|
Post by Kingswood Polak on May 31, 2017 12:39:43 GMT
Sainsburys money minus directors loans minus Wonga loan leaves ? (enough to build a stadium??) I doubt it without borrowing/investment If Sainbury's had just handed NH £32m he wouldn't have needed the wonga loan to pay the legal fees etc, the director loans would have just been turned into equity in the UWE. Fact is if they did honour their side, the build price had gone up exponentially and NH was in a state. The futile court cases just added more debt and when he knew very well it was far from watertight. There was blaming other directors and the legal team. Other directors had refused to pay over a penny more. I believe we may still have the Sainsbury's legal charge against us but could be wrong as I now don't look. Perhaps others that do can elucidate on that ?
|
|
|
Post by Kingswood Polak on May 31, 2017 12:44:57 GMT
I fail to see how a 21,700 stadium was going to be built for £32million minus legal and consultancy fees. Either the club was going to take out more loans OR UWE was going to be part owners. Which obviously the current board do not want.Which may have been a sticking point in the deal. Now UWE owning the land still and buying a 25% share in the stadium and having a greater say over stadium use and 1/4 share of profits made...well that's a deal I could see them being keen to hold onto. Not a rental agreement on the land and some use of the space in the stadium. If you remember well then a clause of the stadium build was that there was no debt attached. This became more and more of a problem with the many court cases and borrowing from MSP. Nick Higgs was cast adrift by the board as they flatly refused to hand over anymore money and one director was furious as he bought a certain property that enabled the entrance. Thank god that's no longer the case and we have pros running the club
|
|
|
Post by knowall on May 31, 2017 14:27:20 GMT
I fail to see how a 21,700 stadium was going to be built for £32million minus legal and consultancy fees. Either the club was going to take out more loans OR UWE was going to be part owners. Which obviously the current board do not want.Which may have been a sticking point in the deal. Now UWE owning the land still and buying a 25% share in the stadium and having a greater say over stadium use and 1/4 share of profits made...well that's a deal I could see them being keen to hold onto. Not a rental agreement on the land and some use of the space in the stadium. If you remember well then a clause of the stadium build was that there was no debt attached. This became more and more of a problem with the many court cases and borrowing from MSP. Nick Higgs was cast adrift by the board as they flatly refused to hand over anymore money and one director was furious as he bought a certain property that enabled the entrance. Thank god that's no longer the case and we have pros running the club Whatever happens this is the most important
|
|