|
Post by Strange Gas on Feb 21, 2016 21:49:14 GMT
Allegedly UWE, having agreed to sell us the lease for £8m in return for naming rights, have upped that to £11M. They also want all matchday car parking revenue, worth c. £400k per annum. We had no contract in place with UWE, so they are free to change terms as they wish. I can see why the new owners might want to look at this in more detail before agreeing anything. Owning the land is obviously desirable, but for that to happen I assume UWE will want considerably more than £8m or £11m. Seems like the whole dam project was built on sand! No actual contract to sell the Mem or build the UWE? FFS! Stick to the building please Mr Higgs
|
|
|
UWE
Feb 21, 2016 21:55:13 GMT
via mobile
Post by lulworthgas on Feb 21, 2016 21:55:13 GMT
Is that really true ? Plenty of people pay ground rent on their houses and don't own the freehold of the land on which it stands, they still get to sell the house or take a mortgage out to buy it in the first place. I think if a good deal can be done with UWE it will get built, but as others have said they need to have a negotiating position to get the deal they want. UWE have to believe we will go elsewhere if necessary, I don't think anyone want the deal to collapse however .... who's going to want to buy a football stadium though? Would take a hell of along time to earn your investment back through rent. You couldn't charge to much rent as if the fc leave then they are stuck with a sfadium hosting a few uni matches a week. Unless they buy because they want to take up the reigns of BR and have there best interests.
|
|
|
UWE
Feb 21, 2016 22:02:12 GMT
via mobile
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 21, 2016 22:02:12 GMT
Is that really true ? Plenty of people pay ground rent on their houses and don't own the freehold of the land on which it stands, they still get to sell the house or take a mortgage out to buy it in the first place. I think if a good deal can be done with UWE it will get built, but as others have said they need to have a negotiating position to get the deal they want. UWE have to believe we will go elsewhere if necessary, I don't think anyone want the deal to collapse however .... Is there a clause in rovers' contract with UWE that it only comes in force if the sainsburys deal goes through? If so, won't we be obliged to proceed on the agreed terms? Can the new owners re-negotiate at this stage if the parties have already signed on the dotted line? Don't expect anyone to actually know the answer, but if our contract with UWE is more watertight than the sainsburys one, might we be held to it by UWE? edit: I see an earlier post says we don't actually have a signed agreement with UWE!
|
|
|
Post by Strange Gas on Feb 21, 2016 22:04:55 GMT
Is there a clause in rovers' contract with UWE What contract? It's not even an issue of it being watertight, it doesn't exist!
|
|
|
Post by long john silver on Feb 21, 2016 22:59:40 GMT
Is there a clause in rovers' contract with UWE What contract? It's not even an issue of it being watertight, it doesn't exist! exactly , the UWE put in planning permission to turn the site into a car park not long ago so i cant imagine any agreement we have with them is set in stone.
|
|
|
Post by beaver132 on Feb 21, 2016 23:14:36 GMT
They've clearly stated long term stability, debt free, commercially viable club. All good. Also stadium as a priority. Good enough for me. It suggests sooner rather than later.
|
|
|
UWE
Feb 21, 2016 23:23:25 GMT
via mobile
Post by Officer Barbrady on Feb 21, 2016 23:23:25 GMT
Allegedly UWE, having agreed to sell us the lease for £8m in return for naming rights, have upped that to £11M. They also want all matchday car parking revenue, worth c. £400k per annum. We had no contract in place with UWE, so they are free to change terms as they wish. I can see why the new owners might want to look at this in more detail before agreeing anything. Owning the land is obviously desirable, but for that to happen I assume UWE will want considerably more than £8m or £11m. easy to capitulate when you know a partner has their back against the wall. The game has changed now though. I should think uwe may well decide to renegotiate those terms.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Feb 21, 2016 23:38:11 GMT
Personally I would be surprised and disappointed if it didn't work out.
Mainly because it is ready to go and I would have thought it was one of the attractions why we were bought in the first place. But also because NH would have wanted to protect his legacy in that UWE was just about his one saving grace. If he sold knowing it was not going ahead then he must have been in a very bad place.
I suspect, and hope, that this is a way of subtly saying allow us to buy the freehold and extra land or we will look elsewhere. Purely a negotiating tactic.
Time will tell. Hope it is soon though, not sure I could stomach yet another stadium project.
|
|
|
UWE
Feb 21, 2016 23:53:56 GMT
Post by gasincider on Feb 21, 2016 23:53:56 GMT
Just to correct an earlier post. The lease that has been discussed is for 125 years.
|
|
|
UWE
Feb 22, 2016 3:02:57 GMT
Post by Captain Jayho on Feb 22, 2016 3:02:57 GMT
Allegedly UWE, having agreed to sell us the lease for £8m in return for naming rights, have upped that to £11M. They also want all matchday car parking revenue, worth c. £400k per annum. We had no contract in place with UWE, so they are free to change terms as they wish. I can see why the new owners might want to look at this in more detail before agreeing anything. Owning the land is obviously desirable, but for that to happen I assume UWE will want considerably more than £8m or £11m. I'm a bit confused about this to be honest. I thought the original idea of the lease was for us to pay UWE a peppercorn rent, but you are saying actually the lease was originally for 8 million? Or are you saying it was a peppercorn rent originally, but if we want to actually purchase the freehold they then wanted 8 million, now revised to 11 million?
