|
Post by stevek192 on Aug 1, 2015 17:49:03 GMT
To end up total tenants again would be a MASSIVE backward step but to be joint owners would be promising.
|
|
|
Post by Gas-Ed on Aug 1, 2015 17:49:39 GMT
How desperate are you lot? Desperate. No new stadium + crippling debts = sh it creek without a boat, let alone a paddle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 17:51:59 GMT
Although you do wonder where a Uni can raise £20m from just to build a stadium as that's an hell of a lot of student loans! Would 27,000 (in 2013) do?They had £15m sat on account at the end of their last financial year.
|
|
|
Post by Dirt Dogg on Aug 1, 2015 17:57:01 GMT
Not sure if I like this, what would happen if UWE decided to up the rent? We'd be stuck in another Eastville scenario!
Not a bad Plan B, as long as there was some sort of rental price agreement put in place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 18:32:32 GMT
Would a state owned organisation be able to become joint shareholders of a private limited company? Don't Swansea City council joint own the Liberty stadium ? No, the City council own the stadium and this year is ten years since Swansea started playing there. However the Swansea Chairman has recently been in talks with them, with the clubs intention to buy the stadium outright from the council.
|
|
|
Post by costahotshot on Aug 1, 2015 18:42:04 GMT
Those of you old enough to remember, we were tenants at Eastville and look where that got us..!!!
|
|
|
Post by Centenary Gas on Aug 1, 2015 18:48:08 GMT
I can see all sorts of 'ughh' moments if we aren't building it. Worst of all being a running track...
Also it is often said we need the 7 day a week income a new stadium would provide... well this wouldn't provide it.
If we could get UWE to put up half of the money as joint owners and let it go ahead as planned upto now, great. Smaller stadium controlled and owned by them? Would rather stay at the Mem.
What we really need to know, is how the club plan on paying off this wonga loan, because right now I have heard nothing from the club about it, which is worrying.
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Aug 1, 2015 18:49:53 GMT
Just as one door seemingly closes. Surely we can put some sort of deal in place where we can purchase the stadium in the future. I can't help but feel a 15,000 seater better suits our needs. Something a little bigger than Rotherham's New York stadium would be ideal. We could always expand i'm sure. I was really impressed by Rotherham's ground. It seems far bigger than it is and you don't have the mass of empty seats on the same scale as, for example, Huddersfield or Wigan. If it had.the.conference facilities etc tbat generate them money, why would they then sell up any of that to us when they could take x amount of rent off us
|
|
|
Post by Mark Ash on Aug 1, 2015 19:16:38 GMT
We could have 15000 at the Mem just by building a South Stand. Might as well, and have our own ground, if we're not going to get revenue from UWE and be insecure tenants.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 1, 2015 19:26:23 GMT
Not sure if I like this, what would happen if UWE decided to up the rent? We'd be stuck in another Eastville scenario! Not a bad Plan B, as long as there was some sort of rental price agreement put in place. Assuming the UWE want us as much as we want a new staduim then perhaps we could just agree a 100 year at a reasonable rate? As far as selling the Mem if we lose the Appeal then the full Wonga loan with interest of £3m+ will have to added to our present £5m+ debt so we won't have much left to buy half a share in a £20m stadium.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 1, 2015 19:28:13 GMT
Would a state owned organisation be able to become joint shareholders of a private limited company? Aren't the UWE run by the Merchant Venturers rather than the state?
|
|
|
Post by britishgas on Aug 1, 2015 19:32:53 GMT
Would rather just keep the Mem than disappear to a new stadium where we could eventually be kicked out for whatever reason. An extra 3,000 seats isn't worth it for the risk of being back at square one, except this time with the Mem razed to the ground. Don't fancy having to share with Cheltenham/FGR/Newport. Anyway, 3,000 seats could be added by expanding the East and South stands, and for much less than it would cost to build a reduced UWE.
|
|
|
Post by kruger on Aug 1, 2015 19:40:40 GMT
Would rather just keep the Mem than disappear to a new stadium where we could eventually be kicked out for whatever reason. An extra 3,000 seats isn't worth it for the risk of being back at square one, except this time with the Mem razed to the ground. Don't fancy having to share with Cheltenham/FGR/Newport. Anyway, 3,000 seats could be added by expanding the East and South stands, and for much less than it would cost to build a reduced UWE. what about if they signed a lease for say 50 years or more?
|
|
|
Post by tommym9 on Aug 1, 2015 19:42:12 GMT
Would rather just keep the Mem than disappear to a new stadium where we could eventually be kicked out for whatever reason. An extra 3,000 seats isn't worth it for the risk of being back at square one, except this time with the Mem razed to the ground. Don't fancy having to share with Cheltenham/FGR/Newport. Anyway, 3,000 seats could be added by expanding the East and South stands, and for much less than it would cost to build a reduced UWE. Is the point that UWE would bring in more non-matchday revenue than add extra seats to the capacity? I thought getting the students in was one of the big driving forces behind moving from the mem.
|
|
|
Post by cheese4ead on Aug 1, 2015 19:55:05 GMT
Those of you old enough to remember, we were tenants at Eastville and look where that got us..!!! I'm a bit sketchy on the details but we had a long term lease agreement with fixed rent at Eastville after selling it to the Bristol Stadium Company in the fifties. From what I remember we got into financial difficulties in the mid eighties under Barry Bradshaw and Martin Flook and they sold our rights to that guaranteed low rent for 150k to the stadium company ( Ian Stevens I think). It didn't take long after that to force us out.
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Aug 1, 2015 19:56:38 GMT
After Eastville, no thanks. Remember, the Mem will clear the debts, then we are much worse off than now. We aren't paying rent at the moment.
Even if we owned half it would not be enough. We lose money now, and with a joint owned UWE , we wouldn't be much better off than now. We need a massive increase in income from non football sources and we won't get that from anything other than a totally owned stadium.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 20:01:36 GMT
Even if we owned half it would not be enough. We lose money now, and with a joint owned UWE , we wouldn't be much better off than now. We need a massive increase in income from non football sources and we won't get that from anything other than a totally owned stadium. Pardon me for being a bit thick,but if we owned half,wouldn't we get half of the non football sources ?? and that's a lot more than we are getting now.
|
|
|
Post by RD on Aug 1, 2015 20:07:45 GMT
Joined ownership big yes from me.
Tenants; astronomical no.
|
|
|
Post by RD on Aug 1, 2015 20:08:36 GMT
After Eastville, no thanks. Remember, the Mem will clear the debts, then we are much worse off than now. We aren't paying rent at the moment. Even if we owned half it would not be enough. We lose money now, and with a joint owned UWE , we wouldn't be much better off than now. We need a massive increase in income from non football sources and we won't get that from anything other than a totally owned stadium. In fairness though, something - however little - is better than nothing, surely?
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 1, 2015 20:25:39 GMT
After Eastville, no thanks. Remember, the Mem will clear the debts, then we are much worse off than now. We aren't paying rent at the moment. Even if we owned half it would not be enough. We lose money now, and with a joint owned UWE , we wouldn't be much better off than now. We need a massive increase in income from non football sources and we won't get that from anything other than a totally owned stadium. Problem is we can't sell the Mem to clear our debts and then remain playing there. Surely playing at a newly built UWE is better than ground sharing with Bath again? If we lose the Appeal we have to find £3m to pay off the Wonga loan plus NH will eventually want his money back. I can't see how we can pay Wonga off without selling the Mem?
|
|