|
Post by a more piratey game on Sept 3, 2017 17:19:19 GMT
we're now over a month past the deadline, and the plan is looking just like it has been all year - dodo-esque
I'm a bit surprised that we haven't heard any more out of UWE, particularly as this was a big thing for them and would have enabled them to build the size and profile of their business a great deal - a real differentiator compared with UK competition perhaps
there were murmurings about the difficulty of negotiating with UWE, and maybe one of their team not communicating sufficient with his wide range of bosses, but that seems to have gone very quiet. And maybe it is all down to Dwayne not ponying up the cash
did anyone else expect anything different to the silence from UWE?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2017 17:26:36 GMT
I've never understood why on Earth UWE felt they needed a stadium on campus.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 3, 2017 18:50:21 GMT
we're now over a month past the deadline, and the plan is looking just like it has been all year - dodo-esque I'm a bit surprised that we haven't heard any more out of UWE, particularly as this was a big thing for them and would have enabled them to build the size and profile of their business a great deal - a real differentiator compared with UK competition perhaps there were murmurings about the difficulty of negotiating with UWE, and maybe one of their team not communicating sufficient with his wide range of bosses, but that seems to have gone very quiet. And maybe it is all down to Dwayne not ponying up the cash did anyone else expect anything different to the silence from UWE? I didnt expect anything from UWE as they have said more or less nothing since the beginning. The press and the fans have given UWE an easy ride in the 'fall out'
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2017 19:59:48 GMT
we're now over a month past the deadline, and the plan is looking just like it has been all year - dodo-esque I'm a bit surprised that we haven't heard any more out of UWE, particularly as this was a big thing for them and would have enabled them to build the size and profile of their business a great deal - a real differentiator compared with UK competition perhaps there were murmurings about the difficulty of negotiating with UWE, and maybe one of their team not communicating sufficient with his wide range of bosses, but that seems to have gone very quiet. And maybe it is all down to Dwayne not ponying up the cash did anyone else expect anything different to the silence from UWE? I didnt expect anything from UWE as they have said more or less nothing since the beginning. The press and the fans have given UWE an easy ride in the 'fall out' In what way? Wael made some nebulous comments about 1 step forward and 4 back, but didn't say who caused the 4 backwards steps. UWE put out a statement which didn't align with what Rovers said, Wael didn't seem bothered enough about it to put the record straight. UWE made it clear that they were still willing to discuss the project, Hamer had said 'never say never', Wael said 'no'. Draw your own conclusions.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 3, 2017 20:20:39 GMT
I didnt expect anything from UWE as they have said more or less nothing since the beginning. The press and the fans have given UWE an easy ride in the 'fall out' In what way? Wael made some nebulous comments about 1 step forward and 4 back, but didn't say who caused the 4 backwards steps. UWE put out a statement which didn't align with what Rovers said, Wael didn't seem bothered enough about it to put the record straight. UWE made it clear that they were still willing to discuss the project, Hamer had said 'never say never', Wael said 'no'. Draw your own conclusions. Where are the BBC inteviews, or the Bristol Post interviews with some relevant person at UWE? Steve Hamer and Wael have been asked and interviewed about it. No one seems to have sought any info from UWE. All we have is tbeir statement that doesnt reconcile with Rovers version. UWEs role (wernt we supposed to be partners under Higgs originally) either seems to have been forgotten about or wilfully ignored IMO Regardless of the answers and what anyone beleives, Rovers are the only ones that have been asked any questions that i know off
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2017 20:28:12 GMT
In what way? Wael made some nebulous comments about 1 step forward and 4 back, but didn't say who caused the 4 backwards steps. UWE put out a statement which didn't align with what Rovers said, Wael didn't seem bothered enough about it to put the record straight. UWE made it clear that they were still willing to discuss the project, Hamer had said 'never say never', Wael said 'no'. Draw your own conclusions. Where are the BBC inteviews, or the Bristol Post interviews with some relevant person at UWE? Steve Hamer and Wael have been asked and interviewed about it. No one seems to have sought any info from UWE. All we have is tbeir statement that doesnt reconcile with Rovers version. UWEs role (wernt we supposed to be partners under Higgs originally) either seems to have been forgotten about or wilfully ignored IMO Regardless of the answers and what anyone beleives, Rovers are the only ones that have been asked any questions that i know off Maybe the difference is that UWE have publicly invited Rovers back to try to make the thing happen, and Wael has declined. In that situation it's probably Wael who has got off lightly by hiding behind confidentiality. I have to say, if UWE were being unreasonable and jeopardising the future of a FC that I owned I would be furious and would have been a bit more robust with the language used about them. But that's just me.
