Etihad Campus, Stadium and Collar Site Development Thread

Posted on SSC

334648042_507565798234558_8615319599230187675_n.jpg


332136864_6511339705563108_2788822344577574419_n.jpg
 
domalino said:
I think @jrb has said that the £4m p/a rent is paid against the total, which is why Bernstein thought the pre-takeover club could possibly buy it 20 years after it was built.
Click to expand...

I attended a meeting of the fairly short-lived Westminster Branch of the Supporters' Club back in January 2003 at which David Bernstein spoke for nearly three hours. This was about six weeks before he quit as chairman and six months before we took up occupation of the new stadium, and the prospective move was the biggest topic of the evening.

Bernstein confirmed that the lease contains an option for MCFC to acquire the freehold at an option price that reduces over time because the rent we've already paid can be offset against it. He also suggested that it wouldn't make financial sense for City to exercise the option for at least twenty years, maybe more. In theory, of course, the financial landscape changed completely with the 2008 takeover, and what the club could reasonably afford was transformed but, for reasons that are well known, we haven't elected to exercise the option.

The provisions of the lease aren't in the public domain, but the lease is treated for accounting purposes as a finance lease (i.e. a type of lease which presupposes a change of ownership when the lease terminates). We can probably, therefore, reasonably infer that the buyout figure isn't going to be a million miles from the future liabilities recorded in the accounts as attributable to the lease.

The overall figure for lease liabilities in the 2021 accounts was, IIRC, around £64.3 million. That includes all leases and there's no breakdown, but unless someone can correct me I find it hard to imagine that we have any others under which the future payments are significant in relative terms. So around £64 million as at summer 2021 is your rough ballpark figure.

EDIT - I suppose we should also note that it's possible that the arrangement changed when the lease was amended to provide for increased rent in the event of expansion and for the sale of stadium naming rights.
 
petrusha said:
I attended a meeting of the fairly short-lived Westminster Branch of the Supporters' Club back in January 2003 at which David Bernstein spoke for nearly three hours. This was about six weeks before he quit as chairman and six months before we took up occupation of the new stadium, and the prospective move was the biggest topic of the evening.

Bernstein confirmed that the lease contains an option for MCFC to acquire the freehold at an option price that reduces over time because the rent we've already paid can be offset against it. He also suggested that it wouldn't make financial sense for City to exercise the option for at least twenty years, maybe more. In theory, of course, the financial landscape changed completely with the 2008 takeover, and what the club could reasonably afford was transformed but, for reasons that are well known, we haven't elected to exercise the option.

The provisions of the lease aren't in the public domain, but the lease is treated for accounting purposes as a finance lease (i.e. a type of lease which presupposes a change of ownership when the lease terminates). We can probably, therefore, reasonably infer that the buyout figure isn't going to be a million miles from the future liabilities recorded in the accounts as attributable to the lease.

The overall figure for lease liabilities in the 2021 accounts was, IIRC, around £64.3 million. That includes all leases and there's no breakdown, but unless someone can correct me I find it hard to imagine that we have any others under which the future payments are significant in relative terms. So around £64 million as at summer 2021 is your rough ballpark figure.

EDIT - I suppose we should also note that it's possible that the arrangement changed when the lease was amended to provide for increased rent in the event of expansion and for the sale of stadium naming rights.
Click to expand...
Thanks, that's exactly the kind of breakdown I was hoping for.

Seems likely if that clause does exist under those terms that the club would buy the stadium inside the next 15 years.
 
domalino said:
Thanks, that's exactly the kind of breakdown I was hoping for.

Seems likely if that clause does exist under those terms that the club would buy the stadium inside the next 15 years.
Click to expand...

Yes. Probably worth keeping an eye on the lease liabilities figure when each successive set of annual accounts comes out.
 
I wonder if the more we do to the stadium the more it makes sense to buy it ? Time also seem to make it more likely.

Didn’t some alleged plans show multiple stadiums and Arenas I would imagine that as as we do more to the stadium the less likely it is that we get a new stadium still feel the stadium will be missing something in terms of wrap and the two main side stand will lack something compared to the North South stands fixing this will I would think be very very expensive for not much gain financially

So would kinda like a new one but then what do we do with this one ?
 
WRicko said:
I wonder if the more we do to the stadium the more it makes sense to buy it ? Time also seem to make it more likely.

Didn’t some alleged plans show multiple stadiums and Arenas I would imagine that as as we do more to the stadium the less likely it is that we get a new stadium still feel the stadium will be missing something in terms of wrap and the two main side stand will lack something compared to the North South stands fixing this will I would think be very very expensive for not much gain financially

So would kinda like a new one but then what do we do with this one ?
Click to expand...
Isn't the issue, it isn't for sale because the council get the rent but wouldn't get the proceeds from any sale.
 
Leeds Arena.

This morning

Contrast and compare to the Coop Live Arena.

Got to be honest, not impressed at all.

PXL-20230304-123955003-MP-2.jpg


PXL-20230304-124012126-MP-2.jpg


PXL-20230304-124143329-MP-2.jpg


PXL-20230304-124254386-MP-2.jpg


PXL-20230304-124516788-MP-2.jpg
 
Centurions said:
The front looks good to me.

View attachment 71019
View attachment 71020
Click to expand...

Looks better at night with coloured LED lighting.

It is underwhelming in the flesh. Internally it might be good?

The Architects are..... Populous!

The First Direct Arena is a multi-purpose facility capable of seating 12,500 people. The varying activities and occupancy levels required a flexible design which could be easily operated to meet the changing requirements of a diverse event schedule. The design intention was to create a rewarding experience for spectators & participants – maximising revenue generating potential, while achieving a strong identity, sense of fun and celebration of the facility.

First-Direct-Arena-Populous-2.jpg


populous.com

First Direct Arena - Populous

The First Direct Arena is a multi-purpose facility capable of seating 12,500 people. The varying activities and occupancy levels required a flexible design which could be easily operated to meet the changing requirements of a diverse event schedule. The design intention was to create a rewarding...
populous.com populous.com
 
Last edited:
blueparrot said:
Isn't the issue, it isn't for sale because the council get the rent but wouldn't get the proceeds from any sale.
Click to expand...
Yes money would go to sports England I think it could be the lottery but how important is that ? If we did buy it the council will have had years of rent and all the improvement in the area and buying it would be part of some wider plans
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top