|
Post by xplosivgas on Mar 8, 2016 8:13:21 GMT
Should be an interesting evening with Stanley playing Portsmouth. I guess a draw would be best so we can regain fourth spot.
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Mar 2, 2016 17:49:43 GMT
That article has put my mind at ease. Looks like he's got his dream team firmly in place!
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Mar 1, 2016 20:17:39 GMT
It's the company that owns BRFC. But who owns Dwane Sports, are they UK based, if so, why aren't they yet registered at companies house? Plus why are they called Dwane Sports in the first place? Certainly curious that there's no trace of our Dwayne on Companies House.
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Mar 1, 2016 17:59:39 GMT
Any idea which headlines he may have found to be "alarming and misleading"? I'm guessing the amount of wealth that the Al-Qadi family has. Can't he put an end to the endless gossiping and speculation by just saying how many £billion he's worth!?
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Mar 1, 2016 13:26:05 GMT
Any idea which headlines he may have found to be "alarming and misleading"?
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Mar 1, 2016 8:05:39 GMT
I think that it's fair to say that the new owners will probably re-examine the entire project now. The previous board could only play the cards they were dealt and negotiated accordingly. They would look at how much investment they could raise and how this would be sustainable for Rovers. They would be restricted by the financial constraints that we all have. The new owners are in a different league and will be able to fund a much bigger project if it stacks up financially. They will have a longer term view of where they want the club to be and I suspect that they will want control of their own destiny by owning the land freehold. This project will be about so much more than 26 matches a season. Using the analogy referred to earlier, there is no point in buying a plot of land for a 3 bed roomed house if you know that in 5 years time you will need something much bigger But ultimately uwe can be extended to 35k, no matter how much success wael brings we are never going to need more than that, there aren't many sites in Bristol or the surrounding area big enough and with the infrastructure for a stadium and we all know how difficult it is to get pp in this city! Agree with this. Some people are saying the owner is wealthy so we are now in a stronger position to negotiate. Maybe that's true to a very small degree in that we're no longer desperate, but it doesn't change the fact that UWE have the perfect plot of land we need so can't go messing them around too much or risk them saying sod it we're off.
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 29, 2016 13:13:33 GMT
As regards the new stadium, I think it's important Wael lets fans know exactly what he's thinking/planning shortly after the appeal decision is known. Most people's patience with the stadium project is wearing thin after all these years, so if we're all left in the dark for too long - with only non-specific phrases like "it's a requirement" being heard - I suspect optimism levels will fall quite rapidly.
At the moment he's not done anything wrong and he's saying all the right things, so I'm going to stay positive!
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 25, 2016 8:58:31 GMT
CG I'm a bit disappointed in your thread title as surely this is a better one from The Times "The role of Bristol Rovers in deciding the future of football around the world" the OTIB willlove this (not!) I agree it would be great if somebody can post the full article on the forum Is that really the title?!?!? Hahaha that's absolutely awesome! The Teds will love that! hahahahaha I suspect the only point they'll pick up on is his playing down of the 'billionaire' tag!
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 25, 2016 8:54:54 GMT
While '21700 may be more' sounds exciting at first glance, increasing the capacity would mean revising the plans (and presumably the planning permission) which will just delay things further. Surely get the thing built ASAP as per the plan and worry about the rest if we're ever selling out several times a season! The current plans allow for expansion anyway I seem to recall.,,
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 25, 2016 8:44:17 GMT
Not just have to have a new stadium - read the Times today - yes the big boys Times - Waed says again a new stadium is vital, it might be 21000 but it might be bigger. Watch this space but I wouldn't be at all surprised if we get a Wembley of the West! I see the article in the times but you need a subscription to read the full piece! Anyone able to paste it here? Looks interesting....
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 22, 2016 13:38:48 GMT
Bored on a lunchtime, I found an article saying the Jordan bank's asset value is £1.72 billion. The family own about 32% of shares in the bank, so that's about £550 million. Then they have other business interests outside of the bank on top of that. So pretty rich based on that! www.footballeconomy.com/content/bristol-rovers-taken-over
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 22, 2016 13:15:19 GMT
Not sure if anyone else has come across this article I've come across, but a couple parts are quite interesting but probably won't improve DC's mood: “...We are going to do some reshuffling … We are going to equip the club with the right people and restructure the club properly so that it functions better.”AND "...part of his plans was to provide Jordanian and even Arab players with a chance to develop their football skills. “This is very positive for Jordan because this vehicle can be used for Jordanian boys to improve and become professional players as well.”"Linkage - www.venturemagazine.me/2016/02/al-qadi-family-buys-bristol-rovers-soccer-club/
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 22, 2016 13:00:35 GMT
I usually stand near the dug outs and it's very difficult to make out what he's saying most of the time
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 21, 2016 22:50:01 GMT
I'm sure they did enjoy their day despite Nick Days wallet quip. To be fair to Weal he gave a good response! I was unable to get to the game, so just curious of nick's quip and his reply...?
