|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 21, 2016 18:15:25 GMT
anyone thinking that we can survive at the Mem is dreaming. Ask Geoff Dunford he will tell you that they have always looked at the Mem being a temporary home Is that the same GD that ripped us off at Beeches? Or who had us choosing seats at Cheltenham in readiness for the Mem redevelopment?
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 21, 2016 18:16:37 GMT
The sad part (in my opinion) is that whatever happens we won't have any input in it. The major decisions of our club are down to the owners at the time and will never take what we think/want into consideration. We just sit back and hope/trust that the right decision is made for the right reasons cause us and our children have to live with it once its done. I say that referring to footy in general, the word "club" is the biggest bit of bullshit ever, they are not clubs anymore they are businesses/assets/liabilities owned by an individual/s and their heartbeat(the supporters)are majorly ignored because they have a love/affinity/loyalty of the club which means they can't walk away like other business customers. It stinks but it's modern day football. Not sure there's any evidence clubs are run any better when fans are involved in making the major decisions?
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Jan 21, 2016 19:11:24 GMT
I say there's zero evidence (but plenty of hope) that we can 100% own the UWE without Sainsbury's money. But raising the funds for a part-ownership isn't a problem. We sell the Mem site and there we have our £10m share. I fact I would guess developers would pay that £10m today without planning permission for housing. Permission for housing nowadays is the norm, and plenty of very good reasons have to exist to deny PP. All we then have to do is find other partners willing to put up £20m. I'm guessing (again) that UWE could easily find £10m or £20m. I'm not saying part-ownership is a great thing, but it's a way to get the stadium built if (when) we lose the appeal. I would also like to think that as 33% partners in the the stadium we would be able to veto rent increases above a previously-agreed level. Is it better to own a £10m 33% stake in a brand new 22,000 seat stadium, or a £10m 100% stake in a run down albeit workable stadium? I don't know the answer to that. Think you've overlooked that if we lose the Appeal our total debts will then be approaching £10m, selling the Mem for £10m could well only clear the club's debts? I was assuming that we don't clear our debts. If NH is still in charge with a 33% share of the stadium, he would have his dream (a bit tarnished now) and therefore why would he call in his debts. As for the Wonga loan, I assume also that at some point he would cover that rather than let the cub go into administration. Then as we rise to the Championship in front of much larger crowds eating and drinking like crazy, and also taking 1/3 of the other revenue streams, he can slowly be paid back. I suppose all that is really the Plan B.
|
|
|
Post by dinsdale on Jan 21, 2016 19:27:31 GMT
Just wondering what peoples' opinions are of this... 1. We stay exactly as we are at the Mem, along with all our debt. 2. We get the UWE, clear our debt by selling the Mem - but we are tenants at UWE as we would need to get investors to build it. The reason for UWE was non match day revenue so there is no point in it if we don't reap the reward of that revenue. We need to own a home imo
|
|
|
Post by amgas on Jan 21, 2016 19:40:21 GMT
Very hard to answer this one as we don't know what sort of deal might be on offer. As an example if we had a 100 year lease on a very low rent and got to keep a lot of the revenue raised from football use of the stadium I think most of us would be happy to rent. If however we had no long term agreement on rent and no security of tenure with little of the stadium revenues coming our way most would say no to renting.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 21, 2016 19:52:09 GMT
If the Rovers board retained a controlling share, say between 20% and 40% then I think it would be acceptable, especially if we had a possible option to buy out the others and had a proportionate share of non match day revenue.
As always, the devil is in the detail so a qualified acceptance for me.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 21, 2016 20:03:47 GMT
Think you've overlooked that if we lose the Appeal our total debts will then be approaching £10m, selling the Mem for £10m could well only clear the club's debts? I was assuming that we don't clear our debts. If NH is still in charge with a 33% share of the stadium, he would have his dream (a bit tarnished now) and therefore why would he call in his debts. As for the Wonga loan, I assume also that at some point he would cover that rather than let the cub go into administration. Then as we rise to the Championship in front of much larger crowds eating and drinking like crazy, and also taking 1/3 of the other revenue streams, he can slowly be paid back. I suppose all that is really the Plan B. Why would NH cover the Wonga loan, surely if he could afford to meet that there would be no point incurring the 14% interest in the first place? It seems clear to me the present BoD have no interest in lending the club anymore money and probably want paying back ASAP. NH has already hinted he wants to step down not take on more debts.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 21, 2016 20:06:16 GMT
If the Rovers board retained a controlling share, say between 20% and 40% then I think it would be acceptable, especially if we had a possible option to buy out the others and had a proportionate share of non match day revenue. As always, the devil is in the detail so a qualified acceptance for me. Unless we got to the Championship or Premiership how could we ever find the £20m+ to buy out the staduim owners, plus why would they sell up as soon as we had a bit of success?
