TboneFromTO Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: Lifes not fair Bradford (or London) have effectively been replaced by Toronto, so let the other expansion teams and Toulouse take care of the other spots over time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUBRATS Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 39 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said: The overall point from the past batch of posts is that none of the SL clubs have actually funded new grounds from their own funds, nor have their owners paid for it.They just happened to have benefitted from being in 'the right place at the right time' to benefit from a scheme that was paid for by someone else. Unfortunately for Wakefield, Castleford and Bradford (for somewhat different reasons that we don't need to discuss AGAIN) they haven't been so fortunate. Correct , which is why as long as in the event of funds becoming available none of those clubs mentioned above were just given funds , but were given deposit loans secured by SLE to help them find the type of outside help others have acquired nobody should really complain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUBRATS Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 44 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said: L&G seem to believe they are letting the property to Leeds MDC who are subletting to the 2 sports clubs https://www.legalandgeneralgroup.com/media-centre/press-releases/legal-general-funds-headingley-stadium-redevelopment/ The ' property ' in question is the dual stand , who has financed the Rugby South Stand ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M j M Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 49 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said: L&G seem to believe they are letting the property to Leeds MDC who are subletting to the 2 sports clubs https://www.legalandgeneralgroup.com/media-centre/press-releases/legal-general-funds-headingley-stadium-redevelopment/ They are but that's just the way the deal has been structured to work for Yorkshire and to enable the council's involvement. Ultimately underneath it all it's just an improvement mortgage. 54 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said: The overall point from the past batch of posts is that none of the SL clubs have actually funded new grounds from their own funds, nor have their owners paid for it. Leeds have paid for about 50% of the total stadium redevelopment from cash reserves when the east stand is included. Saints owners funded significant parts of theirs. But your point is valid, of them all only Leeds is vaguely close to a commercial arrangement that ends up being funded out of trading cashflows and there is little hope of Wakey, Cas or the Bulls being able to join them. But using alternative sources of capital funding isn't a problem as long as the club gets a suitable stadium and a proper financial base to work from. Situations where clubs are abused tenants of dominant landlords or stadium management companies are less optimal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
getdownmonkeyman Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 On 30/12/2019 at 17:30, GUBRATS said: As far as I am aware , Warrington contributed no financial input into the HJ Warrington paid for the fit-out only. Didn't contribute a solitary bean to the stadium build. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Tonks Sidestep Posted January 3, 2020 Share Posted January 3, 2020 On 30/12/2019 at 18:57, GUBRATS said: The ' property ' in question is the dual stand , who has financed the Rugby South Stand ? They both came under the same funding scheme and from the Council's own report: "Leeds Cricket Football and Athletic Company Limited (LCFA), in partnership with Yorkshire County Cricket Club (YCCC), has developed a holistic scheme to improve both the North-South stand (which sits and is shared between the cricket ground and the rugby ground) and the south stand of the rugby ground. In total the scheme cost is £40m." "Other important aspects of the proposed sub-lease include the ability of the clubs to make lump sum payments to reduce the rent due.... the Council would not have any right either to terminate its lease from the third party investor or to reduce the rent by making a lump sum payment to the third party investor" Note not pay off and then own the stands, even if the rent paid to the Council was reduced to £0 - although at the end of the 42 years the Council and/or the clubs can acquire the remaining 98 years of the headlease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M j M Posted January 3, 2020 Share Posted January 3, 2020 Yes, from clubs point of view it is just a mortgage in substance. The council's involvement and the structuring is very specific for a variety of reasons but the options the clubs have mean it is just a loan on which the capital can be overpaid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris22 Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 Kind of on topic...I was reading an article about the Saracens debacle on BBC Sport, and this quote about private equity investment leapt out at me: Quote Private equity group CVC is about to acquire a 27% stake in the company that owns the Pro14, having taken a 27% stake in Premiership Rugby a year ago. It closing in on another deal to buy a £300m stake in the Six Nations. Private equity firms are not benign entities whose interest is in protecting the traditional structures of the assets they take over. It is about profit, everywhere, at all times. As one deputy team principal said as CVC's 11-year period owning Formula 1 came to an end: "All their actions have been taken to extract as much money from the sport as possible and put as little in as possible." At the same time, the value of title sponsorship of both the Six Nations and the Heineken Champions Cup has fallen dramatically in the past two years. World Rugby's big plans to revitalise the international game through their World League proposal also fell apart, when it could not reach its own agreement with CVC. The full article is an interesting read as a whole, touching on other sports financially trying to compete https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/51168926 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aj1908 Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 Any more news or is this dead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.