|
Post by phillistine on Mar 17, 2016 16:50:39 GMT
Surely not going to appeal on the appeal on the appeal (think that's right?) Bloody madness!!! The goalposts have now changed and if it is decided to take the matter further then it will be with a new team of lawyers on board . If those lawyers ( with no axe to grind) feel that this is winnable then it would suggest that the case is stronger than most on this Forum believe to be the case. It is also a fact that Sainsburys are now taking on an adversary with a bigger pocket and that changes the game completely.
|
|
|
Post by Iliveinbidefordgas on Mar 17, 2016 16:53:51 GMT
Understand what your saying but could drag on another 3 years!! Would help anyone really?
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Mar 17, 2016 17:09:58 GMT
As long as we don't have to wait for it to be resolved in order to get on with UWE, it doesn't really matter how long it takes.
|
|
|
Post by Iliveinbidefordgas on Mar 17, 2016 17:12:50 GMT
True c what your saying
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Mar 17, 2016 17:19:52 GMT
The goalposts have now changed and if it is decided to take the matter further then it will be with a new team of lawyers on board . If those lawyers ( with no axe to grind) feel that this is winnable then it would suggest that the case is stronger than most on this Forum believe to be the case. It is also a fact that Sainsburys are now taking on an adversary with a bigger pocket and that changes the game completely. Changes nothing. 1 x 0 = 0. 3x0= 0. The law stays the same no matter who goes to court to represent us. When yer 4-0 down and run out of time you've lost. We have to live with it. We we were never going to win. Contract law has been fully established over hundreds of years and was therefore not for changing. NH has never been wrong, and in his deluded world he still isn't. Thanks for the huge legal costs Nick. Now go crush some grapes a long way from here, and take the idiot TW with you.
|
|
|
Post by Centenary Gas on Mar 17, 2016 17:20:49 GMT
Couple of things.
Didn't Nick Higgs say that the appeal was no win no fee for the legal team?
Plan B was rumoured to be a scaled down version of UWE paid for by selling the Mem off for housing. I would guess the housing part is the plan B he is talking about (and the old board won't want to make it public if they were thinking of downsizing the project), with the new owners able to sort funding for UWE much easier in the mean time.
|
|
|
Post by Strange Gas on Mar 17, 2016 17:33:14 GMT
". . . kept our options open with UWE" is all you need to hear. Appeal did its job. No UWE no Wael, no Bristol Rovers. Simples
|
|
|
Post by Langford Gas on Mar 17, 2016 17:34:13 GMT
I hoped that he was only being kept on by the new lot was so that he could be the 'spokesperson', for want of a better term, for this court case? It wasn't Wael/Hamer's fight that was lost today afterall. To be honest the only time I ever saw/heard him was outside various courtrooms regarding these bloody appeals so perhaps he has now outlived his usefulness?.. Meanwhile they are doing something useful by meeting potential funders for the new stadium. Where did the "potential" come into it ? i thought the Chairmann said on subs bench he was going to London to meet with the funders ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2016 17:59:10 GMT
Surely not going to appeal on the appeal on the appeal (think that's right?) Bloody madness!!! The goalposts have now changed and if it is decided to take the matter further then it will be with a new team of lawyers on board . If those lawyers ( with no axe to grind) feel that this is winnable then it would suggest that the case is stronger than most on this Forum believe to be the case. It is also a fact that Sainsburys are now taking on an adversary with a bigger pocket and that changes the game completely. My understanding of what I have heard and read today is that we have been refused permission to appeal to the Supreme court which ends the case here and now.
