Jump to content
IGNORED

Coventry In Trouble

Loderingo

By Loderingo
in Football Chat

Recommended Posts

CodeRed

CodeRed

Posted
Posted

They've been in dispute with the owners of the stadium for a long time.

The rent of £1.2M a year ! was always too high and I don't know why they

moved to the ground at that rent level, presumably they were in the PL when construction

was started and by the time they moved in they were in the championship

with falling gates and high legacy wages - when the parachute payments ran out

there was nowhere to go financially.

They are trying to buy a share in the ground the last I heard but if that fails they could end up moving out of the Ricoh

and ground sharing with someone just to survive.

I'm sure the club and fans wish they had stayed at Highfield Road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pongo88

pongo88

Posted
Posted

Also shows what could happen to Bristol City when we can't aford the rent at Ashton Vale.

I don’t think this applies to City, as if we move to Ashton Vale, the set up would be different. O.K. the landowners and the club have been split but with Steve Lansdown I think we have someone who has the interests of the club at heart.

What it does illustrate is problem associated with a club not owning its own ground and paying rent – e.g. Bristol Rugby

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CodeRed

CodeRed

Posted
Posted

Who says we will have to pay rent at AV, more scaremongering.

BCAGFC

We're paying rent now to Ashton Gate Limited.

Perhaps you believe that SL will gift the stadium to BCFC rent free, together with the hotel and restaurant and retail units and allow every penny generated to be channelled straight into the football club to be spent on an endless procession of mediocre players as we do now?

If that's the case you had better start writing your letter to Santa as well!

The stadium will owned by a company owned by SL/JL/JP. BCFC will pay rent, and will keep all the matchday revenue from tickets, catering, club shop exec boxes etc

Concerts, events, conferencing etc will go to the stadium company

I doubt SL will shaft us for the rent like Cov but it will be a a "market rent" although as SL will own the club and the stadium he can charge what he likes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BCAGFC

BCAGFC

Posted
Posted

We're paying rent now to Ashton Gate Limited.

Perhaps you believe that SL will gift the stadium to BCFC rent free, together with the hotel and restaurant and retail units and allow every penny generated to be channelled straight into the football club to be spent on an endless procession of mediocre players as we do now?

If that's the case you had better start writing your letter to Santa as well!

The stadium will owned by a company owned by SL/JL/JP. BCFC will pay rent, and will keep all the matchday revenue from tickets, catering, club shop exec boxes etc

Concerts, events, conferencing etc will go to the stadium company

I doubt SL will shaft us for the rent like Cov but it will be a a "market rent" although as SL will own the club and the stadium he can charge what he likes.

Paying rent to AGL, didn't see that in the accounts.

I don't think we will pay rent at AV as long as SL is in charge......Bristol Rugby Club will pay rent.

That could all change if SL cashes in but that would only be viable for him if he has a PL club with a PL venue, so not going to happen in the short, medium or medium long term.

Obviously BCFC will not get every penny from the AV development, can't name 1 major football development where every penny goes to the club......it's how it goes. AV has to be paid for first but I expect us to get AT LEAST 25% - 30%, which would still work out more than we get at AG as income steams would be so much bigger.

And people thinking that we are ever going to get a club owned by the fans, it ain't gonna happen unless we find ourselves like Pompey, Stockport and the like and even then the fans would have to find millions just to sustain a FL club.......I hope they are saving up as we speak.

I would guess that 90% of FL clubs have one owner who stumps up the cash every year.

BCAGFC

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CodeRed

CodeRed

Posted
Posted

Paying rent to AGL, didn't see that in the accounts.

I don't think we will pay rent at AV as long as SL is in charge......Bristol Rugby Club will pay rent.

BCAGFC

You wouldn't - the accounts are for Bristol City Holdings Ltd

on page 25 it lists the subsidary companies owned by the holding company

They are Bristol City Football Club Ltd and Ashton Gate Limited, the first pays rent to the second.

I agree all 3 are SL owned anyway but that's the way it is set up now and I don't see it changing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timbo7

Timbo7

Posted
Posted

Paying rent to AGL, didn't see that in the accounts.

I don't think we will pay rent at AV as long as SL is in charge......Bristol Rugby Club will pay rent.

