The Finances (9 Viewers)

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
apparently this has all been simplified for the club so what could be going on

SBS&L Group
First off banish all thoughts of £60m or £70m debts/investment. That is all to do with internal debt between the group members. What is actually important and tells you the real debt are the external 3rd Party debts. 31st May 2012 the liabilities of the group of £42,780,404 were made up of

owed to SISU Fund investors £28,554,706
owed to ARVO by CCFC H £6,275,000
owed to ARVO by Otium £ 1,750,814
Accruals, tax and deferred income £ 6,199,842

That gives" investment" by SISU/ARVO at 31/05/12 = £36,580,520. I think the original investment included amounts of £6m that were never paid as we didnt make the Premiership and £1m for the purchase of the option fee by SBS&L that still sits in CCFC Ltd (in liquidation). If true that puts cash investment at 29m not an insignificant sum but not £60m

Since then there may have been additional funding but not enough to support the claim of £60m i would guess.

SBS&L - the individual company

This is the company that owes £28.5m to the SISU funds. It has no real assets itself other than the shares it owns in CCFC H Ltd and Otium. Therefore unless it can make its investments successful it has a large debt with no way to repay it. It is effectively a shell holding company but it is where most of the group debts lays. Between 31st May 2011 and 31st May 2012 the debt to the funds reduced by £1,125,236.
Monies it has lent to CCFC H have been written down to nil value each year. That doesnt mean they are not owed but simply they are unlikely to be repaid and the accounts reflect that.
the total borrowings have changed very little from 2011 to 2012 and remain at £38m. What has changed is that more is now owed to ARVO and incurs interest at an undisclosed rate. Interest total charged in 2012 year end was £1.26m. That means with each ARVO loan the clubs annual costs go up


CCFC Ltd

As we all know now in liquidation with huge debts. More importantly it owned the old lease at the Ricoh which is now effectively broken. At one point the players were reflected as assets in this company. Those players were transferred to CCFC H at some point. Pure guess but when contracts came up for renewal (ie had no value) they were re registered in CCFC H, new players were registered in CCFC H any way.... and CCFC Ltd ended up with no player contracts. But who knows I doubt it will ever be made clear in any definitive way. All rights to assets in this company have been sold to Otium for £1.5m. The Golden share taken way and given to Otium. As we all know none of the liabilities that CCFC Ltd owe are likely to be repaid by the company. But keep in mind most of the debt was internal to the group or clever uses of security charges. The real debt still exists in full in the SBS&L Group. CCFC Ltd has no value to the Group, and some large liabilities will disappear when liquidated

CCFC H

Up until 02/08/13 CCFC H ran the football club it owned the players, fixtures, trademark, and Ryton. It had large internal group debts to SBS&L, £2m owed to Otium and owed ARVO £6.275m. We are told that all assets now belong to Otium. CCFC H is to be wound up in December - but to do that it has to have settled its debts, something that must already have happened because the charges ARVO & SBS&L had over CCFC H have been removed. The debt to SBS&L is internal and financed by the SISU funds, which we know are happily intact in full sitting in SBS&L - so writing off the CCFC H debts to SBS&L will cost ? nothing they have already been written down to nil by SBS&L every year in any case. The ARVO debt is different and that is where Otium comes in. CCFC H is now a shell company and worthless but it also has no debts left to pay

OTIUM
This company was formed by SISU and originally funded by £2m from ARVO (who also own 9% of the shares). The £2m was lent by Otium to CCFC H but in the books of Otium written down to nil value. So it seems 31/05/12 another company with large debt no assets. Since that time Otium have received a further 9.1m from ARVO in loans of differing sorts. Would Otium have needed that funding before 31/05/13? no it wasnt trading. Do we know anything the SBS&L Group of companies could have bought for £9.1m? were losses that great in the final season at the Ricoh given rent wasnt paid, the escrow account used up, wage bill dropped routine maintenance not carried out and income holding firm when the cup runs were entered in to the equation. The aim is to run on a balanced budget - match day income wont do it at Sixfields but there are other ways to get income and player sales will be one

