Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2014 20:20:43 GMT
Yes what possible reason have we to criticise Geoff and Nicks glorious reign Oh a multitude of reasons .... But with that line he was pretty much right otherwise football would be a bit predictable wouldn't it ! It was the fact his approach at running the club was to sack another manager and throw money at the problem rather then sort out the structures that made people link it to that comment.
|
|
yattongas
Proper Gas
Posts: 13,797
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Sept 29, 2014 20:38:19 GMT
Oh a multitude of reasons .... But with that line he was pretty much right otherwise football would be a bit predictable wouldn't it ! It was the fact his approach at running the club was to sack another manager and throw money at the problem rather then sort out the structures that made people link it to that comment. Thanks but I don't need it explaining to me the line was still right though !!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2014 21:22:21 GMT
Is there any point in another thread on this. The OS says there is nothing to report and say they are in negoitiations with their partner. I am sure none of us are counting our chickens, but it would be good just to keep our hopes alive that it could happen.
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Sept 29, 2014 21:29:58 GMT
Just to help out KP. Withdraw your bet. You can't afford to lose this one, and you will lose.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2014 3:09:28 GMT
Just to help out KP. Withdraw your bet. You can't afford to lose this one, and you will lose. I can afford it. Just waiting to see if my offer is taken up. A chess game say NR. It's a grandmaster v a beginner. Sainsburys have the power, politically and monetarily, to keep this going ad infinitum. Wherever do you see a " business partner" suing the other ? My offer still stands. There is not a chance in hell that you know of any result. I call bullshit
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2014 4:48:03 GMT
I think we will end up selling the mem for housing and then its a question of whether we get any compo so that we can afford uwe or build a smaller stadium elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Gasshole on Sept 30, 2014 5:41:50 GMT
Just to help out KP. Withdraw your bet. You can't afford to lose this one, and you will lose. I can afford it. Just waiting to see if my offer is taken up. A chess game say NR. It's a grandmaster v a beginner. Sainsburys have the power, politically and monetarily, to keep this going ad infinitum. Wherever do you see a " business partner" suing the other ? My offer still stands. There is not a chance in hell that you know of any result. I call bullshit I'm with KP, it's not going to happen people. wait till we get back in the league, snap up some grant money for a modest redevelopment at the tent end.Job done.
|
|
|
Post by BishopstonBRFC on Sept 30, 2014 5:51:43 GMT
I can afford it. Just waiting to see if my offer is taken up. A chess game say NR. It's a grandmaster v a beginner. Sainsburys have the power, politically and monetarily, to keep this going ad infinitum. Wherever do you see a " business partner" suing the other ? My offer still stands. There is not a chance in hell that you know of any result. I call bullshit I'm with KP, it's not going to happen people. wait till we get back in the league, snap up some grant money for a modest redevelopment at the tent end.Job done. Something we should have done 10 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Gasshole on Sept 30, 2014 6:21:21 GMT
The amount of money we've wasted so far would of been better spent on a new tannoy and some dancing girls. QPR are in the prem with a modest stadium, case closed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2014 6:35:47 GMT
The amount of money we've wasted so far would of been better spent on a new tannoy and some dancing girls. QPR are in the prem with a modest stadium, case closed. And a couple of quid in investment....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2014 6:40:24 GMT
Prob ain't gonna happen but oh well hardly the end of the world is it. Its all about perception.
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Sept 30, 2014 7:13:46 GMT
I would to just point out to interested parties that BCC planning can revoke their original refusal for the revised opening hours based on new information presented. BCC planning have asked for the appeal hearing to be delayed for 3 months while they review this new data.
If BCC Planning accept the new data as valid and approve the revised opening hours then it will not go to appeal.
This decision will not go to a full planning meeting where councilors vote but done within the original constraints of first application.
If BCC Planning approve then the ball is firmly back in Sainsbury court.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Sept 30, 2014 7:37:13 GMT
HG this is an interesting development, although I'm not sure if it's good or bad news as surely the club can't another 3 months delay, should it then be referred for the appeal hearing. Hopefully it's good news though and it won't take BCC the full 3 months to consider the new data.
