|
Post by Slide away on Jan 3, 2017 13:36:34 GMT
Back to the subject of the stadium development at UWE. I am not "in the know" and therefore my comments here can only be described as speculative. However, it is my humble opinion that the reason for the delay in progressing this is that the new owners want to BUY the site on which the stadium will be built so that we own and have the rights to everything entailed with the development of stadium . The original business plan when the project started was to build the stadium on land leased from UWE. There is a massive difference with the two scenarios from the point of view of the owner, BRFC and UWE. That takes some ironing out from all sides. Whilst it is frustrating not to hear the news that the stadium is pushing ahead, I do trust the owners to make sure it is the right deal for the club - even if it extends the timescale. Hang on- this is level headed opinion! Admin, please remove!
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Jan 3, 2017 13:42:05 GMT
Back to the subject of the stadium development at UWE. I am not "in the know" and therefore my comments here can only be described as speculative. However, it is my humble opinion that the reason for the delay in progressing this is that the new owners want to BUY the site on which the stadium will be built so that we own and have the rights to everything entailed with the development of stadium . The original business plan when the project started was to build the stadium on land leased from UWE. There is a massive difference with the two scenarios from the point of view of the owner, BRFC and UWE. That takes some ironing out from all sides. Whilst it is frustrating not to hear the news that the stadium is pushing ahead, I do trust the owners to make sure it is the right deal for the club - even if it extends the timescale. Hang on- this is level headed opinion! Admin, please remove!
Been saying this for weeks. Wael told me at Millwall that it was a case of UWE trying to screw us over the cost of the land, and I've posted that on here at least three times. So this is not new. Also that Wael sees no sense in building it on leasehold land, must be freehold.
|
|
|
Post by countygroundhotel on Jan 3, 2017 13:44:06 GMT
Back to the subject of the stadium development at UWE. I am not "in the know" and therefore my comments here can only be described as speculative. However, it is my humble opinion that the reason for the delay in progressing this is that the new owners want to BUY the site on which the stadium will be built so that we own and have the rights to everything entailed with the development of stadium . The original business plan when the project started was to build the stadium on land leased from UWE. There is a massive difference with the two scenarios from the point of view of the owner, BRFC and UWE. That takes some ironing out from all sides. Whilst it is frustrating not to hear the news that the stadium is pushing ahead, I do trust the owners to make sure it is the right deal for the club - even if it extends the timescale. Is there really a massive difference? The original lease was going to be 125 years more than enough to base a business plan on the only drawback being the lease holder could object to any change of use (for someone like me who didn't trust the last board that drawback was very much a positive). The difference is in cost, and surely are new owners wouldn't have overlooked that in their plans, and naming rights, which really is all about costs as well.
|
|
|
Post by slam on Jan 3, 2017 14:04:29 GMT
The new stadium is going to generate the majority of our income for generations to come - so, with respect, I believe that there is a major difference between leasehold and freehold.
You get much more control with a freehold property as opposed to leasehold. Also with a leasehold property you are stuck with a diminishing sale valuation as the years progress and then you cede the entire asset at the end of the lease. I agree that 125 years was sufficient within the terms of our previous financial constraints - but I would argue that the preferred option for a truly sustainable long term future is through freehold.
BRFC 1883 has been in existence for 134 years already and look at the turmoil when we lost the home at eastville. When we now have the opportunity to negotiate our way to a freehold why would you store another problem like that up, even if it is 125 years away.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2017 14:11:33 GMT
John Kayes and Stuart Harding (Uncle Alberts brother) did the whole Sabadell organisation last year and did it on a package deal basis, so that flights, transfers, hotels etc etc were done in a complete deal. It resulted in about 600 of us going over and Sabadell were delighted with the whole event. If the club want to do it themselves this time I'm glad Peter Parker feels they will be able to do it. I hope they fare better than this years shirts debacle. It seems the club haven't asked JK and SH helping out with this as they have not been asked to. I know because I was with JK yesterday, and he told me that he has not been asked by the club to help, but will be happy to give them the benefit of what he learnt about arranging the last one. In fact I think he was relieved not to do it this time, as it almost took over his life for months. Remember, the fans were all flown to Gerona (in JKs deal) then bussed to the hotel in Santa Susanna then bussed to the game on the day and back to Santa Susanna for a few more days, before then being bussed back to the airport for the flight home. The players were flown direct to a Barcelona and put up in a top notch country hotel which the club were delighted with, all at no cost to our club. Will the club do it on the same basis or will we be left to organise ourselves individually? Time will tell, but if most of the arrangements are to be done for ourselves, then I feel we won't get half as many there next time. That isn't what I said is it.
I said the club are capable of arranging a pre-season game.
If John Keyes and co want to organise trips and the like they can do so
As the date is not yet finalised it is a bit hard for either party to organise any packages right now
Spot on. The date hasn't been finalised yet, so it's a bit harsh to start criticizing the club regarding travel arrangements !
|
|
|
Post by countygroundhotel on Jan 3, 2017 14:16:12 GMT
The new stadium is going to generate the majority of our income for generations to come - so, with respect, I believe that there is a major difference between leasehold and freehold.
