Fisher "more players are needed" (1 Viewer)

coundonskyblue · Jul 10, 2012

More spin

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/coventry-city-fc/coventry-city-fc-news/2012/07/10/coventry-city-chief-tim-fisher-says-club-does-have-a-plan-for-future-92746-31359533/

Just once I would like him to say something that actually has some substance to it.

ccfcway · Jul 10, 2012

"The business plan has been completed and we are looking forward to sitting down with the council in the very near future to present the finer details."

“In parallel, the business re-structuring is well under way at present including executing a competitive football budget which has seen some players leave but also quality players come to the club. However, we are in no doubt that more players are needed".

skyblueman · Jul 10, 2012

OK so what is it then? I'm sure the club would have alot more supporters behind it prepared to hand over their money if this were made public

covcity4life · Jul 10, 2012

least hes said that bit publically....come on city..2 central midfielders in this week please! dont let it go till transfer weekend.

Sky Blues · Jul 10, 2012

coundonskyblue said:
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/coventry-city-fc/coventry-city-fc-news/2012/07/10/coventry-city-chief-tim-fisher-says-club-does-have-a-plan-for-future-92746-31359533/

Just once I would like him to say something that actually has some substance to it.

I think there was something of substance hidden away in that article and I think it is good news for the club. It's this line: “This option also sees the club invest in the Academy with the application for Category 2 status – which, we are delighted to say, was successfully achieved last week."

As I understand it, this means the club will be able to take players from age 4, sign them from age 9, not be limited to the 90minute travel rule and require nearly £1million to run every year. That's a fairly substantial sum for us in our situation and an indication of at least some kind of ambition.

Brighton Sky Blue · Jul 10, 2012

That's true SB-level 3 status requires just £300k to maintain and would've been tempting to go for on a cost cutting basis.

Astute · Jul 10, 2012

coundonskyblue said:
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/coventry-city-fc/coventry-city-fc-news/2012/07/10/coventry-city-chief-tim-fisher-says-club-does-have-a-plan-for-future-92746-31359533/

Just once I would like him to say something that actually has some substance to it.

Yet you are fully against a rent reduction of even 1p whilst we are in Div3 and paying 1/3 of our income on rent. You don't want us to sell players to raise funds. How are we supposed to raise funds for players without getting further into debt?

SkyBlueJohnso · Jul 10, 2012

our academy is vital for long term survival, gives us the chance to grow and develop young kids into potential stars, and although there are set fees in place now, if we can get the balance right between selling players on to make some profits, and moving others into 1st team action, i think its essential we keep and develop through the academy.

from a financial point of view agreed they could of took a cheaper option, and this shows some long term commitment and ambition imo

oldskyblue58 · Jul 10, 2012

ccfcway said:
"The business plan has been completed and we are looking forward to sitting down with the council in the very near future to present the finer details."

“In parallel, the business re-structuring is well under way at present including executing a competitive football budget which has seen some players leave but also quality players come to the club. However, we are in no doubt that more players are needed".

I dont understand why the business plan is separate to the restructuring ...... surely it is all part of the same process. Or it should be

Also why does a private company need to clear the business plan with the council before implementing it...... presenting three cases for the council to choose one ..... please do me a favour TF stop treating us like financial idiots. Option 1 was to get rid of everything (a threat about losing a tenant at the Ricoh) Option 2 was the option they had already chosen because it is the only sensible way forward for CCFC and Option 3 was to do nothing (not an option at all)

"Following the meeting we opted for the path which will see us undertake major restructuring at the club, while trying to build a sustainable and competitive team on the pitch." Complete tosh - it had nowt to do with the meeting ..... it is the only viable option with the potential for getting the investment back and should have been implemented years ago

more spin and smoke and mirrors TF

We all know we need more players....... stating the bleeding obvious ....... the only blockage to that is SISU and the directors of CCFC.

But I think the real questions and details to confirm is how and when are CCFC going to pay a proper rent and bring their account with ACL up to date ? and stop putting ACL, and a valuable Coventry asset, at risk. Or is that the plan ? ......... with hold anything due to ACL, weaken it, decrease its value, put it at risk and get the Ricoh on the cheap?:thinking about:

Please keep in mind the only people that TF & co are turning the club around for are the owners......... they are not doing it for the council, the charity, ACL or even the fans.

a small thing that bothers me is that when we need a united front from ACL, Charity and Council there seems to be a gap developing between each..... the council are in someways going their own direction and i am not sure if that is driven by economics or by a political agenda

Astute · Jul 10, 2012

Putting all this money into the academy means they will sell at least 1 player a year that comes through to cover costs, but as long as they bring through at least 2 players a season the squad will still be better off.

