|
|
Post by playtowin on Nov 30, 2022 17:22:02 GMT
If a new stadium doesnt appear there might only be few options.
Probably redevelop the Mem site into a 12,000 seater stadium with all available space used for other income streams.
The income needs to pay for the mem and the quarters.
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 30, 2022 17:25:15 GMT
Where did it say jogging track was around the pitch? I recall there being something outside the stadium in the plans but I may have remembered incorrectly. They spoke about it being around the pitch, they said it wouldn't be as wide as an athletic track, but it would still have had a negative impact on the atmosphere. That was in the original plans we've no idea what was in the plans Wael/Hani were considering for so long, even to the extent Mr Al-Qadi flew over for talks, apparently against his own wishes, so a deal must have been reasonably close, or at least the Al-Q's wanted a deal, but lets now stick to the idea it was always a bad deal for Rovers and never really given any consideration to by the Al-Q's. Regardless why would the UWE want a deal which put Rovers future in any doubt, what good would it be to them to have an unused stadium on their land? |
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Nov 30, 2022 17:34:18 GMT
They spoke about it being around the pitch, they said it wouldn't be as wide as an athletic track, but it would still have had a negative impact on the atmosphere. They being? Higgs or someone else from the board at the time, when they were answering questions about it. Doesn't actually say on the plans you can see now. It does say that the teaching space was 4x the size of the club shop and 3x the size of the bar though. The gym for the uni was going to be bigger than the shop and bar as well. All for the club though🤣. We will never know for full details. So I can only go on what I've seen/heard. A lot of fans were so desperate for a stadium, they were willing to let things go. I wanted it built, as I really want us to have a new stadium. But a lot of what was said worried me. |
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Nov 30, 2022 18:33:29 GMT
The loan was to fight a court case not build a stadium! Are you deliberately misrepresenting facts or just so devoted to Wael you just make them up to conflate two utterly separate things? Geoff Dunford thought UWE was a good deal for the club. Higgs thought the same. Steve Hamer the same. It wasn’t though a good deal for the ALQ family because it didn’t give them personally the return on investment they wanted to put their capital at risk. That doesn’t mean it wouldn’t have been a good enough deal for the FC. The FC is a separate entity to the ALQ family and the return on investment requirements will not necessarily be the same. That makes no sense and you know it. If it's not giving a return to the owners, you do know it's not given a return to the club?? If the club becomes more substainable, then the value goes up. The loan was taken to give the owners more time, which gave the club more time. It was a risk to the club and owners though! Waels that bothered about a personal return, that he wrote off millions of debt! I'm not even a Wael fan, I'm in the middle. I just use facts though and not made up stuff. If someone can come in and build a stadium that is aimed at us, I'm all for it and Wael can move aside. Higgs also said the Sainsburys deal was water tight, they were desperate and would have signed anything. Did Dunford say how a jogging track for students helps to improve the atmosphere as the fans are further from the pitch🤣. Did he say having a lecture hall for the uni was good for the club? I expect he was just talking in general, saying it's good for the club no knowing the details and you took it literally. I'm just going by what was in the public domain and it looked like the majority of the stuff, was aimed at uwe, including naming rights. Nothing makes much sense to you though. You cannot comprehend how owners and the entities they own interests don’t necessarily align. You even argued with someone else last week that nothing happening with a new stadium means something is happening with a new stadium! There is no point arguing with such twisted delusions. Look up Bill Archer and Brighton and Hove Albion or that fellow that owned Pompey when they won the cup if you want examples of owners profiting at the expense of the entity they owned. If you want an example the other way where the entity they owned benefited at the detriment to the ‘return on investment’ of the owner you can look 4 miles across the city, as one of countless examples. The Coates family at Stoke are another who have supported their club to build infrastructure for no personal gain. Loads more too. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Nov 30, 2022 18:42:47 GMT