You get much more control with a freehold property as opposed to leasehold. Also with a leasehold property you are stuck with a diminishing sale valuation as the years progress and then you cede the entire asset at the end of the lease. I agree that 125 years was sufficient within the terms of our previous financial constraints - but I would argue that the preferred option for a truly sustainable long term future is through freehold.
BRFC 1883 has been in existence for 134 years already and look at the turmoil when we lost the home at eastville. When we now have the opportunity to negotiate our way to a freehold why would you store another problem like that up, even if it is 125 years away. Well if we were to go into administration then the buyers could do whatever they like with the land (subject to planning) on a freehold basis which may or may not include it being a sports stadium. On a leasehold basis only the UWE could allow a change of use of the land, effectively meaning that there would be a sports stadium there, with only one perspective tenant, as long as you or I live. So the major difference in my opinion is the cost and as I said our owners are far to clever to overlook that in their plans, surely? They've changed the plan from NHs proposals so it's obvious that that would've changed the UWE stance as well
|
|
|
Post by Squiffy on Jan 3, 2017 18:19:27 GMT
Back to the subject of the stadium development at UWE. I am not "in the know" and therefore my comments here can only be described as speculative. However, it is my humble opinion that the reason for the delay in progressing this is that the new owners want to BUY the site on which the stadium will be built so that we own and have the rights to everything entailed with the development of stadium . The original business plan when the project started was to build the stadium on land leased from UWE. There is a massive difference with the two scenarios from the point of view of the owner, BRFC and UWE. That takes some ironing out from all sides. Whilst it is frustrating not to hear the news that the stadium is pushing ahead, I do trust the owners to make sure it is the right deal for the club - even if it extends the timescale. Is there really a massive difference? The original lease was going to be 125 years more than enough to base a business plan on the only drawback being the lease holder could object to any change of use (for someone like me who didn't trust the last board that drawback was very much a positive). The difference is in cost, and surely are new owners wouldn't have overlooked that in their plans, and naming rights, which really is all about costs as well. Surely the difference between Leasehold and Freehold is that we would be allowed to stick Blu Tak to the walls without losing our deposit.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 3, 2017 18:32:18 GMT
Hang on- this is level headed opinion! Admin, please remove!
Been saying this for weeks. Wael told me at Millwall that it was a case of UWE trying to screw us over the cost of the land, and I've posted that on here at least three times. So this is not new. Also that Wael sees no sense in building it on leasehold land, must be freehold. I never really liked NH's idea of giving away the lease rights to the ground our stadium was going to be built on after we took decades to gain ownership of our own stadium at the Mem, however, having a new stadium on a 125 year lease must be better than having to start again from scratch finding an alternative site, designing a new stadium and obtaining full pp, then financing and building the stadium. Although if the UWE are apparently trying to now rip us off how's that issue going to be resolved in a couple of weeks anyway as Hamer's apparently suggested?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2017 18:37:44 GMT
Back to the subject of the stadium development at UWE. I am not "in the know" and therefore my comments here can only be described as speculative. However, it is my humble opinion that the reason for the delay in progressing this is that the new owners want to BUY the site on which the stadium will be built so that we own and have the rights to everything entailed with the development of stadium . The original business plan when the project started was to build the stadium on land leased from UWE. There is a massive difference with the two scenarios from the point of view of the owner, BRFC and UWE. That takes some ironing out from all sides. Whilst it is frustrating not to hear the news that the stadium is pushing ahead, I do trust the owners to make sure it is the right deal for the club - even if it extends the timescale. Is there really a massive difference? Um, yes.
|
|
|
Post by singupgas on Jan 3, 2017 18:47:07 GMT
I hope we are seriously looking at alternative sites that could hold the stadium we want to build.
could be a good card to have to play against the UWE to try force them into a decision.
The hold up over the cost of land/ownership is just pure greed on Thier part. Universities around the country already rob students of 10'000 each year. they are absolutely rolling in money. It's getting to a point now where UWE are taking the P!$$
|
|
|
Post by justin blue on Jan 3, 2017 19:26:32 GMT
I hope we are seriously looking at alternative sites that could hold the stadium we want to build. could be a good card to have to play against the UWE to try force them into a decision. The hold up over the cost of land/ownership is just pure greed on Thier part. Universities around the country already rob students of 10'000 each year. they are absolutely rolling in money. It's getting to a point now where UWE are taking the P!$$ How many alternative sites do you think there are?, it has taken the club more than thirty years to find this site. This as far as we know is a joint venture with UWE. I really don't think it's a good idea to start making unfounded accusations while negotiations are taking place.
|
|
|
Post by beaver132 on Jan 3, 2017 19:32:20 GMT
Two blokes sat on a train. One of them gets in conversation with other people that come and sit with them. Afterwards one of the guys turns and says "who was that? Why were they asking about a whale at a university with a hammer who was building a stadium, and why did you have to talk to them? They're clearly nutters!
