TF explains how ........ (1 Viewer)

oldskyblue58 · Jun 6, 2013

latest report regarding new stadium build .....

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/sky-blues-chief-tim-fisher-4065237

That would be Lionel Road IN Brentford would it ?

and Brentford who have a ground to sell

A new stadium financed by other development that you have yet to decide on and get planning approval for ..... let alone planning approval for the stadium..... not the greatest financial modelling.....

Anything is possible but ............

Sub · Jun 6, 2013

he is completely deluded how are they going to pay for it if nobody turns up why do they not understand this ? :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2013

So the bloke has paid 10 million just for the land and has not built the stadium yet.

He also owns other land he can sell for 10 million.

By the time Brentford build the stadium it will cost him 20-30 million.

I take it when Tim says it won't cost SISU 20-30 million. It is because he doesn't see debt as actually costing anything?

Well it does and would leave CCFC 100 million in debt.

Please keep explaining Tim it gives me more and more confidence this is not happening.

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2013

Effectively SISU will pay for the land say 5-10 million then borrow the rest (in the name of CCFC) against that land. They will no doubt borrow against Ryton again as well
100 million here we come......

ajsccfc · Jun 6, 2013

Couldn't we have afforded to keep hold of some players and prevent being in league one and having all this mess?

Bennets Afro · Jun 6, 2013

Who would own any redevelopments around the stadium. CCFC or SISU?

How would money get channeled into CCFC if SISU own the assets, loans????

oldskyblue58 · Jun 6, 2013

Brentford have been working on this since October 2002 didnt acquire the site until June 2012 and wont move in until 2016/17 season............. we have to show the FL detailed plans by end July (before start of season).............. :thinking about:

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · Jun 6, 2013

dongonzalos said:
Effectively SISU will pay for the land say 5-10 million then borrow the rest (in the name of CCFC) against that land. They will no doubt borrow against Ryton again as well
100 million here we come......

All great companies have debt for example Enron De Lorean and look at tose companies now

Sub · Jun 6, 2013

mr fisher ready to present his plans to the FL

SonofErnie · Jun 6, 2013

5 key differences between the Brentford plan's and SISU's (I refuse to call them CCFC's):

1. The stadium will be within the boundaries of Brentford
2. It will be in an area where regeneration plans are likely to be accepted
3. They have sensible funding plans
4. They own their own stadium and can utilise the sale of this towards the cost
5. Most importantly - their fans back the plans!!!!!

I'm sure there are more areas if difference, but the above are already enough to make SISU's plans dead in the water. They are desperately trying to convince everyone they are serious to push the price up for bidders. It can't and won't work!

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · Jun 6, 2013

:claping hands::claping hands::claping hands:

Sub said:
mr fisher ready to present his plans to the FL

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
Brentford have been working on this since October 2002 didnt acquire the site until June 2012 and wont move in until 2016/17 season............. we have to show the FL detailed plans by end July (before start of season).............. :thinking about:

I take it this is all part of a campaign of double bluff to try and ramp the price up for Ltd.

As in SISU have future plans so will pay a lot for it, so to out bid them you will have to pay a fortune?

Glaziers green top · Jun 6, 2013

Im sorry to bring it down to such basic levels, but Tim, F**K OFF!

Otis · Jun 6, 2013

SonofErnie said:
5 key differences between the Brentford plan's and SISU's (I refuse to call them CCFC's):

1. The stadium will be within the boundaries of Brentford
2. It will be in an area where regeneration plans are likely to be accepted
3. They have sensible funding plans
4. They own their own stadium and can utilise the sale of this towards the cost
5. Most importantly - their fans back the plans!!!!!

I'm sure there are more areas if difference, but the above are already enough to make SISU's plans dead in the water. They are desperately trying to convince everyone they are serious to push the price up for bidders. It can't and won't work!

And number 5 there is the most crucial.

We already have a stadium here and the huge majority of fans don't wish for us to move away from the Ricoh.

Godiva · Jun 6, 2013

Otis said:
And number 5 there is the most crucial.

We already have a stadium here and the huge majority of fans don't wish for us to move away from the Ricoh.

Problem is 'our' stadium is killing the club. And is isn't actually 'ours'.

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2013

Godiva said:
Problem is 'our' stadium is killing the club. And is isn't actually 'ours'.

And it didn't have to be that way.....

Hopefully the new owners understand this.

fernandopartridge · Jun 6, 2013

dongonzalos said:
And it didn't have to be that way.....

Hopefully the new owners understand this.

The (potential) new owners do understand this, which is why none of them would wish to continue with the current arrangement (or even the reduced rent deal). What's the difference?

SonofErnie · Jun 6, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
The (potential) new owners do understand this, which is why none of them would wish to continue with the current arrangement (or even the reduced rent deal). What's the difference?

