New stadium meeting with RBC (3 Viewers)

[Astute]

So potentially mitigating risk legally or defaulting to CCC, then reducing the term by roughly a third
Quite harsh terms and potential failure to the end user
Sounds like something a hedge fund might do
Cheers for the answer by the way
No come backs to the private Investors

Yes they get their money back and then put the risk on Wasps/ACL. If it all goes wrong for Wasps it looks like the bond holders would be left with the lease on the Ricoh as it is secured against the lease. It would then be down to how much collectively they would be prepared to take for it.

 

---

[LB87ccfc]

I like your first paragraph....you question why we discuss the subject......then you discuss :claping hands:

I was not discussing merely pointing out two key points that people are missing in their discussion surrounding an imaginary idea in Fishers thoughts, funny how they ALWAYS make up a new story on this subject when it suits them! - making out they are doing something for the football club are they, bit of PR, as they have early bird season tickets on sale...

 

[wingy]

Why would they need to keep us sweet? If we're not building a new stadium they become a monopoly. They can treat us how they like and charge us whatever they want and we have little other option.

With no evidence of things having moved forward on a new ground since the Sixfields move would the league give permission for a similar thing to happen again? I don't see how they could. If it really is the Ricoh or nothing we have to take whatever Wasps offer, even if its worse than the deal we had when we first moved there.

We do need to sort a deal now though
If we're running into the final 18 months They could really take the piss with us

 

[LB87ccfc]

I think the opposite, everyone should get behind Fisher and tell him to get on with it. Call his bluff.



Would that not depend on location? If, for example, it was in Ansty right next to the business park / motorway would it really be any different to the Ricoh?



I suspect the theory would be that it works very long term. Lets say the Ricoh has a further 150 years left in it. How much would we pay in rent against how much in revenues in that time compared against a new stadium. Clearly while we were paying off finance we wouldn't be seeing much in the way of extra cash coming into the club but once that was paid off after say 50 years would we not then be in a better position than we are currently?

Sure a lot of us won't be around to see the benefit but we're stuck between a rock and a hard place at the moment and neither option seems particularly attractive in the short to medium term.

Not to sound nasty but in 50 years alot of us would of been dead by then so nothing will matter we would not see the benefits would we.

 

[Astute]

I was not discussing merely pointing out two key points that people are missing in their discussion surrounding an imaginary idea in Fishers thoughts, funny how they ALWAYS make up a new story on this subject when it suits them! - making out they are doing something for the football club are they, bit of PR, as they have early bird season tickets on sale...

......as in joining in with the discussion.......

 

[LB87ccfc]

......as in joining in with the discussion.......

I have no need to discuss something what will never happen, I merely commented stirring the pot on here Mr Astute.

Not looking to discuss neverland with the lost boys on here.

 

[stupot07]

Disagree on both.

Owning our own out of town stadium with the debt associated with it will finish us.

Wasps will profit from us being at the Ricoh and to keep us there they need to keep us sweet.

No wasps just need to keep us desperate. They have the monopoly on Coventry football league standard stadiums, and know from their own experience how hard it is to get planning permission and how hard it is to get finance to build a stadium. They know the chances are very very slim, and hold all the cards. They don't need to give us a sweetener, what else are we going to do? Go to Northampton and play in front of 2k fans again?

You keep banging on about the PL, we aren't getting there renting the stadium matchday only with little matchday revenues and no additional stadium income, without a billionaire owner who's willing to throw a shed load of cash. There is no deal to be had with regard ownership of ACL so there's very little chance of said billionaire owner touching us with a barge pole.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Astute]

Lets say the Ricoh has a further 150 years left in it. How much would we pay in rent against how much in revenues in that time compared against a new stadium.

At the current rent we would pay 15m for 150 years rent, but the big bonus is we wouldn't pay a penny in the upkeep which would be much more than 15m

 

[Astute]

No wasps just need to keep us desperate. They have the monopoly on Coventry football league standard stadiums, and know from their own experience how hard it is to get planning permission and how hard it is to get finance to build a stadium. They know the chances are very very slim, and hold all the cards. They don't need to give us a sweetener, what else are we going to do? Go to Northampton and play in front of 2k fans again?

You keep banging on about the PL, we aren't getting there renting the stadium matchday only with little matchday revenues and no additional stadium income, without a billionaire owner who's willing to throw a shed load of cash. There is no deal to be had with regard ownership of ACL so there's very little chance of said billionaire owner touching us with a barge pole.

I thought the same until they decided to raise so much cash against the lease and Richardson wanted to cash out. I am not so sure now. And if SISU think similar we could be in for an uncertain few years.

 

[Captain Dart]

3 points.

Who are these investors that wish to take revenge on the Council

“There are investors interested, so long as the physical resource is outside of Coventry (due to Coventry Council doing a hostile takeover of the club they don’t wish to invest in Coventry).”

Only discarded sites have been mentioned, look elsewhere. Only place makes sense to me is Airport, isn't that is green belt & it isn't in Rugby BC area.
Can't speak for others but I am against despoiling the greenbelt.