It now looks like SISU are putting a proper plan together. These are still dark times for us, but there is a chink of light coming through.

coundonskyblue · Jul 10, 2012

<p>

Astute said:
Yet you are fully against a rent reduction of even 1p whilst we are in Div3 and paying 1/3 of our income on rent. You don't want us to sell players to raise funds. How are we supposed to raise funds for players without getting further into debt?

You seem to know a lot about me. For a start im not against a rent reduction, just some of the ignorant views on here that blame the council for all our problems.

Also I have no problem in selling players to raise transfer funds, what I do have a problem with is selling players to cover running costs.

What exactly have my views on these subjects got to do with my original post anyway? Do you think that article is full of factual information/

Sky Blues · Jul 10, 2012

At £25,000 per year developed, we're unlikely to see a return on the £1m if players are nabbed from us before they turn 16. But if we are going to be fast tracking youngsters into the first team once they turn 17 or 18, as we have been doing, then we may see this starting to turn a profit (assuming we don't let good prospects go for small sums - eg Bigi?). Of course, I'd prefer it if we can keep the good ones in the squad to get us promoted!

Astute · Jul 10, 2012

Of course SISU are trying to turn the club around for their own means OSB. If they manage it though it will be good for us in the long run.

I want SISU to succeed. Not for them but for us and the club we love.

Brighton Sky Blue · Jul 10, 2012

Timmy assumes, or at least hopes, that we are all like their numpties at the CT who will be content with vague comments or half truths without having the initiative to think and delve further.

Astute · Jul 10, 2012

coundonskyblue said:
<p>

You seem to know a lot about me. For a start im not against a rent reduction, just some of the ignorant views on here that blame the council for all our problems.

Also I have no problem in selling players to raise transfer funds, what I do have a problem with is selling players to cover running costs.

What exactly have my views on these subjects got to do with my original post anyway? Do you think that article is full of factual information/

You have said several times there should not be a rent reduction. You have also said against players being sold to help with the costs of running the club. Where should the money come from to bring players in to improve our squad?

Income is income. Outgoings are outgoings. We need to reduce our outgoings or improve our income to be self sufficient. So you say there should be no rent reduction or players sold to keep our club afloat. That is easy to say. Please let me know where the money should come from to improve our squad and have a proper chance of promotion without going further into debt?

Sub · Jul 10, 2012

they could try to improve the main source of income by having a better relationship with the fans but they do not seem intrested in doing that, also they have do so much damage to the fan base of the last few years it could almost be at the point of no return for alot of fans

oldskyblue58 · Jul 10, 2012

Astute said:
Of course SISU are trying to turn the club around for their own means OSB. If they manage it though it will be good for us in the long run.

I want SISU to succeed. Not for them but for us and the club we love.

but the real agenda has nothing to do with making the club a success though does it ...... in reality they just need to stop it making losses - break even will do. The real agenda is simply about getting their hands on the Ricoh as cheap as possible to maximise the return for their investors

that aside I welcome the category 2 status - entirely the right move ......... which i believe requires annual funding of £986k ...... wonder where that money comes from though ?

Sky Blues · Jul 10, 2012

I read it was £969k, but either way it's a big amount for us!
The existing academy must have been costing a fair bit already though I have no idea how much.

coundonskyblue · Jul 10, 2012

Astute said:
You have said several times there should not be a rent reduction. You have also said against players being sold to help with the costs of running the club. Where should the money come from to bring players in to improve our squad?

Income is income. Outgoings are outgoings. We need to reduce our outgoings or improve our income to be self sufficient. So you say there should be no rent reduction or players sold to keep our club afloat. That is easy to say. Please let me know where the money should come from to improve our squad and have a proper chance of promotion without going further into debt?

If I havent made myself clear then I will now. There should be no rent reduction without a complete restructure of the club, the way the club is run at the moment even playing in a rent free Ricoh would make no difference. Most of my comments on here on the subject are to those who paint the Council as the bad guys, I am just trying to argue against those ill informed comments. I believe there is an argument for a rent reduction, if it would make a drastic difference to the clubs finances, and Sisu go about it the right way. At present I am not comfortable with a rich hedge fund witholding money from a company owned by a charity and local government. Sisu have not acted reasonable with this.

After 5 years in charge the club should not be reliant on player sales to meet running costs. Sisu have not run the business in a prudent way, and we are now paying the price. Can you name me any succesful club/business that sells its assets to meet running costs?

I don't have a problem with players being sold to fund transfers, I do have a problem with players being sold to pay day to day bills. That side of the cub should have been sorted a long time ago.

CCFCSteve · Jul 10, 2012

coundonskyblue said:
If I havent made myself clear then I will now. There should be no rent reduction without a complete restructure of the club, the way the club is run at the moment even playing in a rent free Ricoh would make no difference. Most of my comments on here on the subject are to those who paint the Council as the bad guys, I am just trying to argue against those ill informed comments. I believe there is an argument for a rent reduction, if it would make a drastic difference to the clubs finances, and Sisu go about it the right way. At present I am not comfortable with a rich hedge fund witholding money from a company owned by a charity and local government. Sisu have not acted reasonable with this.

