not get in the playoffs this year so stop this claptrap about ACL stopping Cov getting promoted. It's bullshit

I will apologise now but your an idiot. Its fans like you which drive me mad no confidence what so ever in our team. if the point deduction does not comes in we have a very very good chance of making the play offs start off by winning tomorrow to show other teams that we havnt let the off field shananigans affect and then just wait for one of the top 6 to slip up again which one of them has been doing every game for the last month or so ! People need to start having faith in the team. This is the best football i have seen from this club in the last 10 years !

Godiva · Mar 22, 2013

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
Haven't SISU already agreed to buy the Highs share, giving them half ownership? Bit having agreed a deal, done nothing with an open option until 2015?

No, they agreed heads of terms - a roadmap of negotiations that would ultimately lead to buying the shares if they could agree on conditions.

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 22, 2013

SkyBlue_Taylor said:
... Would it be good if ACL put us into admin and another season in L1 is guaranteed? The general consensus seems to be it would be good, what dream world are most people in? Who actually wants us to have another season in L1!?

No but it is entirely self inflicted through Fisher's illegal rent boycott through to him rejecting an offer which gives him a huge reduction and access to a huge amount in revenues. His actions have led to this yet he is still defended.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Mar 22, 2013

Godiva said:
No, they agreed heads of terms - a roadmap of negotiations that would ultimately lead to buying the shares if they could agree on conditions.

So why not conclude. Listening to ACL on the radio recently they stated SISU hadn't returned to the negotiating table. If heads of terms were agreed, which is what I have read too, the terms couldn't have been onerous.

By netting off income, this would have halved the rent, given access to income, plus the turnover of the totality of the venue meaning FFP and embargos wouldn't be an issue?!?

Godiva · Mar 22, 2013

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
So why not conclude. Listening to ACL on the radio recently they stated SISU hadn't returned to the negotiating table. If heads of terms were agreed, which is what I have read too, the terms couldn't have been onerous.

By netting off income, this would have halved the rent, given access to income, plus the turnover of the totality of the venue meaning FFP and embargos wouldn't be an issue?!?

I think you find your answer in the fact that TF stated ACL were in financial trouble. If Higgs said they wanted £8-10m for their half-part of a financial distressed company, then negotiations were bound to break. There's no way an investor (let alone a hedge fund!) would valuate ACL at approximately £20m - even today after the CCC bailout ACL is not worth anything like that.
Add the potential of losing the club and all the revenue it brings to the stadium and it's businesses - ACL may head for failure in 2-5 years. At least it will struggle hard to make a profit.

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 22, 2013

Godiva said:
I think you find your answer in the fact that TF stated ACL were in financial trouble. If Higgs said they wanted £8-10m for their half-part of a financial distressed company, then negotiations were bound to break. There's no way an investor (let alone a hedge fund!) would valuate ACL at approximately £20m - even today after the CCC bailout ACL is not worth anything like that.
Add the potential of losing the club and all the revenue it brings to the stadium and it's businesses - ACL may head for failure in 2-5 years. At least it will struggle hard to make a profit.

Negotiations were bound to break because they wanted nothing less than to own the ground for nothing.

wingy · Mar 22, 2013

If I were ACL I would'nt hesitate to lock the Gates whether it meant my downfall or notI'm Betting a move to another Ground will diminish the fanbase by anther2-3K.

Sky Blue Pete · Mar 22, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Negotiations were bound to break because they wanted nothing less than to own the ground for nothing.

Well we don't know that do we but I don't trust people I can't see. Rule of negotiation is to speak to the person making the decisions. Sisu have never put her up

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 22, 2013

Sky Blue Pete said:
Well we don't know that do we but I don't trust people I can't see. Rule of negotiation is to speak to the person making the decisions. Sisu have never put her up

I was being facetious-though given they rejected an offer which saved and brought us huge sums of money it's hard to know what they would've accepted.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Mar 22, 2013

Godiva said:
I think you find your answer in the fact that TF stated ACL were in financial trouble. If Higgs said they wanted £8-10m for their half-part of a financial distressed company, then negotiations were bound to break. There's no way an investor (let alone a hedge fund!) would valuate ACL at approximately £20m - even today after the CCC bailout ACL is not worth anything like that.
Add the potential of losing the club and all the revenue it brings to the stadium and it's businesses - ACL may head for failure in 2-5 years. At least it will struggle hard to make a profit.

Maybe so, but that's only a half-story. It's not a per se valuation of a business in a normal way; as it's not only the net worth of the business, but the saving the club would make by means of rent reduction as it would own half of the entity to which it was paying rent.

Rent saving plus aditional incomes could have made the purchase - even at the rates you elude to; make sense within 10 years. That's not bad for this sort of deal.

Why agree heads of terms then? If so far our of kilter with reality, why agree the parameters of the roadmap to which you elude?