Where did it say jogging track was around the pitch? I recall there being something outside the stadium in the plans but I may have remembered incorrectly. They spoke about it being around the pitch, they said it wouldn't be as wide as an athletic track, but it would still have had a negative impact on the atmosphere. I recall when the news broke about UWE (completely out of the blue - how did they keep that quiet?) that the pitch had a 2 or 3 lane jogging track. Always thought that was a bit weird and probably why it stuck in my mind. |
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Nov 30, 2022 20:00:39 GMT
That makes no sense and you know it. If it's not giving a return to the owners, you do know it's not given a return to the club?? If the club becomes more substainable, then the value goes up. The loan was taken to give the owners more time, which gave the club more time. It was a risk to the club and owners though! Waels that bothered about a personal return, that he wrote off millions of debt! I'm not even a Wael fan, I'm in the middle. I just use facts though and not made up stuff. If someone can come in and build a stadium that is aimed at us, I'm all for it and Wael can move aside. Higgs also said the Sainsburys deal was water tight, they were desperate and would have signed anything. Did Dunford say how a jogging track for students helps to improve the atmosphere as the fans are further from the pitch🤣. Did he say having a lecture hall for the uni was good for the club? I expect he was just talking in general, saying it's good for the club no knowing the details and you took it literally. I'm just going by what was in the public domain and it looked like the majority of the stuff, was aimed at uwe, including naming rights. Nothing makes much sense to you though. You cannot comprehend how owners and the entities they own interests don’t necessarily align. You even argued with someone else last week that nothing happening with a new stadium means something is happening with a new stadium! There is no point arguing with such twisted delusions. Look up Bill Archer and Brighton and Hove Albion or that fellow that owned Pompey when they won the cup if you want examples of owners profiting at the expense of the entity they owned. If you want an example the other way where the entity they owned benefited at the detriment to the ‘return on investment’ of the owner you can look 4 miles across the city, as one of countless examples. The Coates family at Stoke are another who have supported their club to build infrastructure for no personal gain. Loads more too. Did any of those owners clear millions of debt?? Again I don't care who is in charge of our club, I just want us to have a stadium. You honestly think Wael is in it to make a profit🤣 I never said it was proof that something was happening🤣. |
|
|
|
Post by Colyton Gas on Nov 30, 2022 20:13:13 GMT
Having travelled from Stafford to Twerton for many years I often wondered if we could share a new stadium with Bath Rugby?
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 30, 2022 21:47:12 GMT
Having travelled from Stafford to Twerton for many years I often wondered if we could share a new stadium with Bath Rugby? Why would Bristol Rovers went to play permanently in Bath? Although their new stadium saga seems just as bad as ours. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 30, 2022 21:52:10 GMT
Nothing makes much sense to you though. You cannot comprehend how owners and the entities they own interests don’t necessarily align. You even argued with someone else last week that nothing happening with a new stadium means something is happening with a new stadium! There is no point arguing with such twisted delusions. Look up Bill Archer and Brighton and Hove Albion or that fellow that owned Pompey when they won the cup if you want examples of owners profiting at the expense of the entity they owned. If you want an example the other way where the entity they owned benefited at the detriment to the ‘return on investment’ of the owner you can look 4 miles across the city, as one of countless examples. The Coates family at Stoke are another who have supported their club to build infrastructure for no personal gain. Loads more too. Did any of those owners clear millions of debt?? Again I don't care who is in charge of our club, I just want us to have a stadium. You honestly think Wael is in it to make a profit🤣 I never said it was proof that something was happening🤣. How do you know what Wael's intentions really are, why would a wealthy banker buy a foreign football club and be content to make a massive loss? |
|
|
|
Post by Colyton Gas on Nov 30, 2022 22:02:55 GMT
Having travelled from Stafford to Twerton for many years I often wondered if we could share a new stadium with Bath Rugby? Why would Bristol Rovers went to play permanently in Bath? Although their new stadium saga seems just as bad as ours. I am grasping at Straws Topper old chap and didn't say it would have to be in Bath.Somewhere in between would have suited both perhaps? |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Nov 30, 2022 22:06:50 GMT