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Sept 4, 2017 8:13:27 GMT
Fail to see why anyone thinks UWE needed this development. They sit on a prime piece of real estate and senior people have spoken about concentrating on building business schools and not stadiums. As to interviews should the BBC et Al be interviewing every land owner who doesn't complete a land sale.
The fact, that some people desperately won't accept, is the responsibility for making this deal happen is on our owners. After all it was them that let Hamer make the ridiculous 'landing lights are on' statement. I just presume Hamer mistook the landing lights for the M32
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,126
|
Post by eppinggas on Sept 4, 2017 8:36:58 GMT
UWE definitely come out of this looking like "the bad guys". By most accounts we were very close to an agreement. We effectively slammed the door shut. So either: 1. UWE were impossible to work with and tried to screw Dwayne Sports/BRFC. In which case surely we would shout from the rooftops that UWE are the villains. We do not appear to have done that. Confidentiality agreements my arse. 2. There was a deal that actually suited both parties. For whatever reasons (see numerous other threads) not only did we not sign it - we refused to negotiate any further. This is either brinkmanship - or utter stupidity, or something fundamentally wrong (like we don't actually have any money). Seeing as a month has passed, I guess we can now discount brinkmanship. In this latter scenario - if I was the UWE - I would bloody well leak the truth. Confidentiality agreements my arse. I do not understand why local media haven't asked UWE for their side of the story. I have to be careful what I write - but right now, I feel like Gasheads are being treated like a bunch of cotton headed ninny muggins.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2017 8:45:27 GMT
concentrating on building business schools and not stadiums. They can't be that senior if they didn't realise it was completed months ago.
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Sept 4, 2017 9:07:08 GMT
UWE definitely come out of this looking like "the bad guys". By most accounts we were very close to an agreement. We effectively slammed the door shut. So either: 1. UWE were impossible to work with and tried to screw Dwayne Sports/BRFC. In which case surely we would shout from the rooftops that UWE are the villains. We do not appear to have done that. Confidentiality agreements my arse. 2. There was a deal that actually suited both parties. For whatever reasons (see numerous other threads) not only did we not sign it - we refused to negotiate any further. This is either brinkmanship - or utter stupidity, or something fundamentally wrong (like we don't actually have any money). Seeing as a month has passed, I guess we can now discount brinkmanship. In this latter scenario - if I was the UWE - I would bloody well leak the truth. Confidentiality agreements my arse. I do not understand why local media haven't asked UWE for their side of the story. I have to be careful what I write - but right now, I feel like Gasheads are being treated like a bunch of cotton headed ninny muggins. Option 3 - Another Party wants to build the stadium for the UWE to use
|
|
|
Post by CabbagePatchBlues on Sept 4, 2017 9:08:56 GMT
Following Rovers is a bit like watching Game of Thrones. No sooner are we out of the woods and onto the home straight than up pops the Army of the Dead.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 4, 2017 9:15:52 GMT
Fail to see why anyone thinks UWE needed this development. They sit on a prime piece of real estate and senior people have spoken about concentrating on building business schools and not stadiums. As to interviews should the BBC et Al be interviewing every land owner who doesn't complete a land sale. The fact, that some people desperately won't accept, is the responsibility for making this deal happen is on our owners. After all it was them that let Hamer make the ridiculous 'landing lights are on' statement. I just presume Hamer mistook the landing lights for the M32 I don't believe UWE needed the development, that doesn't mean they don't have questions to answer though IMO.