The difference is, the lines of communication and negotiation are now closed to SISU, which is not the case for new owners. SISU have well and truly 'burnt bridges' and 'scorched earth'!

djpalms23 · Jun 6, 2013

Tim Fisher = :jerkit::jerkit::jerkit::jerkit::jerkit::jerkit::jerkit::jerkit::jerkit::jerkit:

oldskyblue58 · Jun 6, 2013

further info regarding possible sites

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-brandon-stadium-agents-4065441

seems Brandon is favourite but the agents have yet to settle on a list of final bidders .........

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Jun 6, 2013

Godiva said:
Problem is 'our' stadium is killing the club. And is isn't actually 'ours'.

Two points: the rent is less than one tenth of the disclosed debts. Even allowing for zero rent, full F&B's and sponsorship monies, that accululated value would barely scratch the surface of those losses.

If we were £10 million in debt, I would agree with you. But we're not.

Our current owners are 'killing' the club.

Better owners, with access to the Ricoh's income via ownership is where the solution is. Not another SISU iteration at a half-baked stadium built in the troubled kingdom of Fisher's mind

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
The (potential) new owners do understand this, which is why none of them would wish to continue with the current arrangement (or even the reduced rent deal). What's the difference?

They are doing something about in a professional way. Ie trying to buy half of ACL not break them. Did you really need that spelling out?

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Jun 6, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
The (potential) new owners do understand this, which is why none of them would wish to continue with the current arrangement (or even the reduced rent deal). What's the difference?

They appear to have a strategy to secure it via negotiation; as opposed to illegal withholding of cash and evident distressing. That'll be the difference, I guess

Godiva · Jun 6, 2013

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
Two points: the rent is less than one tenth of the disclosed debts. Even allowing for zero rent, full F&B's and sponsorship monies, that accululated value would barely scratch the surface of those losses.

If we were £10 million in debt, I would agree with you. But we're not.

Our current owners are 'killing' the club.

Better owners, with access to the Ricoh's income via ownership is where the solution is. Not another SISU iteration at a half-baked stadium built in the troubled kingdom of Fisher's mind

Losses and debts are different things.
If we owned ACL we (most likely) wouldn't run at a loss.

We don't know the full 'value' of the debts. It may say £70m in the accounts, but that is hardly the exact value across the companies in the group. Sisu have bloated the debts as a protection against a hostile takeover - we see the effect of that right now.
Don't expect a new owner to do it differently!

Godiva · Jun 6, 2013

dongonzalos said:
They are doing something about in a professional way. Ie trying to buy half of ACL not break them. Did you really need that spelling out?

What have they offered Higgs for their shares?

Sky blue north east · Jun 6, 2013

Timmy go play with the traffic.....

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2013

Godiva said:
What have they offered Higgs for their shares?

A figure they are happy with

James Smith · Jun 6, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
The (potential) new owners do understand this, which is why none of them would wish to continue with the current arrangement (or even the reduced rent deal). What's the difference?

How do you know this, why wouldn't they want to buy the charity share of the Arena as SISU/CCFC started to do?

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2013

Godiva said:
What have they offered Higgs for their shares?

Lets just hope they see if through and don't just agree a price then try and break them instead

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2013

I genuinely believe SISU do not want to win the bid for Ltd.

They are trying to push the price of it up.

I also think they hope to sell holdings to the buyer of Ltd hence fighting to justify the importance of holdings.

The stadium concept, the more I hear about it the more it confirms they want out

fernandopartridge · Jun 6, 2013

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:
They appear to have a strategy to secure it via negotiation; as opposed to illegal withholding of cash and evident distressing. That'll be the difference, I guess

The comments from TF at the London Supporters Club forum suggests that SISU tried negotiation originally.]

The prospective new owners aren't exactly White Knights are they? If they were, they'd have surely looked to takeover the club when it was in a slightly better position, or is it different for them?

fernandopartridge · Jun 6, 2013

James Smith said:
How do you know this?

Because the whole premise of their bids is to takeover ACL. Not to sublet from ACL.

Sub · Jun 6, 2013

would be great if somebody else would take over the club and run it correctly, but if somebody would take over the club and run it properly and break SISU in the process now that would be excellent!!

dongonzalos · Jun 6, 2013

fernandopartridge said:
The comments from TF at the London Supporters Club forum suggests that SISU tried negotiation originally.]

The prospective new owners aren't exactly White Knights are they? If they were, they'd have surely looked to takeover the club when it was in a slightly better position, or is it different for them?

The difference I would imagine is today they deal with an administrator 6 months ago it would have been SISU.

The last two attempts went well dealing with SISU

Otis · Jun 6, 2013

oldskyblue58 said:
further info regarding possible sites

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-brandon-stadium-agents-4065441

seems Brandon is favourite but the agents have yet to settle on a list of final bidders .........

Hmmm ..... Brandon to city centre CV1 is 6.4 miles.

Ricoh to city centre CV1 is 4.2 miles.

I thought Tim told us that the new stadium would be actually nearer to the city centre than the Ricoh.

TF explains how ........ (1 Viewer)

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

CCFC Finance Director

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

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