|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 16, 2017 12:07:33 GMT
Pretty much the same thing. Not really. I thought the whole problem was that they had pretty much agreed terms, but UWE started reviewing things that they had already agreed. So it wasn't the case that UWE provided terms and we decided to that they weren't sustainable - more that UWE failed to provide their final terms at all. That's how I see it as well. I thought that's what you meant, hence my comment. |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 16, 2017 12:09:03 GMT
Is it just me that cant see the planning going through with developing the mem. I really don't think it will happen. i think the uwe was our only really hope for us to progress further. But didn't we have planning permission to develop the Mem in the first instance? |
|
|
|
Post by milesy83 on Aug 16, 2017 12:16:18 GMT
Is it just me that cant see the planning going through with developing the mem. I really don't think it will happen. i think the uwe was our only really hope for us to progress further. But didn't we have planning permission to develop the Mem in the first instance? Yeah we did but surely it would be a bigger problem with the extras they want to support non match day sales..like hotel,functions? Theres still the problem of parking too as its a pain in the a** as it is lol |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 16, 2017 12:19:06 GMT
But didn't we have planning permission to develop the Mem in the first instance? Yeah we did but surely it would be a bigger problem with the extras they want to support non match day sales..like hotel,functions? Theres still the problem of parking too as its a pain in the a** as it is lol I'm guessing the extras have been reduced and we're (I say we're, I mean Wael) have just decided to make the most of the Mem ground and will just build a nice little 15k all seater stadium and enjoy just seeing what the brings? |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Aug 16, 2017 12:22:16 GMT
Is it just me that cant see the planning going through with developing the mem. I really don't think it will happen. i think the uwe was our only really hope for us to progress further. Based on what? The Mem may or may not be tarted up or rebuilt. We may identify a new piece of land and start again. There have been several areas of land and plans submitted in the past after all. We have had so many false dawns and new proposals that anything is possible, though nothing is more probable of course. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 16, 2017 12:48:30 GMT
Pretty much the same thing. Not really. I thought the whole problem was that they had pretty much agreed terms, but UWE started reviewing things that they had already agreed. So it wasn't the case that UWE provided terms and we decided to that they weren't sustainable - more that UWE failed to provide their final terms at all. But didn't the UWE say last week they were waiting for the Head of Terms to be agreed and SH or Wael said we'd submitted our own HoT's for agreement, if that's the case surely we couldn't have been that far apart if both sides, or even one side, had gone as far as drawing up an HoT's? I can't get my head around how both sides can spend years working on a project then both walk away w/o having a face to face discussion over whether any agreement can, or can't be reached, unless the ALQ's are still insisting they buy the land the UWE it's leased but wouldn't that have been obvious 18 months ago that issue couldn't be overcome? |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 16, 2017 12:52:34 GMT
Not really. I thought the whole problem was that they had pretty much agreed terms, but UWE started reviewing things that they had already agreed. So it wasn't the case that UWE provided terms and we decided to that they weren't sustainable - more that UWE failed to provide their final terms at all. But didn't the UWE say last week they were waiting for the Head of Terms to be agreed and SH or Wael said we'd submitted our own HoT's for agreement, if that's the case surely we couldn't have been that far apart if both sides, or even one side, had gone as far as drawing up an HoT's? I can't get my head around how both sides can spend years working on a project then both walk away w/o having a face to face discussion over whether any agreement can, or can't be reached, unless the ALQ's are still insisting they buy the land the UWE it's leased but wouldn't that have been obvious 18 months ago that issue couldn't be overcome? Both sides haven't been negotiating for years, the Al Qadi family only bought us 18 months ago. As for not having face to face discussions, you have no idea whatsoever as to how many times they've met. |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Aug 16, 2017 13:01:47 GMT
anyway. Is today the day?
