Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
Excellent, what's your opinion on the question I asked about AEG? Do you agree with my opinion that I stated about the revenue streams?
You asked the question - which I tried to answer. That doesn't mean it's my opinion.
"As a club that's making massive losses" - Aren't these losses being covered by the owners?
I think it would be wrong to try and guess how much money is in Sisu's back pockets..
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not sure how you managed to arrive at me suggesting that. Are you really stating that the moon is made of cheese? Pretty silly if you are.
The losses are currently being covered by the investors that our owners are managing. Good job too, as they don't look as though they will stop in the foreseeable future.
Why not guess about SISU's wealth, we guess about pretty much everything else. I seem to recall from their accounts they only have a million or so, but I may be wrong on that. I'll have a look.
To of even posed that question in itself was silly, let's say on average that based on last seasons attendance figures that £4.50 worth of beverages was purchased during every home game.
£4.50 x 10,000 = £45,000
£45,000 x 23 = £1,035,000
Now of course this is a rough guess, but if it was accurate for instance it would pay off match costs and rent, based on the last offer two seasons over.
Is it beneficial? Of course it is.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So it was a silly question.......that you then decided you wanted to work out an answer to.
I doubt I spent £4.50 over a whole season in the ground, so I doubt it would be near that on average for everyone.
Of course you haven't knocked off the cost of buying the stuff they are selling, including wastage, or any staff costs, before covering the costs you state.
Any revenue is important, Grendel reminds up of FFP every hour or so in case we forget, but F & B income is not the biggest thing we need to concern ourselves with.
Agreed I have left all that necessary information out and glad you picked up on it, but I was merely highlighting how a figure of that size could be vital to the Football Club when you think that every penny is vital in this day and age of the sport.
However back to topic any rental deal (and I must admit I can't see us returning to the Ricoh under a tenancy agreement) would have to be inclusive to more revenues.
Although as I have previously stated what I would prefer the Club to do is purchase the Higgs Share of ACL for what it was originally sold for and rebuild that way.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What were the match day costs on that deal James? These costs seem to change with each deal.
I think that the club needs the whole package to build a sustainable future.
I do appreciate that total package would cost, and there is no way SISU should get it on the cheap. So if it was available they should pay the correct price for it.
Not sure if I totally answered your question though...
It's a shame no one from the club/Sisu has yet explained why they didn't buy the Higgs share shortly after acquiring us or any time since.
The shares that the council view as worthless? These shares James?
The shares that Sisu are willing to lose 3 or 4 million a year to obtain? These shares Grendel?
Absolutely. Shares that sisu offered money for that the council deemed worthless. James, why did the council view them as worthless?
Question: Why can't Sisu accept a temp rent deal?
Answer: They don't want to rent a Stadium.
I can't see how that is so hard to understand frankly.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Looks to be a better deal than buying or building a stadium, especially for a club with little funds.
I think that the club needs the whole package to build a sustainable future.
I do appreciate that total package would cost, and there is no way SISU should get it on the cheap. So if it was available they should pay the correct price for it.
Not sure if I totally answered your question though...
The shares that the council view as worthless? These shares James?
Ouch. Those words have come from somewhere. Any idea where?
Wasn't it where Deering was pulled up by the judge? The value of the shares being zero was a possibility, but only if everything went wrong and ACL went to the wall. But the SISU line was that the shares were worthless. And Joy had offered 2m as the money was to go to a charity. A typical move by SISU. Ignore all of the details and take out the little bit that sounds like what they want it to sound like and state it as the truth.
Yes the 1.8m interest to Arvo is always conveniantly forgot or ignored !!!!
As per the title. Why can't Sisu accept the offer made through the FL now and give us fans and the playing staff some hope ahead of next season?
If you believe some posters on here and indeed if they believe themselves then the JR is a done deal and Sisu are going to be acquiring the Ricoh on their terms anyway.
So where's the harm in accepting ACL's offer through the FL now when apparently it will never take effect anyway?
Yes the 1.8m interest to Arvo is always conveniantly forgot or ignored !!!!
The 1.8m interest does not make the £1.3m rent ok. No one has forgotten or ignored it. The fact is if we weren't such a loss making club we wouldn't need to borrow money to cover losses and we wouldn't be paying interest on loans.
The level of interest is unacceptable but so was the £1.3m rent.
Incidentally Man Utd spent £71m on interest charges, etc last year.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/sep/18/manchester-united-record-financial-results
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Would you take Utd's position over ours?
A bit of a stupid question that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Not really, because you try and compare us to Utd by saying what you did. United can more than live with their debt charges, we cannot. So is yours not a stupid comment?
Not really, because you try and compare us to Utd by saying what you did. United can more than live with their debt charges, we cannot. So is yours not a stupid comment?
Quick question for the less well informed/cant be arsed to read through all the threads - It was mentioned earlier on the thread that SISU winning the JR is likely to see them get the Ricoh on their terms. Am I wrong in thinking that this isn't going to be the case...the case is around whether CCCs £14m 'loan' was illegal or not?
Are some folk suggesting this because if the High Court confirms that the loan was illegal it merely gives SISU a better chance of obtaining the Ricoh complex, as opposed to defo getting it on the cheap?
Sore head this morning so excuse the naivety of my questioning...
WM
No, sisu winning the JR won't see them getting The Ricoh on their terms. If ACL have to pay back the loan, then there is nothing stopping them from going out and getting a loan from elsewhere albeit on worse terms.
Even if ACL go tits up the council own the freehold and have control of who gets the leasehold. If ACL were to go in to admin or up for sale there's nothing stopping another company buying them out.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Nice one, cheers Stu. Why do some folk think that SISU winning the JR automatically entitles them to the Ricoh?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?