|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Oct 5, 2014 10:10:16 GMT
Another piece from Graham Russell in today's paper where he says our bid to build our new stadium is about to become a car crash.
I don't think he has all his facts right because he says that Rovers have already bought the land at UWE, but he has obviously spoken to his source again that gave him the story a couple of months ago that Sainsburys wanted to pull out ahead of that becoming public knowledge.
The main gist of what he has said today is;-
New Sainsburys chief to announce a freeze on all major development on Nov 12th. Rovers are poised to sue Sainsburys for (he says £20m) for the contract to buy the land in full. Sainsburys say it is all about a supermarket or nothing. Our chances of successfully suing Sainsburys is considered to be 60%. Sainsburys are prepared to consider a max of £2m in compensation for costs incurred. Rovers costs on the battle are running at £10,000 per month
So not much new really and he seems to be saying that even if the remaining onerous condition is satisfied Rovers will still have to take Sainsburys to court if they want to force the contract.
|
|
|
Post by Cantankerous Gas on Oct 5, 2014 10:27:32 GMT
If they are only offering a sihtty £2m compo then we have no choice but to battle them all the way.
|
|
|
Post by Rod1883 on Oct 5, 2014 10:42:25 GMT
Don't want to sound too defeatist, but if that is an opening offer of compensation, and it can be significantly increased, and it more than covers costs and losses so far incurred, it might just be the right thing to do, rather than fight on incurring more costs only to lose with little or no compensation? Discuss?
|
|
|
Post by empirebaypete on Oct 5, 2014 10:50:33 GMT
Well to start with, were we ever going to buy the land? I thought it was a long lease from uwe???
2 million definitely not enough. Let's talk over 5 million and maybe the next time I'm in the UK I'll consider shopping there.
We really need to recover ALL costs and them add the compo on top.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 11:33:46 GMT
I believe the value of the land for housing is about £10m less than for a supermarket so thats the fee we need to get. As i said before i beleive we will scrap uwe and build elsewhere probably a smaller project as still need to pay off debts and GDs loans.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 11:44:01 GMT
Another piece from Graham Russell in today's paper where he says our bid to build our new stadium is about to become a car crash. I don't think he has all his facts right because he says that Rovers have already bought the land at UWE, but he has obviously spoken to his source again that gave him the story a couple of months ago that Sainsburys wanted to pull out ahead of that becoming public knowledge. The main gist of what he has said today is;- New Sainsburys chief to announce a freeze on all major development on Nov 12th. Rovers are poised to sue Sainsburys for (he says £20m) for the contract to buy the land in full. Sainsburys say it is all about a supermarket or nothing. Our chances of successfully suing Sainsburys is considered to be 60%. Sainsburys are prepared to consider a max of £2m in compensation for costs incurred. Rovers costs on the battle are running at £10,000 per month So not much new really and he seems to be saying that even if the remaining onerous condition is satisfied Rovers will still have to take Sainsburys to court if they want to force the contract. Given that he was 100% right last time, I have to believe this. The timeline of events led me to believe this anyway and it is ALWAYS going to be a battle royal when a small club like ours take on the behemoth that is Sainsbury's. Our partner ffs. Oi vet
|
|
|
Post by Jon the Stripe on Oct 5, 2014 12:25:15 GMT
I have a sneaky feeling we're gonna come out of this in reasonable shape, and for some strange feeling i think UWE will be built.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Oct 5, 2014 12:29:56 GMT
I have a sneaky feeling we're gonna come out of this in reasonable shape, and for some strange feeling i think UWE will be built. Is this strange feeling in the pants area?
|
|
|
Post by Gas-Ed on Oct 5, 2014 16:56:41 GMT
I always said that I would believe it when sat in it. Nothing has changed for me thus far. Things like the UWE just don't happen to BRFC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 17:18:41 GMT
I believe the value of the land for housing is about £10m less than for a supermarket so thats the fee we need to get. As i said before i beleive we will scrap uwe and build elsewhere probably a smaller project as still need to pay off debts and GDs loans. Anyone reckon we can get £10m compensation from Sainsbury's then? I don't think there'd be a question over approving the land for housing. Too much demand for it for anybody to stand in the way. As the Sainsbury's poster said the other day, 'try and squeeze an extra 50p out of every customer'. As BRFC say, 'try and squeeze an extra £8m out of a multi-national corporation'.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Oct 5, 2014 17:20:25 GMT
I believe the value of the land for housing is about £10m less than for a supermarket so thats the fee we need to get. As i said before i beleive we will scrap uwe and build elsewhere probably a smaller project as still need to pay off debts and GDs loans. Remind us again how many decades did it take us to find the UWE land & get planning permission?
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Oct 5, 2014 17:34:19 GMT
Bloody hell. Compared to most on here NH is a genius. Thank god you lot don't run the club. We'd be on the downs.
Graham Russell isn't even close.
If he thinks our legal costs are about £10k per month he must be living in Panama. If he thinks we're buying the land why have we got a 120 year lease?