|
|
|
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 xplosivgas on Feb 21, 2016 20:08:17 GMT
Rightly it wrongly, if the new owners pass on the UWE site/deal for 'commercial' or 'business model' reasons, I will lose all faith in them instantly. Someone should give them a brief history of our stadium plight and point out that a better plot of land - with planning permission - than we have now in our grasp is fantasy. How do you know they haven't already identified or are in negotiations to buy alternative sites? I don't, but on the balance of probabilities I doubt it. Even if they identified a new site we all know that's no guarantee it'll work out. We have UWE on a silver platter and can't comprehend why anyone would want to pass on it.
|
|
|
UWE
Feb 21, 2016 19:52:51 GMT
via mobile
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 21, 2016 19:52:51 GMT
Rightly it wrongly, if the new owners pass on the UWE site/deal for 'commercial' or 'business model' reasons, I will lose all faith in them instantly. Someone should give them a brief history of our stadium plight and point out that a better plot of land - with planning permission - than we have now in our grasp is fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 21, 2016 18:52:29 GMT
Has the new owner categorically stated the UWE will definitely be built regardless of the appeal decision? I know he acknowledged a new stadium is a 'requirement', but that's not quite the same - or am I just being overly paranoid? When the appeal decision comes out, I guess everyone will be demanding such a definitive assurance if it goes sainsbury's way.
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Feb 20, 2016 8:38:14 GMT
To be honest if the new owners supply a new stadium and invest enough to improve the squad each year (perhaps even pay a £150k fee or two!), I'll be more than happy.
Not that it matters hugly, but I notice a lot of the media referring to 'billionaire owners'. Are they really in that leauge? I can't see from my internet searching that their Jordan bank shareholding is worth that amount, but I guess they have other business interests in leisure etc. anyone have any reliable info on them?
|
|
|
Post by xplosivgas on Jan 27, 2016 13:38:05 GMT
This was posted by A More Piratey Game on the other forum yesterday:- "I was there for about 40 minutes this morning. Here's my take on it while I was there, plus below already C&Pd by PP on another thread It was, this time, in a proper court building. Old and with lots of shields and statues and vaulted ceilings. The courtroom itself is more prosaic though, and a little bit smaller than the one we had last time. We were in number 75, so there are plenty of them. I nodded at Nick and Toni when I went in (them probably thinking 'who's that bloke?'), and I saw one other Gashead there - a trainee barrister in his 60's who was there for parts of the original case. There were 23 people in the room, including 3 judges and 4 barristers in their matchday kit. There were also lots of people scribbling notes fairly actively - maybe ten of them. Ali Durden was also there. There are microphones all over the room, so best not eat crisps or pass wind or anything as it'll be picked up Nick looked a bit stressed to me - like I might if I had tens of millions of quid riding on the case. Or he might have stayed overnight and gone for a few scoops with Toni last night. The legalese was unsurprisingly arcane. I think the judges found it pretty nuanced - they looked pretty puzzled some of the time. Our brief, Mr Matthias, was up and taking them through it. At one point one of the judges raised his eyebrows at Mr David Matthias as if to say 'that's a pretty clever point you just made', although maybe also 'that's pretty smarty-pants' I don't know if Rovers won their application to submit new evidence, but I guess they did as there was talk about 'we knew x but couldn't discuss it as it wasn't part of our case or the other party's'. Our brief said that it was 'an extraordinary case' and that the original judge had cocked it up, though in the nicest possible way. 'In our respectful submission the learned judge was on a frolic of her own.....' 'erred in concluding....', sort of stuff. One precedent was discussed, and one of the judges suggested that the 'learned judge' in that case exhibited 'a piece of judicial exhuberance' There was a very technical discussion of estoppel and the Section 73 application. The estoppel arguments are apparently all new, or something - they weren't brought in last time. Our briefs said they saw the draft judgement and saw the error immediately. Our position is summarised in some 'post-judgement submissions' I considered giving them a verse of Irene, which would at least have livened it up a bit, but thought it might not help so I left quietly." Looks as though somebody else from there might be attending today. Thanks for the update and report Tilly. The most intriguing part of the update was the 60 year old trainee barrister!
|
|