Why would Bristol Rovers went to play permanently in Bath? Although their new stadium saga seems just as bad as ours. Grasping at Straws Topper old chap and didn't say it would have to be in Bath.Somewhere in between would have suited both perhaps? Topper obviously didn’t tell you about all those active volcanoes that litter the landscape between the two cities. If he had I’m sure it would be obvious to you that any ground shared by the two clubs would have had to be in the centre of Bath !!! |
|
|
|
Post by otleygas on Dec 1, 2022 2:08:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Dec 1, 2022 6:08:38 GMT
Grasping at Straws Topper old chap and didn't say it would have to be in Bath.Somewhere in between would have suited both perhaps? Topper obviously didn’t tell you about all those active volcanoes that litter the landscape between the two cities. If he had I’m sure it would be obvious to you that any ground shared by the two clubs would have had to be in the centre of Bath !!! It seems pretty obvious to me that Bath RFC have no intentions of ever leaving Bath nor ground sharing with Rovers. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Dec 1, 2022 8:40:14 GMT
Topper obviously didn’t tell you about all those active volcanoes that litter the landscape between the two cities. If he had I’m sure it would be obvious to you that any ground shared by the two clubs would have had to be in the centre of Bath !!! It seems pretty obvious to me that Bath RFC have no intentions of ever leaving Bath nor ground sharing with Rovers. For gods sake. The bloke used to wonder about the possibility when travelling to Twerton - that would have been over 25 years ago. Let’s turn it in to a long rambling pointless debate about whether Bath rugby would ever consider moving and sharing with Rovers 🥱 |
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Dec 1, 2022 10:04:31 GMT
Did any of those owners clear millions of debt?? Again I don't care who is in charge of our club, I just want us to have a stadium. You honestly think Wael is in it to make a profit🤣 I never said it was proof that something was happening🤣. How do you know what Wael's intentions really are, why would a wealthy banker buy a foreign football club and be content to make a massive loss? Why would anyone buy a football club?? Expect he's but content at losing money and will want to make us self efficient. But that's different to wanting to make a profit, for personal gain. Getting a bit off topic now🤣. I was only answering the other person, who said the uwe deal was great for the club, but bad for Wael so he turned it down. It was going to make the club magic money, but the owner wasn't going to get any of it🤣. |
|
|
|
Post by Kingswood Polak on Dec 1, 2022 11:53:20 GMT
How do you know what Wael's intentions really are, why would a wealthy banker buy a foreign football club and be content to make a massive loss? Why would anyone buy a football club?? Expect he's but content at losing money and will want to make us self efficient. But that's different to wanting to make a profit, for personal gain. Getting a bit off topic now🤣. I was only answering the other person, who said the uwe deal was great for the club, but bad for Wael so he turned it down. It was going to make the club magic money, but the owner wasn't going to get any of it🤣. i think some of the facts were indisputable, such as Firstly, when Rovers were going to get 29 million from Sainsburys for the Mem Nick Higgs was very transparent and said that had to be ring fenced for the stadium. Understandably UWE didn't want anyone to start constructing a stadium then run out of money leaving an eyesore on their land with them having to clean up the mess. That's why, when the Sainsburys deal fell through, the UWE told Dwane Sports they wanted a cash bond in place to make sure construction costs were covered. The Al-Qadi's couldn't or wouldn't come up with a cash bond. Secondly, the stadium including the bars, gymnasium, teaching space and shop were all going to be owned by Rovers. Rovers would have derived revenue from the bars whether it was students or fans drinking there. The gymnasium was to be leased by Rovers to an operator to provide revenue for the club (this was mentioned in the court case transcript). The teaching space was to be leased to UWE to provide revenue for Rovers. The customers at the shop could be students or fans but the revenue would still go to Rovers. And the naming rights and non matchday parking were given to UWE in lieu of ground rent for the land on which the stadium was to be built which was a sensible commercial arrangement. As i have previously said, we will never know the real reasons why it fell through or how monies and finance are dealt with, there are just too many Dwane subsidiaries and i am not clever enough to even start to work it out. All i can go on is what was in the public domain. Does it come down to what is good for the club or good for the owner is another we will not know. Who would want to be an owner eh ? |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Dec 1, 2022 12:12:03 GMT