As you say this could really put the ball back in Sainsbury's court!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2014 9:28:17 GMT
I would to just point out to interested parties that BCC planning can revoke their original refusal for the revised opening hours based on new information presented. BCC planning have asked for the appeal hearing to be delayed for 3 months while they review this new data. If BCC Planning accept the new data as valid and approve the revised opening hours then it will not go to appeal. This decision will not go to a full planning meeting where councilors vote but done within the original constraints of first application. If BCC Planning approve then the ball is firmly back in Sainsbury court. The original problem still stands though in that they have clearly stated, on two public occasions, that they do not want to build. They have even waived two other such store onerous conditions. Do you not think they have more technicalities they will use ? Serious question. They don't want it and can afford to drag it on as they are in Wadebridge and Southend. My feelings are that this is now a battle for the right to claim compensation. I've never heard of a case where two apparent partners are embroiled in litigation. You know, I hope I am wrong but the facts, laid bare, do not paint a picture of an harmonious team looking to move forward together. My main worry is that would UWE wait much longer ? I have no idea about that and I have asked some very relevant people but they look at me blankly when I have done so. If body language was an indicatior then we are done. Thanks Henbury Gas
|
|
|
Post by Mark Ash on Sept 30, 2014 9:42:07 GMT
I can afford it. Just waiting to see if my offer is taken up. A chess game say NR. It's a grandmaster v a beginner. Sainsburys have the power, politically and monetarily, to keep this going ad infinitum. Wherever do you see a " business partner" suing the other ? My offer still stands. There is not a chance in hell that you know of any result. I call bullshit I'm with KP, it's not going to happen people. wait till we get back in the league, snap up some grant money for a modest redevelopment at the tent end.Job done. I like the sound of that. I have no idea what will happen about the stadium and I read all this with interest/hope/despair. But a modest plan like the above sounds like something plausible as a back-up.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Sept 30, 2014 10:11:34 GMT
I would to just point out to interested parties that BCC planning can revoke their original refusal for the revised opening hours based on new information presented. BCC planning have asked for the appeal hearing to be delayed for 3 months while they review this new data. If BCC Planning accept the new data as valid and approve the revised opening hours then it will not go to appeal. This decision will not go to a full planning meeting where councilors vote but done within the original constraints of first application. If BCC Planning approve then the ball is firmly back in Sainsbury court. The original problem still stands though in that they have clearly stated, on two public occasions, that they do not want to build. They have even waived two other such store onerous conditions. Do you not think they have more technicalities they will use ? Serious question. They don't want it and can afford to drag it on as they are in Wadebridge and Southend. My feelings are that this is now a battle for the right to claim compensation. I've never heard of a case where two apparent partners are embroiled in litigation. You know, I hope I am wrong but the facts, laid bare, do not paint a picture of an harmonious team looking to move forward together. My main worry is that would UWE wait much longer ? I have no idea about that and I have asked some very relevant people but they look at me blankly when I have done so. If body language was an indicatior then we are done. Thanks Henbury GasThere are numerous reported cases where two former business partners have fallen out and it's then led to court action. It seems if BRFC can overcome the delivery times issue the club probably have binding contracts with Sainsbury's, if they don't pay up then there is always the possibilty the club could also sue for loss of profits etc from the UWE project if it can't go ahead plus the £30m+ Sainsbury's agreed to pay the club for the Mem.
|
|
|
Post by Gashead73 on Sept 30, 2014 10:14:24 GMT
Over the Moon when the UWE was first announced, was at the courts when the Judical Review was announced in our favour but' now I am saddenned that our dream is slipping away.
I feel like we fought alongside an allie (Sainsburys) and our allie is turning against us!!!
P.S I ain't shopping in Sainsburys also at this present time
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Sept 30, 2014 10:53:46 GMT
The original problem still stands though in that they have clearly stated, on two public occasions, that they do not want to build. They have even waived two other such store onerous conditions. Do you not think they have more technicalities they will use ? Serious question. They don't want it and can afford to drag it on as they are in Wadebridge and Southend. My feelings are that this is now a battle for the right to claim compensation. I've never heard of a case where two apparent partners are embroiled in litigation. You know, I hope I am wrong but the facts, laid bare, do not paint a picture of an harmonious team looking to move forward together. My main worry is that would UWE wait much longer ? I have no idea about that and I have asked some very relevant people but they look at me blankly when I have done so. If body language was an indicatior then we are done. Thanks Henbury GasThere are numerous reported cases where two former business partners have fallen out and it's then led to court action. It seems if BRFC can overcome the delivery times issue the club probably have binding contracts with Sainsbury's, if they don't pay up then there is always the possibilty the club could also sue for loss of profits etc from the UWE project if it can't go ahead plus the £30m+ Sainsbury's agreed to pay the club for the Mem. I'm sure the UWE stadium in its current format will not be built The purpose of the writ is to force Sainsbury to pay for any potential profit lost due to their continued no purchase of the Mem, the longer they drag it on the more it will cost them. If UWE pull the plug on the stadium due to Sainsbury dragging it out that will be seen as lost profit and they will be liable for that as well. It all hinges on the application for revised hours be approved of course ! it was a master stroke by Mr Higgs to get the writ in place so it forces Sainsbury hand to not drag it out !
|
|
|
Post by dragonfly on Sept 30, 2014 11:19:28 GMT
I think we will end up selling the mem for housing and then its a question of whether we get any compo so that we can afford uwe or build a smaller stadium elsewhere. Building a stadium elsewhere would be good except that we have been thwarted in this respect several times in the past. Although the MEM leaves much to be desired, at least it belongs to the Club ( subject to mortgage) and is an asset which can also be transformed if we continue to do well, bringing increased revenue along with the possibility of compensation. Higgs seems convinced the UWE will go ahead - is he just bluffing?
|
|
|
Post by Mark Ash on Sept 30, 2014 11:40:03 GMT
I think we will end up selling the mem for housing and then its a question of whether we get any compo so that we can afford uwe or build a smaller stadium elsewhere. Building a stadium elsewhere would be good except that we have been thwarted in this respect several times in the past. Although the MEM leaves much to be desired, at least it belongs to the Club ( subject to mortgage) and is an asset which can also be transformed if we continue to do well, bringing increased revenue along with the possibility of compensation. Higgs seems convinced the UWE will go ahead - is he just bluffing? This is what I find fascinating and puzzling. It' s easy to say that Higgs is a liar and a fool etc. but he does sound absolutely adamant that we are at least in a strong position re UWE. Surely he is just setting the BoD up for an even greater fall if it's all bluff? On Radio Bristol the other week he was determined that the stadium would go ahead. He knew about the problems when he said that, so maybe he really has got it under control. I claim no expertise or inside knowledge, so I may be just an optimistic fool, but it seems odd that he is so sure, when he could just blame Sainsbury and let it go.
|
|