faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 11, 2015 15:37:08 GMT
Forget about Rovers involvement for a minute... If an opportunity presented itself to an investor to build a complete stadium complex with bang up to date infrastructure in place and full planning approved, i'm sure some rich company with previous experience in developing such facilities would be interested... it could happen you know ? I can go with the principle. Then again, is there any precedent for a third party developing and leasing out a stadium (rather than venue, arena etc.) in this country? As in the lead developer, holding the risk and financial model, rather than as agents for a football club, the FA etc? Would UWE be the lead? It seems a long way off though, and a very long way and frankly divorced from chasing Sainsbury's through the courts for years. I wouldn't categorise that as 'confident it will happen' (and you seem to have downgraded to 'it could happen you know?'). So that's your 'how': care to plump for a 'when'? Plus, it means the club being asset-free tenants, which is not the objective for which they've been asking us to man the barricades as a great leap into the future, commercial stability, and all shortcomings being magically improved.
How about this as a daydream scenario:
Rovers sell the Mem and have £10m left over after repaying all debts;
Move into UWE stadium as tenants, charge £0.5m a year rent;
£10m is invested returning 10% per annum which is drawn down, paying the rent plus £0.5m a year left over for investing in the team.
Wouldn't be so bad, would it? Would mean that whoever runs the UWE stadium has to worry about non-match day income etc, while Rovers can concentrate on the core business of being a football club rather than property developers.
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Aug 11, 2015 15:52:46 GMT
I can go with the principle. Then again, is there any precedent for a third party developing and leasing out a stadium (rather than venue, arena etc.) in this country? As in the lead developer, holding the risk and financial model, rather than as agents for a football club, the FA etc? Would UWE be the lead? It seems a long way off though, and a very long way and frankly divorced from chasing Sainsbury's through the courts for years. I wouldn't categorise that as 'confident it will happen' (and you seem to have downgraded to 'it could happen you know?'). So that's your 'how': care to plump for a 'when'? Plus, it means the club being asset-free tenants, which is not the objective for which they've been asking us to man the barricades as a great leap into the future, commercial stability, and all shortcomings being magically improved.
How about this as a daydream scenario:
Rovers sell the Mem and have £10m left over after repaying all debts;
Move into UWE stadium as tenants, charge £0.5m a year rent;
£10m is invested returning 10% per annum which is drawn down, paying the rent plus £0.5m a year left over for investing in the team.
Wouldn't be so bad, would it? Would mean that whoever runs the UWE stadium has to worry about non-match day income etc, while Rovers can concentrate on the core business of being a football club rather than property developers.
It seems to me that this line of argument is based on the premise that UWE are really desperate to build a stadium and would therefore go to the effort of securing the necessary alternative funding for that. I don't really see why they would be that interested. The original deal was great for UWE as it gave them a nice little selling point, some additional secure and some upgraded facilities at a pretty cheap cost. So I can see why they might hang on in there to the end to see if there was any chance of salvaging parts of the deal. But, it's not as if they have staked their entire future on building a football stadium. It's a big project but I can't imagine they view it as a critical one for their future. People who say that they're lining it up as some kind of US sporting college model are way wide of the mark. How could that possibly work? That's a culture that has built up over a 100 years and there's no way it could replicated in isolation at one University. UWE is doing quite nicely thank you on its own terms - from their point of view surely they are in a win-win situation. If the stadium deal somehow happens then great, if it doesn't then there's lots of other lucrative things they could do with that land. The onus is surely on Rovers to provide the investment though. I don't think a stadium is going to magically appear at the UWE for us to rent.
|
|
Cheshiregas
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,166
|
Post by Cheshiregas on Aug 11, 2015 16:28:09 GMT
I can go with the principle. Then again, is there any precedent for a third party developing and leasing out a stadium (rather than venue, arena etc.) in this country? As in the lead developer, holding the risk and financial model, rather than as agents for a football club, the FA etc? Would UWE be the lead? It seems a long way off though, and a very long way and frankly divorced from chasing Sainsbury's through the courts for years. I wouldn't categorise that as 'confident it will happen' (and you seem to have downgraded to 'it could happen you know?'). So that's your 'how': care to plump for a 'when'? Plus, it means the club being asset-free tenants, which is not the objective for which they've been asking us to man the barricades as a great leap into the future, commercial stability, and all shortcomings being magically improved.
How about this as a daydream scenario:
Rovers sell the Mem and have £10m left over after repaying all debts;
Move into UWE stadium as tenants, charge £0.5m a year rent;
£10m is invested returning 10% per annum which is drawn down, paying the rent plus £0.5m a year left over for investing in the team.
Wouldn't be so bad, would it? Would mean that whoever runs the UWE stadium has to worry about non-match day income etc, while Rovers can concentrate on the core business of being a football club rather than property developers.
Faggoty, where can you get 10% pa return, is it those Nigerian Princess Lottery bonds or Somalian Pirate futures.... Very little that is safe (protected investment) that will get you over 1.90% in todays market. Well I suppose there is Greek national debt guaranteed by the German Government!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2015 16:52:56 GMT
How about this as a daydream scenario:
Rovers sell the Mem and have £10m left over after repaying all debts;
Move into UWE stadium as tenants, charge £0.5m a year rent;
£10m is invested returning 10% per annum which is drawn down, paying the rent plus £0.5m a year left over for investing in the team.
Wouldn't be so bad, would it? Would mean that whoever runs the UWE stadium has to worry about non-match day income etc, while Rovers can concentrate on the core business of being a football club rather than property developers.
Faggoty, where can you get 10% pa return, is it those Nigerian Princess Lottery bonds or Somalian Pirate futures.... Very little that is safe (protected investment) that will get you over 1.90% in todays market. Well I suppose there is Greek national debt guaranteed by the German Government! 1.9% PA? There are some people out there willing to give you 1.2% per month, and they'll secure it against property worth 5x the amount they want to borrow.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2015 17:15:20 GMT
I can go with the principle. Then again, is there any precedent for a third party developing and leasing out a stadium (rather than venue, arena etc.) in this country? As in the lead developer, holding the risk and financial model, rather than as agents for a football club, the FA etc? Would UWE be the lead? It seems a long way off though, and a very long way and frankly divorced from chasing Sainsbury's through the courts for years. I wouldn't categorise that as 'confident it will happen' (and you seem to have downgraded to 'it could happen you know?'). So that's your 'how': care to plump for a 'when'? Plus, it means the club being asset-free tenants, which is not the objective for which they've been asking us to man the barricades as a great leap into the future, commercial stability, and all shortcomings being magically improved. Ah the "When" Word.... in the great scheme of things these things just don't happen do they ! If its going to happen it may take an announcement from the BOD that are pulling out or the contract with the UWE will lapse so the facilities are open for different investment Will it EVER Happen, i'm 50/50 at the moment, before the Sainsbury fiasco started 70/30... I don't mean to have a go, but this branch of the thread started when someone said they remained confident that UWE would happen, and you and one other promptly agreed, all without showing any workings out. I genuinely asked what gave people that confidence because I can't see it. Having talked about a different scenario where someone else builds it and we flog off the Mem and move in as tenants, you now say you're only 50/50 and falling on that, and don't really give grounds for that. I'm beginning to feel I might be a long way from Kansas.
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Aug 11, 2015 17:20:26 GMT
How about this as a daydream scenario:
Rovers sell the Mem and have £10m left over after repaying all debts;
Move into UWE stadium as tenants, charge £0.5m a year rent;
£10m is invested returning 10% per annum which is drawn down, paying the rent plus £0.5m a year left over for investing in the team.
Wouldn't be so bad, would it? Would mean that whoever runs the UWE stadium has to worry about non-match day income etc, while Rovers can concentrate on the core business of being a football club rather than property developers.
Faggoty, where can you get 10% pa return, is it those Nigerian Princess Lottery bonds or Somalian Pirate futures.... Very little that is safe (protected investment) that will get you over 1.90% in todays market. Well I suppose there is Greek national debt guaranteed by the German Government! If faggoty let's on where you can get a secure 10% then that's the stadium up in smoke as why would someone invest £30m to get an annual return of £0.5m? Just invest the money and get the 10% return, £3m a year
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 11, 2015 17:21:21 GMT
Ah the "When" Word.... in the great scheme of things these things just don't happen do they ! If its going to happen it may take an announcement from the BOD that are pulling out or the contract with the UWE will lapse so the facilities are open for different investment Will it EVER Happen, i'm 50/50 at the moment, before the Sainsbury fiasco started 70/30... I don't mean to have a go, but this branch of the thread started when someone said they remained confident that UWE would happen, and you and one other promptly agreed, all without showing any workings out. I genuinely asked what gave people that confidence because I can't see it. Having talked about a different scenario where someone else builds it and we flog off the Mem and move in as tenants, you now say you're only 50/50 and falling on that, and don't really give grounds for that. I'm beginning to feel I might be a long way from Kansas. Your probably right but where did Vital get the idea from that the UWE were interested in financing a smaller staduim? Assuming somebody who is usually reliable wouldn't have published such a storey without a good source(s) for the news? Also why haven't the UWE come out and flatly denied the story, instead of just leaving it to a "spokesman".
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2015 17:36:28 GMT
I don't mean to have a go, but this branch of the thread started when someone said they remained confident that UWE would happen, and you and one other promptly agreed, all without showing any workings out. I genuinely asked what gave people that confidence because I can't see it. Having talked about a different scenario where someone else builds it and we flog off the Mem and move in as tenants, you now say you're only 50/50 and falling on that, and don't really give grounds for that. I'm beginning to feel I might be a long way from Kansas. Your probably right but where did Vital get the idea from that the UWE were interested in financing a smaller staduim? Assuming somebody who is usually reliable wouldn't have published such a storey without a good source(s) for the news? Also why haven't the UWE come out and flatly denied the story, instead of just leaving it to a "spokesman". ...which is all valid, but is pursuing a line that would make BRFC building a stadium at UWE completely invalid, when what people (not you) were glibly saying was that they were confident that it would happen. Any questioning of that seems to be answered by considering the merits or chances of a completely different scheme. We've had Nick Higgs giving a press release where he says he's inundated by people cheering him on and finds it all very touching, and people on this thread agreeing with each other that they're confident the club will build a stadium at UWE. Can anyone justify that confidence, because I can't see it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2015 17:41:49 GMT
I don't mean to have a go, but this branch of the thread started when someone said they remained confident that UWE would happen, and you and one other promptly agreed, all without showing any workings out. I genuinely asked what gave people that confidence because I can't see it. Having talked about a different scenario where someone else builds it and we flog off the Mem and move in as tenants, you now say you're only 50/50 and falling on that, and don't really give grounds for that. I'm beginning to feel I might be a long way from Kansas. Your probably right but where did Vital get the idea from that the UWE were interested in financing a smaller staduim? Assuming somebody who is usually reliable wouldn't have published such a storey without a good source(s) for the news? Also why haven't the UWE come out and flatly denied the story, instead of just leaving it to a "spokesman". I don't think the Vital article actually went into finance just that UWE had the appetite for a smaller stadium to be built on their land. I don't think that it suggested names either other than saying it was unclear if Rovers were involved.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 11, 2015 17:52:21 GMT
Still can't see UWE effectively stealing Rovers plans and building a 15K stadium if it wasn't planned for Rovers to use. Although the whole story could be nonsense.
As far as Set comments I think there's a difference between fans telling NH not to let Sainsbury's win but actually supporting him spending more of the cluns money on legal costs fighting an appeal. Unfortunately NH can't, or doesn't want to, see the difference.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Aug 11, 2015 17:55:24 GMT
Still can't see UWE effectively stealing Rovers plans and building a 15K stadium if it wasn't planned for Rovers to use. Although the whole story could be nonsense. As far as Set comments I think there's a difference between fans telling NH not to let Sainsbury's win but actually supporting him spending more of the cluns money on legal costs fighting an appeal. Unfortunately NH can't, or doesn't want to, see the difference. It could be built and we could be tenants to someone and they will rake in all the magic beans the stadium was.going to.produce and make us a super power
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2015 18:07:32 GMT
Let's broaden it.
The Fixed Term Parliament Act sets the next general election as the first Thursday in May 2020. We will have a home game one Saturday either side of that. That's a reasonable horizon. Where do people genuinely think that home game will be?
I think at the Memorial Stadium, in much the same state as it is now. The thing that might alter that is if the club has a fundamental change of ownership by, say, the end of next year and the new people, with finance, getting straight down to addressing the ground thing. I'm not saying that's a good or bad thing, just that's the feeling in my bones when people say they're confident about the UWE stadium happening.
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 11, 2015 18:55:05 GMT
How about this as a daydream scenario:
Rovers sell the Mem and have £10m left over after repaying all debts;
Move into UWE stadium as tenants, charge £0.5m a year rent;
£10m is invested returning 10% per annum which is drawn down, paying the rent plus £0.5m a year left over for investing in the team.
Wouldn't be so bad, would it? Would mean that whoever runs the UWE stadium has to worry about non-match day income etc, while Rovers can concentrate on the core business of being a football club rather than property developers.
It seems to me that this line of argument is based on the premise that UWE are really desperate to build a stadium and would therefore go to the effort of securing the necessary alternative funding for that. I don't really see why they would be that interested. The original deal was great for UWE as it gave them a nice little selling point, some additional secure and some upgraded facilities at a pretty cheap cost. So I can see why they might hang on in there to the end to see if there was any chance of salvaging parts of the deal. But, it's not as if they have staked their entire future on building a football stadium. It's a big project but I can't imagine they view it as a critical one for their future. People who say that they're lining it up as some kind of US sporting college model are way wide of the mark. How could that possibly work? That's a culture that has built up over a 100 years and there's no way it could replicated in isolation at one University. UWE is doing quite nicely thank you on its own terms - from their point of view surely they are in a win-win situation. If the stadium deal somehow happens then great, if it doesn't then there's lots of other lucrative things they could do with that land. The onus is surely on Rovers to provide the investment though. I don't think a stadium is going to magically appear at the UWE for us to rent. Agreed. Just saying that renting might not be such a bad idea, should the opportunity arise.
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 11, 2015 18:59:49 GMT
How about this as a daydream scenario:
Rovers sell the Mem and have £10m left over after repaying all debts;
Move into UWE stadium as tenants, charge £0.5m a year rent;
£10m is invested returning 10% per annum which is drawn down, paying the rent plus £0.5m a year left over for investing in the team.
Wouldn't be so bad, would it? Would mean that whoever runs the UWE stadium has to worry about non-match day income etc, while Rovers can concentrate on the core business of being a football club rather than property developers.
Faggoty, where can you get 10% pa return, is it those Nigerian Princess Lottery bonds or Somalian Pirate futures.... Very little that is safe (protected investment) that will get you over 1.90% in todays market. Well I suppose there is Greek national debt guaranteed by the German Government! Top end I admit, but historical return in the stock market with dividends is close to 9%. Last 5 years, way above that. Yes gilts will only get you 2% or so, but why would Rovers need to go 100% gilts? You only do that if you need the capital in the short term. This is a hypothetical long term fund, so could support significant risk.
|
|
Bridgeman
Alfie Biggs
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,549
|
Post by Bridgeman on Aug 12, 2015 22:28:42 GMT
Faggoty, where can you get 10% pa return, is it those Nigerian Princess Lottery bonds or Somalian Pirate futures.... Very little that is safe (protected investment) that will get you over 1.90% in todays market. Well I suppose there is Greek national debt guaranteed by the German Government! Top end I admit, but historical return in the stock market with dividends is close to 9%. Last 5 years, way above that. Yes gilts will only get you 2% or so, but why would Rovers need to go 100% gilts? You only do that if you need the capital in the short term. This is a hypothetical long term fund, so could support significant risk. Rovers having a new stadium is also hypothetical but without the long term significant risk
|
|
Thatslife
"Decisions are made by those who turn up"
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 669
|
Post by Thatslife on Aug 13, 2015 5:37:35 GMT
The MEM is ok if you don't mind BRfC staying as they are. It is not suitable for regular crowds of over 8000. The attendance of 8000+ at our first home game just showed how bad the infrastructure around the ground struggled to cope with the traffic. Long wait to get out of the car park, gridlock on Filton Ave as the away coaches struggle with the narrow road. It is not a ground that BRFC can grow in, simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Aug 13, 2015 7:45:17 GMT
Surely the traffic problem could be resolved with better policing of the local area, particularly around the Filton Ave lights which only let a couple of cars out of the staduim car park each sequence.
I'm not really sure the UWE is going to be ideal as even on Satuday you had to queue at the MacDonalds traffic lights, imagine 22,000 fans trying to leave the ground by just the one road onto that roundabout on a busy Saturday in December.
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 13, 2015 7:49:02 GMT
Top end I admit, but historical return in the stock market with dividends is close to 9%. Last 5 years, way above that. Yes gilts will only get you 2% or so, but why would Rovers need to go 100% gilts? You only do that if you need the capital in the short term. This is a hypothetical long term fund, so could support significant risk. Rovers having a new stadium is also hypothetical but without the long term significant risk Liquidity risk? Opportunity risk? Costs?
I've often thought, what's the point in football clubs tying up huge amounts of money in assets that they can't sell when they need the money? Partnerships with stadium / arena companies more appropriate provided sufficient capital, along with a significant shareholding in the stadium company, is retained to mitigate the risk of the place being sold from under them.
Happy to hear arguments against though.
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 13, 2015 7:51:25 GMT
Surely the traffic problem could be resolved with better policing of the local area, particularly around the Filton Ave lights which only let a couple of cars out of the staduim car park each sequence. I'm not really sure the UWE is going to be ideal as even on Satuday you had to queue at the MacDonalds traffic lights, imagine 22,000 fans trying to leave the ground by just the one road onto that roundabout on a busy Saturday in December. Or do something after the game to get people to stick around in the stadium bars. For the benefits of doing that on a much larger scale, look at the concert that gets put on at Silverstone after the British Grand Prix - that was mostly instigated to help with traffic problems.
|
|
Thatslife
"Decisions are made by those who turn up"
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 669
|
Post by Thatslife on Aug 13, 2015 10:57:36 GMT
Surely the traffic problem could be resolved with better policing of the local area, particularly around the Filton Ave lights which only let a couple of cars out of the staduim car park each sequence. I'm not really sure the UWE is going to be ideal as even on Satuday you had to queue at the MacDonalds traffic lights, imagine 22,000 fans trying to leave the ground by just the one road onto that roundabout on a busy Saturday in December. Or do something after the game to get people to stick around in the stadium bars. For the benefits of doing that on a much larger scale, look at the concert that gets put on at Silverstone after the British Grand Prix - that was mostly instigated to help with traffic problems.
It seems obvious to me that the coaches leaving the ground have difficulty making the right turn into Filton Ave due to the narrow road , the cars parked on it, and the traffic. I suggested to the club that the away supporters should be kept in the ground for half an hour or so to allow the car parks to clear, then when the coaches do leave at least the traffic will have died down. I got the usual reply ......nothing.
|
|