Inspector Lestrade Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 Just now, nevthelodgemoorowl said: Exactly no worries what so ever. Just imagine Wednesday v Spurs in FA Cup 5th round In Concorde Park; No Sag and an attendance of 41,000. I dunno now, he's got me worried. Bugger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirksandallowl Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 22 minutes ago, Manwë said: I gave Rotherham as an example, a very local one Mr Booth sold Rotherham United for £1, but kept hold of Milmoor which he leased back to Rotherham United for silly money and conditions attached (Rotherham pay for maintenance and upgrades, Booth gets share of the receipts, free tickets, free advertising for his business, Rotherham's FA Cup Final ticket allocation etc). There's absolutely no guarantee that Hillsborough would return to Wednesday if Mr Chansiri decides to sell up. In fact Hillsborough might be his only way of recouping any money at all. If Booth charged Rotherham £200k a year 12 years for a few thousand fans, what would the rent on 25k fans at Hillsborough in the Championship be today? Also Rotherham don’t own the New York stadium, it is currently owned by a stadium management company (via a mortgage from the council) which is in turn owned by the current chairman. it is a much more common arrangement than I think you realise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minton Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 14 minutes ago, cbirks said: I maintain that this is not 'the majority' of clubs, but you're right these do seem to have successful arrangements in which they don't wholly own grounds. However, my concerns remain that we were one of the ones that did. And now we don't. Not even through same parent companies as at least 5 of the above are. I'm not envious of any of the examples you've offered. We had a concrete asset, and now we don't, and we have no idea what arrangement will take eventual control of ours. Will we be able to afford our eventual arrangement? Or will it break us? I'd rather not have to ask the question. How much do you think we paid each month in maintenance, match day services etc etc when we did own the ground? Including the off season. A rental agreement is long term and cost effective. It's really not a big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirksandallowl Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 13 minutes ago, cbirks said: I maintain that this is not 'the majority' of clubs, but you're right these do seem to have successful arrangements in which they don't wholly own grounds. However, my concerns remain that we were one of the ones that did. And now we don't. Not even through same parent companies as at least 5 of the above are. I'm not envious of any of the examples you've offered. We had a concrete asset, and now we don't, and we have no idea what arrangement will take eventual control of ours. Will we be able to afford our eventual arrangement? Or will it break us? I'd rather not have to ask the question. What is the difference between being owned by the same parent company and being owned by a related company with the same ultimate owner (ie DC) I just don’t see any difference. DC the single owner of the club could have separated the club and stadium at any point up to and including as part of a potential future sale and can still sell the 2 separately or jointly just as he could before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwë Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 6 minutes ago, kirksandallowl said: Also Rotherham don’t own the New York stadium, it is currently owned by a stadium management company (via a mortgage from the council) which is in turn owned by the current chairman. it is a much more common arrangement than I think you realise. So they pay rent to the landlord? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbirks Posted July 7, 2020 Author Share Posted July 7, 2020 Just now, Minton said: How much do you think we paid each month in maintenance, match day services etc etc when we did own the ground? Including the off season. A rental agreement is long term and cost effective. It's really not a big deal. I honestly, truly, hope that if it comes to that then you're right. I hope that, if it happens, we're a Brighton and not a Coventry. I really do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirksandallowl Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 4 minutes ago, Manwë said: So they pay rent to the landlord? It looks that way from their accounts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbirks Posted July 7, 2020 Author Share Posted July 7, 2020 2 minutes ago, kirksandallowl said: What is the difference between being owned by the same parent company and being owned by a related company with the same ultimate owner (ie DC) I just don’t see any difference. DC the single owner of the club could have separated the club and stadium at any point up to and including as part of a potential future sale and can still sell the 2 separately or jointly just as he could before. If it were the same parent company you're at least dealing with the same group of shareholders. It's also not a great situation, of course. I'm not saying he's done anything outside of rules or capability, but I am saying that he's done something that weakens the position of SWFC in a way that, judging by increasingly common limited company behaviour, could be disastrous. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirksandallowl Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 6 minutes ago, kirksandallowl said: It looks that way from their accounts About £1m per year looking at the stadium company accounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwë Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 31 minutes ago, kirksandallowl said: Just a quick 5 mins on google shows the following stadiums aren’t owned by the football clubs that play in them Arsenal Brighton Man City Hull MiddlesborougH Sheffield United they're the 1st six I checked, I’m sure there are plenty more. Some are owned by stadium management companies linked to the football club or the same parent company that owns the club, some are owned by the local council. Sorry, this post slipped me by. The irony of quoting Brighton as an example isn't lost on me. They sold their ground (Goldstone) due to financial difficulties, but it was the owner that got the cash from the sale. Brighton were homeless following their owners sale of the ground. Brighton now play in a community stadium because they lost their home, not because of some planned move to modern financial ways. None of the examples given are that way due to a ground sale to pay the wage bill for a mid-table crack at the championship. We'll have to agree to disagree, but the moment you sell long-term assets to pay short term operating costs, is a time when you are in danger of going under, whether that be a business or personal. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChapSmurf Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 It reads like it has been written by a 6 year old. But then, it is the Guardian! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirksandallowl Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 Just now, Manwë said: Sorry, this post slipped me by. The irony of quoting Brighton as an example isn't lost on me. They sold their ground (Goldstone) due to financial difficulties, but it was the owner that got the cash from the sale. Brighton were homeless following their owners sale of the ground. Brighton now play in a community stadium because they lost their home, not because of some planned move to modern financial ways. None of the examples given are that way due to a ground sale to pay the wage bill for a mid-table crack at the championship. We'll have to agree to disagree, but the moment you sell long-term assets to pay short term operating costs, is a time when you are in danger of going under, whether that be a business or personal. We haven’t sold it to pay the wage bill, the chairman was paying it anyway. The sale was a paper exercise because the EFL rules stop the chairman spending his own money. The current Brighton owner is apparently very wealthy and could have funded the stadium. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mildatheart67 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 The Brighton case was particularly bad questions were asked in parliament and they had to ultimately play home games in Gillingham 70 miles away for two years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nevthelodgemoorowl Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 56 minutes ago, Inspector Lestrade said: I dunno now, he's got me worried. Bugger like you said initially. Cone without cream, Pie without pork. Makes no sense what so ever . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minton Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, cbirks said: I honestly, truly, hope that if it comes to that then you're right. I hope that, if it happens, we're a Brighton and not a Coventry. I really do. Coventry are in a mess of their own making. They signed a lease deal, then several years down the line, their owners decided that it wasn't a good deal (it wasn't) and tried to play hard-ball to renegotiate by refusing to pay the rent. The stadium owners already had another paying tenant (the rugby team) and so called their bluff and turfed them out. We are not in that situation. Edited July 7, 2020 by Minton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nevthelodgemoorowl Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 7 minutes ago, Minton said: Coventry are in a mess of their own making. They signed a lease deal, then several years down the line, their owners decided that it wasn't a good deal (it wasn't) and tried to play hard-ball to renegotiate by refusing to pay the rent. The stadium owners already had another paying tenant (the rugby team) and so called their bluff and turfed them out. We are not in that situation. Coventry put themselves in the position of being short term tenants. SWFC and Hillsborough share the same Papa and the same mutual trust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minton Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 2 minutes ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said: Coventry put themselves in the position of being short term tenants. SWFC and Hillsborough share the same Papa and the same mutual trust. They actually weren't short term, they just defaulted on the deal, meaning it was able to be terminated. I agree with the sentiment though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogers Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 I can’t believe the concept of which holding company owns the ground is so hard to understand. As I see it, SWFC owned by DC used to own the ground. So when SWFC gets sold, the ground comes in the package, now it doesn’t. So who’s going to buy a club with no home? It gives DC the right to loan the ground back to us; which has caused a load of issues with other clubs mentioned in this thread. Its a big worry for the following reasons: a) attracting a buyer Is made harder b) making any sale more complicated c) provides the Chansiri family with a stick to hit us with for years to come until we move grounds. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
33 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 I'm never wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah Owl Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 8 hours ago, Weshallovercome said: With what DC would want for the club he'd have no chance selling it, with or without the stadium......and he's not Chinese. p.s....I wasn't one of the 48%. He could sell the club on the cheap and have us as tenants paying him rent every year or then sell the ground for development to recoup some of his losses. Never a good thing for club and ground to be parted and goodness knows we've mocked others for this very thing frequently in the past (Piggies and Leeds for starters). 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now