' Scumsea agree stadium lease deal '

Sounds risky and a few years too late



Swansea City FC agree deal to lease Liberty Stadium

BBC

Monday 6th November 2017

Swansea council built the stadium which opened in 2005 at a cost of £27m

Swansea City FC has agreed to lease its Liberty Stadium home after securing a deal with the council.

The Swans will pay the authority £300,000 a year for 37 years, give it a cut of stadium sponsorship revenue and build 3G pitches in the city.

The club and the Ospreys rugby region have played at the £27m venue since 2005, paying a nominal rent to the management company running it.

Swansea council's cabinet should rubber-stamp the deal on 16 November.

It will retain ownership of the stadium and the Ospreys will continue to play there.

"We've moved from a position where the taxpayer in Swansea was getting zero from this asset," said council leader Rob Stewart.
"This gives the taxpayer a fair deal, it gives the Swans and the Ospreys a fair deal in this fantastic theatre where they can realise their dreams."

The agreement will allow the Swans to explore more commercial opportunities.

That could include stadium naming rights and a possible expansion of the ground, which currently holds 21,000 spectators.
The club's chief operating officer Chris Pearlman said: "Our gut feeling is we can sell more tickets.

"What's important to us is making sure we put in the right number of seats and we do it in the most cost-effective manner as possible."

However, the Swans are struggling on the pitch and are back in the Premier League's relegation zone after narrowly avoiding the drop last season.





'Balancing act'

Mr Pearlman said the Swans' struggles would be taken into account in any decision but the work was "necessary" and would help the club grow financially.
"We'd be foolish to ever move forward with an expansion without contemplating we may some day not be in the Premier League," he said, adding the decision is a "balancing act".
Any naming rights deal for the stadium could tie in with expansion work, which would still require planning permission.
Ospreys chairman Roger Blyth called the news positive.
He said: "It gives us full control over our own destiny, releasing us from any future stadium liabilities.
"This provides clarity and certainty on both future income and expenditure, enabling us to plan for the medium and long term with security."




Analysis by Rob Phillips, BBC Wales' football correspondent

The stadium lease makes sense for Swansea City - providing they conquer the more immediate challenge of staying in the Premier League.
The whole progress of the club is built on the foundation of remaining in the richest top flight league in world football.
Forget increasing stadium capacity if Swansea are relegated.
And despite parachute payments for relegated clubs, the sides in the Championship earn nowhere near the sums enjoyed by those at the foot of the Premier League.
Last season Swansea earned more than £103m for finishing 15th.
The stadium can be a big benefit commercially - providing it is the stage for Premier League football.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

thet go down and they got to pay 300k a year rent thats a lot

thet go down and they got to pay 300k a year rent thats a lot

The yanks are not stupid bet it makes sense to them pay 300k a year but they get good slice of naming rights and commercial income then can bugger off in profit ! No way will they expand stadium as was reckoned to be 20m+ but screwed small businesses now rate payers as well? As if believe council they got peanuts if not nothing past 7yrs!

thet go down and they got to pay 300k a year rent thats a lot

Maybe, but financially its a cracking deal. An asset with construction costs alone of £ 27 million for a lease deal of £ 300 k a year. A smidgen over 1%. You going get a £ 50 k car for £ 500 a year, of course not. I appreciate it doesn't depreciate like a car but it has a life span and its never paying at that level. Its way under valued in my opinion.

thet go down and they got to pay 300k a year rent thats a lot

Maybe, but financially its a cracking deal. An asset with construction costs alone of £ 27 million for a lease deal of £ 300 k a year. A smidgen over 1%. You going get a £ 50 k car for £ 500 a year, of course not. I appreciate it doesn't depreciate like a car but it has a life span and its never paying at that level. Its way under valued in my opinion.

will take the council 90 years to re coup the 27 million...thats well past the stadium life span..
a real bargain for them..and a bit of a pisstake for the rate payers

thet go down and they got to pay 300k a year rent thats a lot

Maybe, but financially its a cracking deal. An asset with construction costs alone of £ 27 million for a lease deal of £ 300 k a year. A smidgen over 1%. You going get a £ 50 k car for £ 500 a year, of course not. I appreciate it doesn't depreciate like a car but it has a life span and its never paying at that level. Its way under valued in my opinion.

will take the council 90 years to re coup the 27 million...thats well past the stadium life span..
a real bargain for them..and a bit of a pisstake for the rate payers

Only thing you can guarantee is that the yanks are doing this to benefit themselves and not the rate payers?

thet go down and they got to pay 300k a year rent thats a lot

its peanuts mate....especially if the council have to stump up for repairs..
pretty sure West Ham are paying 2.5 million a year and most of the other London clubs consider that unfair and too little..i know its a bigger,better ground...but

Rent boys!

Rent boys!

thet go down and they got to pay 300k a year rent thats a lot

That's nothing.

Coventry are paying over a £1m for the Reebok every season and when the board refused to pay it the fans went against them. So I would say the Jacks must be thinking Christmas has come early for them with this deal.

