|
Post by bluebeard on Jan 20, 2015 23:59:48 GMT
Funny how some posters "re-appear" when things are bad though. Especially when the information they post is relevant to the discussion. Well there does seem to be an irritating air of smugness in certain quarters. FWIW I don't think this is a surprise to anyone. We will just have to wait and see whether or not the contract is watertight. A judge may need to make this decision but, alternatively, either party can reach their own conclusion and back down as the process unfolds. People can bleat on about the general failings of the board but TBF this situation was outside their control and the "everything is proceeding as planned" line we've been fed has probably been adopted with legal proceedings in mind. Who knows, we may even have a Plan B.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2015 0:09:47 GMT
Especially when the information they post is relevant to the discussion. Well there does seem to be an irritating air of smugness in certain quarters. FWIW I don't think this is a surprise to anyone. We will just have to wait and see whether or not the contract is watertight. A judge may need to make this decision but, alternatively, either party can reach their own conclusion and back down as the process unfolds. People can bleat on about the general failings of the board but TBF this situation was outside their control and the "everything is proceeding as planned" line we've been fed has probably been adopted with legal proceedings in mind. Who knows, we may even have a Plan B. You nearly got me sympathising with the board for the first time since dear old dennis left the chair, but it fell apart on reading your final sentence.
|
|
|
Post by bluebeard on Jan 21, 2015 0:32:12 GMT
This article was in the context of "will UWE fund the stadium if Sainsburys walk away from the deal?" Of course they wouldn't. Yes there is a risk UWE could change their mind if the process drags on indefinitely but the priority for the club and its lawyers at this point in time is to bring matters to a head with Sainsburys. As others have said, we should find out within the next few weeks whether this is going to go all the way. The lawyers on both sides will know the most likely outcome so it's a waiting game now to see who backs down first. My guess is that the refinancing was partly done to provide a fighting fund in the knowledge that we have a good chance of success. I'm quietly confident that, at worst, rovers will receive a substantial payment but whether the UWE stadium is ever built is another matter. There is bound to be speculation and rumour throughout the process but the reality is that, NH will not (and should not) show his hand as long as legal proceedings are underway. Assuming that I'm right to be optimistic, worst case scenario would be that the club is on a sound financial footing with the resources to consider a Plan B or even C.
|
|
|
Post by bluebeard on Jan 21, 2015 0:44:30 GMT
Well there does seem to be an irritating air of smugness in certain quarters. FWIW I don't think this is a surprise to anyone. We will just have to wait and see whether or not the contract is watertight. A judge may need to make this decision but, alternatively, either party can reach their own conclusion and back down as the process unfolds. People can bleat on about the general failings of the board but TBF this situation was outside their control and the "everything is proceeding as planned" line we've been fed has probably been adopted with legal proceedings in mind. Who knows, we may even have a Plan B. You nearly got me sympathising with the board for the first time since dear old dennis left the chair, but it fell apart on reading your final sentence. If making snide remarks and apportioning blame etc helps people to deal with the ongoing disappointment and dispair of being a rovers fan, then good luck to them. The point I'm trying to make is that in this particular matter NH may well be acting appropriately and in the club's best interests. If my optimism is misplaced, rest assured that I will be singing "sack the board" and demanding a top to bottom review along with everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 21, 2015 8:42:44 GMT
Which makes you wnder why there's so many negative posts on this thread, isn't it what all Gasheads want, one way or the other?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2015 8:51:37 GMT
Which makes you wnder why there's so many negative posts on this thread, isn't it what all Gasheads want, one way or the other? I think a lot of Negative posts on here are by people who want to have a moan about Nick Higgs whatever the subject matter
|
|
The Gas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 484
|
Post by The Gas on Jan 21, 2015 8:53:39 GMT
What if the Judge decides in nine months time that Sainsbury have to pay us the full £30m+ and they decide to appeal the decision, this could drag on for years.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2015 9:01:43 GMT
What if the Judge decides in nine months time that Sainsbury have to pay us the full £30m+ and they decide to appeal the decision, this could drag on for years. It will and that will please a few on here
|
|
dagnogo
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 872
|
Post by dagnogo on Jan 21, 2015 9:10:43 GMT
What if the Judge decides in nine months time that Sainsbury have to pay us the full £30m+ and they decide to appeal the decision, this could drag on for years. It will and that will please a few on here Tell me who would be pleased at the club's continued struggle. The reason Higgs gets so much stick is because the club hasn't stopped struggling since he took over as chairman.