Here are the RBC ward maps, Dunsmore & Binley are the ones bordering Coventry
http://www.rugby.gov.uk/info/200038/elections_and_voting/1244/ward_maps
this is the best area map I can find at the moment.
http://www.rugby.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/6680/rural_proposals_map

 

[stupot07]

I thought the same until they decided to raise so much cash against the lease and Richardson wanted to cash out. I am not so sure now. And if SISU think similar we could be in for an uncertain few years.

Yep, good point. We'd need wasps to fail for that plan to work. I wonder whether wasps will loan ACL the money to pay the council back and charge ACL high interest on that. We're then back to square one of sisu not wanting to buy because of bad debt?

It also doesn't bode well for the sort of deal wasps will offer/able to give us when we do renegotiate.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[Astute]

Yep, good point. We'd need wasps to fail for that plan to work. I wonder whether wasps will loan ACL the money to pay the council back and charge ACL high interest on that. We're then back to square one of sisu not wanting to buy because of bad debt?

It also doesn't bode well for the sort of deal wasps will offer/able to give us when we do renegotiate.

Why loan money to re-loan it? Other than tax reasons that is. I think it was actually put down as to pay off the loan owed to CCC. The bonds are secured on the arena. So it should mean that they are the prime lenders. But I wouldn't trust any sort of hedge fund. Maybe Richardson regrets taking over Wasps like Joy regrets SISU taking over CCFC. The difference is that Richardson saw a way out? I just don't understand why he would loan the money through Wasps to pay himself if he owns Wasps. It will cost him a lot of money doing so. If he is doing so because he needs the money how is he going to raise the 30m plus in 7 years?

And as for the negotiations. It looks like Richardson and SISU need each other. Russian roulette comes to mind.

 

[skybluetony176]

The club will not own the stadium. it will be owned by investors ... and so will any associated debts.
The club will own a new stadium management company.

How much are SISU and their investors going to charge us for that and where is the money going to come from? 2 very simple questions you would have thought TF would have answered from the out set, yet nearly 2 years on...

 

[Ian1779]

How much are SISU and their investors going to charge us for that and where is the money going to come from? 2 very simple questions you would have thought TF would have answered from the out set, yet nearly 2 years on...

Probably the same amount that Richardson and his other investors will in relation to their own stadium management company.

 

[Astute]

How much are SISU and their investors going to charge us for that and where is the money going to come from? 2 very simple questions you would have thought TF would have answered from the out set, yet nearly 2 years on...

There are reasons why they would charge more than Wasps. There are reasons why they would charge less than Wasps. It would be more secure than renting off Wasps though.

 

[wingy]

How long Is left on the Compass Contract
4-5yrs?

 

[Grendel]

How much are SISU and their investors going to charge us for that and where is the money going to come from? 2 very simple questions you would have thought TF would have answered from the out set, yet nearly 2 years on...

Same as wasps holdings will be charging acl?

 

[chiefdave]

Not to sound nasty but in 50 years alot of us would of been dead by then so nothing will matter we would not see the benefits would we.

I almost certainly will be dead by then but I think we're reaching a point where we have to think that long term. It seems hugely unlikely that we can have any success past L1 level as tenants at the Ricoh so do we stick with that and be content with 10K in an increasingly Wasps branded stadium or do we look at alternatives?

 

[covcity4life]

i cant be assed to go to rugby and i doubt many others will either.

 

[Malaka]

So they have investors, this is really bad news. they have already lost millions of investors money so they will attempt to get their money back by extortionate rent from CCFC as I am sure CCFC will not be the owners of the stadium, or will will be sold at a large profit, crippling us with debt for years to come.
lose-lose situation IMO

 

[duffer]

Why loan money to re-loan it? Other than tax reasons that is. I think it was actually put down as to pay off the loan owed to CCC. The bonds are secured on the arena. So it should mean that they are the prime lenders. But I wouldn't trust any sort of hedge fund. Maybe Richardson regrets taking over Wasps like Joy regrets SISU taking over CCFC. The difference is that Richardson saw a way out? I just don't understand why he would loan the money through Wasps to pay himself if he owns Wasps. It will cost him a lot of money doing so. If he is doing so because he needs the money how is he going to raise the 30m plus in 7 years?

And as for the negotiations. It looks like Richardson and SISU need each other. Russian roulette comes to mind.

I think the bond is about paying back Richardson to the tune of at least £10m, and clearing the mortgage for ACL for another £14m or so. That would leave £5-£10m spare, which currently would cover Wasps operating losses for a few years.

In fairness, you'd probably expect Wasps to make more money now they're at the Ricoh, but then they are also going to have to service the interest on the bonds to the tune of over £2m a year. The salary cap for top level rugby teams is just on £5m a year now - so presumably Wasps will need to be paying about that to compete. As with football, it's not hard to see that even with TV money and other sponsorship coming in, clubs themselves are not guaranteed to remain solvent. Perhaps this is why Richardson wants to get some of his money out of Wasps.

Given that we're not going to get a great deal from Wasps, and the best chance of CCFC getting hold of the Ricoh is Wasps failing, I personally wouldn't be in any rush to sign a long term deal with them either. It's not as though we're going to get a share of any 24/7/365 revenues - there's no 'partnership' to be had, despite all of the wishful thinking and the vague promises to CCC.