|
|
|
Post by oldmarket65 on Jan 3, 2017 19:38:09 GMT
Surely there must be a cut off time in regards to current planning permission ' still active '. And if we have missed this deadline. What are the implications for submitting a fresh planning request ??. I have no evidence and no - one seems to give ( above ) a clear answer on this matter. If and it is only an if planning have run out. I worry about the potential for lawyers : Greens : local activist fighting and using our law system to drag out and probably stop this project. www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200126/applications/58/the_decision_making_process/6
|
|
|
Post by lulworthgas on Jan 3, 2017 19:40:02 GMT
If I was as rich as wael, I'd get a heli to and from games.
|
|
|
Post by gasstrictband on Jan 3, 2017 20:11:09 GMT
IMO for Wael our owner to fly by helicopter to and from away games is to much of a risk this guy is our saviour let's not forget Mathew Harding flying back from Bolton when he was killed
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 3, 2017 20:25:05 GMT
Surely there must be a cut off time in regards to current planning permission ' still active '. And if we have missed this deadline. What are the implications for submitting a fresh planning request ??. I have no evidence and no - one seems to give ( above ) a clear answer on this matter. If and it is only an if planning have run out. I worry about the potential for lawyers : Greens : local activist fighting and using our law system to drag out and probably stop this project. www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200126/applications/58/the_decision_making_process/6 It's already been confirmed we had 3 rather than the normal 5 years to start work, in the unlikely event it became an issue there's no obvious reasons the Green etc would object to us seeking an extension. As far as blackmailing the UWE into selling us the land by finding an alternative site, as I've said before on here if it's no longer the UWE stadium why would they now still want a stadium near there campus rather than residential/retail development? Although I thought Charlotte Leslie was claiming the stadium opened up £200m worth of development in the around the Henbury Loop?
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Jan 3, 2017 20:29:21 GMT
Surely there must be a cut off time in regards to current planning permission ' still active '. And if we have missed this deadline. What are the implications for submitting a fresh planning request ??. I have no evidence and no - one seems to give ( above ) a clear answer on this matter. If and it is only an if planning have run out. I worry about the potential for lawyers : Greens : local activist fighting and using our law system to drag out and probably stop this project. www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200126/applications/58/the_decision_making_process/6 Cut off date early 2018. Cut off date to begin the UWE build for us to start season 2018/19 in it is about April/May this year.
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Jan 3, 2017 20:39:37 GMT
How many alternative sites do you think there are?, it has taken the club more than thirty years to find this site. This as far as we know is a joint venture with UWE. I really don't think it's a good idea to start making unfounded accusations while negotiations are taking place. Three potential sites have been mentioned by S Gloucs, but the probable most likely one is off the ring road near Emersons Green by the Sainsbury's (it would be) depot. The club didn't find this (UWE) site. UWE approached Rovers. Its not a joint venture , it will be wholly owned by Rovers. UWE wanted the land to be leased, but we want ownership of the site. The cost was to be covered by naming rights in favour of UWE. Approx £8m each way. Now UWE want almost twice as much apparently. What would you call them? Now we come to what SH has supposedly said to a Gashead on the train yesterday. Fingers crossed 🤞
|
|
|
Post by singupgas on Jan 3, 2017 20:53:24 GMT
I hope we are seriously looking at alternative sites that could hold the stadium we want to build. could be a good card to have to play against the UWE to try force them into a decision. The hold up over the cost of land/ownership is just pure greed on Thier part. Universities around the country already rob students of 10'000 each year. they are absolutely rolling in money. It's getting to a point now where UWE are taking the P!$$ How many alternative sites do you think there are?, it has taken the club more than thirty years to find this site. This as far as we know is a joint venture with UWE. I really don't think it's a good idea to start making unfounded accusations while negotiations are taking place. who is making accusations I am just suggesting that it might be good idea to look at other options. A joint venture that seems to be going nowhere really, completely stagnated. How long can negotiations actually go on for?
|
|
|
Post by justin blue on Jan 3, 2017 21:06:36 GMT
How many alternative sites do you think there are?, it has taken the club more than thirty years to find this site. This as far as we know is a joint venture with UWE. I really don't think it's a good idea to start making unfounded accusations while negotiations are taking place. Three potential sites have been mentioned by S Gloucs, but the probable most likely one is off the ring road near Emersons Green by the Sainsbury's (it would be) depot. The club didn't find this (UWE) site. UWE approached Rovers. Its not a joint venture , it will be wholly owned by Rovers. UWE wanted the land to be leased, but we want ownership of the site. The cost was to be covered by naming rights in favour of UWE. Approx £8m each way. Now UWE want almost twice as much apparently. What would you call them? Now we come to what SH has supposedly said to a Gashead on the train yesterday. Fingers crossed 🤞 And supposedly everything you say is fact. Maybe SH should have told Oldgas to ask you.
|
|