What I think has happened is that Otium have used the money to firstly buy the rights to any assets in CCFC Ltd for £1.5m. Secondly they have bought from CCFC H the assets it owned (Ryton, equipment, trademark, players, any goodwill, debtors, stock etc etc). Now they can choose any value they like on all that but would seem logical to choose a figure that pays off the loans CCFC H had from Otium plus the loan from ARVO £6.275m. After potential funding since 31/05/12 call it all £10m. The neat thing about that is ARVO loan Otium 9.1m part of which £6.275m they get straight back when Otium buys the CCFC H assets which were all charged to ARVO in the first place. In addition Otium have bought the rights to rates refunds, transfer monies still due on previous sales, compensation and prize monies due but withheld by the league etc - there is cash flow coming

This leaves Otium with loans to ARVO of 11.1m but assets bought from other group companies 11.5m (CCFC LTd 1.5m CCFC H 10m). The original CCFC companies now disappear. At 31/05/12 the Group balance sheet disclosed net liabilities at £38m. What it might look like now is


Assets in Otium 11.5m
Liabilities to ARVO 11.1m

Current assets 3.0m
curr liabilities 3.0m

Loans from SISU funds 28.8m (these loans are parked in SBS&L, they dont have to repay infull or at all, they can use SBS&L in other projects and recoup losses/value)

value of Group debt 28.4m instant improvement


go a step further and just look at the value of the football operation

Assets 11.5m
ARVO (11.1m)
Current assets 3.0m
Curr. Liabilities (3.0m)

represented by
shares issues 0.5m
Reserves (0.1m)

Worth of the football operation balance sheet is on that basis 0.4m .............. bit different to a football club with a balance sheet £50m, £60m £70m in debt.

This is about adding value, not the revenue losses. Makes the club more attractive to investors or easier to sell. Add to it a ground and that makes an interesting proposition doesnt it? In fact would that encourage finance to buy the Ricoh or a new ground? Then add to it rising values of playing staff, a premium to be added by being in Championship if promoted etc etc etc

All guess work I know but I wonder if it will be far off the mark. There has to be a reason or rhyme to their planning or stance. It isnt, I feel, about revenue losses it is about adding value in what ever way they can including clever accounting. Not sure they are in a hurry or as pressured as some think
 

Last edited:

lewys33

Well-Known Member
tumblr_inline_mgdyi6rNrl1qd0k7a.gif
 

Monners

Well-Known Member
This is a facinating read OSB, and thanks. Certainly seems to make the club more enticing as an investment. I take that means the Ricoh freehold is the key for them to enhance value further (obvioulsy ACL still being the fly in the ointment maybe)?
 
Last edited:

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
not really because ARVO are a seperate legal entity as are the SISU Funds. The club is in debt to ARVO who act as a bank and charge interest. If you only owed yourself would you charge interest to yourself ?

No debt to me still means zero owed on the balance sheet...... this isnt that
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
This is a facinating read OSB, and thanks. Certainly seems to makfe the club more enticing as an investment. I take that means the Ricoh freehold is the key for them to enahnce value further (obvioulsy ACL still being the fly in the ointmene maybe)?

I think that getting the Ricoh makes the value happen quicker certainly
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
not really because ARVO are a seperate legal entity as are the SISU Funds. The club is in debt to ARVO who act as a bank and charge interest. If you only owed yourself would you charge interest to yourself ?

No debt to me still means zero owed on the balance sheet...... this isnt that

Fair enough. It's schizophrenic but I understand.
 

James Smith

Well-Known Member
I'm gonna have to re-read that but thanks for summing it up for us non finance types.
 

italiahorse

Well-Known Member
This is a facinating read OSB, and thanks. Certainly seems to make the club more enticing as an investment. I take that means the Ricoh freehold is the key for them to enhance value further (obvioulsy ACL still being the fly in the ointment maybe)?

Reading between the lines SISU have yet to make a sensible offer.
I don't know if you can be a fly in the ointment just by waiting for a proper offer.
In addition I guess they are reluctant to sell to somebody that to them seems to deal underhandedly.
 

Sky Blues

Active Member
Thanks OSB. So are they setting up the next hedge?
Without the stadium they now have a company worth £28.4m (am I reading that right?) and I'm guessing from what you've said that that doesn't include the value of City's young stars. So if a ground deal isn't completed, they may still be able to get out in a cash positive position if they sold a few stars and sold the club for £28.4m, and if they can grab the stadium, then it's £28.4m + sell a few stars + stadium value (which I guess would magically rise from the <£5m or whatever Sisu were prepared to pay for it)? If they lose, they win and if they win, they win?
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
So if someone bid 30 million for CCFC
and 20 million for ACL as a whole they could and probably would get the lot for 50 million.
 

edgy

Well-Known Member
Thanks OSB. So are they setting up the next hedge?
Without the stadium they now have a company worth £28.4m (am I reading that right?) and I'm guessing from what you've said that that doesn't include the value of City's young stars. So if a ground deal isn't completed, they may still be able to get out in a cash positive position if they sold a few stars and sold the club for £28.4m, and if they can grab the stadium, then it's £28.4m + sell a few stars + stadium value (which I guess would magically rise from the <£5m or whatever Sisu were prepared to pay for it)? If they lose, they win and if they win, they win?