The stadium was always (originally at least) portrayed as a joint venture. I don't know what either side wanted out of it come the end, or if either side wanted it at all.
Let's pretend/assume UWE changed their mind and don't want the stadium. It's in their interest to say given what The Al-Qadi's have said they are still open to discussion knowing it won't happen and trying to make BRFC/Dwane look bad. Perhaps we were trying to negotiate with people who didn't really want it.
We will see if any sports stadia. be it 5,000 or 20,000 gets built there or something else.
No one knows the truth and unless someone asks question of all parties than we will never know, but lets all s**t on the Al-Qadi's because of 2nd, 3rd,4th hand evidence. spouted on the internet. It may be true, but would be nice to have real information
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Sept 4, 2017 9:50:16 GMT
Fail to see why anyone thinks UWE needed this development. They sit on a prime piece of real estate and senior people have spoken about concentrating on building business schools and not stadiums. As to interviews should the BBC et Al be interviewing every land owner who doesn't complete a land sale. The fact, that some people desperately won't accept, is the responsibility for making this deal happen is on our owners. After all it was them that let Hamer make the ridiculous 'landing lights are on' statement. I just presume Hamer mistook the landing lights for the M32 I don't believe UWE needed the development, that doesn't mean they don't have questions to answer though IMO.
The stadium was always (originally at least) portrayed as a joint venture. I don't know what either side wanted out of it come the end, or if either side wanted it at all.
Let's pretend/assume UWE changed their mind and don't want the stadium. It's in their interest to say given what The Al-Qadi's have said they are still open to discussion knowing it won't happen and trying to make BRFC/Dwane look bad. Perhaps we were trying to negotiate with people who didn't really want it.
We will see if any sports stadia. be it 5,000 or 20,000 gets built there or something else.
No one knows the truth and unless someone asks question of all parties than we will never know, but lets all s*** on the Al-Qadi's because of 2nd, 3rd,4th hand evidence. spouted on the internet. It may be true, but would be nice to have real information
You're sprouting rubbish. A commercial deal has broken down happens everyday. Don't recall the UWE promising rovers fans a new stadium just the current and previous owners doing that. Put quite simply if a deal isn't done then don't try to hoodwink the fans that it's a done deal. Admittedly most rovers fans don't require much hoodwinking
|
|
|
Post by PessimistGas on Sept 4, 2017 10:19:26 GMT
I don't believe UWE needed the development, that doesn't mean they don't have questions to answer though IMO.
The stadium was always (originally at least) portrayed as a joint venture. I don't know what either side wanted out of it come the end, or if either side wanted it at all.
Let's pretend/assume UWE changed their mind and don't want the stadium. It's in their interest to say given what The Al-Qadi's have said they are still open to discussion knowing it won't happen and trying to make BRFC/Dwane look bad. Perhaps we were trying to negotiate with people who didn't really want it.
We will see if any sports stadia. be it 5,000 or 20,000 gets built there or something else.
No one knows the truth and unless someone asks question of all parties than we will never know, but lets all s*** on the Al-Qadi's because of 2nd, 3rd,4th hand evidence. spouted on the internet. It may be true, but would be nice to have real information
You're sprouting rubbish. A commercial deal has broken down happens everyday. Don't recall the UWE promising rovers fans a new stadium just the current and previous owners doing that. Put quite simply if a deal isn't done then don't try to hoodwink the fans that it's a done deal. Admittedly most rovers fans don't require much hoodwinking What if it was a done deal? I don't believe that we are the injured party here and that UWE's disbelief was genuine.
