nsgas
Joined: July 2014
Posts: 61
|
Post by nsgas on Aug 5, 2015 11:26:30 GMT
They have planning permission which can be modified. Why should they not cover every angle. They seem to have been professional in all that's been happening with the BoD and Shamesburys. If they fear BRFC will go under they will also know that with such a large fanbase a phoenix club will rise in the form of a new company or an AFC BRFC. That club will need a stadium because MSP will call their charge on the Mem and the Administrator will sell to the best bidder who will be unlikely to use the Mem as a Sports ground or care about its "Memorial" status. If it is a supermarket they won't care about fans having a stadium or the Nimbys having a flower garden either (Trash take note). UWE owning the stadium would mean they take nearly all revenues and have a sports complex that can be used by students and for sports scholarships. Makes sense if the BoD lose the case and BRFC crashes. PS LPG, is that In the Know or is there another Hidden Agenda ((copyright) Henbury Gas 2015) Care to say how many football league clubs have been put in Administration and the Administrator has sold the freehold of the ground separately to the whole club? From Wiki: On 4 March 2011, Plymouth Argyle entered administration. As part of a rescue package, which saw South West hotelier James Brent take over the club, Plymouth City Council agreed to buy back the freehold of Home Park for a reported £1.6m and lease the ground back to the club for an annual rent of £135,000. I don't know of any others of the top of my head, but Exeter's ground is owned by the council and Coventry don't own their stadium.
|
|
|
Post by bluebeard on Aug 5, 2015 11:55:49 GMT
You're right of course but I think the point being made was that no club has been left homeless by having its ground forceably sold off to a 3rd party. The Plymouth deal was a sale and leaseback to raise cash and the Coventry situation is different again. No idea about Exeter but imagine it was the same as Plymouth.
|
|
|
Post by bluebeard on Aug 5, 2015 11:56:44 GMT
Double post
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 12:10:45 GMT
You're right of course but I think the point being made was that no club has been left homeless by having its ground forceably sold off to a 3rd party. The Plymouth deal was a sale and leaseback to raise cash and the Coventry situation is different again. No idea about Exeter but imagine it was the same as Plymouth. Alex Hamilton tried to do just that at Wrexham didn't he?
|
|
|
Post by bluebeard on Aug 5, 2015 12:14:47 GMT
You're right of course but I think the point being made was that no club has been left homeless by having its ground forceably sold off to a 3rd party. The Plymouth deal was a sale and leaseback to raise cash and the Coventry situation is different again. No idea about Exeter but imagine it was the same as Plymouth. Alex Hamilton tried to do just that at Wrexham didn't he? Yes but he was the owner not an administrator and Wrexham still play there.
|
|
|
Post by gasparilla on Aug 5, 2015 12:28:23 GMT
If there's any truth in this story, it might not be so terrible. A running track alone would be terrible as far as I'm concerned. I don't know 2 flower beds just inside the track at each end & we will be back at Eastville
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Aug 5, 2015 13:21:27 GMT
A running track alone would be terrible as far as I'm concerned. I don't know 2 flower beds just inside the track at each end & we will be back at Eastville And some letters of the alphabet to be used at half time. OMG.....think I might shed a tear or two if I go on.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 13:24:00 GMT
A running track alone would be terrible as far as I'm concerned. I don't know 2 flower beds just inside the track at each end & we will be back at Eastville There's certainly enough dogs around Horfield if anyone fancies that.
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Aug 5, 2015 13:30:57 GMT
So in your sources view is the staduim dead w/o Rovers/Sainsbury's money, or is it possible it could be finanaced by another interested party? Could we have a situation where UWE supply the land, somebody like Icon etc financing & then managing it, with Rovers & the UWE making use of it? Like I've repeatedly said the University will not pay for a stadium. That doesn't answer may question though? As far as the other poster saying UWE have not submitted plans that doesn't mean they, or somebody acting for them, hasn't had off the records discussions about how a formal planning application would be conidered. I assume Rovers discussed their plans with S Glos before annoucing them publicily. I can't see Lansdown really spending £20m just for his ladies football team, and whilst concerts etc might bring in money weren't they restricted to 4 a year anyway?