|
|
lockleazer
Tarki Micalleff
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 411
|
Post by lockleazer on Jan 21, 2015 9:34:26 GMT
Which makes you wnder why there's so many negative posts on this thread, isn't it what all Gasheads want, one way or the other? I think a lot of Negative posts on here are by people who want to have a moan about Nick Higgs whatever the subject matter Thats is quite simply not true, the problem is Nick Higgs has overseen the worst period of Bristol Rovers history, thats why people are negative about him plain and simple! The one thing Higgs had in his positive side was the Stadium .... looks increasing likely that this will not be deliverd (yes thet maynot be down to him ) but that leaves the postives list empty and the Negatives still full and briming. Maybe its time Nick contacted Colin Williams to see if his offer still stands and let someone else have a go (if colin is still prepared to offer it after it was turned down last time) that would leave nick to continue his fight for the stadium and a new regime to run the football side of the club !
|
|
Igitur
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 2,294
|
Post by Igitur on Jan 21, 2015 9:35:11 GMT
What if the Judge decides in nine months time that Sainsbury have to pay us the full £30m+ and they decide to appeal the decision, this could drag on for years. It will and that will please a few on here
Meanwhile the money that could have been used on the team, not including the planning costs to revamp the Mem, continues to be poured down the drain.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Jan 21, 2015 9:37:09 GMT
feeling the blues. Why are you privy to Sainsburys walking away and no one else is? As far as I am aware, they have said nowt, so we are trying to speed up the process as we want to commence building by May, the cut off date for completion to play at UWE next season. Rovers' own writ states that Sainsbury's rep, what was his name, Ben Littman wasn't it, said to Watola and Higgs in person that they were going to walk away last April, in fact here you go, copied from Bristol Post website, so in April it was 'still', implying that Sainsbury's had said previous to that that they intended to walk away
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,068
|
Post by Angas on Jan 21, 2015 9:58:30 GMT
Especially when the information they post is relevant to the discussion. Well there does seem to be an irritating air of smugness in certain quarters. FWIW I don't think this is a surprise to anyone. We will just have to wait and see whether or not the contract is watertight. A judge may need to make this decision but, alternatively, either party can reach their own conclusion and back down as the process unfolds. People can bleat on about the general failings of the board but TBF this situation was outside their control and the "everything is proceeding as planned" line we've been fed has probably been adopted with legal proceedings in mind. Who knows, we may even have a Plan B. No smugness from me. I'd love to think Tote end was right - that UWE do desperately want a stadium. Sadly, it doesn't sound that way.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2015 10:00:18 GMT
Rovers' own writ states that Sainsbury's rep, what was his name, Ben Littman wasn't it, said to Watola and Higgs in person that they were going to walk away last April, in fact here you go, copied from Bristol Post website, so in April it was 'still', implying that Sainsbury's had said previous to that that they intended to walk away
Indeed. I believe it was the previous February that Sainsburys had made it known that they were no longer intending to build at the Mem. Not the fault of the board of course, but think of all the bulls**t thst has been spouted by the board since that initial communication from Sainsburys.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2015 10:03:13 GMT
Well there does seem to be an irritating air of smugness in certain quarters. FWIW I don't think this is a surprise to anyone. We will just have to wait and see whether or not the contract is watertight. A judge may need to make this decision but, alternatively, either party can reach their own conclusion and back down as the process unfolds. People can bleat on about the general failings of the board but TBF this situation was outside their control and the "everything is proceeding as planned" line we've been fed has probably been adopted with legal proceedings in mind. Who knows, we may even have a Plan B. No smugness from me. I'd love to think Tote end was right - that UWE do desperately want a stadium. Sadly, it doesn't sound that way. To be fair Ann, there will always be academics who feel the money should be spent in a different way. Pragmatism and academia do not make comfortable bed fellows.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Jan 21, 2015 10:03:45 GMT
so that explains a year of delay, or almost. The Board have at least been consistent during that year - sticking to the plan, doing what had to be done, saying very little
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,068
|
Post by Angas on Jan 21, 2015 10:09:46 GMT
No smugness from me. I'd love to think Tote end was right - that UWE do desperately want a stadium. Sadly, it doesn't sound that way. To be fair Ann, there will always be academics who feel the money should be spent in a different way. Pragmatism and academia do not make comfortable bed fellows. Much like Sainsbury's and Rovers, it seems. Happy days eh.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2015 10:22:42 GMT
this situation was outside their control Was it? Maybe with better communication and PR, and a plan that actually benefited the community beyond yet another supermarket, they could have carried the majority of locals with them rather than getting tied down in trench warfare with the likes of TRASH and Carstairs.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2015 10:25:06 GMT
To be fair Ann, there will always be academics who feel the money should be spent in a different way. Pragmatism and academia do not make comfortable bed fellows. Much like Sainsbury's and Rovers, it seems. Happy days eh. Happy days indeed Ann. How many years has it been now with this lot? Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose Hope you are well.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2015 10:26:00 GMT
this situation was outside their control Was it? Maybe with better communication and PR, and a plan that actually benefited the community beyond yet another supermarket, they could have carried the majority of locals with them rather than getting tied down in trench warfare with the likes of TRASH and Carstairs. ooh, you radical you. But spot on.
|
|