Why would anyone buy a football club?? Expect he's but content at losing money and will want to make us self efficient. But that's different to wanting to make a profit, for personal gain. Getting a bit off topic now🤣. I was only answering the other person, who said the uwe deal was great for the club, but bad for Wael so he turned it down. It was going to make the club magic money, but the owner wasn't going to get any of it🤣. i think some of the facts were indisputable, such as Firstly, when Rovers were going to get 29 million from Sainsburys for the Mem Nick Higgs was very transparent and said that had to be ring fenced for the stadium. Understandably UWE didn't want anyone to start constructing a stadium then run out of money leaving an eyesore on their land with them having to clean up the mess. That's why, when the Sainsburys deal fell through, the UWE told Dwane Sports they wanted a cash bond in place to make sure construction costs were covered. The Al-Qadi's couldn't or wouldn't come up with a cash bond. Secondly, the stadium including the bars, gymnasium, teaching space and shop were all going to be owned by Rovers. Rovers would have derived revenue from the bars whether it was students or fans drinking there. The gymnasium was to be leased by Rovers to an operator to provide revenue for the club (this was mentioned in the court case transcript). The teaching space was to be leased to UWE to provide revenue for Rovers. The customers at the shop could be students or fans but the revenue would still go to Rovers. And the naming rights and non matchday parking were given to UWE in lieu of ground rent for the land on which the stadium was to be built which was a sensible commercial arrangement. As i have previously said, we will never know the real reasons why it fell through or how monies and finance are dealt with, there are just too many Dwane subsidiaries and i am not clever enough to even start to work it out. All i can go on is what was in the public domain. Does it come down to what is good for the club or good for the owner is another we will not know. Who would want to be an owner eh ? Problem is none of us know what % the UWE wanted from the bar takings etc, it seems pretty certain they'd want more back from the club than just having "UWE" stuck on the side of the stadium. You'd still think the club would make more from 20,000 fans at the UWE than just 10,000 fans at the Mem regardless of the % the UWE wanted. |
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Dec 1, 2022 12:52:52 GMT
Why would anyone buy a football club?? Expect he's but content at losing money and will want to make us self efficient. But that's different to wanting to make a profit, for personal gain. Getting a bit off topic now🤣. I was only answering the other person, who said the uwe deal was great for the club, but bad for Wael so he turned it down. It was going to make the club magic money, but the owner wasn't going to get any of it🤣. i think some of the facts were indisputable, such as Firstly, when Rovers were going to get 29 million from Sainsburys for the Mem Nick Higgs was very transparent and said that had to be ring fenced for the stadium. Understandably UWE didn't want anyone to start constructing a stadium then run out of money leaving an eyesore on their land with them having to clean up the mess. That's why, when the Sainsburys deal fell through, the UWE told Dwane Sports they wanted a cash bond in place to make sure construction costs were covered. The Al-Qadi's couldn't or wouldn't come up with a cash bond. Secondly, the stadium including the bars, gymnasium, teaching space and shop were all going to be owned by Rovers. Rovers would have derived revenue from the bars whether it was students or fans drinking there. The gymnasium was to be leased by Rovers to an operator to provide revenue for the club (this was mentioned in the court case transcript). The teaching space was to be leased to UWE to provide revenue for Rovers. The customers at the shop could be students or fans but the revenue would still go to Rovers. And the naming rights and non matchday parking were given to UWE in lieu of ground rent for the land on which the stadium was to be built which was a sensible commercial arrangement. As i have previously said, we will never know the real reasons why it fell through or how monies and finance are dealt with, there are just too many Dwane subsidiaries and i am not clever enough to even start to work it out. All i can go on is what was in the public domain. Does it come down to what is good for the club or good for the owner is another we will not know. Who would want to be an owner eh ? Who said we were going to own everything?? That's not the impression I got listening to the interviews at the time. Why would Uwe gift us the space and pay rent on top of that. That makes no business sense for them and I don't think they would be allowed to do that, even if they wanted to. What was in it for them?? None of us know the truth, because of the clauses. You could well be right. But if it was all that rosey, then finance wouldn't have been a problem and it would have been a great deal for the club and the owners! So I can't think why it wouldn't have went ahead. More likely that you were given false information by someone with an agenda and took it. |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Dec 1, 2022 12:53:55 GMT
daniel300380 i think some of the facts were indisputable, such as Firstly, when Rovers were going to get 29 million from Sainsburys for the Mem Nick Higgs was very transparent and said that had to be ring fenced for the stadium. Understandably UWE didn't want anyone to start constructing a stadium then run out of money leaving an eyesore on their land with them having to clean up the mess. That's why, when the Sainsburys deal fell through, the UWE told Dwane Sports they wanted a cash bond in place to make sure construction costs were covered. The Al-Qadi's couldn't or wouldn't come up with a cash bond. Secondly, the stadium including the bars, gymnasium, teaching space and shop were all going to be owned by Rovers. Rovers would have derived revenue from the bars whether it was students or fans drinking there. The gymnasium was to be leased by Rovers to an operator to provide revenue for the club (this was mentioned in the court case transcript). The teaching space was to be leased to UWE to provide revenue for Rovers. The customers at the shop could be students or fans but the revenue would still go to Rovers. And the naming rights and non matchday parking were given to UWE in lieu of ground rent for the land on which the stadium was to be built which was a sensible commercial arrangement. As i have previously said, we will never know the real reasons why it fell through or how monies and finance are dealt with, there are just too many Dwane subsidiaries and i am not clever enough to even start to work it out. All i can go on is what was in the public domain. Does it come down to what is good for the club or good for the owner is another we will not know. Who would want to be an owner eh ? Problem is none of us know what % the UWE wanted from the bar takings etc, it seems pretty certain they'd want more back from the club than just having "UWE" stuck on the side of the stadium. You'd still think the club would make more from 20,000 fans at the UWE than just 10,000 fans at the Mem regardless of the % the UWE wanted. Not sure who mentioned it at the time, but it was clearly stated that the UWE deal just wasn't right for BRFC. |
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Dec 1, 2022 12:58:52 GMT
daniel300380 i think some of the facts were indisputable, such as Firstly, when Rovers were going to get 29 million from Sainsburys for the Mem Nick Higgs was very transparent and said that had to be ring fenced for the stadium. Understandably UWE didn't want anyone to start constructing a stadium then run out of money leaving an eyesore on their land with them having to clean up the mess. That's why, when the Sainsburys deal fell through, the UWE told Dwane Sports they wanted a cash bond in place to make sure construction costs were covered. The Al-Qadi's couldn't or wouldn't come up with a cash bond. Secondly, the stadium including the bars, gymnasium, teaching space and shop were all going to be owned by Rovers. Rovers would have derived revenue from the bars whether it was students or fans drinking there. The gymnasium was to be leased by Rovers to an operator to provide revenue for the club (this was mentioned in the court case transcript). The teaching space was to be leased to UWE to provide revenue for Rovers. The customers at the shop could be students or fans but the revenue would still go to Rovers. And the naming rights and non matchday parking were given to UWE in lieu of ground rent for the land on which the stadium was to be built which was a sensible commercial arrangement. As i have previously said, we will never know the real reasons why it fell through or how monies and finance are dealt with, there are just too many Dwane subsidiaries and i am not clever enough to even start to work it out. All i can go on is what was in the public domain. Does it come down to what is good for the club or good for the owner is another we will not know. Who would want to be an owner eh ? Problem is none of us know what % the UWE wanted from the bar takings etc, it seems pretty certain they'd want more back from the club than just having "UWE" stuck on the side of the stadium. You'd still think the club would make more from 20,000 fans at the UWE than just 10,000 fans at the Mem regardless of the % the UWE wanted. They would make more, but you have to make enough to cover the build in the first place. So you have to make enough to cover the build cost and then still make more than the mem. Which is why we would need a high percentage of any new ground takings and include things that bring in non match day revenue for the club. |
|
