Wasps new deal with Compass

skybluejelly

Well-Known Member
Apr 15, 2011
2,403
338
133
rugby
I think it's all in the detail ... Projected turnover could be as high as 195 million....could be as low as 50 million ... Nobody knows .. Just more spin from wasps
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2011
25,013
4,475
163
I think it's all in the detail ... Projected turnover could be as high as 195 million....could be as low as 50 million ... Nobody knows .. Just more spin from wasps
Could be 195m in total before compass syphon off their cut like with the F&B's. They're not a charity, they'll be making a decent profit before wasps see anything.

Likely to be spin, just like the exhibitions being up in the first 6 months of them being here, when in reality these events are planned and booked well in advanced and would have been booked in before wasps came along.


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

RFC

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2013
2,226
140
63
I think it's all in the detail ... Projected turnover could be as high as 195 million....could be as low as 50 million ... Nobody knows .. Just more spin from wasps
Not interested as no benefit to the Sky Blues. Yes more positive WASPS 'spin'!⚽
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2008
25,928
14,195
363
Coventry
Bit confused by the article, although that's more than likely down to a misunderstanding on my part. Compass signed a 10 year deal in 2009 (said to be valued at £125m, can we see from ACL's accounts if the Ricoh is actually generating £12.5m a year in F&B revenue?), so how does todays 15 year extension leave the contract running to 2030, shouldn't it be 2034? A 15 year extension to 2030 would mean the old deal had expired. And what's happened to IEC?

The figures also imply that despite these new facilities and the arrival of all the extra events and Wasps themselves revenue is only project to be £13m a year, wouldn't it be expected to be a lot higher than in 2009?

What am I missing here? Something obvious probably!

Suppose at the end of the day it doesn't really matter. They can't even be bothered to open all the facilities that are already there for us on matchday so we most likely won't see much benefit from this.
 

Terry Gibson's perm

Well-Known Member
Mar 17, 2014
12,746
4,902
163
Nuneaton
I shall continue to purchase nothing in the ground so I will not be helping them achieve their targets,

1 overpriced shit looking at it
2 I try to give as little to help fund our insect overlords as possible.

Having read it when we move to our new ground they are less likely to hit their targets, they can rename the ground what they want it will still be called the Ricoh by most and I hope when they change the name Wasps will be paying to change all of the signage on the surrounding area send motorway.
 

lewys33

Well-Known Member
May 1, 2013
2,789
91
98
Coventry
All the "pro-club" fans are furiously masturbating over this on twitter.

Clearly spin. If it isn't then why aren't the people of Coventry in uproar at how cheap the Ricoh was sold for?!
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2008
25,928
14,195
363
Coventry
If it isn't then why aren't the people of Coventry in uproar at how cheap the Ricoh was sold for?!
It amazes me that the CT or CWR still haven't asked serious questions of the council and Wasps following the information that was in the bond prospectus. We're supposed to believe that Wasps paid less than £6m and then in a matter of weeks the stadium was worth was it £40 something million in the prospectus? Now they reckon they've got a £195m deal with Compass and of course naming rights soon.

Surely the council selling off an asset generating hundreds of millions for less than £6m should cause uproar?
 

lewys33

Well-Known Member
May 1, 2013
2,789
91
98
Coventry
People have short memories. Remember the uproar when joy offered 2 million for the higgs share BEFORE the council loan?!
 

Terry Gibson's perm

Well-Known Member
Mar 17, 2014
12,746
4,902
163
Nuneaton
It amazes me that the CT or CWR still haven't asked serious questions of the council and Wasps following the information that was in the bond prospectus. We're supposed to believe that Wasps paid less than £6m and then in a matter of weeks the stadium was worth was it £40 something million in the prospectus? Now they reckon they've got a £195m deal with Compass and of course naming rights soon.

Surely the council selling off an asset generating hundreds of millions for less than £6m should cause uproar?
Totally agree Chief this was a terrible deal for the people of Coventry it was a total give away, I don't believe for a minute it would have been any better for us if Sisu had got hold of it either. The financial director at the council has seriously got the figures wrong and should really be searching for a new job

Lucas let her personal feelings towards Sepalla get in the way of the correct decisions.
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2012
8,171
1,264
113
Hey! Let's go around the houses again...we might have missed something...

...onwards & upwards PUSB
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2013
25,608
10,512
263
It amazes me that the CT or CWR still haven't asked serious questions of the council and Wasps following the information that was in the bond prospectus. We're supposed to believe that Wasps paid less than £6m and then in a matter of weeks the stadium was worth was it £40 something million in the prospectus? Now they reckon they've got a £195m deal with Compass and of course naming rights soon.

Surely the council selling off an asset generating hundreds of millions for less than £6m should cause uproar?
I'm more in uproar because with the right approach this is a deal SISU could have got for CCFC. SISU had other ideas though.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2011
54,319
13,968
763
I'm more in uproar because with the right approach this is a deal SISU could have got for CCFC. SISU had other ideas though.
The right approached paying £24 million and still not owning the stadium. That was the original F and B offer wasn't it - and that before the two sides fell out.

The article is ridiculous spin and not a single figure in it can in any way be guaranteed.
 

Covstu

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2008
13,342
3,090
163
Costa del Cov
It amazes me that the CT or CWR still haven't asked serious questions of the council and Wasps following the information that was in the bond prospectus. We're supposed to believe that Wasps paid less than £6m and then in a matter of weeks the stadium was worth was it £40 something million in the prospectus? Now they reckon they've got a £195m deal with Compass and of course naming rights soon.

