Guess that it partly depends on what was in Ron's response!
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.
Existing Users:.
Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.
New Users:
Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.
Fans from other clubs
We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.
Assistance Required
For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.
Yes [6.3.08] and The Future
Guess that it partly depends on what was in Ron's response!
EastStandBlue
Life President
- Joined
- May 29, 2005
- Messages
- 15,519
So do we have any kind of start date for construction? Any news at all?
Irate Ian
Members
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
- Messages
- 2,070
stevie_G_G_G
The OG King
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2007
- Messages
- 2,348
Come on Ian.....
Click on e-mail,
Ctrl C
Click on ShrimperZone
Ctrl V
Post message
Hows that going to take 2 and a bit hours haha ;)
Irate Ian
Members
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
- Messages
- 2,070
There are some personal matters raised by RM which I want to reply to 1st, that is to give him immediate answers to his questions !!
Might make it by 20.30 Steve, but cannot guarantee.
Up-dated the first 8 questions but with RM's replies the total characters are above 10,000 and SZ site limitation does not permit above that number.
Will try to add replies to questions 9 -15 separately.
Last edited:
Irate Ian
Members
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
- Messages
- 2,070
RM Replies Questions 9-15
Q9. What are the projected financials viz can the club sustain to trade with the overheads that are anticipated.
A9. I have not got a crystal ball to accurately determine what the projected financials might be in the new stadium although, in conjunction with Deloitte, we did table an analysis at the Inquiry. Since that time I have continued to carry out financial engineering exercises on the stadium design together with income modelling and I believe we will do even better than those assessments. It is important to remember that whilst the gap between the Premiership and Championship continues to grow in terms of TV income, the same applies to the Championship and League 1. I have made this point a number of times and it continues to hold true.
Q9a Do the financials assume higher level of average gate, if so what average number?
A9a No Response - this + 9b & 9c were added questions after original series were raised.
Q9b. How was this number estimated and what if any market research may have been undertaken and will this be published, if so, when.
A9b. No Response
Q9c. Has Ron considered raising capital by SUFC from its supporters by other than purchase of shares; for the advance purchase of season cards for [a] more than one year life [c] perpetual [in form of some type of foundation debenture purchase as with the Royal Albert Hall]
A9c. No Response
Q10. What liabilites are presently subsisting to the owners of Roots Hall by SUFC in respect of [a] rent service charges or other liability.
A10. As is a matter of public record from the Club’s audited accounts, the rent due to the parent company has been written off and there has never been any “service charges” (whatever that means!) payable or liable.
Q11. What is to be done concerning these liabilities if the development proceeds.
A11. Not relevant – see 10 above
Q12. What if any pre-conditions are anticipated for advance purchase of season cards for above 1 year.
A12. I do not envisage there to be any “preconditions” for the purchase of season cards over one year. To the contrary, we would wish to encourage supporters of the Club to secure their seats and that is why I have been investigating the merits of the Morgan Stanley entity – Stadium Capital Financing Group. This is a proprietary product which, in my view, is an absolute win-win situation for the Club and its supporters. However I must emphasise this would be limited to no more than 6% of the stadium capacity (with an order of priority i.e. shareholders, existing season ticket holders etc.) to avoid any adverse impact on future income streams.
Q13. Will any purchase include all/or any events taking place at the stadium.
A13. In the event that we operate such a scheme as described in 12 above, I would propose that it would include, in some way, all events in the stadium. As such the seat purchase would include a premium payment but which we would seek to mesh with a long term purchase facility so that the commitment could be discharged over a number of years on a monthly basis thereby lessening any burden.
Q14. If not, will season card holders be afforded first refusal on other than football events in "their" seats.
A14. This is answered in 13 above.
Q15. What other information can Ron disclose to supporters that will serve to enable a greater understanding of the proposed legacy he anticipates bestowing upon SUFC in return for the club being the vehicle by which his or other development companies can ultimately re-develop the site of Roots Hall.
A15. I do not have any preconceived views on this. My primary objective is to ensure the Club’s financial stability within an infrastructure that gives it the opportunity to maximise its potential from the Club’s immediate demographic. I believe what I am seeking to create will achieve that and in many respects a large percentage of the hard work has already come to fruition – including the “key” Sainsbury approval. The next stage, notwithstanding the financial turmoil that the banks’ own illiquidity is causing, is more controllable.
