SISU's Investment or lack of... (5 Viewers)

[Bennets Afro]

How can SISU keep saying that have invested x amount of money in the team and behind the scenes when all they have done is spent money on the club and say it's a loan to the holding company that now needs to be paid back to the tune of £32m according to some reports..

 

---

[rob9872]

They acquired the shares for nothing too. I argued that I felt this was the case some time back and they had put very little if anything at all into the club. As I see it though, they won't ever get that return unless we reach the Premiership, so at some point must find an investor or be prepared to write it off and walk away.

The recession and the way we were funded probably affected all of their plans and they were stuck with us when they believed they could make a quick buck and run.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

That's the way it works.

If they make it as a loan, the interest is offsetable against tax so if we ever make a profit they'll have lots of losses to carry forward to remove the tax bill.

If (when?) they sell the club, the tax losses will be one of the few assets the company will have!

 

[skyblu3sk]

Not sure they will get all of their money back on us though 32 Million seems a bit rich.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

I think they'd snap anyone's hand off for a reasonable percentage of what they've put in!

 

[Bennets Afro]

So it's not really an investment then if they are looking to get back what they put in by saying it's a loan???

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

People often think of investment as the purchase of shares, but many "investments" are a combination of shares and loans. As noted above there are good tax reasons for using loans.

I think we all knew from the start that SISU were not planning to own CCFC forever, but were hoping to make a profit by selling them and in that context there's a limited difference between the investment being in shares or loans.

 

[singers_pore]

They are having a right laugh if they seriously think they are going to get back 32m or whatever it is. They clearly want out given that the club is losing around 80K per week. If I were the prospective buyer I would offer them about 100K and tell them I am doing them a favor by letting them get out without having to continually cover the future continuing losses.

 

[skybluesam66]

Another way of looking at it

25m would undoubtedly satisfy sisu
10m for 50% of the Ground
Plough 20m into the team over 2 seasons

therefore for 55m you have a premier league team, owning half of the ricoh (which in itself cost more than 100m)

Simples

 

[Godiva]

Another way of looking at it

25m would undoubtedly satisfy sisu
10m for 50% of the Ground
Plough 20m into the team over 2 seasons

therefore for 55m you have a premier league team, owning half of the ricoh (which in itself cost more than 100m)

Simples

There's a slight catch ... if we still play in this division about half of that investment would be worth nothing and the weekly losses would be a lot more than 80K!

 

[rob9872]

... and players likely to get you into the promised land would command Premiership level wages.

20m over two seasons doesn't even put us on a level footing with the parachute payments from relegated clubs who already have a stronger starting platform. We are now way off the pace and to get up will require some luck and a bit of a Blackpool as the gap is now so wide. It's a bitter pill to swallow but we must accept that we are currently a secondtier team. It's important that we at least maintain that status and it would be nice to be consistently in the top half of the league, but second tier is currently our rightful home.

 

[crowsnest]

Middlesboro have said they need to reduce their wage bill from £20m a season down to £6m this summer as they will lose the parachute payment.

So £20m a year does not guarantee a good squad.