|
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 16, 2017 13:07:43 GMT
anyway. Is today the day? If you mean have I gone shopping this morning, had a few pints lunchtime, then yes. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Aug 16, 2017 13:17:52 GMT
anyway. Is today the day? Tick tock...... |
|
|
|
Post by alvestongas on Aug 16, 2017 13:23:08 GMT
Is it just me that cant see the planning going through with developing the mem. I really don't think it will happen. i think the uwe was our only really hope for us to progress further. There is a huge advantage one would think of BCC agreeing the original PP for the Mem revamp with hotel & student accommodation. That's a pretty strong precedent set & there may be ways of revisiting that. They would probably look favourably on a similar Stadium design with accommodation whether it be Student, hotel or residential & that might just be the enabling factor that could make the Mem attractive where the UWE were not prepared to allow that additional development by BRFC/AQs on their land. |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Aug 16, 2017 13:25:11 GMT
Not really. I thought the whole problem was that they had pretty much agreed terms, but UWE started reviewing things that they had already agreed. So it wasn't the case that UWE provided terms and we decided to that they weren't sustainable - more that UWE failed to provide their final terms at all. But didn't the UWE say last week they were waiting for the Head of Terms to be agreed and SH or Wael said we'd submitted our own HoT's for agreement, if that's the case surely we couldn't have been that far apart if both sides, or even one side, had gone as far as drawing up an HoT's? I can't get my head around how both sides can spend years working on a project then both walk away w/o having a face to face discussion over whether any agreement can, or can't be reached, unless the ALQ's are still insisting they buy the land the UWE it's leased but wouldn't that have been obvious 18 months ago that issue couldn't be overcome? Heads of Terms are only really bullet points of what you ultimately want to contract to. Just because each side have their own draft of those doesn't really mean much. For example mine might say: - You will sell me your house for tuppence - You will still come round every summer to paint the front door And yours might say - You will leave me the f**k alone Just because we both have our idea of what we want out of the deal it doesn't mean we're necessarily on the verge of agreeing that. |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Aug 16, 2017 13:26:34 GMT
Balls ... this is how it starts - people start discussing seriously what they know is a fairy tale and before you know it we're at 20 pages.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Aug 16, 2017 13:33:25 GMT
But didn't the UWE say last week they were waiting for the Head of Terms to be agreed and SH or Wael said we'd submitted our own HoT's for agreement, if that's the case surely we couldn't have been that far apart if both sides, or even one side, had gone as far as drawing up an HoT's? I can't get my head around how both sides can spend years working on a project then both walk away w/o having a face to face discussion over whether any agreement can, or can't be reached, unless the ALQ's are still insisting they buy the land the UWE it's leased but wouldn't that have been obvious 18 months ago that issue couldn't be overcome? Heads of Terms are only really bullet points of what you ultimately want to contract to. Just because each side have their own draft of those doesn't really mean much. For example mine might say: - You will sell me your house for tuppence - You will still come round every summer to paint the front door And yours might say - You will leave me the f**k alone Just because we both have our idea of what we want out of the deal it doesn't mean we're necessarily on the verge of agreeing that. My wife refuses to move out. What colour do you want the door doing? |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 16, 2017 13:50:57 GMT
But didn't the UWE say last week they were waiting for the Head of Terms to be agreed and SH or Wael said we'd submitted our own HoT's for agreement, if that's the case surely we couldn't have been that far apart if both sides, or even one side, had gone as far as drawing up an HoT's? I can't get my head around how both sides can spend years working on a project then both walk away w/o having a face to face discussion over whether any agreement can, or can't be reached, unless the ALQ's are still insisting they buy the land the UWE it's leased but wouldn't that have been obvious 18 months ago that issue couldn't be overcome? Heads of Terms are only really bullet points of what you ultimately want to contract to. Just because each side have their own draft of those doesn't really mean much. For example mine might say: - You will sell me your house for tuppence - You will still come round every summer to paint the front door And yours might say - You will leave me the f**k alone Just because we both have our idea of what we want out of the deal it doesn't mean we're necessarily on the verge of agreeing that. After 18 months of apparently numerous meetings you'd have hoped we'd reached some middle ground, otherwise why bother sending HoT's setting out the bullet points if both parties were miles apart i.e. we wanted to purchase the land, the UWE only ever wanted to lease it. |
|
|
|
Post by RD on Aug 16, 2017 14:07:17 GMT
Well Gasincider's gone awfully quiet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2017 14:10:57 GMT
If similar sized stadiums are/were to be built at the Mem and UWE then the Mem stadium will
be FAR more expensive to build and will have to undergo more negotiations and protests.
The cheaper ,easier option is/was the UWE stadium.
Ater all planning was already done and the land owners wanted the stadium.
For the owners to actually choose the Mem stadium option it stands to reason the UWE deal
must have been VERY poor for Bristol Rovers .
On this basis alone I believe the owners are making the right decision. Even if I would have preferred a stadium at uwe as a concept.
|
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Aug 16, 2017 14:11:49 GMT
Heads of Terms are only really bullet points of what you ultimately want to contract to. Just because each side have their own draft of those doesn't really mean much. For example mine might say: - You will sell me your house for tuppence - You will still come round every summer to paint the front door And yours might say - You will leave me the f**k alone Just because we both have our idea of what we want out of the deal it doesn't mean we're necessarily on the verge of agreeing that. After 18 months of apparently numerous meetings you'd have hoped we'd reached some middle ground, otherwise why bother sending HoT's setting out the bullet points if both parties were miles apart i.e. we wanted to purchase the land, the UWE only ever wanted to lease it. But so what if we had? One variation in one of those bullet points can and does cause deals to collapse all the time, 18 months on or not. |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 16, 2017 14:14:06 GMT
Well Gasincider's gone awfully quiet. Probably in a meeting. Or hanging around outside the door in someone else's meeting. |
|
|
|
Post by pucklegas on Aug 16, 2017 14:14:31 GMT
Well Gasincider's gone awfully quiet. Perhaps we should contact someone in the chamber of powers to pay the ransom for spilling the beans! |
|