If you are asking would I convey the stadium to, say, the Local Authority; the answer is probably no. Alternatively if you are suggesting would I place it in trust; I would suspect the answer today would equally be no. I think the best interests of the Club and its supporters are served by the attraction of further investment and therefore to ring fence the Club’s principal asset may detract from that opportunity.
Whatever the case my intention is to see Southend United succeed and this entire project is geared to that goal – football vernacular!
Q9. What are the projected financials viz can the club sustain to trade with the overheads that are anticipated.
A9. I have not got a crystal ball to accurately determine what the projected financials might be in the new stadium although, in conjunction with Deloitte, we did table an analysis at the Inquiry. Since that time I have continued to carry out financial engineering exercises on the stadium design together with income modelling and I believe we will do even better than those assessments. It is important to remember that whilst the gap between the Premiership and Championship continues to grow in terms of TV income, the same applies to the Championship and League 1. I have made this point a number of times and it continues to hold true.
Q9a Do the financials assume higher level of average gate, if so what average number?
A9a No Response - this + 9b & 9c were added questions after original series were raised.
Q9b. How was this number estimated and what if any market research may have been undertaken and will this be published, if so, when.
A9b. No Response
Q9c. Has Ron considered raising capital by SUFC from its supporters by other than purchase of shares; for the advance purchase of season cards for [a] more than one year life [c] perpetual [in form of some type of foundation debenture purchase as with the Royal Albert Hall]
A9c. No Response
Q10. What liabilites are presently subsisting to the owners of Roots Hall by SUFC in respect of [a] rent service charges or other liability.
A10. As is a matter of public record from the Club’s audited accounts, the rent due to the parent company has been written off and there has never been any “service charges” (whatever that means!) payable or liable.
Q11. What is to be done concerning these liabilities if the development proceeds.
A11. Not relevant – see 10 above
Q12. What if any pre-conditions are anticipated for advance purchase of season cards for above 1 year.
A12. I do not envisage there to be any “preconditions” for the purchase of season cards over one year. To the contrary, we would wish to encourage supporters of the Club to secure their seats and that is why I have been investigating the merits of the Morgan Stanley entity – Stadium Capital Financing Group. This is a proprietary product which, in my view, is an absolute win-win situation for the Club and its supporters. However I must emphasise this would be limited to no more than 6% of the stadium capacity (with an order of priority i.e. shareholders, existing season ticket holders etc.) to avoid any adverse impact on future income streams.
Q13. Will any purchase include all/or any events taking place at the stadium.
A13. In the event that we operate such a scheme as described in 12 above, I would propose that it would include, in some way, all events in the stadium. As such the seat purchase would include a premium payment but which we would seek to mesh with a long term purchase facility so that the commitment could be discharged over a number of years on a monthly basis thereby lessening any burden.
Q14. If not, will season card holders be afforded first refusal on other than football events in "their" seats.
A14. This is answered in 13 above.
Q15. What other information can Ron disclose to supporters that will serve to enable a greater understanding of the proposed legacy he anticipates bestowing upon SUFC in return for the club being the vehicle by which his or other development companies can ultimately re-develop the site of Roots Hall.
A15. I do not have any preconceived views on this. My primary objective is to ensure the Club’s financial stability within an infrastructure that gives it the opportunity to maximise its potential from the Club’s immediate demographic. I believe what I am seeking to create will achieve that and in many respects a large percentage of the hard work has already come to fruition – including the “key” Sainsbury approval. The next stage, notwithstanding the financial turmoil that the banks’ own illiquidity is causing, is more controllable.
If you are asking would I convey the stadium to, say, the Local Authority; the answer is probably no. Alternatively if you are suggesting would I place it in trust; I would suspect the answer today would equally be no. I think the best interests of the Club and its supporters are served by the attraction of further investment and therefore to ring fence the Club’s principal asset may detract from that opportunity.
Whatever the case my intention is to see Southend United succeed and this entire project is geared to that goal – football vernacular!
Irate Ian
Members
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
- Messages
- 2,070
RM Replies to Questions 1 - 8
Q1. Who [names of all consortia members] or what corporation [and names of their shareholders] are the beneficial owners of the land on which the Fossetts development is proposed.
A1. The immediate parent company of Southend United Football Club Ltd is South Eastern Leisure (UK) Ltd, of which I, via my corporate ownership, am a 100% share holder. There are no “consortia members”. It took Delancey and myself a while to come to terms for me to acquire their 50% interest in the parent company and I am in no hurry to re-enter into a joint venture! The beneficial owners of the Fossetts Farm development are me and my immediate family.