After 5 years in charge the club should not be reliant on player sales to meet running costs. Sisu have not run the business in a prudent way, and we are now paying the price. Can you name me any succesful club/business that sells its assets to meet running costs?

I don't have a problem with players being sold to fund transfers, I do have a problem with players being sold to pay day to day bills. That side of the cub should have been sorted a long time ago.

I agree with your concerns about the running of the club but two things. I dont believe SISU are a rich hedgefund (I really believe they lack the substantial wealth to continue to cover the losses of the club). Also, the argument about selling players to cover the day bills is the reality for a majority of football clubs (without a wealthy backer). Fans press clubs to be successful, they in turn throw millions at players wages and in turn clubs lose millions.

Its not just our club that needs restructuring, its football in this country in general, its totally unsustainable.

The one area I would like visibility on is recent/current management costs, other than that we have little choice but to sell players to cover losses (and hopefully not pay players above the going rate - again Id like to see what some players are on but nobody has the actual figures)

OSB - Whilst I dont doubt SISUs plan is to try to get hold of the Ricoh, I do believe they are looking to reduce rent because they cant afford to pay £1.2m as a league one club and not for the ulterior motives you suggest. Most struggling businesses would do the same and most landlords across the country would listen to what the tenant had to say as the alternative could be no rent at all. ps Even if they did have this devious plan Id be shocked if the council/Higgs fell for them weakening ACL by not paying rent and then giving it to them for next to nothing.

Chipfat · Jul 10, 2012

Coundon well put and totally agree with your opinion, the council cutting the rent is a spot on an elephants arse compared to the trouble SISU are and know it... Bigi, Christie and Willis have all been touted about and if that pay the bills what is the future of our club!!!!!!!!

skyblueman · Jul 10, 2012

I think SISU are giving it one last roll of the dice - they are going to go all out for operational break-even at whatever cost

Their plan:

Get the rent reduced or deferred
Sell anyone they can for cash - this means absolutely anyone
Hope the fans keep coming and buying tickets
Hope the academy uncovers some gems that can be sold on

That's about it - if it can break-even they will hang about and see if it's got any potential for return - if not and the losses continue upwards they will walk and write off their losses

You can put all the spin in the world on it but that's the bottom line - it's all about return on investment - they wouldn't be bothered about anything else - the club least of all

oldskyblue58 · Jul 10, 2012

Just a thought on the rent .....

perhaps they could, as crowds are predicted to be substantially lower, use less of the stands and thereby reduce the rent. Not very satisfactory I know but perhaps an option. I don't know just throwing in ideas ...... but say close either or both ends (certainly the away end is unlikely to attract many fans for most matches) would that save on some rent?

Not saying its even practical or desirable but every penny seems to count at CCFC. How far are they prepared to go to cut costs?

skyblueman · Jul 10, 2012

Not sure that would wash OSB as it's a bit of an all or nothing really - mind you it all depends on what we get for the rent - do the owners have to provide certain services for that? If there's a lot fewer people in there then closing part of the ground would surely reduce the number of people required to staff it, clean it etc.. I could argue that should get a reduction in itself

Grendel · Jul 10, 2012

What is the rent per game £50,000. Do the club receive nothing from catering parking etc? Who pays the policing? It looks shocking on a match by match basis and u sustainable.

Astute · Jul 10, 2012

coundonskyblue said:
I don't have a problem with players being sold to fund transfers, I do have a problem with players being sold to pay day to day bills. That side of the cub should have been sorted a long time ago.

This is nothing new for us though. It is how we have been run for many years. Things went wrong when we tried to throw money at players that ended up being not good enough, selling our ground whilst planning a better version of the Ricoh and then got relegated from the Prem. I fully agree that we should have sorted our finances out by now. Should have been done many, many years ago. This part is not all the fault of SISU. It is the reason why we ended up with them running our club though. They have taken too long to sort the finances out. Would the fans have been happy if they would have done it from day one?

oldskyblue58 · Jul 10, 2012

the stewards etc included as a CCFCH cost already according to the accounts so club would make savings accordingly ..... but guess I am asking how serious is the cost cutting or is it selective. If the rent was able to be cut by doing this would ACL go for it, would CCFC go for it ? Has it been offered by ACL and if so what are the reasons for not doing it? Have CCFC requested it and if so why was it refused?

Just a thought or possible option..... like i said not saying it is the preferred way to go but these are not times for easy options

stupot07 · Jul 10, 2012

Grendel said:
What is the rent per game £50,000. Do the club receive nothing from catering parking etc? Who pays the policing? It looks shocking on a match by match basis and u sustainable.

