|
Post by Henbury Gas on Aug 13, 2015 14:32:23 GMT
So, come the end of the year when the loan is due, along with the additional legal fees and costs if the case is lost, what is a realistic scenario?
I genuinely have no idea.
It will all be sorted out by then Plan "B" is alive and Kicking !
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Aug 13, 2015 14:37:14 GMT
So, come the end of the year when the loan is due, along with the additional legal fees and costs if the case is lost, what is a realistic scenario?
I genuinely have no idea.
It will all be sorted out by then To what degree?
Are the BoD suddenly expecting Sainsbury's to offer us £10m or something given the decision was in their favour. Sainsbury's surely hold a stronger hand now then they did before
I am still interested that Sainsbury's say we were advised to take £1.5m and Rovers say this is rubbish. I wouldn't trust either side to be honest. it was probably something like £1.45m and Rovers can say they are telling the truth. All just playing with words
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,278
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Aug 13, 2015 17:24:53 GMT
It will all be sorted out by then Plan "B" is alive and Kicking ! Yet another statement with no meat on the bones. This is pretty typical of the board, give us vague statements and hope many believe it. Sadly many do and it's why Highs gets away with murder
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 13, 2015 17:57:44 GMT
It will all be sorted out by then To what degree?
Are the BoD suddenly expecting Sainsbury's to offer us £10m or something given the decision was in their favour. Sainsbury's surely hold a stronger hand now then they did before
I am still interested that Sainsbury's say we were advised to take £1.5m and Rovers say this is rubbish. I wouldn't trust either side to be honest. it was probably something like £1.45m and Rovers can say they are telling the truth. All just playing with words
I still read it that Sainsbury's feel they were vindicated in offering £1.5m by the judge awarding them £375K in interim costs when we didn't beat their apparent pre trial offer.
|
|
harrybuckle
Always look on the bright side
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5,430
|
Post by harrybuckle on Aug 13, 2015 18:01:40 GMT
our case is waterproof and just like the ...unsinkable
|
|
Thatslife
"Decisions are made by those who turn up"
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 669
|
Post by Thatslife on Aug 13, 2015 22:01:54 GMT
Plan "B" is alive and Kicking ! Yet another statement with no meat on the bones. This is pretty typical of the board, give us vague statements and hope many believe it. Sadly many do and it's why Highs gets away with murder Mr Higgs doesn't HAVE to tell you anything. His financial dealings, which will include the 51% ownership of BRFC, are private, apart from those he has to declare legally. You have the right to know nothing but that, however I do believe he and the rest of the BOD are crap at communication generally.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2015 22:10:44 GMT
Yet another statement with no meat on the bones. This is pretty typical of the board, give us vague statements and hope many believe it. Sadly many do and it's why Highs gets away with murder Mr Higgs doesn't HAVE to tell you anything. His financial dealings, which will include the 51% ownership of BRFC, are private, apart from those he has to declare legally. You have the right to know nothing but that, however I do believe he and the rest of the BOD are crap at communication generally. I don't think KP was referring to Higgs unless the poster is him??
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,068
|
Post by Angas on Aug 13, 2015 22:19:36 GMT
Yet another statement with no meat on the bones. This is pretty typical of the board, give us vague statements and hope many believe it. Sadly many do and it's why Highs gets away with murder Mr Higgs doesn't HAVE to tell you anything. His financial dealings, which will include the 51% ownership of BRFC, are private, apart from those he has to declare legally. You have the right to know nothing but that, however I do believe he and the rest of the BOD are crap at communication generally. Maybe he doesn't have to tell us anything. Your brother likes to make it sound as if someone is telling him lots of things though. Or maybe he just likes agitating.
|
|
Thatslife
"Decisions are made by those who turn up"
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 669
|
Post by Thatslife on Aug 13, 2015 22:29:41 GMT
Mr Higgs doesn't HAVE to tell you anything. His financial dealings, which will include the 51% ownership of BRFC, are private, apart from those he has to declare legally. You have the right to know nothing but that, however I do believe he and the rest of the BOD are crap at communication generally. Maybe he doesn't have to tell us anything. Your brother likes to make it sound as if someone is telling him lots of things though. Or maybe he just likes agitating. Some people are telling him things, a lot of which he can't disclose as it would reveal the identity of the people doing the telling.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2015 22:34:30 GMT
Maybe he doesn't have to tell us anything. Your brother likes to make it sound as if someone is telling him lots of things though. Or maybe he just likes agitating. Some people are telling him things, a lot of which he can't disclose as it would reveal the identity of the people doing the telling. Well if he's been told in confidence then why post teasers? My guess is that whoever is telling him things want him to repeat it. I think he's being used.
|
|
Thatslife
"Decisions are made by those who turn up"
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 669
|
Post by Thatslife on Aug 13, 2015 22:50:38 GMT
Some people are telling him things, a lot of which he can't disclose as it would reveal the identity of the people doing the telling. Well if he's been told in confidence then why post teasers? My guess is that whoever is telling him things want him to repeat it. I think he's being used. They are not teasers but hints, take a poll, if the majority don't want his hints then I am sure he would stop, but it seams to me that some people have short memories and seem to have forgotten all the correct info he wrote during the planning process. As for the people telling him things, I can categorically say that they don't want it to be repeated as it could cost them their jobs.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2015 0:03:22 GMT
Well if he's been told in confidence then why post teasers? My guess is that whoever is telling him things want him to repeat it. I think he's being used. They are not teasers but hints, take a poll, if the majority don't want his hints then I am sure he would stop, but it seams to me that some people have short memories and seem to have forgotten all the correct info he wrote during the planning process. As for the people telling him things, I can categorically say that they don't want it to be repeated as it could cost them their jobs. It would be sensible not to tell him then, given he seems to like gossiping more than most.
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Aug 14, 2015 5:31:37 GMT
Mr Higgs doesn't HAVE to tell you anything. His financial dealings, which will include the 51% ownership of BRFC, are private, apart from those he has to declare legally. You have the right to know nothing but that, however I do believe he and the rest of the BOD are crap at communication generally. Maybe he doesn't have to tell us anything. Your brother likes to make it sound as if someone is telling him lots of things though. Or maybe he just likes agitating. I know Nothing But plan "B" is up and running !
|
|
|
Post by Curly Wurly on Aug 14, 2015 6:48:35 GMT
Mr Higgs doesn't HAVE to tell you anything. His financial dealings, which will include the 51% ownership of BRFC, are private, apart from those he has to declare legally. You have the right to know nothing but that, however I do believe he and the rest of the BOD are crap at communication generally. If we were talking about a normal company, we would have to accept this, but this is a football club with thousands of supporters. I bought the "can't reveal anything due to a confidentiality agreement" with Sainsbury's and I can understand why ongoing negotiations with new investors may be held in secret. However, if the appeal goes against us and there is no plan B of any merit and the financial and football status of Bristol Rovers is jeopardised, there is going to be a hell of a backlash from ordinary, generally mild mannered supporters like me.
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 14, 2015 7:32:15 GMT
Yet another statement with no meat on the bones. This is pretty typical of the board, give us vague statements and hope many believe it. Sadly many do and it's why Highs gets away with murder Mr Higgs doesn't HAVE to tell you anything. His financial dealings, which will include the 51% ownership of BRFC, are private, apart from those he has to declare legally. You have the right to know nothing but that, however I do believe he and the rest of the BOD are crap at communication generally. Of course he doesn't have to. But in my company, we have a user group meeting once a year with all our clients to tell them all that's going on, and our plans for the future. It's called customer service.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,225
|
Post by eppinggas on Aug 14, 2015 8:20:12 GMT
Maybe he doesn't have to tell us anything. Your brother likes to make it sound as if someone is telling him lots of things though. Or maybe he just likes agitating. I know Nothing But plan "B" is up and running ! The first statement looks 100% correct. As for the second statement - I would refer people to the previous henbury/trym ramblings regarding numerous references to the imminent start of building the new stadium at the UWE. They were all rubbish. So I would conclude that any references to the mythical "Plan B" are also rubbish.
|
|
|
Post by onedaytheuwe on Aug 14, 2015 8:26:29 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. I've argued similar in the past, that without a modern stadium, Rovers would not attract investment and not have the potential to grow, citing Swansea and reading as examples. All well and good, until Bournemouth come along with a stadium that is little better than the Mem and make it to the Premier League. The key in all of the cases of clubs of similar potential size as Rovers is that investment is made in all aspects of the playing side as the main priority. I'd still welcome a move to UWE, but being a pragmatist, I'd suggest that Rovers must plan for a future at the Mem and seek to address the shortcomings as much as possible. Although there is minor inconvenience, I would disagree that we "struggle to cope" with crowds over 8000. I've been to many grounds where the traffic congestion is much, much worse than the Mem with crowds of 10,000+. I'm no expert, but traffic management at the Mem is done with a very light touch. A more structured approach (which I guess would involve the police) could greatly improve the flow of traffic away from the ground at the end of the game. One example is the absence of park and ride arrangements. If Forest Green can do it, why can't we? From a physical point of view, there is plenty of opportunity to develop the ground at less cost than the proposed UWE build. Phased development of the East, West and South stands (in that order) to extend to the full extent of the pitch would not only increase capacity and matchday revenue, but also provides the opportunity to develop the non-matchday revenue promised at the UWE. I understand license arrangements may need to be improved, but surely this would be an opportunity to test the metal of the council's support for Rovers. So how much would it cost and how would it be funded? Very roughly, an increase of 1,000 to an existing ground capacity with a relatively easy build would cost £1.7million, i.e a 4,000 increase to the capacity of the Mem would cost less than £7million. That would be a stretch in one go, but as suggested, I think this could be done in a phased manner. Extending the East stand and with it bringing the conference facilities up to scratch would be the first move for me and could be done for around £2million IMO. Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by onedaytheuwe on Aug 14, 2015 8:41:43 GMT
Curly wurly (see above)
And I have argued ( on the old forum) that it's fine to have all these grand plans but who's going to pay for it ? . In fact I have a library full of information upstairs of one plan after another on the memorial ground site. First it was the north stand:then a three phase revamp and a full revamp and now the UWE pipedream. The fact is we have been trying to submit plans for 15 years in the hope someone else will come in and pay for it.
I am afraid to say when people like Henbury Gas remark " another plan" it is just hope. Maybe I am too cynical but I rather accept reality than spend millions on proposed plans and projected visions. My conclusion is this. Unless someone is 100% putting money up to pay for it. I would rather rip up these plans work out how we will pay back our debt and stop one more penny being spent. If we can't afford £50000 on a player or a 1000 small stand on the south side ( tent end ) . What chance do we have ??
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Aug 14, 2015 9:54:23 GMT
I know Nothing But plan "B" is up and running ! The first statement looks 100% correct. As for the second statement - I would refer people to the previous henbury/trym ramblings regarding numerous references to the imminent start of building the new stadium at the UWE. They were all rubbish. So I would conclude that any references to the mythical "Plan B" are also rubbish. Think the explains its a dead duck....
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2015 10:16:18 GMT
The first statement looks 100% correct. As for the second statement - I would refer people to the previous henbury/trym ramblings regarding numerous references to the imminent start of building the new stadium at the UWE. They were all rubbish. So I would conclude that any references to the mythical "Plan B" are also rubbish. Think the explains its a dead duck.... Wasn't it always?
|
|