That could all change if SL cashes in but that would only be viable for him if he has a PL club with a PL venue, so not going to happen in the short, medium or medium long term.

Obviously BCFC will not get every penny from the AV development, can't name 1 major football development where every penny goes to the club......it's how it goes. AV has to be paid for first but I expect us to get AT LEAST 25% - 30%, which would still work out more than we get at AG as income steams would be so much bigger.

And people thinking that we are ever going to get a club owned by the fans, it ain't gonna happen unless we find ourselves like Pompey, Stockport and the like and even then the fans would have to find millions just to sustain a FL club.......I hope they are saving up as we speak.

I would guess that 90% of FL clubs have one owner who stumps up the cash every year.

BCAGFC

Although you are beginning to get a little more realistic (which is encouraging) I would just love to know where you get 25% to 30% from. But just for fun, 30% of the non-football revenue from Ashton Vale will be enough to allow Bristol City to break-even if the total revenue is £47 million per annum - I would have to concede that is a pretty good yield on a £90M investment - I don't think we need SL to back that one. I have not studied the plans in detail so I may have missed the diamond mine.

Also, I think discussion regarding inter-company payments between the football company and the stadium company is something of a red herring - both are wholly owned subsidiaries of Bristol City Holdings Limited (whose accounts we have all been enjoying) and hence charges between them are unreported and of little relevance at present.

Although none of us know, and it may not yet have been decided, it seems likely that the freehold on the Ashton Vale development might remain in the hands of a third party, as this is likely to enable the most economic set-up. For as long as one or more wealthy Bristol City supporters retain control of the new stadium company, this is also likely to be of little consequence. However the future is a long time and I suppose the Coventry City case will be interesting to watch - I'm not sure how many other prospective tenants there are to take over if the club goes to the wall (and how this will effect the owners efforts to pursue the debt) but I guess the various London Rugby clubs will be watching with interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timbo7

Timbo7

Posted
Posted

You wouldn't - the accounts are for Bristol City Holdings Ltd

on page 25 it lists the subsidary companies owned by the holding company

They are Bristol City Football Club Ltd and Ashton Gate Limited, the first pays rent to the second.

I agree all 3 are SL owned anyway but that's the way it is set up now and I don't see it changing.

Often overlooked and proportionately irrelevant - but Bristol City Holdings Limited has a large number of other owners - together with SL and KD we own the owner of Football Club and Stadium companies

Link to comment
Share on other sites
del ete

del ete

Posted
Posted

Although you are beginning to get a little more realistic (which is encouraging) I would just love to know where you get 25% to 30% from. But just for fun, 30% of the non-football revenue from Ashton Vale will be enough to allow Bristol City to break-even if the total revenue is £47 million per annum - I would have to concede that is a pretty good yield on a £90M investment - I don't think we need SL to back that one. I have not studied the plans in detail so I may have missed the diamond mine.

Also, I think discussion regarding inter-company payments between the football company and the stadium company is something of a red herring - both are wholly owned subsidiaries of Bristol City Holdings Limited (whose accounts we have all been enjoying) and hence charges between them are unreported and of little relevance at present.

Although none of us know, and it may not yet have been decided, it seems likely that the freehold on the Ashton Vale development might remain in the hands of a third party, as this is likely to enable the most economic set-up. For as long as one or more wealthy Bristol City supporters retain control of the new stadium company, this is also likely to be of little consequence. However the future is a long time and I suppose the Coventry City case will be interesting to watch - I'm not sure how many other prospective tenants there are to take over if the club goes to the wall (and how this will effect the owners efforts to pursue the debt) but I guess the various London Rugby clubs will be watching with interest.

As always those in the minority make the most noise on subjects like these. E.g. 30-1 on the council polls suggest most people are for the new stadium. Personally all my friends and family are in favour of it.

Out of interest are you against it as you have concerns for the clubs financial stability, or because you dont agree with the development of "green" areas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BCAGFC

BCAGFC

Posted
Posted

You wouldn't - the accounts are for Bristol City Holdings Ltd

on page 25 it lists the subsidary companies owned by the holding company

They are Bristol City Football Club Ltd and Ashton Gate Limited, the first pays rent to the second.

