Fruit Market OFF - Club redeveloping Mem instead.

Not sure who mentioned it at the time, but it was clearly stated that the UWE deal just wasn't right for BRFC.

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 ? 



 

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.

Didn't make anything up. I just said what was in the plans. What did I make up??? Did you want a jogging track around the pitch and lecture halls?? Personally I would rather football related stuff, or something that's going to bring in more money.

I have never said what we pulled out, as I don't know. I'm just saying, that I didn't like the plans myself and it's not as rosey as loads are making out on here. Saying it was a great deal for the club, if it was, we wouldn't have pulled out.

Not sure how old you are but as a young lad going to Eastville i always thought the greyhound track was a real detriment to the ground as fans were too far away from the action. A bit like some old European grounds where they had an athletics track . Not for me thanks .

Didn't make anything up. I just said what was in the plans. What did I make up??? Did you want a jogging track around the pitch and lecture halls?? Personally I would rather football related stuff, or something that's going to bring in more money.

I have never said what we pulled out, as I don't know. I'm just saying, that I didn't like the plans myself and it's not as rosey as loads are making out on here. Saying it was a great deal for the club, if it was, we wouldn't have pulled out.

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.

UWE weren't giving us the space; they were leasing it to us for 125 years. That means they receive a capital payment and then ongoing rent from the leaseholder. In return apart from the financial return they got a car park they could use on non-match days and facilities in the stadium they could use on non-match days. UWE press release here info.uwe.ac.uk/news/uwenews/news.aspx?id=1983 plenty more info here bristolroversmemorabilia.weebly.com/uwe-stadium.html

The only person who persists with false information (in sycophantic support of WAQ) on here is you.

Once it was clear that the Mem wasn't being sold to Sainsbury's and the money had to come from elsewhere The ALQ family decided that they didn't want to commit their own money to such a big project. That is what happened. That doesn't mean it wouldn't have been good for the football club to go ahead if for instance the ALQ family were prepared to put their own money at risk as share capital, but that would have meant tying their money up and not being able to realise it again until they sold their shares. so not a good deal as far as they were concerned. Would have been fantastic for the football club though if they had!