What a few have been saying all along.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Thanks OSB. So are they setting up the next hedge?
Without the stadium they now have a company worth £28.4m (am I reading that right?) and I'm guessing from what you've said that that doesn't include the value of City's young stars. So if a ground deal isn't completed, they may still be able to get out in a cash positive position if they sold a few stars and sold the club for £28.4m, and if they can grab the stadium, then it's £28.4m + sell a few stars + stadium value (which I guess would magically rise from the <£5m or whatever Sisu were prepared to pay for it)? If they lose, they win and if they win, they win?

Sorry SB I had missed a word out...... the overall group debt comes down to 28.4m.

However it does mean the football operation on its own has a nil or positive balance sheet........ instead of showing huge losses

It is hard to value the squad but even players from the academy have a value. Even if based on compensation then a youngster after 6 years in academy could be worth 60k + if they get to play in league 1 that adds £10k to the value for just one game (the bandings of 10 games a time increase compensation by £10k a time). Make debut in Championship it adds £25k every 10 games

But yes they could sell just the football side to someone prepared to deal with ACL and get something. That something could be paid to SBS&L and used to fund more profitable projects without repaying the SISU Fund investors in full or even part.

They have options which would be enhanced by owning a stadium

Could mean they have a way out so could been seen as a win , ACL look like they are prepared to go it alone and make their business pay in other ways that could be a win for them .............. only ones that seem to be losing out are the fans ........... but nothing new there
 

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
So if ARVO are charging £1.26M interest.. isn't that as much of a burden as the old rent to ACL?

Just saying..
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
So if ARVO are charging £1.26M interest.. isn't that as much of a burden as the old rent to ACL?

Just saying..

well if you think about it further if i am correct in my thoughts above then the club are paying interest on a loan to buy assets they already owned as a group to benefit the owners ....... assets which could have been transferred anyway in a group situation ...................
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
So if someone bid 30 million for CCFC
and 20 million for ACL as a whole they could and probably would get the lot for 50 million.

I would guess the guy who's just bought Fulham payed not a disimilar amount.
Everton have been looking to sell or gain Investment,what price /
Where is CCFC's value.
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
So if ARVO are charging £1.26M interest.. isn't that as much of a burden as the old rent to ACL?

Just saying..

The loan charges will go up due to extra money that was borrowed due to the clubs decision to move itself to Northampton, requiring extra funding to cover the increased loses of about 2 million a year of lost revenue.
So that puts the 1.2 million rent or 400k rent into perspective.
 
Last edited:

wingy

Well-Known Member
well if you think about it further if i am correct in my thoughts above then the club are paying interest on a loan to buy assets they already owned as a group to benefit the owners ....... assets which could have been transferred anyway in a group situation ...................
Don't know why OSB but get the feeling That Fisher has some form of stake through ARVO.
 

dongonzalos

Well-Known Member
I would guess the guy who's just bought Fulham payed not a disimilar amount.
Everton have been looking to sell or gain Investment,what price /
Where is CCFC's value.

Did Fulham only cost 50 million?
Did he get a prem team and the stadium in one of the most sort after areas in the country for that?
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
Did Fulham only cost 50 million?
Did he get a prem team and the stadium in one of the most sort after areas in the country for that?

Don't know Don ,but i know Everton have been looking ,figures bandied £60-80M. no takers as yet.


EDIT; The land obviously skews things !!
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Did Fulham only cost 50 million?
Did he get a prem team and the stadium in one of the most sort after areas in the country for that?

£150 million was the edtimate
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
So if someone bid 30 million for CCFC
and 20 million for ACL as a whole they could and probably would get the lot for 50 million.

Why would anyone bid £30m for CCFC . The actual worth in that scenario is in the stadium and ACL have the rights to income there.