Surely the council selling off an asset generating hundreds of millions for less than £6m should cause uproar?
Bang on.................
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2013
25,608
10,512
263
The right approached paying £24 million and still not owning the stadium. That was the original F and B offer wasn't it - and that before the two sides fell out.

The article is ridiculous spin and not a single figure in it can in any way be guaranteed.
The right approach was clearly the approach Wasps took. SISU had ample opportunity before and after they all fell out to take this approach. I know that's uncomfortable for you to accept but that's the truth it.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2011
54,319
13,968
763
The right approach was clearly the approach Wasps took. SISU had ample opportunity before and after they all fell out to take this approach. I know that's uncomfortable for you to accept but that's the truth it.
Were the club told to buy back the F and B rights would cost £24 million - yes or no?
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2013
25,608
10,512
263
Were the club told to buy back the F and B rights would cost £24 million - yes or no?
The Wasps deal was there to be done. I can say this with complete confidence simply because Wasps did it. As always you'd rather deflect than accept.
 

Nick

Administrator
Feb 25, 2008
112,222
35,353
1,063
Coventry
Pretty sure that the Ricoh is in Coventry so no, SISU wouldn't have had to move CCFC 80 miles away to acquire the Ricoh.
Wasps weren't in Coventry, so their approach was to move 80 miles wasn't it? Which I bet the ones lauding it so much and giving it the great business line, would be the first to be outraged if we were moved 80 miles in the same circumstances as them.
 

Nick

Administrator
Feb 25, 2008
112,222
35,353
1,063
Coventry
The Wasps deal was there to be done. I can say this with complete confidence simply because Wasps did it. As always you'd rather deflect than accept.
Yes it was there for Wasps. Can you say 100% it was there for CCFC also? The same one?
 

Ian1779

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2012
6,083
3,573
163
The Wasps deal was there to be done. I can say this with complete confidence simply because Wasps did it. As always you'd rather deflect than accept.
He has a point... that was the offer on the table for the club before the fallout.

Compared of course with the pants down offer for Wasps.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2011
54,319
13,968
763
The Wasps deal was there to be done. I can say this with complete confidence simply because Wasps did it. As always you'd rather deflect than accept.
Not deflecting. I believe the deals given to the club show the council never wanted the club to own the ground at all.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2013
25,608
10,512
263
He has a point... that was the offer on the table for the club before the fallout.

Compared of course with the pants down offer for Wasps.
So why weren't SISU capable of negotiating this pants down deal for the Ricoh. The pants down deal as you put it was there to be done, Wasps being capable of doing it proves this 100%. Why didn't / wouldn't SISU do it? Or make inroads even to try and do it?
 

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
Oct 26, 2013
8,573
3,668
113
Bit confused by the article, although that's more than likely down to a misunderstanding on my part. Compass signed a 10 year deal in 2009 (said to be valued at £125m, can we see from ACL's accounts if the Ricoh is actually generating £12.5m a year in F&B revenue?), so how does todays 15 year extension leave the contract running to 2030, shouldn't it be 2034? A 15 year extension to 2030 would mean the old deal had expired. And what's happened to IEC?

The figures also imply that despite these new facilities and the arrival of all the extra events and Wasps themselves revenue is only project to be £13m a year, wouldn't it be expected to be a lot higher than in 2009?

What am I missing here? Something obvious probably!

Suppose at the end of the day it doesn't really matter. They can't even be bothered to open all the facilities that are already there for us on matchday so we most likely won't see much benefit from this.
Businesses always predict they will grow, doesn't mean that will or ever realistically could happen. But having said that Wasps do seem to be well managed, they may be successful long term.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2011
54,319
13,968
763
He has a point... that was the offer on the table for the club before the fallout.

Compared of course with the pants down offer for Wasps.
Yet of course as we were constantly told ACL were in a much stronger position now financially

how strange. Does anyone know how much they paid for the F and B rights - surely it wasn't part of the £5.4 million?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2011
54,319
13,968
763
Businesses always predict they will grow, doesn't mean that will or ever realistically could happen. But having said that Wasps do seem to be well managed, they may be successful long term.
Where is the evidence they are well managed?
 

Nick

Administrator
Feb 25, 2008
112,222
35,353
1,063
Coventry
So why weren't SISU capable of negotiating this pants down deal for the Ricoh. The pants down deal as you put it was there to be done, Wasps being capable of doing it proves this 100%. Why didn't / wouldn't SISU do it? Or make inroads even to try and do it?
It doesn't prove the offer was there 100% for the club does it?
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2008
25,928
14,195
363
Coventry
Yes it was there for Wasps. Can you say 100% it was there for CCFC also? The same one?
That's the key question. And a question the council have so far refused to answer. Was ACL available to SISU on the same terms it was eventually sold to Wasps?

Personally I take the refusal to answer as a strong indication that the answer is no. If they wasn't the case I think the council would be making sure everyone knew as quickly as possible that the deal was there for SISU but was rejected.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2011
54,319
13,968
763
So why weren't SISU capable of negotiating this pants down deal for the Ricoh. The pants down deal as you put it was there to be done, Wasps being capable of doing it proves this 100%. Why didn't / wouldn't SISU do it? Or make inroads even to try and do it?
No because the council didn't want the club to own the ground.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2013
25,608
10,512
263
Yes it was there for Wasps. Can you say 100% it was there for CCFC also? The same one?
We can say 100% Wasps pursued this deal and made it happen. Did SISU ever pursue this deal or did they choose a different disastrous route to gain control of the Ricoh?