I agree all 3 are SL owned anyway but that's the way it is set up now and I don't see it changing.

On Page 25 on the accounts from the OS, there is no mention of any of what you say, the 3 companies are mentioned elsewhere in the document but nothing about rent being paid from 1 to another.

BCAGFC

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CiderHider

CiderHider

Posted
Posted

Hold the front page!!!! Cov City in new shock horror as football club runs at a loss!!!!

Toys for the rich and stupidly rich, without SL we would be the same, deducted points, relegated ... gone.

SL keeps this club batting waaay above its average, its a worrying thought. The Gov needs to protect clubs, owners must pay a retainer or a deposit to take the club on, and smaller clubs give waaay more money to keep themselves afloat for basic running costs, becuaee otherwise we will have francise teams popping up everywhere, do you really want to support WICKS FC, or ASDA Orient? What would happen to Man City if the owner just said cheers im off?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CodeRed

CodeRed

Posted
Posted

On Page 25 on the accounts from the OS, there is no mention of any of what you say, the 3 companies are mentioned elsewhere in the document but nothing about rent being paid from 1 to another.

BCAGFC

As timbo says above these payments are not reported as the accounts published are of the parent company (BCFC Holdings)

not the subsideries, there's nothing unusual in that. But we do pay rent to AG ltd, think about it - what's the point of setting up a separate stadium company if services are not going to properly accounted and paid for by those using those using those services?

How stupid would AG Ltd's accounts look if they were not charging for their services?

Believe me or not - up to you - but BCFC Ltd do pay rent to AG Ltd and this is entirely normal in the way SL: has set up the business structure of the 2 companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BCAGFC

BCAGFC

Posted
Posted

As timbo says above these payments are not reported as the accounts published are of the parent company (BCFC Holdings)

not the subsideries, there's nothing unusual in that. But we do pay rent to AG ltd, think about it - what's the point of setting up a separate stadium company if services are not going to properly accounted and paid for by those using those using those services?

How stupid would AG Ltd's accounts look if they were not charging for their services?

Believe me or not - up to you - but BCFC Ltd do pay rent to AG Ltd and this is entirely normal in the way SL: has set up the business structure of the 2 companies.

I was under the impression that the football club & stadium were seperated years ago so that if the football club went bust, we wouldn't lose AG as part of administration.....just like Southampton did/tried to.

I still don't think that SL would charge BCFC rent when he is potentially making money at 2% above interest rate for his loans.

Where can we see the accounts for AG Ltd?.

BCAGFC

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CotswoldRed

CotswoldRed

Posted
Posted

Surely if Cov can't pay their current deal then the stadium owners will have to renegotiate?

If Cov leave the stadium then who will fill the gap? There can't be many business out their queuing up to bring 10,000 people along on 25 occasions during the year.

The stadium owners will just have to lump what the club can afford or lose all of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Monkeh

Monkeh

Posted
Posted

Surely if Cov can't pay their current deal then the stadium owners will have to renegotiate?

If Cov leave the stadium then who will fill the gap? There can't be many business out their queuing up to bring 10,000 people along on 25 occasions during the year.

The stadium owners will just have to lump what the club can afford or lose all of it.

There's a casino and indoor arena there which more then covers the councils costs

You can't compare it to Ashton vale when we build it it will still be owned by Lansdown and dare so the rent will be nominal

The only time to worry will be if Lansdown sales the club but keeps the new stadium

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CodeRed

CodeRed

Posted
Posted

There's a casino and indoor arena there which more then covers the councils costs

You can't compare it to Ashton vale when we build it it will still be owned by Lansdown and dare so the rent will be nominal

The only time to worry will be if Lansdown sales the club but keeps the new stadium

More guesswork

We don't know how much the other business' pay to Arena Coventry.

The ground is not owned totally by the council - Arena Coventry is a JV owned by 2 partners (a charity & the council)

The AV site is owned by Vence(S & J Lansdown) ...dare(?) or Dawe doesn't own a share (but J. Pontin owns the southern bit

of the site) ..and no one knows how much the rent at AV will be yet

Not much chance of Lansdown selling the club - without the stadium - at the moment, but it's happened before

to other clubs (Palace, Bradford City Pompey etc) nobody lives forever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...