SISU dont need to clear the SISU funds investors out they can let that sit for now. Any incoming owner of CCFC would need to pay off ARVO and anything above that goes to the share holders SBS&L and ARVO. Say SBS&L got £10m then they could invest that in a different new deal and hope to pay off the investors from that not CCFC

Of course from SISU's point of view a number of these transactions and valuations would carry a cut to be paid to them in management services paid by the investors.
In addition ARVO get interest off their loans
Both ARVO and SBS&L have the potential for a share of any sale (SISU would get a management fee you would assume)..... but if kept and the Otium reserves positive the potential for dividends
If say they acquired the Ricoh cheap it could be argued that with the football team there then it is worth much more the value of Otium up ..... is there more management fees to pay by the investment funds?
Up to now I would guess the various funds have been valued at nil so any improvement would mean more annual fees for the funds to pay perhaps?

there is money to be made even from losses............ it is what hedge funds do ............

btw just to be clear in none of the posts above am I claiming or implying any illegality or wrong doing what so ever............
 
Last edited:

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
well if you think about it further if i am correct in my thoughts above then the club are paying interest on a loan to buy assets they already owned as a group to benefit the owners ....... assets which could have been transferred anyway in a group situation ...................

i still cant believe people see ACL/CCC as enemy No1 to the club, i'm not saying they are innocent and don't deserve some form of hatred but they don't and never have had the potential to do the damage to our club that sh1tsu/arvo can.

its akin to ignoring Nazi Germany to have a go at Mussolini's Italy.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
It is hard to value the squad but even players from the academy have a value.

I thought for balance sheets players from the academy tended to have a balance of zero, players bought in had their transfer fee as value, which was amortised over the course of their contract?

Hence why selling Turner for anything would be 'profit' regardless.
 
J

Jack Griffin

Guest
I don't see how £1.2M interest can be paid while the club is at Northampton, the turnover from ticket sales plus F&B isn't going to be a lot more than £0.5M and the academy has to receive £0.5M in funds to match what the FA are paying!

The only other potential source of income (barring a really good cup run) has got to be player sales, I can see the likelihood of a £1M fee (there might be 3 or 4 players that will attract a decent fee, so selling 1 or 2 of those should cover it, but they'd have to be replaced). However, that surely will only amount to break even..

I guess its possible for SISU to sit it out for 3 more years.. before the threat of having to pay the FL the bond comes up..

What should people think if they haven't cut a deal to get back to the Ricoh or they haven't got a new stadium site with planning permission in a year's time?
 

Sky Blues

Active Member
Thanks OSB.

Edgy, I was asking the question in the context of the scenario. I'm not sure the point you're trying to make. Clearly, given the name, a hedge fund will try to hedge its bets.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
I thought for balance sheets players from the academy tended to have a balance of zero, players bought in had their transfer fee as value, which was amortised over the course of their contract?

Hence why selling Turner for anything would be 'profit' regardless.

Talking about a different valuation NW

You are absolutely correct about the balance sheet calculation in the statutory accounts. It is based on what had been paid for a players contract and written down over the period of that contract.

What I was trying to explain, was that if you were valuing the squad say for an investment report to investors or as part of a sale document then you wouldnt use that valuation in the statutory accounts. You would want to give a worth that is current. It isnt a statutory valuation and as such doesnt have to be in accordance with the accounting regulations or the accounting policies in the accounts. It does of course have to be realistic.

For an academy player there is a formula agreed in the League to calculate the compensation a club is entitled to from another club for that player. You could, not saying they have, but they could use that to place value on all academy players for an investment report (or part of a justification of a sale price when moving playing assets from CCFC H to Otium).

The point is that the players last valued in 31/05/12 at £949k have a much greater value if being valued for an investment report, report to financiers or potential sale.

Also say that the valuation was done to transfer from CCFC H to Otium, then all players would have a cost to be included in the Balance sheet of Otium whereas there was very little or anything for most of them in CCFC H. Even so with the value being done say August then we could expect values to have increased again couldnt we given the performance of some eg Wilson. What has gone on could well have crystallised a value in Otium that was previously hidden in CCFC H but still in terms of full value for the investors could still be short

Hope that kind of makes sense ?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
no idea - there is no information to go on.

The management fees in the old CCFC H accounts were charged by CCFC H to CCFCLtd. Dont remember any details of management fees being paid to SISU or ARVO in the any accounts to 31/05/12. That could have changed of course since then
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top