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jan 21, 2016 20:27:49 GMT
If the Rovers board retained a controlling share, say between 20% and 40% then I think it would be acceptable, especially if we had a possible option to buy out the others and had a proportionate share of non match day revenue. As always, the devil is in the detail so a qualified acceptance for me. Unless we got to the Championship or Premiership how could we ever find the £20m+ to buy out the staduim owners, plus why would they sell up as soon as we had a bit of success? I am thinking an agreement to buy shares in incremental stages or simply having the first refusal. Say we have a good cup run or sell a player in 5 years time for £1m. That would by X amount of shares depending on an agreed mark up. It need not be all or nothing. In terms of why, they are investors and in time may wish to move on. We are and always will be a football club needing a place to play. We will be there for decades, our 'partners' may move on in time. Sometimes we are spending too long looking for gold that we end up missing the silver lining!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 20:56:16 GMT
33 people need their heads checked!
|
|
|
Post by torontogaz on Jan 21, 2016 22:45:37 GMT
Memories of Eastville. Don't rent...EVER, PERIOD enuf said, LOL
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2016 8:54:29 GMT
Re-vamp and stay at the Mem, and we will always be a Div 1/Div 2 club. It really is as simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 22, 2016 9:21:11 GMT
Re-vamp and stay at the Mem, and we will always be a Div 1/Div 2 club. It really is as simple as that. Why? I like you mate, but that is bollocks. While we have an asset we will always have the future potential to sell up and move out at a later date. No one here is saying stay at the Mem forever. We give up ownership of our ground that's it. Forever. If giving up ownership is part of any deal we should pass it up and move on. Anything less is madness.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2016 9:31:46 GMT
This is worse than Sophie's choice!
Stay in our sh1t hole tip of a ground or place ourselves in the very unstable position of not owning the stadium we play in, essentially our number 1 asset.... What a terrible choice to have to make!
I guess playing in a nice new stadium would be brilliant! But owning our own home is essential. Essential wins.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2016 9:48:08 GMT
Re-vamp and stay at the Mem, and we will always be a Div 1/Div 2 club. It really is as simple as that. Why? I like you mate, but that is bollocks. While we have an asset we will always have the future potential to sell up and move out at a later date. No one here is saying stay at the Mem forever. We give up ownership of our ground that's it. Forever. If giving up ownership is part of any deal we should pass it up and move on. Anything less is madness. Turning it back around....what if we had part-ownership with the provision to buy more at a future point?
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 22, 2016 10:32:01 GMT
Why? I like you mate, but that is bollocks. While we have an asset we will always have the future potential to sell up and move out at a later date. No one here is saying stay at the Mem forever. We give up ownership of our ground that's it. Forever. If giving up ownership is part of any deal we should pass it up and move on. Anything less is madness. Turning it back around....what if we had part-ownership with the provision to buy more at a future point? Yeah, possibly with the right partners and if we retained majority ownership. Not terribly sure I'd trust us to tie up a watertight contract that didn't allow us to get shafted though. And sadly that not just a witty aside, I genuinely have lost faith in our legal advisers. This thread poll is a straightforward either/or decision. Own the Mem, Rent UWE. Its amusing to see so many people willing to stretch things to suit because they really want a shiny new stadium. Hell, I want it as bad as the rest of us but not at any cost. If I'm honest I wasn't super sure about owning the stadium and renting the land its on either. Remember how important it was to us when we bought the Mem when the rugby club went bust? That seems no longer important to so many here since someone waved some pretty pictures at us and told us that we are doomed if we don't buy into it? There are other solutions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2016 10:42:02 GMT
Surely though, if we were to sell the Mem for 15 or 20 million that should give us at least a 50% stake in the new stadium? I don't think it is a black & white decision regarding buy or rent. As you say, there are options available, so the poll is a bit blinkered.
But I still stick to my opinion, and that is if we stay at the Mem, we'll always be rag bag Rovers.
|
|
|
Post by knowall on Jan 22, 2016 10:43:00 GMT
As already quoted on here don't forget the past, we used to own Eastville and sold it and then rented it and we all know what happened there, whose to say it would not happen again i for one would rather stay put at least we would have more control over our future and i believe we could move forward, Bournemouth, Blackpool, Yeovil, Brentford,Burton to name a few have all played or are currently playing at a higher level than we have for sometime, it is how they are managed that makes a difference. UTG you think Ikea want to be at UWE?
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 22, 2016 10:45:26 GMT
Surely though, if we were to sell the Mem for 15 or 20 million that should give us at least a 50% stake in the new stadium? I don't think it is a black & white decision regarding buy or rent. As you say, there are options available, so the poll is a bit blinkered. But I still stick to my opinion, and that is if we stay at the Mem, we'll always be rag bag Rovers. Minus debt/mortgage/loans. Mem was valued at around 10/12M for housing use I seem to recall. So really what do we have left to invest. Certainly nowhere near half.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2016 10:48:57 GMT
Surely though, if we were to sell the Mem for 15 or 20 million that should give us at least a 50% stake in the new stadium? I don't think it is a black & white decision regarding buy or rent. As you say, there are options available, so the poll is a bit blinkered. But I still stick to my opinion, and that is if we stay at the Mem, we'll always be rag bag Rovers. Minus debt/mortgage/loans. Mem was valued at around 10/12M for housing use I seem to recall. So really what do we have left to invest. Certainly nowhere near half. Depends on many things. Maybe there is another supermarket that would want to buy it. Not for 30m though. That figure was just used so Sainsbury's could win the contract, but they never had any intention to build. Still at the Mem, with no debts/mortgage/loan, and we'd still be rag bag Rovers.
|
|