I think the 35p and 1987 thing sort of make it lose seriousness, as well as the Damp Squib. No need for it, just put the offer.
If there was a full on business plan type thing with details and figures it would be a lot more serious and would make you think, which is only why I am asking Michael figures etc.
What makes this different from the other offers of help in the past?
The thing is, how can people back it without knowing all of the details?
It is like me offering to pay your mortgage for you (without knowing how much your mortgage is) and then saying "but you will have to pay some" and not actually saying how much you will have to pay.
As soon as there are some workings out, people can start saying SISU are right of wrong to reject it surely?
Needs a one step at a time approach. Ideas have been around for some time. Got finance in place so was able to make offer. Next step is sisu's response.
Needs a one step at a time approach. Ideas have been around for some time. Got finance in place so was able to make offer. Next step is sisu's response.
Most fans have always accepted the real and only reason SISU have taken for playing at Sixfields is to try and distress ACL, with the continuing court cases pursued for exactly the same reason. I doubt if anyone truly believes that SISU aren't aware that they would be easily financially better off playing at the Ricoh, even they aren't that stupid.
In view of this,it is hard to see why fans suddenly believe there is any chance of SISU agreeing to a plan which will result in increased revenue streams to their bitter enemies at ACL. It would make no sense at all, and is why they wouldn't have ever considered the Hoffman deal last year.
The thing is, how can people back it without knowing all of the details?
It is like me offering to pay your mortgage for you (without knowing how much your mortgage is) and then saying "but you will have to pay some" and not actually saying how much you will have to pay.
As soon as there are some workings out, people can start saying SISU are right of wrong to reject it surely?
Nice of you to answer for Rob, but as he has previously told us that he is in constant contact with the other groups about what is happening, I would hope he would have an idea what is going on. So if that is true I would like his take on it, not you answering for him as you have already told us what you think.
As the crowd will ALWAYS be over 5000 then the rent will never be free for the Club
From what I see it's no different to them paying the rent themselves
The thing is, how can people back it without knowing all of the details?
It might be easy to look at it as a simple business proposition. To illustrate (using very rough made up figures).
Option A
You can run your business from location A, it costs you £150K a year and you get approx. 46,000 visitors a year at an average £10 per person, revenue of £460K, you pay rent of £150K a year so a profit of £310K
Option B
You can run your business from location B, it costs you £150K a year and if you get less than approx. 110,000 visitors a year at an average £10 per person (revenue of £1.1m) you pay zero rent so make £1.1m profit. If you get, as expected, approx. 230,000 visitors a year at an average £10 per person revenue is £2.3m, let's assume you pay rent of £400K a year including matchday costs so a profit of £1.9m.
I don't think you have to be a genius business person to conclude the only result of taking option B would be to benefit the company you are running. There is zero risk involved, the only possible outcome can be that your business would be better off.
In my opinion we have all the detail we need. KCIC have offered to cover the rent unless the crowds at the Ricoh are at such a level that we are significantly better off than playing at Sixfields. They have offered to show proof of funds so clearly it's not just some PR stunt. The fact that they can show proof of funds should be enough to show people its a serious and genuine offer. There is absolutely no valid reason for SISU to turn this down, its a perfect deal for them if what they have been telling the fans is correct, they don't have to deal with ACL, they are covered against loss of revenue compared to Sixfields if people refuse to return while SISU are in control and it covers the period in which they claim they will build the new stadium.
It might be easy to look at it as a simple business proposition. To illustrate (using very rough made up figures).
Option A
You can run your business from location A, it costs you £150K a year and you get approx. 46,000 visitors a year at an average £10 per person, revenue of £460K, you pay rent of £150K a year so a profit of £310K
Option B
You can run your business from location B, it costs you £150K a year and if you get less than approx. 110,000 visitors a year at an average £10 per person (revenue of £1.1m) you pay zero rent so make £1.1m profit. If you get, as expected, approx. 230,000 visitors a year at an average £10 per person revenue is £2.3m, let's assume you pay rent of £400K a year including matchday costs so a profit of £1.9m.
I don't think you have to be a genius business person to conclude the only result of taking option B would be to benefit the company you are running. There is zero risk involved, the only possible outcome can be that your business would be better off.
In my opinion we have all the detail we need. KCIC have offered to cover the rent unless the crowds at the Ricoh are at such a level that we are significantly better off than playing at Sixfields. They have offered to show proof of funds so clearly it's not just some PR stunt. The fact that they can show proof of funds should be enough to show people its a serious and genuine offer. There is absolutely no valid reason for SISU to turn this down, its a perfect deal for them if what they have been telling the fans is correct, they don't have to deal with ACL, they are covered against loss of revenue compared to Sixfields if people refuse to return while SISU are in control and it covers the period in which they claim they will build the new stadium.
Other than Coventry playing in Coventry, the CCFC bank account benefiting from the extra revenue from ticket sales (I do believe ticket sales count towards FFP, ot is it just the tea and coffee money?) and perhaps we can start looking like a proper football club again.
Yes it wouldn't really change anything would it. What you meant was it wouldn't benefit sisu's long term plan for their investors.
It might be easy to look at it as a simple business proposition. To illustrate (using very rough made up figures).
Option A
You can run your business from location A, it costs you £150K a year and you get approx. 46,000 visitors a year at an average £10 per person, revenue of £460K, you pay rent of £150K a year so a profit of £310K
Option B
You can run your business from location B, it costs you £150K a year and if you get less than approx. 110,000 visitors a year at an average £10 per person (revenue of £1.1m) you pay zero rent so make £1.1m profit. If you get, as expected, approx. 230,000 visitors a year at an average £10 per person revenue is £2.3m, let's assume you pay rent of £400K a year including matchday costs so a profit of £1.9m.