Q2. In consideration for the release of restrictive covenant of use of land at Roots Hall now or previously, what if any long term security of tenure are SUFC to be granted at the proposed new stadia and by what vehicle or deed.
A2. I do not know what you mean by “release of restrictive covenant of use of land at Roots Hall”. The restrictive covenants recited in the title are not enforceable and in any event as a quid pro quo the entire proposal is structured on the development of the New Stadium. The Club will not be moving from Roots Hall until the new stadiums is complete and fit for football.
Q3. What terms of lease and anticipated rent is to be payable [and to whom] by SUFC at Fossetts. Also what termly rent reviews are proposed.
A3. The Club currently benefits from a short term lease at Roots Hall and which has been renewed at least twice. The rent was de-capped to represent 10% of the initial investment at the time i.e. £4m – to prevent an almost certain administration – providing for an annual rent of £400,000. As you will know the Club has not paid one penny in rent in respect of Roots Hall and in very recent years I have written off some £2.8m in rent arrears so as to improve the Club’s balance sheet. Furthermore it is not my intention to charge the Club any rent while it remains here at Roots Hall.
Under the terms of the new stadium a lease in precisely the same format will exist for the benefit of the Club at the new stadium but for a longer term to ensure the security of tenure that you allude to. There will be a Stadium Operating Company which will collect all the rental income from the stadium development and redistribute this, including for the benefit of the Club. This will underpin its gate receipts and, we anticipate, give the Club an edge over its competitors. As to whether any rent will be paid or accrued will largely depend on the Club’s success - but in any event it is intended that there will be quarterly reviews, as indeed is the case at present.
Q3a Does Ron feel that because of his possible need to maximise profits from the development, that he has any possible conflict of interest with the needs of SUFC to remain solvent during its use and occupation of the stadium.
A3a. I do not feel there is a need to maximise profits from the development. If this were the objective then I would not be building a 22,000 seater stadium of such high specification. Colchester Stadium cost £14m, some £30, less than that estimated to complete what will be an iconic building for SUFC to thrive and succeed.
Even now there are supporters who suggest we could compete in the Championship from a stadium of 15,000 seats. If I were to take that “advice” I could save a minimum of £14m in construction costs. Similarly there is no need to include a hotel at a further cost of £10m. Therefore if I was seeking to maximise property profits (if such a thing still exists!) there would have been many opportunities to do so.
Q3b If the immediate landlord sells the freehold, will any provision for SUFC being protrected against eviction be envisaged.
A3b. If the freehold of the stadium were to be sold at some future date SUFC would be protected by the terms of its lease. I would never leave it in a position to risk “eviction”. I regard that comment/question as a strange observation when the entire purpose of this exercise is to bring success to the Club so that it can maximise its potential and compete in the upper echelons of the Championship. It is certainly not designed to see the Club fail.
Q3c In the event of SUFC Ltd entering any form of Insolvency, will the football team trading under the name of Southend United be given first refusal to continue use and occupation under identical terms as SUFC Ltd under the proposed Lease or Trust Deed so that perpetual occupation by any re-incarnation of Southend United only be first assured ?
A3c. As I say above, the purpose of this structure is to underpin the Club’s financial security. However I am not a prophet; I cannot predict what the ultimate future may hold save I am creating a framework to secure the Club’s future and tenure. In reality very few clubs go out of business and if there were future financial problems for the Club I would suggest the Club and its new home – which we are in the throes of creating – will be a very attractive investment to any would-be buyer.
Q4. Who will be [a] the immediate and the residual landlord.
A4. The immediate landlord would be the Stadium Operating Company. I have not yet thought of a name for that entity (SOC is halfway there!) but I will be represented on the Board along with others who have Southend United Football Club’s interests at heart. By “residual landlord” you may mean ultimate and, of course, here again this would fall under the umbrella of beneficial ownership as in 1 above.
Q5. Will there be a right of forfeiture of lease for faliure to pay rent on a timely basis or other covenants.
A5. All institutional leases have the right of forfeiture, as does the lease the Club holds at present. As I say above, over the past nine years the Club has paid no rent at Roots Hall and there has been no question as to its right to occupy. The lease structure will be the same (again as I say above) at the new stadium and there will be no restrictive covenants to undermine the Club’s interests.
Q6. Will SUFC have sole use of the stadium and capability to derive benefit of income from other permitted uses.