To put another context on it. One of the hospital trusts is paying £ 8 million a year for a £ 40 million hospital. Accepted that includes some services and maintenance but wow what difference. In both cases the tax payer shafted.

thet go down and they got to pay 300k a year rent thats a lot

That's nothing.

Coventry are paying over a £1m for the Reebok every season and when the board refused to pay it the fans went against them. So I would say the Jacks must be thinking Christmas has come early for them with this deal.

When you consider there is currently an office block in Swansea available for rent at £700k per year it sort of puts in perspective just how good a deal this is for the Jacks. For the Council Tax payers of Swansea this "Deal" represents a 1% return on their investment which is a joke.

Your right about Christmas and for the Jacks it started 12 years ago.

Subsidised Sketty White Sox.

Like said screwed local buisnesses now rate payers as well! The yanks are laughing all way to the bank,
But thats not going to help the club at all.

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

Deal cost club for lease is around 11m in total not including extras like maintenance But thats over 37years! Naming rights could be more than that? Do you think yanks are doing it if not to make money for themselves?

Guaranteed it will be the best stadium in League 2 though

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

I completely forgot they the deal gives them income from the Ospreys as well. Absolute deal of the century.

American's 1 Tax payers of west wales 0

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

Deal cost club for lease is around 11m in total not including extras like maintenance But thats over 37years! Naming rights could be more than that? Do you think yanks are doing it if not to make money for themselves?

That's exactly my point Allen doing this ensures they don't have todip into their pockets. Take the TV money etc and go....the yanks aren't bothered about Swansea city in 10,20 or 30 years time.

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

I completely forgot they the deal gives them income from the Ospreys as well. Absolute deal of the century.

American's 1 Tax payers of west wales 0

Suspect they dont get anything from ospreys as they would surely not pay more than they do now especially as they are financially strapped like all regions! Besides they must have input and ability to object as they are joint tenants.? Need roathy or swans fan to give their take on situation.

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

Deal cost club for lease is around 11m in total not including extras like maintenance But thats over 37years! Naming rights could be more than that? Do you think yanks are doing it if not to make money for themselves?

That's exactly my point Allen doing this ensures they don't have todip into their pockets. Take the TV money etc and go....the yanks aren't bothered about Swansea city in 10,20 or 30 years time.

I know they want recoup their money asap and have no interest in swans over long term which is bad news for club! Council not bothered as sounds as if they are actually getting something from club where before they got peanuts according to statement and in 37yrs its their asset again.

It is difficult to comment in detail upon the deal without knowing a lot more about it. We don’t really know what the club will be responsible for in terms of running costs, how additional income will be shared, what will the Ospreys contribute, how will naming rights be shared, is the rent fixed or will it be reviewed periodically etc. ?

However on the face of it the rent looks quite preferential. There is no real market for rented stadia to help assess the market value. In each case it’s really what the occupying club can afford to pay and will pay. But if you take a commercial view then this is hardly a ‘full’ rent. If one assumes that the stadium (with land) would cost say £35 million to provide, and that any commercial landlord would want a return of at least say 6%, then a rent of £300,000 is very preferential. Let at £300,000 per annum (assuming that that’s the total income), then the investment is worth no more than say £5million, so the council will have taken a hit. On this basis it's a good deal for the club, although perhaps not as good as City did in Cardiff. Did their fans expect the council to sit back indefinitely receiving a pittance of a rent while the club continue to benefit from the rich pickings of the premier League?

I hate to say it but I suspect that for a rent equal to the cost of a very average player, the americans have secured a good deal, that will make the club easier to sell, even after they get relegated this season - as I so hope they will.

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

it wasnt a zero lease..they had no lease and now they have one.
and some of the 300k will be offset by rent off the Ospreys..
i know the more extreme retards on swamp think its a con...but these are the same people singing ...we want our club back...and we want jenkins out...the vast majority of whom only remember the club with Huw at the helm....so which is it..?

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

it wasnt a zero lease..they had no lease and now they have one.
and some of the 300k will be offset by rent off the Ospreys..
i know the more extreme retards on swamp think its a con...but these are the same people singing ...we want our club back...and we want jenkins out...the vast majority of whom only remember the club with Huw at the helm....so which is it..?

How can ospreys pay swansea when they wasn't paying Council? Council cant ride roughshot over ospreys as the stadium is for both clubs not just swans? Reading it the yanks want control over incolm from their side and only way was to have a lease which freed up them to collect money from stadium name ect suspect ospreys still pay nothing and carry on keeping their income as they are now .

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=189760

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

it wasnt a zero lease..they had no lease and now they have one.
and some of the 300k will be offset by rent off the Ospreys..
i know the more extreme retards on swamp think its a con...but these are the same people singing ...we want our club back...and we want jenkins out...the vast majority of whom only remember the club with Huw at the helm....so which is it..?