I don't think you have to be a genius business person to conclude the only result of taking option B would be to benefit the company you are running. There is zero risk involved, the only possible outcome can be that your business would be better off.
In my opinion we have all the detail we need. KCIC have offered to cover the rent unless the crowds at the Ricoh are at such a level that we are significantly better off than playing at Sixfields. They have offered to show proof of funds so clearly it's not just some PR stunt. The fact that they can show proof of funds should be enough to show people its a serious and genuine offer. There is absolutely no valid reason for SISU to turn this down, its a perfect deal for them if what they have been telling the fans is correct, they don't have to deal with ACL, they are covered against loss of revenue compared to Sixfields if people refuse to return while SISU are in control and it covers the period in which they claim they will build the new stadium.
I am by no means saying playing at Sixfields is best for the club, but we also don't know any details of this offer do we without the details?
It could well be that after 5,000 we need to pay £200k a week and businessmen get 50% of ticket sale money for all we know (Not that I think it is).
How the fuck is the club coming back while the long term future is sorted something to nit pick about?
I'm genuinely stunned.
Correct me if I'm wrong Michael, but it seems to me that the offer is about getting us home while Seppala and Lucas play split or steal. The fact that it's free for less than 5k would (again correct me if I'm wrong) guarantee it's better for the club financially than Sixfields.
Seriously. Nick. Torch. You need to have a fucking word with yourself. Do you even want Cov back or is it too comfortable on your high horse in Northampton?
Unbelievable!
"Just asking questions" you're not fucking 12 Nick, you know what you're doing.
Oh, and well done Michael. Yet again putting other fans' groups lack of acton to shame.
Edit: to be honest, though the ownership offer is an obvious joke, I'd say that if anything you're doing a Seppala and offering above the market value for something that's worthless. Shame there's no JR process for private companies if she turns it down. As we know from Grendel and Nick, it's all about market value. It'd be insane to turn it down as no-one is offering more. And as we know from Grendel and Nick, that's how a market works and to do anything else is a sign of conspiracy
Edit 2: Michael, if/when this is turned down, you should release a press release using the same words as the Sisu JR skeleton argument about CCC turning down the offer for ACL, and how this is obviously irrational
Exactly. This is ridiculous.
The offer letter was published, the details are public knowledge. What do you think is being concealed?
If you want details then maybe you should ask SISU where & when they propose to build their stadium, either that or admit they are not going to build one and are only intent on distressing ACL.
To be honest, the main thing that the offer does is to highlight the complete absurdity of SISU keeping us in Northampton.
But there are very few who need convincing of that (outside the SISU Boardroom).
Is it April 1st?
This is bollocks.
How the fuck is the club coming back while the long term future is sorted something to nit pick about?
I'm genuinely stunned.
Correct me if I'm wrong Michael, but it seems to me that the offer is about getting us home while Seppala and Lucas play split or steal. The fact that it's free for less than 5k would (again correct me if I'm wrong) guarantee it's better for the club financially than Sixfields.
Seriously. Nick. Torch. You need to have a fucking word with yourself. Do you even want Cov back or is it too comfortable on your high horse in Northampton?
Unbelievable!
"Just asking questions" you're not fucking 12 Nick, you know what you're doing.
Oh, and well done Michael. Yet again putting other fans' groups lack of acton to shame.
Edit: to be honest, though the ownership offer is an obvious joke, I'd say that if anything you're doing a Seppala and offering above the market value for something that's worthless. Shame there's no JR process for private companies if she turns it down. As we know from Grendel and Nick, it's all about market value. It'd be insane to turn it down as no-one is offering more. And as we know from Grendel and Nick, that's how a market works and to do anything else is a sign of conspiracy
Edit 2: Michael, if/when this is turned down, you should release a press release using the same words as the Sisu JR skeleton argument about CCC turning down the offer for ACL, and how this is obviously irrational
At the minute I don't think there is any good in it, but IF the CLUB were to get the stadium dirt cheap or free because of it then there would have been something at the end of it.
Why do people have such an issue with me asking questions? Do they not think SISU will rip it apart to ask things if they take it half seriously?
Another serious question, what makes this different from that crowd funded offer, or the other Hoffman "free rent" deal?
No doubt I will just get called a SISU lover rather than an actual, thought about answer.
I have said many a time I also don't believe there is a stadium
The details aren't public knowledge as they haven't got the rent figures have they?
I assume you are still routing for Brian Patton then?
But the club are not paying any rent, that is the whole point of it.. up to 5K crowds they pay nothing..
So over 5k, they will be paying rent and matchday fees won't they?
Just for that reason it is worthwhile. SISU either ignore it or respond and reject it and make themselves look even more incompetent by ignoring an offer everyone can see is in our best interest, or they respond and accept and we've back at the Ricoh.
Of course we all know the FL will do nothing but this all adds to a body of evidence that clearly shows we could be playing in Coventry and it is purely down to our owners decisions and objectives that we are not.
So over 5k, they will be paying rent and matchday fees won't they?
Will be interesting to see what Labovitch's response will be seeing as he was supposedly trying to broker some sort of deal.
Nice to the responses we are getting and some unsure about the small print, but what this does give us is a small chance to move forward, start negotiating and see where it takes us. If Sisu just dismiss it out of hand without even saying they will look or try to negotiate then does that not show Sisu up for not even trying to get back to Coventry.
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?