A6. SUFC will not have sole use of the stadium as the west stand will be occupied by a number of parties including a hotel and other ancillary uses such as offices, all of which will provide an income to the benefit of the stadium operating company which can then flow, as directed by that Board, to the benefit of the Football Club as appropriate. Additionally under the current approval there is also the right to hold concerts on limited occasions throughout the year. If I were able to include – subject to the Council’s approval – an arena as part of the stadium structure (encompassing the west stand seating and facilities) this would have enormous synergy providing still further income for the operating company and Football Club. I am currently undertaking a feasibility study in this connection. If this proves viable and consent is forthcoming then this phase of construction would be integrated within the programme.
Q7. What other uses are envisaged.
A7. See 6 above
Q8. Does RM envisage SUFC being capable of meeting payment of rent based upon the projected operating costs of SUFC at the new stadium.
A8. The answer is yes, but as I say in 3 above whether the rent is paid or written off will be a matter for the stadium operating company and will be determined entirely by the success of the Club. Which, of course, is pivotal to this entire exercise.
__________________
Q1. Who [names of all consortia members] or what corporation [and names of their shareholders] are the beneficial owners of the land on which the Fossetts development is proposed.
A1. The immediate parent company of Southend United Football Club Ltd is South Eastern Leisure (UK) Ltd, of which I, via my corporate ownership, am a 100% share holder. There are no “consortia members”. It took Delancey and myself a while to come to terms for me to acquire their 50% interest in the parent company and I am in no hurry to re-enter into a joint venture! The beneficial owners of the Fossetts Farm development are me and my immediate family.
Q2. In consideration for the release of restrictive covenant of use of land at Roots Hall now or previously, what if any long term security of tenure are SUFC to be granted at the proposed new stadia and by what vehicle or deed.
A2. I do not know what you mean by “release of restrictive covenant of use of land at Roots Hall”. The restrictive covenants recited in the title are not enforceable and in any event as a quid pro quo the entire proposal is structured on the development of the New Stadium. The Club will not be moving from Roots Hall until the new stadiums is complete and fit for football.
Q3. What terms of lease and anticipated rent is to be payable [and to whom] by SUFC at Fossetts. Also what termly rent reviews are proposed.
A3. The Club currently benefits from a short term lease at Roots Hall and which has been renewed at least twice. The rent was de-capped to represent 10% of the initial investment at the time i.e. £4m – to prevent an almost certain administration – providing for an annual rent of £400,000. As you will know the Club has not paid one penny in rent in respect of Roots Hall and in very recent years I have written off some £2.8m in rent arrears so as to improve the Club’s balance sheet. Furthermore it is not my intention to charge the Club any rent while it remains here at Roots Hall.
Under the terms of the new stadium a lease in precisely the same format will exist for the benefit of the Club at the new stadium but for a longer term to ensure the security of tenure that you allude to. There will be a Stadium Operating Company which will collect all the rental income from the stadium development and redistribute this, including for the benefit of the Club. This will underpin its gate receipts and, we anticipate, give the Club an edge over its competitors. As to whether any rent will be paid or accrued will largely depend on the Club’s success - but in any event it is intended that there will be quarterly reviews, as indeed is the case at present.
Q3a Does Ron feel that because of his possible need to maximise profits from the development, that he has any possible conflict of interest with the needs of SUFC to remain solvent during its use and occupation of the stadium.
A3a. I do not feel there is a need to maximise profits from the development. If this were the objective then I would not be building a 22,000 seater stadium of such high specification. Colchester Stadium cost £14m, some £30, less than that estimated to complete what will be an iconic building for SUFC to thrive and succeed.
Even now there are supporters who suggest we could compete in the Championship from a stadium of 15,000 seats. If I were to take that “advice” I could save a minimum of £14m in construction costs. Similarly there is no need to include a hotel at a further cost of £10m. Therefore if I was seeking to maximise property profits (if such a thing still exists!) there would have been many opportunities to do so.
Q3b If the immediate landlord sells the freehold, will any provision for SUFC being protrected against eviction be envisaged.
A3b. If the freehold of the stadium were to be sold at some future date SUFC would be protected by the terms of its lease. I would never leave it in a position to risk “eviction”. I regard that comment/question as a strange observation when the entire purpose of this exercise is to bring success to the Club so that it can maximise its potential and compete in the upper echelons of the Championship. It is certainly not designed to see the Club fail.
