|
|
Post by youmadethatup on Mar 12, 2016 14:48:15 GMT
We know Sainsburys will not be owners of the mem site , that may be a housing developer .The court case is about whether they broke the contract or not and the compensation that could be due .
So the case is irrelevant to the UWE stadium going ahead ,just claiming back some money that's been lost/wasted by the fiasco.
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 12, 2016 19:03:19 GMT
Once again the legal case for the Mem is mentioned as an obstacle. We all know we're going to lose. Can't they just get on with the judgement so we can move on? We are moving on. There is a lot going on behind the scenes. The verdict of the court case is irrelevant now. Probably in terms of financing the UWE but it could still be irrelevant given that both parties are still awaiting clarification of whether the contact was binding and, if so, whether Sainsbury's have a contractual obligation to buy the Mem. |
|
|
|
Post by banjogas on Mar 12, 2016 19:34:25 GMT
Refreshing to hear the family have moved quickly to address the commercial operations at the club.
Lot of talk in the bars that a new commercial director will be appointed after the AGM.
I hope this will mean the end of the shirt draw, errea kits, poor stadium branding and an axe will be wielded over the dead wood that has held the club back for many years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Mar 12, 2016 19:38:53 GMT
We are moving on. There is a lot going on behind the scenes. The verdict of the court case is irrelevant now. Probably in terms of financing the UWE but it could still be irrelevant given that both parties are still awaiting clarification of whether the contact was binding and, if so, whether Sainsbury's have a contractual obligation to buy the Mem. I believe that technically Sainsbury's have already breached that contract, and so it would be about compensation, not about forcing them to honour it. |
|