For everyone who queries why the club need that 24/7/365 revenue stream, have you asked yourselves why it's so important to Wasps. Why are we any different to them?

 

[rupert_bear]

I almost certainly will be dead by then but I think we're reaching a point where we have to think that long term. It seems hugely unlikely that we can have any success past L1 level as tenants at the Ricoh so do we stick with that and be content with 10K in an increasingly Wasps branded stadium or do we look at alternatives?

Why can't we be successful while renting off Wasps, don't get that statement at all.

 

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

If I was an investor I would be asking,wait a minute didn't you have a 32000 seater all singing and dancing stadium right on the m6you could have had a 250 year lease on for 20million? Sorry now you want 30/40 million for an 18000 seater stadium in the middle of nowhere? Seems like a good deal to me I'm in,after all I know one day my luck will turn on the roulette wheel if I just keep chasing

 

[skybluetony176]

Probably the same amount that Richardson and his other investors will in relation to their own stadium management company.

I was asking about CCFC and SISU. Wasps have sweet FA to do with my question but 10 out of 10 for the attempted diversion.

 

[wingy]

Has the MO shifted here re Investment
Are we still talking Seed money +third party developers or the full whack in house
On gates of 7-8k still can't see third parties getting on board

 

[Ian1779]

I was asking about CCFC and SISU. Wasps have sweet FA to do with my question but 10 out of 10 for the attempted diversion.

You have the cheek to call me out for diversionary tactics?

The point is relevant - whatever charges made will probably be comparable to what other companies in a similar situation would do.

Unless of course you are championing the good cop/bad cop version of hedge funds.

 

[skybluetony176]

Same as wasps holdings will be charging acl?

I was asking about CCFC and SISU. Wasps have sweet FA to do with my question but 10 out of 10 for the attempted diversion. Tim will be proud of you.

 

[duffer]

Why can't we be successful while renting off Wasps, don't get that statement at all.

Because without income streams other than ticket revenue, we're going to suffer under SCMP in League One. In the championship the rules are even tougher.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/financial-fair-play-league-one-8560150

So the likely scenario is that we stay as tenants grounded in L1, with maybe the odd foray towards the Championship, or perhaps we really do have to look elsewhere.

 

[stupot07]

Why can't we be successful while renting off Wasps, don't get that statement at all.

Because our turnover is limited to one of the lowest 3-4 in the championship when we eventually get there due to the lack of access to revenues. This info and graphs have been posted on here numerous times. We have a similar turnover in the championship to Peterborough......




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

 

[skybluetony176]

You have the cheek to call me out for diversionary tactics?

The point is relevant - whatever charges made will probably be comparable to what other companies in a similar situation would do.

Unless of course you are championing the good cop/bad cop version of hedge funds.

I don't think it was cheek. It's a CCFC related thread on a CCFC forum and in no shape or form was my question leading to anything Wasps related.

Mays if's and buts is all we have almost two years on and you want to talk about what wasps may or may not be doing. It was a pretty simple question and should be part of the business case we've never seen for dreamland.

 

[wingy]

What are the best estimates for the performance of ACL over the coming years £3-5M
What are the best likely results likely to be for a CCFC version of ACL with SISU In the role. of CCC?

 

[Ian1779]

I don't think it was cheek. It's a CCFC related thread on a CCFC forum and in no shape or form was my question leading to anything Wasps related.

Mays if's and buts is all we have almost two years on and you want to talk about what wasps may or may not be doing. It was a pretty simple question and should be part of the business case we've never seen for dreamland.

You are right - all we have is if's and buts. Which is why in this instance using an example like Wasps and ACL is relevant, as we have seen first hand evidence of what it could entail.

Given the fact so many are keen to point out the merits of the Wasps bond scheme to raise funds, I expect the same people to jump at the chance to put that into action when CCFC offer a similar scheme to fund a new stadium.

 

[wingy]

In Wasps shoes would you maximise your Sponsorship to the team or Stadium Naming to the detriment of ACL?

 

[Noggin]

You are right - all we have is if's and buts. Which is why in this instance using an example like Wasps and ACL is relevant, as we have seen first hand evidence of what it could entail.

Given the fact so many are keen to point out the merits of the Wasps bond scheme to raise funds, I expect the same people to jump at the chance to put that into action when CCFC offer a similar scheme to fund a new stadium.

The bond coupon (percentage interest rate) for this to be an attractive option for investors would be what 10 times higher than for the wasps one? 50% or 60% interest? not even sure it's appealing then.

I don't think there has been much talking up of the wasps bond whatsoever not to mention the fact we don't care if wasps can't pay it back in 7 years and goes bust.

 

[Astute]

Given the fact so many are keen to point out the merits of the Wasps bond scheme to raise funds, I expect the same people to jump at the chance to put that into action when CCFC offer a similar scheme to fund a new stadium.

I would have been pissed off if SISU would have done the bonds issue that Wasps have. I am happy that Wasps have done it as it is our only realistic chance of getting our own stadium.