|
|
|
Post by empirebaypete on Feb 22, 2016 3:27:30 GMT
Allegedly UWE, having agreed to sell us the lease for £8m in return for naming rights, have upped that to £11M. They also want all matchday car parking revenue, worth c. £400k per annum. We had no contract in place with UWE, so they are free to change terms as they wish. I can see why the new owners might want to look at this in more detail before agreeing anything. Owning the land is obviously desirable, but for that to happen I assume UWE will want considerably more than £8m or £11m. I'm a bit confused about this to be honest. I thought the original idea of the lease was for us to pay UWE a peppercorn rent, but you are saying actually the lease was originally for 8 million? Or are you saying it was a peppercorn rent originally, but if we want to actually purchase the freehold they then wanted 8 million, now revised to 11 million? my understanding of what aghast wrote is . Originally there was a peppercorn rent but the stadium was UWE stadium. but for 8 million we could have the naming writes. now for the naming rights they want 11 million.
|
|
|
Post by womble on Feb 22, 2016 7:25:02 GMT
Allegedly UWE, having agreed to sell us the lease for £8m in return for naming rights, have upped that to £11M. They also want all matchday car parking revenue, worth c. £400k per annum. We had no contract in place with UWE, so they are free to change terms as they wish. I can see why the new owners might want to look at this in more detail before agreeing anything. Owning the land is obviously desirable, but for that to happen I assume UWE will want considerably more than £8m or £11m. I'm a bit confused about this to be honest. I thought the original idea of the lease was for us to pay UWE a peppercorn rent, but you are saying actually the lease was originally for 8 million? Or are you saying it was a peppercorn rent originally, but if we want to actually purchase the freehold they then wanted 8 million, now revised to 11 million? The commercial value of the 125 year lease was £8m. Rather than getting £8m, UWE were going to be given the naming rights in exchange, so that no money was actually involved. Whether the freehold value is greater than the leasehold value I wouldn't know.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2016 8:53:34 GMT
Without upsetting posters on here, I fel quite sure our new owners have negotiating skills way above and beyond anyone on here and already having had several meetings with UWE would not have gone ahead with the purchase of BRFC if they thought UWE was not deliverable.
|
|
|
UWE
Feb 22, 2016 8:58:59 GMT
Post by bstokegas on Feb 22, 2016 8:58:59 GMT
Without upsetting posters on here, I fel quite sure our new owners have negotiating skills way above and beyond anyone on here and already having had several meetings with UWE would not have gone ahead with the purchase of BRFC if they thought UWE was not deliverable. Totally agree with this. I am sure the new owners would not have been interested in the purchase if they were not going to consider UWE. To many delays and risks involved with looking at a new site. I am sure they just want to go over the finer points and make sure they are getting the best deal and not just assume that Higgs and co had done that.
|
|
|
UWE
Feb 22, 2016 9:01:05 GMT
Post by gasincider on Feb 22, 2016 9:01:05 GMT
Without upsetting posters on here, I fel quite sure our new owners have negotiating skills way above and beyond anyone on here and already having had several meetings with UWE would not have gone ahead with the purchase of BRFC if they thought UWE was not deliverable. I hope and believe that this is where we are. Of course it doesn't mean anything has been decided. I would think a meeting of all three partners to the stadium is a priority. Remember there are are many infrastructure projects that are dependent on the stadium going ahead. South Gloucs will also be putting pressure on UWE to conclude a deal. Its not all a one way street.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Feb 22, 2016 9:07:17 GMT
Blimey, WAQ. Get your arse in gear. It's nearly ten past nine and we haven't heard a thing.
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Feb 22, 2016 9:10:26 GMT
Without upsetting posters on here, I fel quite sure our new owners have negotiating skills way above and beyond anyone on here and already having had several meetings with UWE would not have gone ahead with the purchase of BRFC if they thought UWE was not deliverable. They have also had a meeting with South Glos as well
|
|
|
UWE
Feb 22, 2016 9:26:30 GMT
Post by oldgas on Feb 22, 2016 9:26:30 GMT
Without upsetting posters on here, I fel quite sure our new owners have negotiating skills way above and beyond anyone on here and already having had several meetings with UWE would not have gone ahead with the purchase of BRFC if they thought UWE was not deliverable. They have also had a meeting with South Glos as well Do you think that's because they've decided to not f@ck about and build a 36,000 seater straight away?
|
|
|
UWE
Feb 22, 2016 9:29:03 GMT
Post by Antonio Fargas on Feb 22, 2016 9:29:03 GMT
They have also had a meeting with South Glos as well Do you think that's because they've decided to not f@ck about and build a 36,000 seater straight away? afair the 27,000 expansion is available without more planning permission. But the big expansion, while integral to the design, needs different planning permission.
|
|
|
UWE
Feb 22, 2016 9:46:39 GMT
Post by Henbury Gas on Feb 22, 2016 9:46:39 GMT
They have also had a meeting with South Glos as well Do you think that's because they've decided to not f@ck about and build a 36,000 seater straight away? Now that would be nice ! Its all about the Camel Park
|
|