Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2014 23:04:12 GMT
Only a couple of questions, all that Oldie says is a fact ? and all that others say, is guess work ? With respect Newmarket, it matters little what I say (thankfully this is true), but what does matter is the evidence out there (and we're not party to it).The fact remains that over the last couple of years since the proposed new stadium development was announced we have been told a number of things, and those that have announced these statements have basked in the glory (I didn't see too much basking as you put it - credit to them though), whilst at the same time taking the club out of the league (of course they must take some responsibility but I presume you go to matches and saw last season what John Ward delivered) .Now it is emerging that in fact those same people were not in control of events as they led us to believe. Justin King has really just confirmed that. (Your distorted interpretation - see post and answers above).My own speculation, and this is exactly what it is, the best we can hope for is a reduced offer for the Mem. Where that leaves the specification for the new stadium and claims that the club will be debt free is really quite obvious, if correct. (Speculation and guesswork again and again and again)Only 8 short weeks ago we were told that relegation would not affect the development and that other than the tedious challenges to the planning approval and resultant delays, the project was good to go. (True then and still true now)Clearly not. (It's clear the process is ongoing).I ask you to think of one other potential issue. The BoD have a fiduciary responsibility to all shareholders not just the majority. Think about it. (Condescending much, and not with respect to Newmarket as you initially stated).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 1:42:36 GMT
I'm inclined to agree with Oldie. If we could go ahead with the UWE there is no question in my mind that we would have done by now. There is no way the BOD are holding this up now. You'd have to wonder how we got this far without a non binding contract. Id be surprised if we are not covered. My hope is that Sainsburies are tied and this delay is just them wiggling for a better deal because they know we are desperate. One thing bond of us should be shocked at is the utter lack of forward planning by this lot. They sh** their collective loads thinking it was a done deal and ballsed up. The incompetence is astounding even for this lot and with NH being a so called expert.
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Jul 13, 2014 8:04:05 GMT
The hold up believe it or not was at our end with the legals. This is now just about sorted.
And ignore KITR on OTIB. There is no issue with the section 106's, at the end of the day they were minor irritants in the greater scheme of things, and are settled.
Sainsburys are a little unhappy with the amount they are paying for the Mem, but that's life. Should reach a conclusion ONE WAY OR THE OTHER shortly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 8:34:13 GMT
The hold up believe it or not was at our end with the legals. This is now just about sorted. And ignore KITR on OTIB. There is no issue with the section 106's, at the end of the day they were minor irritants in the greater scheme of things, and are settled. Sainsburys are a little unhappy with the amount they are paying for the Mem, but that's life. Should reach a conclusion ONE WAY OR THE OTHER shortly. I have no idea what "legals" Justin King is referring to, but I cannot see how 1883ltd could not be involved given that they are the other party to the contract? Again the point is these legal issues were still outstanding when we were told the project was good to go. It is manifestly obvious that it was not. I agree with you, I too suspect that Sainsburys have reduced their offer price, with all the impact on the financing of the project that this will have. Again the point is that if this proves to be true then no binding contracts could have been in place, so all the pronouncements about wholly owned and debt free was more of an ambition than a statement of fact, as we were led to believe. In my opinion this does call in to question the skill sets on the BoD, perhaps, but the leadership abilities most certainly. Remember whilst this confusion over the status of this project was occuring, on the field the club has been led into a series of disasterous seasons, resulting in relegation out of the league. This cannot carry on, surely?
|
|
|
Post by stevek192 on Jul 13, 2014 9:08:22 GMT
Before criticising and questioning the Bods skills or lack of them should we not wait and see the final result because at the end of the day that is all that matters. If the BOd deliver the Stadium then a good job has been done.If not then they will deserve every bit of criticism.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 10:52:22 GMT
Before criticising and questioning the Bods skills or lack of them should we not wait and see the final result because at the end of the day that is all that matters. If the BOd deliver the Stadium then a good job has been done.If not then they will deserve every bit of criticism. Sorry Steve, completely disagree. The ends almost never justify the means, as the means almost always come back to bite you in the ass.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 11:01:39 GMT
Before criticising and questioning the Bods skills or lack of them should we not wait and see the final result because at the end of the day that is all that matters. If the BOd deliver the Stadium then a good job has been done.If not then they will deserve every bit of criticism. I've a feeling this stadium will be a white Elephant that could see us disappear. No one will quantify how these streams of money will appear or even discuss how it takes time to build up a customer base for the facilities. If we remain in the conference when/if we move in then it really will be a drain. We can't fill the Mem let alone a 22 thousand stadium. Quite where the extra fans are to appear from is another one that baffles me. The first thing we need is an half tidy and relatively successful football team. I feel the whole thing has had an huge impact on the footballing side and is a huge part of the reason we were relegated.