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Sept 4, 2017 12:36:08 GMT
You're sprouting rubbish. A commercial deal has broken down happens everyday. Don't recall the UWE promising rovers fans a new stadium just the current and previous owners doing that. Put quite simply if a deal isn't done then don't try to hoodwink the fans that it's a done deal. Admittedly most rovers fans don't require much hoodwinking What if it was a done deal? I don't believe that we are the injured party here and that UWE's disbelief was genuine. So therefore Wael and Co should be explaining exactly why they pulled out of a deal? Put simply if say BT and Vodafone are negotiating a deal and Vodafone pull out it isn't the responsibility of BT to explain to Vodafone shareholders why Vodafone pulled out.
|
|
|
Post by PessimistGas on Sept 4, 2017 12:40:38 GMT
What if it was a done deal? I don't believe that we are the injured party here and that UWE's disbelief was genuine. So therefore Wael and Co should be explaining exactly why they pulled out of a deal? Put simply if say BT and Vodafone are negotiating a deal and Vodafone pull out it isn't the responsibility of BT to explain to Vodafone shareholders why Vodafone pulled out. I agree that UWE are not answerable to our fan base, even though some seem to be under the impression that they are. Neither were Sainsbury's or Opal, even though that there is an argument that in both cases their conduct was less than exemplary. I'm not convinced that is the case this time.
|
|
|
Post by Colyton Gas. on Sept 4, 2017 12:52:49 GMT
Wael and Co rarely give any explanation or update on new stadium,new training ground,Mem update plans etc so we are all really continually in the dark.Would be nice if they held their hands up to say,'We ain't got no-where and we are out of our depth'. At least do not inflict this constant wall of silence on the long suffering fans.Just fill us in .Pleased DC still with us but his utterances of having to improve the club's infrastructure when the new regime took over appears as far away as ever. Meanwhile ,my village team are building a new stand!!!!!! Update please Board on everything.Some hopes!!!!!!!!!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2017 12:59:11 GMT
What if it was a done deal? I don't believe that we are the injured party here and that UWE's disbelief was genuine. So therefore Wael and Co should be explaining exactly why they pulled out of a deal? Put simply if say BT and Vodafone are negotiating a deal and Vodafone pull out it isn't the responsibility of BT to explain to Vodafone shareholders why Vodafone pulled out. That's a good analogy and puts it in context. A pound to a penny, Vodafone would issue a statement saying that the proposed merger was now not progressing; BT would issue a statement saying that it was a shame. Neither would give details or enter into he-said-she-said, and neither side would be pursued and grilled by the business media, which would report it once and then consider the issue dead (unless something juicy came to light).
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 4, 2017 13:08:19 GMT
So therefore Wael and Co should be explaining exactly why they pulled out of a deal? Put simply if say BT and Vodafone are negotiating a deal and Vodafone pull out it isn't the responsibility of BT to explain to Vodafone shareholders why Vodafone pulled out. I agree that UWE are not answerable to our fan base, even though some seem to be under the impression that they are. Neither were Sainsbury's or Opal, even though that there is an argument that in both cases their conduct was less than exemplary. I'm not convinced that is the case this time. I agree UWE aren't answerable to our fan base. That doesn't mean questions shouldn't be asked of them which is all I am saying.
Interesting you mention Saibsburys. because when that went tits up, NH and co wanted us to question Sainsbury's and ignore their own failings. This time it's question BRFC, but not UWE?
unless I am mistaken, UWE haven't refuted that terms were agreed at certain points but they changed their minds
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2017 13:39:42 GMT
I've never understood why on Earth UWE felt they needed a stadium on campus. That's probably the crux of it - they almost certainly don't, so what was in it for them? The simplest solution was to sell surplus land, done. Whether a football stadium would be built on it is more a question of whether they'd be happy with that and sell to a football club for that purpose. So what did they want, that stopped that? Inflated price? Income stream? Access rights? The latter would maintain some sort of involvement, hold, or veto on stuff*. Who knows, but there's (probably) the rub. I don't think the intricacies or pros and cons are readily or respectfully explained in public. * It has to be more than access to the car park, because the core demand for a car park for a university and a football ground are at completely different times, so that would be just down to a minor and mutually beneficial agreement between neighbours.
|
|