How can ospreys pay swansea when they wasn't paying Council? Council cant ride roughshot over ospreys as the stadium is for both clubs not just swans? Reading it the yanks want control over incolm from their side and only way was to have a lease which freed up them to collect money from stadium name ect suspect ospreys still pay nothing and carry on keeping their income as they are now .

its hardly riding roughshode Allan..i am sure the Ospreys are fully aware of whats been going on.and both the council and Swansea City have made some sort of agreement with them..but i doubt the Ospreys expect to play there forever and free of charge..Swansea City now having the lease..its not half and half with council so therefore i assume the Ospreys will now need to stump up some rent to the lease holder { SCFC}..

£300k might not sound a lot now, but to a league 1 or hopefully 2 club it might well be. Let’s see how far they fall first hey....

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

it wasnt a zero lease..they had no lease and now they have one.
and some of the 300k will be offset by rent off the Ospreys..
i know the more extreme retards on swamp think its a con...but these are the same people singing ...we want our club back...and we want jenkins out...the vast majority of whom only remember the club with Huw at the helm....so which is it..?

How can ospreys pay swansea when they wasn't paying Council? Council cant ride roughshot over ospreys as the stadium is for both clubs not just swans? Reading it the yanks want control over incolm from their side and only way was to have a lease which freed up them to collect money from stadium name ect suspect ospreys still pay nothing and carry on keeping their income as they are now .

its hardly riding roughshode Allan..i am sure the Ospreys are fully aware of whats been going on.and both the council and Swansea City have made some sort of agreement with them..but i doubt the Ospreys expect to play there forever and free of charge..Swansea City now having the lease..its not half and half with council so therefore i assume the Ospreys will now need to stump up some rent to the lease holder { SCFC}..

Missing point the ground was a joint venture
For both clubs why should ospreys pay swans money when previously they wasnt same as swans wasn't according to council, swans can throw them out as landlords ? What would rate payers or rugby fans say to that? If ospreys were not expecting to play there for ever why would swans think they would? Like said its both clubs ground not just swans

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

it wasnt a zero lease..they had no lease and now they have one.
and some of the 300k will be offset by rent off the Ospreys..
i know the more extreme retards on swamp think its a con...but these are the same people singing ...we want our club back...and we want jenkins out...the vast majority of whom only remember the club with Huw at the helm....so which is it..?

How can ospreys pay swansea when they wasn't paying Council? Council cant ride roughshot over ospreys as the stadium is for both clubs not just swans? Reading it the yanks want control over incolm from their side and only way was to have a lease which freed up them to collect money from stadium name ect suspect ospreys still pay nothing and carry on keeping their income as they are now .

its hardly riding roughshode Allan..i am sure the Ospreys are fully aware of whats been going on.and both the council and Swansea City have made some sort of agreement with them..but i doubt the Ospreys expect to play there forever and free of charge..Swansea City now having the lease..its not half and half with council so therefore i assume the Ospreys will now need to stump up some rent to the lease holder { SCFC}..

Missing point the ground was a joint venture
For both clubs why should ospreys pay swans money when previously they wasnt same as swans wasn't according to council, swans can throw them out as landlords ? What would rate payers or rugby fans say to that? If ospreys were not expecting to play there for ever why would swans think they would? Like said its both clubs ground not just swans

no Allan its you are missing points...
but i give up

Not as great as some thiN the deal is on here.

Swansea fans certainly aren't over the moon.

They've gone from a zero lease to 300k a year, have takeover all operational costs of the stadium including dealing with ospreys, maintenance etc and should they get a big name deal they have to hand a proportion back to the council.

The Americans say quote "another way of generating income streams" Swansea fans see Thomas another excuse for the yanks not to put their handsin their pickets and spend.

it wasnt a zero lease..they had no lease and now they have one.
and some of the 300k will be offset by rent off the Ospreys..
i know the more extreme retards on swamp think its a con...but these are the same people singing ...we want our club back...and we want jenkins out...the vast majority of whom only remember the club with Huw at the helm....so which is it..?

How can ospreys pay swansea when they wasn't paying Council? Council cant ride roughshot over ospreys as the stadium is for both clubs not just swans? Reading it the yanks want control over incolm from their side and only way was to have a lease which freed up them to collect money from stadium name ect suspect ospreys still pay nothing and carry on keeping their income as they are now .

its hardly riding roughshode Allan..i am sure the Ospreys are fully aware of whats been going on.and both the council and Swansea City have made some sort of agreement with them..but i doubt the Ospreys expect to play there forever and free of charge..Swansea City now having the lease..its not half and half with council so therefore i assume the Ospreys will now need to stump up some rent to the lease holder { SCFC}..

Missing point the ground was a joint venture
For both clubs why should ospreys pay swans money when previously they wasnt same as swans wasn't according to council, swans can throw them out as landlords ? What would rate payers or rugby fans say to that? If ospreys were not expecting to play there for ever why would swans think they would? Like said its both clubs ground not just swans

no Allan its you are missing points...
but i give up

Me missing point? But last word this would not happen without ospreys agreeing to it so guess its ok with them So no problem :