|
|
|
Post by stevek192 on Jul 13, 2014 11:47:56 GMT
Can't disagree with anything you say there KP. However the new Stadium is the ONLY chance we will ever get to obtain income OUTSIDE of the football club and that is more important than anything else but will depend on a much better organisation by the Board to make it successful the success football wise will depend how we are doing when we enter it. If we enter it after a succesful run which has brought at least one promotion then we have a chance to build on the momentum and increase the crowd substantially. I do feel though that until we know one way or the other that the criticism on this aspect should be withheld until then.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo Admin on Jul 13, 2014 11:53:48 GMT
The stadium in my opinion is the ONLY hope we have of attracting new investors and securing a viable revenue option. Without it, we truly are down and out.
Really don't see how you can blame the board for this. They will be doing everything they can to get this to go through, I'm sure. It makes no sense whatsoever so suggest that they aren't. Why on earth would they?
As time has gone on and the money has been watered away it makes more sense that we need this project to succeed now more than ever. As for Sainsburys, perhaps their motive has changed. Little we can do about that.
Steve k is right. It either gets built or it doesn't and that will be the measure of success. If it fails I'm interested to hear why anyone can blame the board for this unless it is them who pull out directly. Even if this were the case their reasons for doing so must be analysed before we jump to blame. If we sacrifice the stadium to stop the club folding due to financial problems, could you blame them?
Simple fact, not enough known and way too much conjecture and assumption. We just cant judge it until we reach a resolution.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 15:22:10 GMT
The stadium in my opinion is the ONLY hope we have of attracting new investors and securing a viable revenue option. Without it, we truly are down and out. Really don't see how you can blame the board for this. They will be doing everything they can to get this to go through, I'm sure. It makes no sense whatsoever so suggest that they aren't. Why on earth would they? As time has gone on and the money has been watered away it makes more sense that we need this project to succeed now more than ever. As for Sainsburys, perhaps their motive has changed. Little we can do about that. Steve k is right. It either gets built or it doesn't and that will be the measure of success. If it fails I'm interested to hear why anyone can blame the board for this unless it is them who pull out directly. Even if this were the case their reasons for doing so must be analysed before we jump to blame. If we sacrifice the stadium to stop the club folding due to financial problems, could you blame them? Simple fact, not enough known and way too much conjecture and assumption. We just cant judge it until we reach a resolution. The one thing I can and do blame the board for is they have made this the entire focus of our clubs survival. When you have people like T.Watola talk as he did about the 70 mins in the zone then you realise these guys never have a back up plan nor do they look to have anything in place should the project not move ahead. I don't know why but we have leaders who don't seem to have the capacity to forward plan. Now we are in a s51t* or bust situation because if that. That is the reality of it, not just having a dig.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo Admin on Jul 13, 2014 15:33:02 GMT
The stadium in my opinion is the ONLY hope we have of attracting new investors and securing a viable revenue option. Without it, we truly are down and out. Really don't see how you can blame the board for this. They will be doing everything they can to get this to go through, I'm sure. It makes no sense whatsoever so suggest that they aren't. Why on earth would they? As time has gone on and the money has been watered away it makes more sense that we need this project to succeed now more than ever. As for Sainsburys, perhaps their motive has changed. Little we can do about that. Steve k is right. It either gets built or it doesn't and that will be the measure of success. If it fails I'm interested to hear why anyone can blame the board for this unless it is them who pull out directly. Even if this were the case their reasons for doing so must be analysed before we jump to blame. If we sacrifice the stadium to stop the club folding due to financial problems, could you blame them? Simple fact, not enough known and way too much conjecture and assumption. We just cant judge it until we reach a resolution. The one thing I can and do blame the board for is they have made this the entire focus of our clubs survival. When you have people like T.Watola talk as he did about the 70 mins in the zone then you realise these guys never have a back up plan nor do they look to have anything in place should the project not move ahead. I don't know why but we have leaders who don't seem to have the capacity to forward plan. Now we are in a s51t* or bust situation because if that. That is the reality of it, not just having a dig. well that I cannot argue with but a bit of a different argument I think. Heres one. How can you blame the board for putting too much focus on achieving the new stadium and then argue that they aren't doing all they can to achieve the new stadium? Not suggesting you personally KP bur some are. Seems to me that they just want to blame blame blame. Now there lies some shortfall and blame there without question but I think some of it is a little unfair and/or misdirected.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 17:34:58 GMT
The one thing I can and do blame the board for is they have made this the entire focus of our clubs survival. When you have people like T.Watola talk as he did about the 70 mins in the zone then you realise these guys never have a back up plan nor do they look to have anything in place should the project not move ahead. I don't know why but we have leaders who don't seem to have the capacity to forward plan. Now we are in a s51t* or bust situation because if that. That is the reality of it, not just having a dig. well that I cannot argue with but a bit of a different argument I think. Heres one. How can you blame the board for putting too much focus on achieving the new stadium and then argue that they aren't doing all they can to achieve the new stadium? Not suggesting you personally KP bur some are. Seems to me that they just want to blame blame blame. Now there lies some shortfall and blame there without question but I think some of it is a little unfair and/or misdirected. Obviously I disagree. Its quite interesting I think the way this debate has developed. The use of the word "blame" actually allows those that support the current BoD to get into a circular argumemt over the use of that word, which then deflects away from the real question of evaluating the performance of the BoD over the last five years (or so). Looking at that they have presided over an on field disaster, a comms process that rightly has been ridiculed and now, after beating their chest over the announced delivery of the promised land, ie stadium, all was not as it seemed. The thing is this. Rightly incremental revenue streams are seen as the promised land of sustainability. Given the past performance of the BoD has anyone any real confidence that they can deliver those revenues? What experience do they have on board which suggests they can? This is the key issue. So, lets say the stadium gets built, one way, form or another. Does anyone deny that past performance is not an indicator of the future? Does anyone have any evidence to indicate the club will prosper as a result?
