Discussion in 'Wasps' started by SimonGilbert, May 7, 2015.
More here: http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/wasps-pay-back-134m-ricoh-9201559
No penalty clause - looks like Anne didn't brief Noggin well at all.
Well bugger me sideways.
Wasps to pay back Ricoh Arena loan "within days"
So did you ask them how they would repay the bonds and interest back in 7 year time?
The Coventry tax payers and children's charity have been shafted.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I did. There's a second story to come. Unsurprisingly, they say they are confident they can afford to do it.
But, frankly, you wouldn't really expect them to say anything else would you?
Interesting figures on projected revenue for the first year in there too. But that's not profit of course.
It's not being used to change the colour of the seats apparently. At least that's something. Although the Sandra Garlic group will be disappointed
Simon, can anything be done with those absolute plonkers in the comments? It is embarrassing! It is like Wasps have got 15 - 20 RFC's and told them to hammer the comments section.
It'd be a strange investment pitch indeed if they said anything else!
Christ Eastwood is an ever bigger bullshitter than Fisher, do these people really believe the rubbish they come out with?
Interesting to see not only didn't they have the money to fund the move to the Ricoh they don't have the money for the training ground and will be hitting fans up for that as well. It reminds me very much of the going on down here at Pompey except Wasps fans don't even any up with a sense that they own a share in the club.
Will be interesting to see what the council have to say about this. When they gave the loan to ACL the only real justification they came up with was the profit that would be made via the interest received, now it appears they won't be getting any and 'forgot' to put in a penalty clause.
After the election is over and done with I hope Lucas is made to answer the questions that the prospectus for the bond issue, the bond issue itself and the early repayment of the loan have raised.
How do you work out that they didn't have the money to fund the move? Inside knowledge?
Well they've just created a £35m debt, in large part to pay back loans from CCC, Richardson and Close. They have at least a further £10.3m of debt and the CT article also states they will need to take out more finance for the training ground. So that's at least £45.3m in debt plus whatever debt is taken on for the training ground.
That is called re-financing. The move to the Ricoh seems to have been affordable as I don't think the Prospectus said that payment for the Ricoh was deferred?
You can call it whatever you like its still debt and its debt that exists as Wasps don't have the money to pay upfront.
Having only recently rolled into town you may not know that for most people the biggest concern around SISU gaining ownership of ACL was that they couldn't pay for it outright and would use it as an asset against which to raise finance and that some of that finance may have been diverted to repay the debt to themselves. People were petitioning the council and writing to the local paper pleading for the council not to allow that to happen. Wasps have come along and done the very same thing.
People go mad about Joy lining her pockets.
Its good business when Wasps do it
I've "been in town" quite a long time, and that's fook all to do with "most" people's concern in my opinion.
Most wanted them to get off their arses and buy the Ricoh. Would have saved a tasty sum in courts fees which would have helped buy it....
And If they had, I doubt many on here would even be talking about wasps now, even if they had moved 80 miles in a different direction...
<cough> Otis <cough>
When "SISU" reorganised their Balance Sheet a large proportion of owner/investor loans were capitalised. This caused all forms of analysis in the CT and from the forum resident accountant and some cynical review. The financial reorganisation of this deal has led to the investor / owner being repaid £10m without similar comment from those parties.
Imagine the outrage if this had been SISU
This is me "insisting" that it was "inevitable" that there would be a repayment charge
A completely reasonable comment and not insisting anything as you always do (normally wrongly.)
It's good business!
There's a bit in the telegraph today about how the train station is happening because of wasps...
Seriously? Is this because they have all these fans coming up from London who will use the train?
It would appear the "Asset" multiplied in value at the point WASPS purchased it. Now if you sell me a piece a property at a reduced price and with preferential loan facilities you would think it would be easy to refinance in the normal funding market.For some reason it wasn't such do you know why - as you are Intheknow?
Perhaps when the Council minutes are released then we will see the real terms of the deal? That would remove all the speculation and you drip feeding the parts you want us to be in the know with you
Here's that second story:
So when will you actually start asking some searching questions?
Stating, "Can you pay the bond back" and hearing back "We wouldnt do anything we couldnt afford" is hardly digging deep. What we need are details of the real fundamentals such as how they will actually do it, after the Arena money, and Richardsons money has been swallowed up.
Without looking, what are the comments like?
The usual pro wasps shite
The fact is that Wasps have managed to get the stadium for less than half its value. Sisu could have had that deal if they'd simply been honest, honourable and decent. As they say - end of.
And anti Sisu.
The plan is almost certainly to refinance, perhaps another bond issue or perhaps something like like a mortgage or could they float on the stock exchange?
The simple fact of the matter is they won't be able to repay the money in 7 years time without doing that but that shouldn't be a problem as long as things go reasonably.
Honestly though it's not really any of our business it seems strange to be insisting the cet probe further into it at a time when our financials are so so much more precarious than theirs. The only people who should care are wasps fans and those who have chosen to take the small risk for 6.5% interest per year.
Oh dear. CCC getting value for the taxpayer again.
£35m over 7 years is about £44m back at the rate. They'd better hope for a great sponsorship deal.
Why wouldn't they investigate it to get the full facts for each article rather than just copy and pasting whatever comes from wasps pr?
I'd have thought so, until Sisu started titting about. Is there evidence otherwise?
Whats there to investigate? if you want to know how wasps will have 35mill to give back in 7 years the answer is they won't, they will have to refinance, obviously they will hope things will be better and they will be well established and they will be able to borrow less than the 35million and at a better rate than 6.5%
Separate names with a comma.