Q3c In the event of SUFC Ltd entering any form of Insolvency, will the football team trading under the name of Southend United be given first refusal to continue use and occupation under identical terms as SUFC Ltd under the proposed Lease or Trust Deed so that perpetual occupation by any re-incarnation of Southend United only be first assured ?
A3c. As I say above, the purpose of this structure is to underpin the Club’s financial security. However I am not a prophet; I cannot predict what the ultimate future may hold save I am creating a framework to secure the Club’s future and tenure. In reality very few clubs go out of business and if there were future financial problems for the Club I would suggest the Club and its new home – which we are in the throes of creating – will be a very attractive investment to any would-be buyer.
Q4. Who will be [a] the immediate and the residual landlord.
A4. The immediate landlord would be the Stadium Operating Company. I have not yet thought of a name for that entity (SOC is halfway there!) but I will be represented on the Board along with others who have Southend United Football Club’s interests at heart. By “residual landlord” you may mean ultimate and, of course, here again this would fall under the umbrella of beneficial ownership as in 1 above.
Q5. Will there be a right of forfeiture of lease for faliure to pay rent on a timely basis or other covenants.
A5. All institutional leases have the right of forfeiture, as does the lease the Club holds at present. As I say above, over the past nine years the Club has paid no rent at Roots Hall and there has been no question as to its right to occupy. The lease structure will be the same (again as I say above) at the new stadium and there will be no restrictive covenants to undermine the Club’s interests.
Q6. Will SUFC have sole use of the stadium and capability to derive benefit of income from other permitted uses.
A6. SUFC will not have sole use of the stadium as the west stand will be occupied by a number of parties including a hotel and other ancillary uses such as offices, all of which will provide an income to the benefit of the stadium operating company which can then flow, as directed by that Board, to the benefit of the Football Club as appropriate. Additionally under the current approval there is also the right to hold concerts on limited occasions throughout the year. If I were able to include – subject to the Council’s approval – an arena as part of the stadium structure (encompassing the west stand seating and facilities) this would have enormous synergy providing still further income for the operating company and Football Club. I am currently undertaking a feasibility study in this connection. If this proves viable and consent is forthcoming then this phase of construction would be integrated within the programme.
Q7. What other uses are envisaged.
A7. See 6 above
Q8. Does RM envisage SUFC being capable of meeting payment of rent based upon the projected operating costs of SUFC at the new stadium.
A8. The answer is yes, but as I say in 3 above whether the rent is paid or written off will be a matter for the stadium operating company and will be determined entirely by the success of the Club. Which, of course, is pivotal to this entire exercise.
__________________
Last edited:
shrimpfan
Manager
nice way to spend a sunday night!!! all others watching golf THANK YOU.
Cricko
Guest
Er No,it's your mission.One of which bores the pants off me.
Irate Ian
Members
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
- Messages
- 2,070
Uncle Leo
This cook is an anti-semite
Well to be fair we don't run this site on a professional basis.
We have no plans to alter the restriction on the number of characters in one post. The limit is there for a reason; interminable posts just don't read well.
Cricko
Guest
Not at all..you have had this bone between your teeth for nearly a year now.Ok Ron did not respond within your time scale as he did not have all the answers ready at hand..Fact is he will answer anybody's questions as no doubt when you met him he did respond to those that had a definitive answer at that time.Rome is not built in a day, but you then went about saying you needed answers before they were able to be supplied...I hope the answers you now have to you questions will enable you to step down from the soap box for a period of time.
Scriv mearly reiterated what we already know...if you have a question for Ron he will answer it when he can, he is 100% approachable.
EastStandBlue
Life President
- Joined
- May 29, 2005
- Messages
- 15,519
So, do we have any timeframe at all for when construction can start? The last I heard, which was some time ago now, RM wanted building to commence this Autumn... Would I be right in thinking this is now some way off?
Irate Ian
Members
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
- Messages
- 2,070
Please don't preach to me, just ban me if you consider it justifiable.
You may be closer to RM than most but I think he can speak for himself, without your putting words into his mouth, or are you now his official spokesperson ?
Cricko
Guest
Lol, where have I put "words into his mouth"..And why would we ban you for a difference of opinion?....I am not closer to Ron than any other supporter who he will freely answer any questions to.
stevie_G_G_G
The OG King
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2007
- Messages
- 2,348
:offtopic: I'm sure we have PM's in place for this guys :peace:
ShrimperZone Sponsors
ShrimperZone - Player Sponsorship
Southend United Away Travel
All At Sea Fanzine