|
|
|
Post by Hugo Admin on Jul 13, 2014 17:37:16 GMT
No more evidence than you have to suggest it is dead in the water.
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Jul 13, 2014 18:12:45 GMT
well that I cannot argue with but a bit of a different argument I think. Heres one. How can you blame the board for putting too much focus on achieving the new stadium and then argue that they aren't doing all they can to achieve the new stadium? Not suggesting you personally KP bur some are. Seems to me that they just want to blame blame blame. Now there lies some shortfall and blame there without question but I think some of it is a little unfair and/or misdirected. Obviously I disagree. Its quite interesting I think the way this debate has developed. The use of the word "blame" actually allows those that support the current BoD to get into a circular argumemt over the use of that word, which then deflects away from the real question of evaluating the performance of the BoD over the last five years (or so). Looking at that they have presided over an on field disaster, a comms process that rightly has been ridiculed and now, after beating their chest over the announced delivery of the promised land, ie stadium, all was not as it seemed. The thing is this. Rightly incremental revenue streams are seen as the promised land of sustainability. Given the past performance of the BoD has anyone any real confidence that they can deliver those revenues? What experience do they have on board which suggests they can? This is the key issue. So, lets say the stadium gets built, one way, form or another. Does anyone deny that past performance is not an indicator of the future? Does anyone have any evidence to indicate the club will prosper as a result? Simple Question - What makes you think that the BoD will be running the new stadium ?? my understanding is that the Stadium complex will be jointly run by The UWE AND Bristol Rovers Stadium Ltd which as you know is NOT the football club
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 19:27:49 GMT
Obviously I disagree. Its quite interesting I think the way this debate has developed. The use of the word "blame" actually allows those that support the current BoD to get into a circular argumemt over the use of that word, which then deflects away from the real question of evaluating the performance of the BoD over the last five years (or so). Looking at that they have presided over an on field disaster, a comms process that rightly has been ridiculed and now, after beating their chest over the announced delivery of the promised land, ie stadium, all was not as it seemed. The thing is this. Rightly incremental revenue streams are seen as the promised land of sustainability. Given the past performance of the BoD has anyone any real confidence that they can deliver those revenues? What experience do they have on board which suggests they can? This is the key issue. So, lets say the stadium gets built, one way, form or another. Does anyone deny that past performance is not an indicator of the future? Does anyone have any evidence to indicate the club will prosper as a result? Simple Question - What makes you think that the BoD will be running the new stadium ?? my understanding is that the Stadium complex will be jointly run by The UWE AND Bristol Rovers Stadium Ltd which as you know is NOT the football club Henbury And pray tell who are the directors of Bristol Rovers Stadium Ltd, and who are the majority shareholders in that company...tell the people.. So you are now suggesting that the UWE will be jointly responsible for operations....so are you saying that all the incremental revenues will be shared? If so, so much for the promised land...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 19:29:52 GMT
No more evidence than you have to suggest it is dead in the water. Try again. I did not, as evidence emerged I have suggested that the intial capital value is at risk
|
|
|
Post by Hugo Admin on Jul 13, 2014 19:40:20 GMT
No more evidence than you have to suggest it is dead in the water. Try again. I did not, as evidence emerged I have suggested that the intial capital value is at risk try again?! No thanks. You win if you like. Still yet to see any evidence for your assumption/conjecture.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 19:44:42 GMT
According to the internet the memorial stadium company only has 3 directors, Dunford, Watola and Bradshaw ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 19:45:19 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2014 19:47:39 GMT
Im assuming BRFC 1883 ltd owns the memorial stadium company in some way ??
|
|