The Squad, or the Arena? (1 Viewer)

Spend £15 million on what?


  • Total voters
    58

The CableGuy

Well-Known Member
Assuming that some crazy bloke gave CCFC £15 million, and buying back our share of the Arena cost £15 million, what would you prefer the money to be spent on?
 

The CableGuy

Well-Known Member
Heart says squad but head says arena!

Same here. I'm hoping (praying?) that the CT's mega-story is that were buying back our share of the Arena. Anything less then that and I'll be disappointed in the CT, and probably CCFC as well.
 

CovLis86

Well-Known Member
Its difficult...aslong as i thought we could stay up for next couple of years, then Arena. But if we dont, well it would have to be squad because if we go down, im not sure we will ever recover.
 

The CableGuy

Well-Known Member
Its difficult...aslong as i thought we could stay up for next couple of years, then Arena. But if we dont, well it would have to be squad because if we go down, im not sure we will ever recover.

What, you think I'm gonna make my 1st SBT poll easy? ;)

I'd still try to buy back our Arena-share, even if we did go down. I think a Championship club gets around £4 million per season for TV money. A League 1 club only gets £100,000 (they're not too happy about this and frankly, I can't blame them!).

Making additional income from the Arena would go a long way from covering that potential loss, if the Sky Blue Relegation Apocalypse did indeed happen.
 

Pigeon

New Member
I think it has to be the arena, we'll make profit off the Ricoh to build up the squad.
 

SkyBlueKay

Facebook User
I've had to say the arena. It makes more sense! Get the revenue off various things if it was ours, and that in turn could go on players!
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
Arena costs us £1m per season. since it will be £20m to buy the arena I would say take up the 50% offer for 10m and invest £5m in the squad (and none of that on sill wages with long contracts). Should be plenty for a decent manager to have a tilt at getting us up when we can then afford to buy the other 50%.
 

Paxman II

Well-Known Member
These figures you are all bounding around...are you sure?

ACL and the Higgs trust is not the ownership of the arena.

Maybe Wednesday is about a new manager who well....we would never have thought would come here....urmmm who could that be?
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
Its a chicken and egg scenario......i'd go for the arena get some income in then the squad will follow
 

skyblu3sk

Well-Known Member
Stuck thread for a while to get the consensus. it's arena for me. will make us a more viable option for a buyer
 

Tonylinc

Well-Known Member
It has to be the Arena for me as well. It might just then feel a little more like "home". As it is it just feels like the Memorial park with seats. Mind you, if we were to get relegated I cannot see us ever getting back.
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
There is an agreement to buy 50% for £10m until 2015 (the ten year anniversary) after that it's open season. Buying it before then is worthwhile as the new 10 year naming rights will be worth having as you can recoup a % immediately.

Hackers, it cost £113m to build mate, but a lot of that was on cleaning up the site first and the value of the ground it stands on, parking and the whole complex who are also tennants (hotel, casino, arena etc). I guess the actual stadium build costs c(pointless without City playing in it) remain a closely guarded secret like all things CCFC.
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
No Tony those are the costs but as I said includes other aspects. The retractable roof, retractable pitch and 45,000 seat plan was when it was all part of Arena 2000 or something
 

Nick

Administrator
Was that when it was planned to have a huge Jaguar overlooking too? Until they pulled out!
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
I think Jaguar only pulled out of the naming rights as the 'Jaguar Arena' and after build completion not as part iof the build
 

hackneyfox

Well-Known Member
Whether it was 30-40m or 113m, who coughed up the money for that and why would they let 50% go for 10m?
 

les_miserables

New Member
This debate has gone on years back in the Derrick Robins era. Arguments galore at boardroom level and money was spent on the ground, we built 3 stands in 4 years. I have yet to see a grandstand score a goal. Get the team right, then the ground.
 

Tonylinc

Well-Known Member
Whatever the cost of the original build I seem to recall that the agreement for sale to higgs incorporated a buy back agreement at a fixed amount. I beleive that the fixed amount was in the region of £10mill. provided it was exercised within a certain period.
 

Nick

Administrator
This debate has gone on years back in the Derrick Robins era. Arguments galore at boardroom level and money was spent on the ground, we built 3 stands in 4 years. I have yet to see a grandstand score a goal. Get the team right, then the ground.

Thing is though, ploughing the money into the squad is a huge gamble and then if you don't get promote you could end up even more in the brown stuff..
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
Whether it was 30-40m or 113m, who coughed up the money for that and why would they let 50% go for 10m?


If you live in Cov, then you helped pay for it Hackers - thanks :)

There was a combination of govt funding, lottery commission, City council, Higgs Trust and World cup 2006 bid. I hope that's clear! Who paid what share I have no idea, but it was part of a condition of the sale of ground that we had with the rebuy options at Highfield Road.
 

Covstu

Well-Known Member
Has to be the arena as its a long term view, if we invested in the squad we would end up selling that money would get lose in the ether and back to square one. We need assets at the club!
 

SkyBluesAndy

Facebook User
Arena as its better long term. If the money was spent on the squad you would have to trust whoever was in charge at the time spending it wisely - just look at all the money Mboro wasted on Strachan! Money from the Ricoh would come in for years to come.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top