I'm sure we've been told that we receive nothing from parking and catering, as it gos straight to ACL. And I would think the club woul pay for policing, stewarding, etc.

coundonskyblue · Jul 10, 2012

Astute said:
This is nothing new for us though. It is how we have been run for many years. Things went wrong when we tried to throw money at players that ended up being not good enough, selling our ground whilst planning a better version of the Ricoh and then got relegated from the Prem. I fully agree that we should have sorted our finances out by now. Should have been done many, many years ago. This part is not all the fault of SISU. It is the reason why we ended up with them running our club though. They have taken too long to sort the finances out. Would the fans have been happy if they would have done it from day one?

I agree its nothing new, and I blame previous owners as much as Sisu.

I think they should have sorted the finances out straight away. As for fans being happy about it, I doubt fans are ever happy about cost cutting. However I think they would have been more accepting of it at the time as we had just nearly gone into admin. The situation now just highlights the fact that they haven't had a clue about what they've being doing over the last 5 years.

stupot07 · Jul 10, 2012

coundonskyblue said:
If I havent made myself clear then I will now. There should be no rent reduction without a complete restructure of the club, the way the club is run at the moment even playing in a rent free Ricoh would make no difference. Most of my comments on here on the subject are to those who paint the Council as the bad guys, I am just trying to argue against those ill informed comments. I believe there is an argument for a rent reduction, if it would make a drastic difference to the clubs finances, and Sisu go about it the right way. At present I am not comfortable with a rich hedge fund witholding money from a company owned by a charity and local government. Sisu have not acted reasonable with this.

After 5 years in charge the club should not be reliant on player sales to meet running costs. Sisu have not run the business in a prudent way, and we are now paying the price. Can you name me any succesful club/business that sells its assets to meet running costs?

I don't have a problem with players being sold to fund transfers, I do have a problem with players being sold to pay day to day bills. That side of the cub should have been sorted a long time ago.

The problem is we don't know what the current state of the accounts are, because those released/submitted were 2010/11 not 2011/12. This time next year we will get to see last seasons accounts which should show considerable reduction of outgoings made through the mass exodus of players.

They have been restructuring the business and wage budget - that's one of the reasons we got relegated.

pw362 · Jul 10, 2012

This season stewarding budget has been cut by 20%. Police budget is cut by 70%.

oldskyblue58 · Jul 10, 2012

CCFC are driving down the escrow account......... i think we can all agree on that .... it was dead money to them, that they could not utilise.

Say that a fair or agreed rent for the ground in League 1 was £600kpa. That means that the escrow account has paid half this financial years rent (june July August) leaving £300k to be spread over the next 9 months or £33.33K per month. Before you say it - the rent isnt paid per match ...... it covers more than that ..... and £33k pm for the rest of the season is pretty good value. Offices at Ricoh likely cost 2k pm shop rent 4k pm use of Olympic standard pitch & stadium, use of bars and facilities etc the rest

So CCFC use up "dead money" get a rent reduction, improve the losses situation, establish lower rent going forward, makes the club more attractive for investment, cash flow improved, less money to find by SISU

ACL get a reasonable income, do not start making losses, have a tenant (assuming CCFC do address the other issues) that adds to the covenant at the Ricoh, are seen to be reasonable and do their bit. Over the years despite what some might think the Charity and Council have often stepped in to help in various ways so they are keen to support the club

seems a reasonable conclusion to me - but i have a feeling it suits CCFC/SISU not to pay anything

of course if you match the full stadium rent with reduction in space used then that might save say £150k reducing rent to £450k pa for example which would leave a balance of £150k to pay for the rest of the season..... that would be 9 months at 16.67k pm (or equivalent to two average League 1 players for a year)

but the saving by doing this and utilising the escrow would be £1m in cash flow this year or equivalent to 12 average league 1 players.............. and as TF says more players needed...... there you go(edit)

just some thoughts

skyblueman · Jul 10, 2012

Seems reasonable OSB but I can't see the owners going for it... key part tho as you say quite rightly IMO "but i have a feeling it suits CCFC/SISU not to pay anything"...

oldskyblue58 · Jul 10, 2012

I think that ACL etc would go for it though ....... so that would take away the ability of SISU to blame everyone else regarding the rent.... much of their recent PR for CCFC has contained a persistent thread of ACL etc being unreasonable in charging too much..... if CCFC didnt go for something like this you would have to ask why and what is the real agenda......

I also think that many fans seeing a 50% reduction in rent plus the escrow being removed would say that it was a decent and fair deal too

Fisher "more players are needed" (1 Viewer)

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

New Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Active Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

CCFC Finance Director

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

New Member

CCFC Finance Director

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency