|
Post by oldie on Feb 11, 2023 4:51:05 GMT
I did a quick skim read, and didn't spot it. Wouldn't say 100% though, need to have a thorough look. I had a quick look last night, like you I couldn't see anything obvious. Thanks Stuart So the owner COULD sell the ground to recover his capital and leave the club homeless. Not surprised and wouldn't knock him for that. It's what most people would do rather than walk away with losses of £20Million plus. What was that about "hanging by a thread" and "the whim of one man"? 🤔🤔🤔🤔
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Feb 11, 2023 8:43:56 GMT
I had a quick look last night, like you I couldn't see anything obvious. Thanks Stuart So the owner COULD sell the ground to recover his capital and leave the club homeless. Not surprised and wouldn't knock him for that. It's what most people would do rather than walk away with losses of £20Million plus. What was that about "hanging by a thread" and "the whim of one man"? 🤔🤔🤔🤔 Was it ever included? I also had an albeit quick look back through Companies House records and couldn't see any resolutions adopting it. Could be a Covenant held by the Land Registry rather than in the Articles of Association?
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Feb 11, 2023 8:55:50 GMT
Thanks Stuart So the owner COULD sell the ground to recover his capital and leave the club homeless. Not surprised and wouldn't knock him for that. It's what most people would do rather than walk away with losses of £20Million plus. What was that about "hanging by a thread" and "the whim of one man"? 🤔🤔🤔🤔 Was it ever included? I also had an albeit quick look back through Companies House records and couldn't see any resolutions adopting it. Somewhere between 2002/3 I think. It definitely happened because the club "accidentally" increased share capital which would have allowed them to resolve to change the articles on this point, something which again was covered in the SS Agreement. I fondly recall being invited to lunch at GD's hotel in Brislington where he explained.🤭
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2023 10:33:56 GMT
I did a quick skim read, and didn't spot it. Wouldn't say 100% though, need to have a thorough look. I had a quick look last night, like you I couldn't see anything obvious. Is there a chance that the previous owners added it a covenant to the deeds of the stadium prior to selling?
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Feb 11, 2023 10:56:39 GMT
Why can't we put a team into this competition? JB might struggle to get an ESTA. Sometimes the funniest things are the truth.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Feb 11, 2023 10:58:30 GMT
I had a quick look last night, like you I couldn't see anything obvious. Is there a chance that the previous owners added it a covenant to the deeds of the stadium prior to selling? That is what I am referring to. Nothing to do with the SC/share scheme.
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Feb 11, 2023 11:10:53 GMT
Is there a chance that the previous owners added it a covenant to the deeds of the stadium prior to selling? That is what I am referring to. Nothing to do with the SC/share scheme. Oh ok. There is/was a covenant I thought implemented when the original owners donated the property, stipulating that the property must be used for sporting purposes. But I thought that was deemed to be easily removed as long as the Memorial Gates were left in tact?. Didn't that come about when Sainsbury's were in the hunt for a new site? Either way, Covenants are a matter of public record...so
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Feb 11, 2023 11:19:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Tilly's Thighs on Feb 11, 2023 11:48:05 GMT
I would guess that an expert in planning law could probably put a case that preserving the gates as part of any development covers this. What else at The Mem can actually be shown to be a community asset?
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Feb 11, 2023 12:35:50 GMT
I would guess that an expert in planning law could probably put a case that preserving the gates as part of any development covers this. What else at The Mem can actually be shown to be a community asset? Indeed. I have now had sight of the Land Registry entry and the only covenant (relative to the point being discussed here) is the original of 1917...determining that use of the land should be restricted to sporting activity. I read it on my phone, and I am not a legal expert, but I could see nothing that supports the assertion Dwayne could not sell it, as Nick Higgs wanted to re Sainsburys.
|
|
|
Post by Tilly's Thighs on Feb 11, 2023 13:54:14 GMT
I would guess that an expert in planning law could probably put a case that preserving the gates as part of any development covers this. What else at The Mem can actually be shown to be a community asset? Indeed. I have now had sight of the Land Registry entry and the only covenant (relative to the point being discussed here) is the original of 1917...determining that use of the land should be restricted to sporting activity. I read it on my phone, and I am not a legal expert, but I could see nothing that supports the assertion Dwayne could not sell it, as Nick Higgs wanted to re Sainsburys. Thank you for clarifying that one. It is also incredible what schemes planning experts are able to get pushed through, we are currently witnessing stage 2 of The Sack of Bath, very sad.
|
|
|
Post by Kingswood Polak on Feb 11, 2023 22:21:01 GMT
No idea, but if I was in his position, as discreetly as possible. In reality, nobody wants to say "look at me, I have been stupid", do they? you seem to do a pretty good job at it Be specific and maybe give some examples. Think you will find it harder than you think, one liners are much easier eh
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 11, 2023 22:21:36 GMT
I would guess that an expert in planning law could probably put a case that preserving the gates as part of any development covers this. What else at The Mem can actually be shown to be a community asset? The Community Asset tag shouldn't really apply to something like a football ground, as it simply entitles the local community time to match any commercial offer received, if we ever sold the Mem then there's no way any local residents would even meet a ⅒ of the sale price.
|
|
|
Post by Kingswood Polak on Feb 11, 2023 22:23:43 GMT
That’s been the case since the Al-Qadi family took over DrF. I said it on the OF and I’m happy to say it here, but you can’t help but think there is a racist element to it or the fact that these one hate we are under foreign ownership and not a local businessman fan like we have always been. As in any walk of life there will be one or two abhorrent small minded bigots, but it is very dangerous throwing about allegations or accusations of racism towards the owner with no evidence. Certainly some are dissatisfied with the way the club is run and others with 6 years of a lack of progress on a new stadium and years and years of near silence on the matter, when the owner has categorically stated "this football club requires and needs a new stadium" and "If we want to succeed, a new stadium has to happen. A new stadium has to be built." There has been absolutely no racism involved and it was a preposterous accusation but when one person hates on another, they get desperate. They later admitted there was no racism
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 11, 2023 22:42:35 GMT
As in any walk of life there will be one or two abhorrent small minded bigots, but it is very dangerous throwing about allegations or accusations of racism towards the owner with no evidence. Certainly some are dissatisfied with the way the club is run and others with 6 years of a lack of progress on a new stadium and years and years of near silence on the matter, when the owner has categorically stated "this football club requires and needs a new stadium" and "If we want to succeed, a new stadium has to happen. A new stadium has to be built." There has been absolutely no racism involved and it was a preposterous accusation but when one person hates on another, they get desperate. They later admitted there was no racism Suggest you read G1981 post again as he's just repeated the allegation. Perhaps you could explain why you clearly mistrust somebody who's ploughed £m's into Rovers, as most of us find it all a bit mystifying?
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Feb 12, 2023 9:33:53 GMT
There has been absolutely no racism involved and it was a preposterous accusation but when one person hates on another, they get desperate. They later admitted there was no racism Suggest you read G1981 post again as he's just repeated the allegation. Perhaps you could explain why you clearly mistrust somebody who's ploughed £m's into Rovers, as most of us find it all a bit mystifying? That's a false flag. It's not about trust, it's about reality. G1981 stated that Dwane Sports could only sell the Mem under certain conditions, conditions laid down in a covenant. Three of us have looked at the Land Registry entry and can find no such condition or covenant (as described). This is the reality.
|
|
yattongas
Proper Gas
Posts: 14,951
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Feb 12, 2023 9:39:21 GMT
Suggest you read G1981 post again as he's just repeated the allegation. Perhaps you could explain why you clearly mistrust somebody who's ploughed £m's into Rovers, as most of us find it all a bit mystifying? That's a false flag. It's not about trust, it's about reality. G1981 stated that Dwane Sports could only sell the Mem under certain conditions, conditions laid down in a covenant. Three of us have looked at the Land Registry entry and can find no such condition or covenant (as described). This is the reality. I thought when Higgs sold the club to Wael the stipulation was that the ground couldn’t be sold unless we had a new stadium to move to was part of the agreement of sale .
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Feb 12, 2023 9:43:48 GMT
That's a false flag. It's not about trust, it's about reality. G1981 stated that Dwane Sports could only sell the Mem under certain conditions, conditions laid down in a covenant. Three of us have looked at the Land Registry entry and can find no such condition or covenant (as described). This is the reality. I thought when Higgs sold the club to Wael the stipulation was that the ground couldn’t be sold unless we had a new stadium to move to was part of the agreement of sale . How is that enforceable?
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 12, 2023 9:49:20 GMT
Suggest you read G1981 post again as he's just repeated the allegation. Perhaps you could explain why you clearly mistrust somebody who's ploughed £m's into Rovers, as most of us find it all a bit mystifying? That's a false flag. It's not about trust, it's about reality. G1981 stated that Dwane Sports could only sell the Mem under certain conditions, conditions laid down in a covenant. Three of us have looked at the Land Registry entry and can find no such condition or covenant (as described). This is the reality. You've simply found something else to scaremonger about when 99.99% of the fan couldn't careless about this issue, most of us are more worried about staying in L1 than the Mem ever being sold for development.
|
|
yattongas
Proper Gas
Posts: 14,951
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Feb 12, 2023 9:49:50 GMT
I thought when Higgs sold the club to Wael the stipulation was that the ground couldn’t be sold unless we had a new stadium to move to was part of the agreement of sale . How is that enforceable? No idea , just remember reading something like that .
|
|