Having got those wildly wrong, you can bet he has guessed the rest. Trouble is, Sainsburys wouldn't tell him what they intend to announce any more than a legal team telling him what the odds of someone winning a case are.
The guy is like an astrologer, and people on here are daft enough to believe him. He is an old hack that should have been put out to pasture a long time ago.
KP, how was he right last time? I knew about the Writ. He probably did what I did. Check the lists at the High Court and they tell you who is setting up an action.
Let me have a guess. Sainsburys will get the delivery times they don't really want and I hope they still try to delay it. Then we can go for punitive damages which could be more than the original contract. In reality they will concede as they don't want to go to court, and we will see the build start about March when the weather warms up.
|
|
|
Post by Jon the Stripe on Oct 5, 2014 17:51:32 GMT
Another piece from Graham Russell in today's paper where he says our bid to build our new stadium is about to become a car crash. I don't think he has all his facts right because he says that Rovers have already bought the land at UWE, but he has obviously spoken to his source again that gave him the story a couple of months ago that Sainsburys wanted to pull out ahead of that becoming public knowledge. The main gist of what he has said today is;- New Sainsburys chief to announce a freeze on all major development on Nov 12th. Rovers are poised to sue Sainsburys for (he says £20m) for the contract to buy the land in full. Sainsburys say it is all about a supermarket or nothing. Our chances of successfully suing Sainsburys is considered to be 60%. Sainsburys are prepared to consider a max of £2m in compensation for costs incurred. Rovers costs on the battle are running at £10,000 per month So not much new really and he seems to be saying that even if the remaining onerous condition is satisfied Rovers will still have to take Sainsburys to court if they want to force the contract. My thoughts: New Sainsburys chief to announce a freeze on all major development on Nov 12th. No news here besides an actual dateRovers are poised to sue Sainsburys for (he says £20m) for the contract to buy the land in full. Sounds correct from what is in public domain.Sainsburys say it is all about a supermarket or nothing. Unsubstantiated, but is pretty much what we'd all guess.Our chances of successfully suing Sainsburys is considered to be 60%. Well it's a figure, i'd say 50/50, but with decisions due in planning that could drastically change one way or another.Sainsburys are prepared to consider a max of £2m in compensation for costs incurred. I would think £0 would be their target, but i can't imagine they would even discuss that with anyone as it's got no value at present in guessing.Rovers costs on the battle are running at £10,000 per month. If we're guessing, i'd at least double that figure.
In summary, anyone could have come up with that article, it has little credance and is irrelevant as a story. By the way, i'm not attacking the OP, i'm just weighing up the value of the article. UTG
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 18:44:15 GMT
I think we are going to finally succeed with this stadium, we are so far along now I just can't see it not happening however strange that sounds . Everything is in place the stadium is planned approved we have a problem at the moment tying up the sale of the Mem and it looks like Sainsburys are dragging their heels in order to get the best out of their investment. I am sure this happens with any such deal. Sainsburys know we need the money from the sale of the Mem to finance the stadium so they have leverage. Nothing I have heard convinces me that the deal will not go ahead.
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Oct 5, 2014 21:16:26 GMT
I think we are going to finally succeed with this stadium, we are so long along now I just can't see it not happening however strange that sounds . Everything is in place the stadium is planned approved we have a problem at the moment tying up the sale of the Mem and it looks like Sainsburys are dragging their heels in order to get the best out of their investment. I am sure this happens with any such deal. Sainsburys know we need the money from the sale of the Mem to finance the stadium so they have leverage. Nothing I have heard convinces me that the deal will not go ahead. Can I have some of whatever you're on please? They've stated they don't want to proceed (see writ), they played no part in the TRASH episode and we're suing them.
|
|
|
Post by ganymede on Oct 5, 2014 21:35:17 GMT
Feeling the Blues … thanks for posting the summary.
There are lazy aspects to the journalism. The picture will change once the issues around delivery/access times have been cleared up (was this mentioned by Graham Russell?)
Sainsbury started all of this and they know they cannot simply walk away. If they could walk away and if they wanted to walk away they would have done so by now. They can’t walk away at the moment and the decision on the delivery/access times is crucial. Let’s see what the planning inspectorate have to say.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 22:27:04 GMT
I think we are going to finally succeed with this stadium, we are so long along now I just can't see it not happening however strange that sounds . Everything is in place the stadium is planned approved we have a problem at the moment tying up the sale of the Mem and it looks like Sainsburys are dragging their heels in order to get the best out of their investment. I am sure this happens with any such deal. Sainsburys know we need the money from the sale of the Mem to finance the stadium so they have leverage. Nothing I have heard convinces me that the deal will not go ahead. Can I have some of whatever you're on please? They've stated they don't want to proceed (see writ), they played no part in the TRASH episode and we're suing them. Have Sainsburys terminated the contract in writing?