And this financial trouble? Is this a case of cause and effect? Did Fisher go back to SISU and tell them they could have half of ACL for, say £8m, and he was instructed to merely distress them into submission at an even lower price?

As the latter instruction, in effect, robbed the club of a chance of rent reductuion and income which are now clamed as beng critical; plus turnover for FFP?

Sky Blue Kid · Mar 22, 2013

The bottom line is...SISU had more than enough time to buy the ACL share from the inset! and 2-3 times after that! They bragged(RR) that "£20m was being made ready to take this club forward" Of which £500k was going to upgrade Ryton.....What happened?...Ryton was re-mortgaged and CCFC fell like a stone into Division3(Lack of investment):facepalm:
On reflection, if SISU had done what they said they would...We wouldn't be where we are now!

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Mar 22, 2013

Sky Blue Kid said:
The bottom line is...SISU had more than enough time to buy the ACL share from the inset! and 2-3 times after that! They bragged(RR) that "£20m was being made ready to take this club forward" Of which £500k was going to upgrade Ryton.....What happened?...Ryton was re-mortgaged and CCFC fell like a stone into Division3(Lack of investment):facepalm:
On reflection, if SISU had done what they said they would...We wouldn't be where we are now!

Correct. They got the shares for free. What if they had been compelled to pay £8m for the Higgs share of ACL?

They could have halved the rent, obtained the income they claim they need, had a championship football team, and access to a venue for less than £10m!!!!

dongonzalos · Mar 22, 2013

Godiva said:
In short: Doing what is necessary.

You are right Godiva SISU will do 100% what is necessary for them.
ACL owned by Coventry City Council and Charity whose sole purpose is to improve Coventry will make decisions partly with the aim of ensuring Coventry have a football club.

That alone should really be enough for Coventry City fans to realise where their support should be in this matter CCFC followed by ACL's stance

Sky Blue Kid · Mar 22, 2013

@ Nick...
I can't understand why my (And others) posts are double posting mate, is it the Website?

torchomatic · Mar 22, 2013

Bloody hell.

wingy said:
If I were ACL I would'nt hesitate to lock the Gates whether it meant my downfall or notI'm Betting a move to another Ground will diminish the fanbase by anther2-3K.

Grendel · Mar 22, 2013

dongonzalos said:
You are right Godiva SISU will do 100% what is necessary for them.
ACL owned by Coventry City Council and Charity whose sole purpose is to improve Coventry will make decisions partly with the aim of ensuring Coventry have a football club.

That alone should really be enough for Coventry City fans to realise where their support should be in this matter CCFC followed by ACL's stance

Go and actually look what other clubs have benighted from by their councils in this situation,

ACL's stance is to force a branch of the company into administration.

Their claim it was to prevent liquidation looks distinctly dubious as the holding company own the league share I would assume.

How you can defend these men in suits is beyond me.

covmark · Mar 22, 2013

wingy said:
If I were ACL I would'nt hesitate to lock the Gates whether it meant my downfall or notI'm Betting a move to another Ground will diminish the fanbase by anther2-3K.

Jesus wept, are you for real

Godiva · Mar 22, 2013

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
Maybe so, but that's only a half-story. It's not a per se valuation of a business in a normal way; as it's not only the net worth of the business, but the saving the club would make by means of rent reduction as it would own half of the entity to which it was paying rent.

Rent saving plus aditional incomes could have made the purchase - even at the rates you elude to; make sense within 10 years. That's not bad for this sort of deal.

Why agree heads of terms then? If so far our of kilter with reality, why agree the parameters of the roadmap to which you elude?

And this financial trouble? Is this a case of cause and effect? Did Fisher go back to SISU and tell them they could have half of ACL for, say £8m, and he was instructed to merely distress them into submission at an even lower price?

As the latter instruction, in effect, robbed the club of a chance of rent reductuion and income which are now clamed as beng critical; plus turnover for FFP?

The half-rent saving is only half true.
First look at the combined profit and loss between ccfc and ACL - the overall result is negative, there are not enough income to make both profitable at the same time.
Second look at the profit of ACL - it's about £500k when ccfc pays full rent. With the remortgaging and cost savings at ACL they may be able to run at a small profit with ccfc paying reduced rent.
Third if ccfc bought the Higgs shares the club would still need to pay rent and although they gain access to revenue streams which is good considering FFP, it is bad as that removes cash from the club. Remember that ACL cannot pay dividend for a long time - longer if their profit is lower due to ccfc paying reduced rent. So the club will lose cash flow, and although it's like putting money into a savings account, it would mean sisu would had to fund that cash flow.
Fourth - sisu would also need to fund the purchase of the shares. And if the purchase is not to add even more liability than assets, then the value of the purchase must be equal to - or greater than - the actual payment.

So why agree heads of terms? Well, to get hold of the shares the first step is to open talks and agree what to talk about.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Mar 22, 2013

covmark said:
Jesus wept, are you for real

Sadly yes, yes he is

different view (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency