|
|
Post by Finnish Gas on Feb 22, 2016 17:15:38 GMT
Potential hold-ups (with reasons) in the delivery of the UWE Stadium have been covered in other informative threads. It is now open to question whether UWE might be heading for a public relations disaster if differences at the negotiating table lead to them holding back the UWE Stadium project. The investment opportunities that the project offers for South Gloucestershire, the Bristol Sub-Region and the wider community have previously been well documented (see below). South Gloucestershire Council, Charlotte Leslie, MP and her colleagues have all recognised the importance of the project. Where are UWE now heading in terms of the Stadium project? The extracts below highlight how committed the UWE have been to the project. June 2011 - UWE welcomes stadium initiativeThe University of the West of England welcomes the proposal for a new football stadium at the Frenchay Campus through a groundbreaking agreement with Bristol Rovers Football Club (BRFC) subject to planning permission. The University has agreed to lease an area of land to BRFC that will create significant benefits for students, staff and the community. The agreement represents a significant investment of approximately £60 million in first class facilities that bring added value to the city and the region. The stadium will be known as the ‘UWE Stadium' ................................ Professor Steve West, Vice Chancellor of says, “UWE welcomes this exciting strategic agreement which will bring tremendous benefits to the University, students and the local community. The agreement makes UWE the first university campus with a 20,000 seat stadium in the UK putting it on a par with many International Universities, and we believe this will have long term value for everyone involved. The team at UWE and at BRFC have worked hard to forge an agreement that delivers real benefits to students and the wider South Gloucestershire community, as well as fulfilling the Club's aspirations and supporting the University's long term strategy. The development would bring much needed employment opportunities to our region as the Stadium is constructed as well as ongoing employment as the Stadium operates. Importantly the scheme is designed to deliver an identified need within South Gloucestershire's Spatial Planning Strategy”. Source: info.uwe.ac.uk/news/UWENews/news.aspx?id=1983December 2011 - Contracts signed for new Bristol Rovers stadiumProfessor Steve West, vice-chancellor at UWE Bristol, said: "I am delighted that we have been able to take this initiative for Bristol and south Gloucestershire a step further to reality. "At a time when belts are tightening it is good to see this ambition being realised with the investment and growth flowing into the region. "The UWE stadium we hope will also allow the university to reach out to young people and our diverse communities across the region." Source: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-161554212012 - Planning Application ConsultationQ. Why a stadium as part of the University?
A. Over half of UWE’s students come from the Bristol region. The stadium offers the University a chance to provide enhanced facilities for its students. There are many school pupils in the Bristol and South Gloucestershire region who do not aspire to go to university. UWE sees the stadium as a way of connecting better with these potential students through sport and Bristol Rovers FC’s own education initiatives. The University invests heavily in its outreach activities with local schools and colleges. Source: www.uwestadium.com/faq.php#a22July 2014 - UWE won't rescue Bristol Rovers' stadium dreams if club fails to sell Memorial Ground"If Bristol Rovers can't sell the Memorial Ground to Sainsbury's and can't find any other buyer then clearly they don't have the funding to be able to develop the stadium," he said. "For UWE that would mean we then have however many acres of land to do something else with. It's as simple as that. Would I rather build a stadium than a faculty of business and law? Absolutely not. Our core business is education. ........ "We would be building the car park because we need the car park, which would happen to the serve the stadium when we are not using it." But Mr West stressed he still expected the project to go ahead. Source: www.bristolpost.co.uk/University-West-England-won-t-rescue-Bristol/story-22015352-detail/story.html |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2016 19:40:39 GMT
That looks like a paragon of patience and common sense to me. 3 years after they set up an agreement, the place was still covered in grass and they said they didn't intend changing the arrangement to pay for it. I'm more interested in what they've been saying since July 2014. Especially if the club hasn't been any more frank with them about delays and bulldozers rolling by the end of May (2014) and watertight contracts than they were in public, I think they're justified in getting restless.
|
|
|
|
Post by PeterHooper57 on Feb 22, 2016 19:52:24 GMT
IMO the UWE have been absolutely brilliant in the way they have conducted themselves throughout the past 5 years. In the meantime, they have gone about their business and built a new Business School without kicking-off; If they now decide to walk away from the deal, I for one could not blame them. I personally hope Wael does not waste too much time trying to progress the UWE option, if they reach a stale mate, I would prefer re-looking at redeveloping the MEM and / or consider buying the vacant Rolls Royce site.
|
|
alfie
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 39 
|
Post by alfie on Feb 22, 2016 21:06:39 GMT
|
|
Bridgeman
Alfie Biggs
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,549
|
Post by Bridgeman on Feb 22, 2016 22:43:18 GMT
I also suspect redeveloping the Mem wouldn't be high on the new owners wish list either, it's too complicated plus local objections from a local pressure group and the Green Party and once built cannot be expanded.
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Feb 23, 2016 14:19:39 GMT
I don't really understand why this would equate to a PR disaster for UWE.
This isn't an all or nothing situation as before. If they're not happy with the changes that Rovers new owners are proposing then surely both parties have the right to pull out claiming that it is not in either of their interests any more. I don't really see that as a PR disaster neccesarily. If they're no longer as keen as they were then surely they can just say that the situation has changed and it no longer makes sense for them to continue with this project. Of all the people who are culpable in difficulties encountered with this developed they are surely at the bottom of the list at this point.
They remain in a win-win position as far as I can see. Plus they are 1st and foremost a University - a PR disaster for them would be more along the lines of an academic/admissions scandal, I wouldn't have thought the breakdown of a complex property deal on a bit of land they own anyway (and have many other options for developing) would be more than a minor dent.
My feeling is that our new owners are engaging in manouevering for a better deal (and may get it because our relative power in this relationship has just massively increased) but that the UWE will ultimately get built. Wouldn't be surprised to see some Post headlines about Rovers exploring alternative options etc. But, once the issue of funding is cleared UWE surely makes quite a lot of sense - not least the timescale involved would be a lot quicker.
|
|
LPGas
Stuart Taylor
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,240
|
Post by LPGas on Feb 26, 2016 11:07:24 GMT
I don't really understand why this would equate to a PR disaster for UWE. This isn't an all or nothing situation as before. If they're not happy with the changes that Rovers new owners are proposing then surely both parties have the right to pull out claiming that it is not in either of their interests any more. I don't really see that as a PR disaster neccesarily. If they're no longer as keen as they were then surely they can just say that the situation has changed and it no longer makes sense for them to continue with this project. Of all the people who are culpable in difficulties encountered with this developed they are surely at the bottom of the list at this point. They remain in a win-win position as far as I can see. Plus they are 1st and foremost a University - a PR disaster for them would be more along the lines of an academic/admissions scandal, I wouldn't have thought the breakdown of a complex property deal on a bit of land they own anyway (and have many other options for developing) would be more than a minor dent. My feeling is that our new owners are engaging in manouevering for a better deal (and may get it because our relative power in this relationship has just massively increased) but that the UWE will ultimately get built. Wouldn't be surprised to see some Post headlines about Rovers exploring alternative options etc. But, once the issue of funding is cleared UWE surely makes quite a lot of sense - not least the timescale involved would be a lot quicker. Our new owners want the free hold to the ground AND to more areas of the site. Originally we were moving in on a lease. By owning the freehold we can borrow against it AND sell the naming rights. I think that is the sticking point |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Feb 26, 2016 11:57:48 GMT
I don't really understand why this would equate to a PR disaster for UWE. This isn't an all or nothing situation as before. If they're not happy with the changes that Rovers new owners are proposing then surely both parties have the right to pull out claiming that it is not in either of their interests any more. I don't really see that as a PR disaster neccesarily. If they're no longer as keen as they were then surely they can just say that the situation has changed and it no longer makes sense for them to continue with this project. Of all the people who are culpable in difficulties encountered with this developed they are surely at the bottom of the list at this point. They remain in a win-win position as far as I can see. Plus they are 1st and foremost a University - a PR disaster for them would be more along the lines of an academic/admissions scandal, I wouldn't have thought the breakdown of a complex property deal on a bit of land they own anyway (and have many other options for developing) would be more than a minor dent. My feeling is that our new owners are engaging in manouevering for a better deal (and may get it because our relative power in this relationship has just massively increased) but that the UWE will ultimately get built. Wouldn't be surprised to see some Post headlines about Rovers exploring alternative options etc. But, once the issue of funding is cleared UWE surely makes quite a lot of sense - not least the timescale involved would be a lot quicker. Our new owners want the free hold to the ground AND to more areas of the site. Originally we were moving in on a lease. By owning the freehold we can borrow against it AND sell the naming rights. I think that is the sticking point Plus the ongoing car park "issue" ask Henbury Gas gas as he knows the full SP with regards to that I believe |
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Feb 26, 2016 16:12:37 GMT
I don't really understand why this would equate to a PR disaster for UWE. This isn't an all or nothing situation as before. If they're not happy with the changes that Rovers new owners are proposing then surely both parties have the right to pull out claiming that it is not in either of their interests any more. I don't really see that as a PR disaster neccesarily. If they're no longer as keen as they were then surely they can just say that the situation has changed and it no longer makes sense for them to continue with this project. Of all the people who are culpable in difficulties encountered with this developed they are surely at the bottom of the list at this point. They remain in a win-win position as far as I can see. Plus they are 1st and foremost a University - a PR disaster for them would be more along the lines of an academic/admissions scandal, I wouldn't have thought the breakdown of a complex property deal on a bit of land they own anyway (and have many other options for developing) would be more than a minor dent. My feeling is that our new owners are engaging in manouevering for a better deal (and may get it because our relative power in this relationship has just massively increased) but that the UWE will ultimately get built. Wouldn't be surprised to see some Post headlines about Rovers exploring alternative options etc. But, once the issue of funding is cleared UWE surely makes quite a lot of sense - not least the timescale involved would be a lot quicker. Our new owners want the free hold to the ground AND to more areas of the site. Originally we were moving in on a lease. By owning the freehold we can borrow against it AND sell the naming rights. I think that is the sticking point Well that makes sense from our perspective - UWE has to decide whether it makes sense from their perspective. I imagine there will probably be some give and take here - UWE are going to want something tangible out of this. But it remains the obvious move from our point of view so I still think that while our negotiating power may have increased, they still have the trump hand here. There are plenty of other ways Universities can make a lot of money out of these kind of land deals - it'll be far from their only option if they are prepared to go back to the drawing board. I doubt it though - I think both sides will move a little bit and this will get done. |
|
|
|
Post by badbloodash on Feb 26, 2016 16:49:17 GMT
That looks like a paragon of patience and common sense to me. 3 years after they set up an agreement, the place was still covered in grass and they said they didn't intend changing the arrangement to pay for it. I'm more interested in what they've been saying since July 2014. Especially if the club hasn't been any more frank with them about delays and bulldozers rolling by the end of May (2014) and watertight contracts than they were in public, I think they're justified in getting restless. Surely we are running out of time if we want to be in the new stadium for August 2017 with a 68 week build or have we missed the boat or are the new owners not that worried about timescale etc we have had a massive boast and exposure in the media but I think it will all be lost if we miss this now |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2016 22:25:40 GMT
Am I alone in not giving a flying fu*k about the "naming rights"?
Give it a name and stick with it for 100 years. If you're not happy with it then, have a review.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Feb 27, 2016 6:54:49 GMT
I think the UWE are going to miss out Bigtime
|
|
|
|
Post by chippenhamgas on Feb 27, 2016 8:17:05 GMT
I think the UWE are going to miss out Bigtime I'm willing to bet the new owners already have an alternative site identified and are using as a bargaining tool. South glos will surely put pressure on to keep uwe alive as it's worth so much to the area. |
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Feb 27, 2016 8:48:22 GMT
I think the UWE are going to miss out Bigtime I'm willing to bet the new owners already have an alternative site identified and are using as a bargaining tool. South glos will surely put pressure on to keep uwe alive as it's worth so much to the area. With South Glos strapped for cash, if they would to offer BRFC a plot of land bigger than what's on offer with the UWE for say £5m, i think that may "wakeup" our "friends" at the UWE  |
|
|
|
Post by billyocean on Feb 27, 2016 8:55:07 GMT
Am I alone in not giving a flying fu*k about the "naming rights"? Give it a name and stick with it for 100 years. If you're not happy with it then, have a review. When we're competing in the Champions League and subject FFP regs we might need stadium naming rights to hide the millions flowing in to pay our superstar players £500k/week |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Feb 27, 2016 17:45:47 GMT
Am I crazy in thinking that we are not the only people who could possibly build the stadium ? Is there anything that says that the stadium is only for us to build ?
I can't help but wonder that, IF the UWE wanted to have the stadium to have the kudos of looking like an American university with facilities for bringing on the next generation of superstars, then maybe the American lot would still be interested in building it. I am asking as I honestly don't know if the university could get it built anyway? If they so wished. I think that they are not short of money, as I understand it anyway
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 27, 2016 18:41:41 GMT
Am I crazy in thinking that we are not the only people who could possibly build the stadium ? Is there anything that says that the stadium is only for us to build ? I can't help but wonder that, IF the UWE wanted to have the stadium to have the kudos of looking like an American university with facilities for bringing on the next generation of superstars, then maybe the American lot would still be interested in building it. I am asking as I honestly don't know if the university could get it built anyway? If they so wished. I think that they are not short of money, as I understand it anyway What would the UWE do with a stadium for 22,000 spectators if wasn't used by us and assuming Bath RFC had no interest in using it? I guess they could build a smaller multi purpose sports complex but that wouldn't have the plaudits of sharing with a league club? Assuming talks are ongoing I guess Wael as similar concerns to us about building a £30m stadium but not owning the land it's built on, when they already own a plot of land at the Mem. Lets hope there's some movement on this in the next couple of months and it's 18 months rather than 3 to 4+ years before we move into our new stadium. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2016 20:11:21 GMT
Am I crazy in thinking that we are not the only people who could possibly build the stadium ? Is there anything that says that the stadium is only for us to build ? I can't help but wonder that, IF the UWE wanted to have the stadium to have the kudos of looking like an American university with facilities for bringing on the next generation of superstars, then maybe the American lot would still be interested in building it. I am asking as I honestly don't know if the university could get it built anyway? If they so wished. I think that they are not short of money, as I understand it anyway What would the UWE do with a stadium for 22,000 spectators if wasn't used by us and assuming Bath RFC had no interest in using it? I guess they could build a smaller multi purpose sports complex but that wouldn't have the plaudits of sharing with a league club? Assuming talks are ongoing I guess Wael as similar concerns to us about building a £30m stadium but not owning the land it's built on, when they already own a plot of land at the Mem. Lets hope there's some movement on this in the next couple of months and it's 18 months rather than 3 to 4+ years before we move into our new stadium. Us? I'm not sure I have any concerns, or that I'm clear what his are. What are our concerns? Who owns the freehold of Stamford Bridge? (Rhetorical question; I don't know, but most of that part of London is leasehold). Who's going to own the stadium, let alone the freehold, when West Ham move to the Olympic Park? |
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Feb 28, 2016 15:10:30 GMT
Am I crazy in thinking that we are not the only people who could possibly build the stadium ? Is there anything that says that the stadium is only for us to build ? I can't help but wonder that, IF the UWE wanted to have the stadium to have the kudos of looking like an American university with facilities for bringing on the next generation of superstars, then maybe the American lot would still be interested in building it. I am asking as I honestly don't know if the university could get it built anyway? If they so wished. I think that they are not short of money, as I understand it anyway It would be absolute madness for UWE to do that. American college sports are a billion dollar industry with huge crowds and mega sponsorship and TV Deal with a direct link to the professional sports. It also has 100+ year tradition and a huge local and national audience. It's not a nice added value thing Universities there tack on to attract additional students or to be good citizens - they do it because it is critical to their core business plans. University sport here is a few kids with hangovers having a kick about on the downs.....Team Bath is not a good example - that was governing bodies coming together to fund a sporting centre to develop talent, attaching it to a University and therefore reducing their costs overall. It was a good idea but it has nothing to do with the US model which is basically a non-starter here as it is a unique aspect of American sporting culture. |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Feb 28, 2016 15:43:07 GMT
Am I crazy in thinking that we are not the only people who could possibly build the stadium ? Is there anything that says that the stadium is only for us to build ? I can't help but wonder that, IF the UWE wanted to have the stadium to have the kudos of looking like an American university with facilities for bringing on the next generation of superstars, then maybe the American lot would still be interested in building it. I am asking as I honestly don't know if the university could get it built anyway? If they so wished. I think that they are not short of money, as I understand it anyway It would be absolute madness for UWE to do that. American college sports are a billion dollar industry with huge crowds and mega sponsorship and TV Deal with a direct link to the professional sports. It also has 100+ year tradition and a huge local and national audience. It's not a nice added value thing Universities there tack on to attract additional students or to be good citizens - they do it because it is critical to their core business plans. University sport here is a few kids with hangovers having a kick about on the downs.....Team Bath is not a good example - that was governing bodies coming together to fund a sporting centre to develop talent, attaching it to a University and therefore reducing their costs overall. It was a good idea but it has nothing to do with the US model which is basically a non-starter here as it is a unique aspect of American sporting culture. I appreciate that Irish but what I wanted to be clear on is, is it possible really and I think you have answered that. While I agree that it wouldn't make sense, I do see UWE as a university that is, much like us, in that it's in the shadows of the the more prestigious Bristol university with its strong heritage. I feel that UWE still are shaking off the polytechnic tag. I know it's a real long shot and that I am probably just thinking utter garbage but the possibly, however minute, is there. Not like it is somethings that bothers me. Thanks mate |
|