|
|
|
Post by chippenhamgas on Mar 17, 2016 18:01:18 GMT
Watola "the new regime are in London today exploring the possibility of alternative financing of the stadium". The word possibility concerns me.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Mar 17, 2016 18:06:02 GMT
The goalposts have now changed and if it is decided to take the matter further then it will be with a new team of lawyers on board . If those lawyers ( with no axe to grind) feel that this is winnable then it would suggest that the case is stronger than most on this Forum believe to be the case. It is also a fact that Sainsburys are now taking on an adversary with a bigger pocket and that changes the game completely. My understanding of what I have heard and read today is that we have been refused permission to appeal to the Supreme court which ends the case here and now. I don't believe so. I believe the system is that the ruling justices can give permission to appeal or not (I guess they can say this might be a bit dodgy so you might want to appeal, or we're pretty certain of this so no you can't appeal). If they don't give permission, you can still seek permission directly from the Supreme Court to appeal to them.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 17, 2016 18:10:22 GMT
Meanwhile they are doing something useful by meeting potential funders for the new stadium. Where did the "potential" come into it ? i thought the Chairmann said on subs bench he was going to London to meet with the funders ? I thought TW said that in today's interview, happy to be proved wrong though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2016 18:11:58 GMT
Watola "the new regime are in London today exploring the possibility of alternative financing of the stadium". The word possibility concerns me. IMHO there are too many people on here worrying about the financing of the UWE and where it will come from. With due respect to those posters unless some of them are bankers or financiers of a very high standing, I for one am quite happy for our new owners who undoubtedly have some knowledge of the financial world to obtain the relevant finance and build the UWE for the benefit of themselves, BRFC and its fanbase. UTG!
|
|
|
Post by Langford Gas on Mar 17, 2016 18:23:50 GMT
Where did the "potential" come into it ? i thought the Chairmann said on subs bench he was going to London to meet with the funders ? I thought TW said that in today's interview, happy to be proved wrong though. Me too ! i've listen to and read so much recently, i don't know who said what or where anymore !
|
|
|
Post by pirate49 on Mar 17, 2016 18:29:05 GMT
Don't pay any attention to what TW says. He looks as if he's been put out to graze and doesn't really know what's going on. Supremely ironic that he had to front it today...don't buy a dinghy from him!
|
|
|
Post by Langford Gas on Mar 17, 2016 18:34:22 GMT
Where did the "potential" come into it ? i thought the Chairmann said on subs bench he was going to London to meet with the funders ? I thought TW said that in today's interview, happy to be proved wrong though. Try this ,see what you think Big Jock posted it and its around 5:50 gaschat.co.uk/thread/6320/steve-hamer-on-bristol
|
|
|
Post by BishopstonBRFC on Mar 17, 2016 18:46:09 GMT
Don't pay any attention to what TW says. He looks as if he's been put out to graze and doesn't really know what's going on. Supremely ironic that he had to front it today...don't buy a dinghy from him! Someone had to be a go-between for the new regime and the legal team. It would have been a ball ache for them to have to get involved with what was clearly a lost cause.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Mar 17, 2016 18:46:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Mar 17, 2016 18:56:43 GMT
The goalposts have now changed and if it is decided to take the matter further then it will be with a new team of lawyers on board . If those lawyers ( with no axe to grind) feel that this is winnable then it would suggest that the case is stronger than most on this Forum believe to be the case. It is also a fact that Sainsburys are now taking on an adversary with a bigger pocket and that changes the game completely. Changes nothing. 1 x 0 = 0. 3x0= 0. The law stays the same no matter who goes to court to represent us. When yer 4-0 down and run out of time you've lost. We have to live with it. We we were never going to win. Contract law has been fully established over hundreds of years and was therefore not for changing. NH has never been wrong, and in his deluded world he still isn't. Thanks for the huge legal costs Nick. Now go crush some grapes a long way from here, and take the idiot TW with you. take a chill it may help
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 17, 2016 19:42:25 GMT
Watola "the new regime are in London today exploring the possibility of alternative financing of the stadium". The word possibility concerns me. Seems I didn't just make it up then, still odd to me TW was sent out to face the cameras today, I thought Hamer would just have appeared and said the club is now prepared to accept the Appeal courts verdict and are now arranging alternative funding for the UWE.
|
|