|
|
nsgas
Joined: July 2014
Posts: 61
|
Post by nsgas on Aug 5, 2015 14:21:51 GMT
You're right of course but I think the point being made was that no club has been left homeless by having its ground forceably sold off to a 3rd party. The Plymouth deal was a sale and leaseback to raise cash and the Coventry situation is different again. No idea about Exeter but imagine it was the same as Plymouth. The difference in our case is that Exeter and Plymouth are one team cities (football-wise at least). Can anyone imagine Bristol City Council buying the Memorial Stadium off of an Administrator to avoid us becoming homeless?
|
|
nsgas
Joined: July 2014
Posts: 61
|
Post by nsgas on Aug 5, 2015 14:38:27 GMT
The board of Brighton and Hove Albion sold off the Goldstone Ground in 1997 to pay off debts, leaving the club homeless. From memory, Hull City lost control of Boothferry Park when the owner of the Club and Stadium sold the Club but kept ownership of the stadium.
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,278
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Aug 5, 2015 14:38:49 GMT
I've already quashed it, this thread should have been locked years ago. Chewie, i know now better than to ask how you know this but is there anymore meat that you can add to this please ? I have found VitalGas to be one of the more reliable sources for decent information and have yet to find anything that has been proved wrong on that site. Thanks in any case
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 15:16:05 GMT
The board of Brighton and Hove Albion sold off the Goldstone Ground in 1997 to pay off debts, leaving the club homeless. From memory, Hull City lost control of Boothferry Park when the owner of the Club and Stadium sold the Club but kept ownership of the stadium. Not quite true. The owner of Brighton sold the stadium to his own property company and then resold it making himself a massive profit.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 15:18:13 GMT
Do you have anything to show us other than a statement that reads like the lyrics to a Bowie song written in a rented room in Berlin? Trust me, UWE won't pay for it. That's slightly different to not wanting to build a stadium on their land.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2015 15:26:20 GMT
Trust me, UWE won't pay for it. That's slightly different to not wanting to build a stadium on their land. I've never said that, just that the University will not pay for it.
|
|
womble
Arthur Cartlidge
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 300
|
Post by womble on Aug 5, 2015 15:28:53 GMT
So we have a rumour of a 15,000 capacity stadium. South Glos say they have received no new application or request for amendments - if they had it would be public knowledge. A UWE spokesperson says they are 'unaware' of any new plan - well that may mean there isn't one or just that one individual is unaware of a new plan. Chewy says UWE won't pay for it (no surprise), but doesn't say the plan doesn't exist. Henbury says UWEs lawyers are busy. Well what do we know for certain? South Glos and UWE both want a stadium. 15,000 is impractically large for just university use. So either the plan doesn't exist, or a user is lined up. Bath rugby are highly unlikely to move, which leaves Rovers or barely conceivably, the Bristol Academy women's team. Funding? Well the Mem is probably worth £12-15m for housing. It doesn't have permission for all housing but that is probably not an insuperable barrier. If the present debt continued to be carried by the directors that is probably sufficient for a half share at least in a 15,000 stadium. So where does the rest come from? Or where does all of it come from and where do we fit in? Or perhaps we don't? Agree with your reasoning except the point that 15000 being to large for a university. Use by the uni is only one possibility, other money generating events such as concerts etc would need the capacity to be financially viable. I take your point, but the present permission only allows for 3 concerts a year and the Bristol Arena is due open at the and of 2017. That will Hoover up virtually all large local concerts and events requiring a 10,000+ capacity.
|
|
Cheshiregas
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,166
|
Post by Cheshiregas on Aug 5, 2015 18:25:14 GMT
They have planning permission which can be modified. Why should they not cover every angle. They seem to have been professional in all that's been happening with the BoD and Shamesburys. If they fear BRFC will go under they will also know that with such a large fanbase a phoenix club will rise in the form of a new company or an AFC BRFC. That club will need a stadium because MSP will call their charge on the Mem and the Administrator will sell to the best bidder who will be unlikely to use the Mem as a Sports ground or care about its "Memorial" status. If it is a supermarket they won't care about fans having a stadium or the Nimbys having a flower garden either (Trash take note). UWE owning the stadium would mean they take nearly all revenues and have a sports complex that can be used by students and for sports scholarships. Makes sense if the BoD lose the case and BRFC crashes. PS LPG, is that In the Know or is there another Hidden Agenda ((copyright) Henbury Gas 2015) Care to say how many football league clubs have been put in Administration and the Administrator has sold the freehold of the ground separately to the whole club? Care to say how many Football clubs have borrowed from Wonga style companies? Clubs mainly borrow from banks, shareholders or other directors. Banks have been known to do pre-packs and the club and ground stay together. The Administrator will get the best possible price to fund the creditors and his fees and won't worry about what fans think. The likes of MSP have no sympathy and are hard nosed business people who get high interest rates for taking greater risks. I have dealt with clients in the past who have had expensive bridging loans and these people don't take prisoners. It gets steeply expensive if you fail to repay or want to refinance. The ground and club are separate companies albeit that the club is owned by 1883 Ltd whose asset is the Mem. It is ideally structured to flog off the asset and the club as two separate lots. Not saying it would definitely happen as I don't have crystal balls, but it is always a possibility. Of course a white knight could be coming over the hill at any moment..............no, pink porcine creatures.
|
|
|
Post by bluebeard on Aug 5, 2015 18:39:30 GMT
Aren't we getting side tracked here? The stadium asset is separated, and therefore protected, from any football debts. In our case, the stadium company also has debt but if the Mem is worth £10m there is £7m equity. If we lost the stadium, Rovers would be homeless but MSP have to return any surplus sale proceeds after repayment of their loan. Costs need to be reasonable so, even if they whack another £1m on top of the £2.7m, the owners would still get £6m. As I think you're suggesting, the real risk isn't administration, its the board deciding to cut and run. Without Sainsburys it's hard to see how they will ever get their money back. It's common in football for a club and its stadium to be separate entities. It's also common for the same people to own both. The stadium is protected from unsecured creditors but the owners can do what they like with it.
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Aug 5, 2015 18:47:02 GMT
Care to say how many football league clubs have been put in Administration and the Administrator has sold the freehold of the ground separately to the whole club? Care to say how many Football clubs have borrowed from Wonga style companies? Clubs mainly borrow from banks, shareholders or other directors. Banks have been known to do pre-packs and the club and ground stay together. The Administrator will get the best possible price to fund the creditors and his fees and won't worry about what fans think.The likes of MSP have no sympathy and are hard nosed business people who get high interest rates for taking greater risks. I have dealt with clients in the past who have had expensive bridging loans and these people don't take prisoners. It gets steeply expensive if you fail to repay or want to refinance. The ground and club are separate companies albeit that the club is owned by 1883 Ltd whose asset is the Mem. It is ideally structured to flog off the asset and the club as two separate lots. Not saying it would definitely happen as I don't have crystal balls, but it is always a possibility. Of course a white knight could be coming over the hill at any moment..............no, pink porcine creatures. So I see you can't name any. Me neither. Still I disagree with the line in bold, that's what Adminstrators do in normal circumstances but when it comes to football just like successful businessmen logic goes out the window.
|
|
|
Post by bluebeard on Aug 5, 2015 19:04:14 GMT
You're right of course but I think the point being made was that no club has been left homeless by having its ground forceably sold off to a 3rd party. The Plymouth deal was a sale and leaseback to raise cash and the Coventry situation is different again. No idea about Exeter but imagine it was the same as Plymouth. The difference in our case is that Exeter and Plymouth are one team cities (football-wise at least). Can anyone imagine Bristol City Council buying the Memorial Stadium off of an Administrator to avoid us becoming homeless? No, but if they bought the Mem (which is worth at least £10m) for £1.6m and leased it back to BRFC with an 8% return, it wouldn't be too bad a deal for the tax payer. We don't know either, whether the Exeter and Plymouth grounds were owned by a separate company. If they were, both clubs could, in theory, have walked away from their unsecured debts and reformed without the stadium being affected. Southampton tried to manipulate a group structure in a different way to avoid their liabilities without getting points deducted. The league saw through it and sanctions were imposed anyway. Saints kept their ground though and they seem to be doing quite well now.
|
|