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Oct 6, 2014 12:23:22 GMT
Feeling the Blues … thanks for posting the summary. There are lazy aspects to the journalism. The picture will change once the issues around delivery/access times have been cleared up (was this mentioned by Graham Russell?) Sainsbury started all of this and they know they cannot simply walk away. If they could walk away and if they wanted to walk away they would have done so by now. They can’t walk away at the moment and the decision on the delivery/access times is crucial. Let’s see what the planning inspectorate have to say. That's not strictly right though is it. They were going to walk away after he delivery hours were chucked out first time, however Rovers are suing them for not making a reasonable effort and it is BRFC that have spent money to help get the hours through. It is Rovers currently stopping them walking away.
Even if it goes our way. Sainsburys are not going to just hand over the money. Something else will spring up from it to delay even further at the very least
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2014 12:35:30 GMT
Bloody hell. Compared to most on here NH is a genius. Thank god you lot don't run the club. We'd be on the downs. Graham Russell isn't even close. If he thinks our legal costs are about £10k per month he must be living in Panama. If he thinks we're buying the land why have we got a 120 year lease? Having got those wildly wrong, you can bet he has guessed the rest. Trouble is, Sainsburys wouldn't tell him what they intend to announce any more than a legal team telling him what the odds of someone winning a case are. The guy is like an astrologer, and people on here are daft enough to believe him. He is an old hack that should have been put out to pasture a long time ago. KP, how was he right last time? I knew about the Writ. He probably did what I did. Check the lists at the High Court and they tell you who is setting up an action. Let me have a guess. Sainsburys will get the delivery times they don't really want and I hope they still try to delay it. Then we can go for punitive damages which could be more than the original contract. In reality they will concede as they don't want to go to court, and we will see the build start about March when the weather warms up. Listen, It's not like I want us to fail ok. I just have no faith, NONE whatsoever, in Higgs and our board. It's not like he does not have form on this. I will just wait & see but please do tell, how long are UWE prepared to wait and why are they arguing over this with us themselves ? Obviously there's a lot more to it but I am sorry, I can't believe another word from Higgs. If you look at developments already partially started then you'll see Sainsbury's can and do stall things regularly ) Wadebridge) then there is the situation at Southend. In my view, based on the information out there, I feel the best we can hope for is compensation but that probably will take years to pay. When a business " partner" sues you, I guess that would cause I'll feeling even though we are in the right. I applaud your positivity just don't think we can all believe what you do. Forgive me but all I see is a username suggesting insider knowledge but no facts to back that up. Maybe you forget just how many times we have been lied to before. As the other poster says, I'll believe it when I am sat in the bugger Why did Higgs deny the original story, in entirety, when it surfaced last time ? It only served to make him look evn worse, if that's possible. Us Rovers fans are very forgiving but if this does not happen then I think he would have no credibility or confidence. He took us out of the FL chasing this.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Oct 6, 2014 13:05:04 GMT
Bloody hell. Compared to most on here NH is a genius. Thank god you lot don't run the club. We'd be on the downs. Graham Russell isn't even close. If he thinks our legal costs are about £10k per month he must be living in Panama. If he thinks we're buying the land why have we got a 120 year lease? Having got those wildly wrong, you can bet he has guessed the rest. Trouble is, Sainsburys wouldn't tell him what they intend to announce any more than a legal team telling him what the odds of someone winning a case are. The guy is like an astrologer, and people on here are daft enough to believe him. He is an old hack that should have been put out to pasture a long time ago. KP, how was he right last time? I knew about the Writ. He probably did what I did. Check the lists at the High Court and they tell you who is setting up an action. Let me have a guess. Sainsburys will get the delivery times they don't really want and I hope they still try to delay it. Then we can go for punitive damages which could be more than the original contract. In reality they will concede as they don't want to go to court, and we will see the build start about March when the weather warms up. Listen, It's not like I want us to fail ok. I just have no faith, NONE whatsoever, in Higgs and our board. It's not like he does not have form on this. I will just wait & see but please do tell, how long are UWE prepared to wait and why are they arguing over this with us themselves ? Obviously there's a lot more to it but I am sorry, I can't believe another word from Higgs. If you look at developments already partially started then you'll see Sainsbury's can and do stall things regularly ) Wadebridge) then there is the situation at Southend. In my view, based on the information out there, I feel the best we can hope for is compensation but that probably will take years to pay. When a business " partner" sues you, I guess that would cause I'll feeling even though we are in the right. I applaud your positivity just don't don't think we can all believe what you do. Forgive me but all I see is a username suggesting insider knowledge but no facts to back that up. Maybe you forget just how many times we have been lied to before. As the other poster says, I'll believe it when I am sat in the bugger Why did Higgs deny his story, in entirety, when it surfaced last time ? It only served to make him look evn worse, if that's possible. Us Rovers fans are very forgiving but if this does not happen then I think he would have no credibility or confidence. He took us out of the FL chasing this. We get it, you don't like Nick Higgs.
|
|