|
Post by frenchgashead on Aug 13, 2014 5:56:08 GMT
Like Swiss I wasn't at the game so rely on all the excellent reports. The only slightly positive thing I can think of is that we've played two of the best teams in the Conference. But this makes Saturday's game the real key to know where we are. If we can't beat a newly promoted team then we really are in big trouble. Can't say I'm optimistic though.
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Aug 9, 2014 5:48:38 GMT
6250 Gas 1 Grimsby 2
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Aug 8, 2014 13:32:18 GMT
What happens if it is turned down? Would it be an excuse to pull out? Will TRASH use this as an opportunity to submit evidence opposing the longer hours?
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Aug 5, 2014 6:11:52 GMT
I've supported the Gas for 60 years and never thought we'd be in the mess we are now. We all want a successful season and a return to League football. What worries me is that we may be too optimistic about the coming season. Then if it goes sour towards the end of the year the recriminations will start again and we get nowhere. Let's hope for the best but be realistic about what we can achieve. Few clubs have ever come straight back from the Conference and we should expect a long hard slog. It's a tough league as other ex-League clubs have found as they're still there. So where are we and what can we realistically expect?
1. The UWE may or may not happen. But it's not going to make any difference for the next two seasons. Even then playing in front of a 1/3 or 1/4 full stadium is not a recipe for success. The UWE would be a great foundation on which to build but a lot has to happen on the field before we can reap the benefits.
2. We have a relatively inexperienced manager who seems a good prospect but who can tell?
3. We have an almost new team that is bound to take time to gel and learn how to play together. Do we have a big enough squad and enough quality? Perhaps.
4. The match on Saturday is a tough start - it'll take a while before we see where we are.
Frankly, I would be satisfied with a top half finish as a realistic expectation. It should then provide a platform for a real go at promotion in 2015-16.
The play-offs would be a great bonus. With only one automatic promotion spot I think that's a sort of 25 -1 shot though we all want it - who wouldn't.
I think failure this season would only be a finish well into the bottom half.
This is not being pessimistic - I want success as much as anybody but being too optimistic could easily backfire if things go wrong.
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Aug 3, 2014 13:11:17 GMT
This all ties in with the MPs letter and the recent press briefing from UWE. The signs for the last month have been that Sainsbury's want to get out of the deal. NH and the club's lawyers may think they have a watertight contract and maybe they have. Sainsbury's probably have better lawyers, more time and more money to drag this out through the courts and argue that it isn't a watertight contract - that's what lawyers are paid for. What will probably happen is that the two sets of lawyers will negotiate for a time - Sainsbury's knowing that we couldn't go through a court case that would last several years and possibly lose and have to pay all the costs. Then in a few months time they offer the club say £10 million compensation to end the matter. The question then would be what do the BoD do? Put the money into the club and do some work on the Mem or pay back their loans and clear off?
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Jul 30, 2014 10:16:13 GMT
I don't think this story is there by accident. It's not hopeless BEP journalism making up a story. Clearly UWE initiated it with the BEP and briefed them yesterday. They are getting their defence in first. They think the scheme is going to fall flat on its face because of Sainsbury's and they want to make it clear they have better options (business school) and they won't rescue the stadium. Judging by the UWE remarks they seem to hope the stadium scheme will fail.
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Jul 27, 2014 6:10:18 GMT
If Sainsbury's are legally caught in the contract why did they not say so in their letter in reply to the MPs? All they had to say was - we will be going ahead once some other issues, not relating to us, are resolved. The letter in fact had let outs in that they were looking at 'commercial' questions. I cannot believe a set of competent lawyers could not find wriggle room if Sainsbury's want it. Or they simply say in the new commercial circumstances we can only offer half what we said originally - agree or sue us. Then it would be a breach of contract case - huge legal costs and further delays and maybe not even success for BRFC at the end if the court accepted Sainbury's reasoning for not proceeding.
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Jul 10, 2014 10:15:02 GMT
I think we need to read this letter carefully. A lot is just verbiage about commitment to Bristol and means nothing. The key part is "once we are in a position commercially and contractually to discuss the next steps" The key word is commercially. I take this to mean that they still haven't decided to go ahead - i.e. whether the scheme is financially viable for them. That would be the let out if they want it.
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Jul 8, 2014 13:36:10 GMT
There is no way UWE would be full (except perhaps in the Premier). If it is, at best, half full, is it a 'white elephant' that is actually going to be a drain on the club's resources. Without the right conditions the main purpose of the stadium is to free up the assets of the club for the benefit of the directors.
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Jul 8, 2014 13:32:32 GMT
This seems to me just sensible action IF Sainsbury's go ahead. The MPs intervention still makes me think there is something wrong - they wouldn't waste their time if everything was sunshine and light.
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Jul 8, 2014 13:28:48 GMT
The value of the Mem is the land it sits on - if it can be used for housing or a supermarket it can be worth £20-30m to someone who can make a profit from the houses or the supermarket. As a sports stadium it's worth very little. If BRFC went bankrupt it will still be an asset for the club. So the directors can only profit if the Mem is sold. Then it's a question of who controls the money and how much is spent on the UWE (or something else). A surplus at the end can pay off the directors loans, leave them with a profit and they can disappear. Who will then own the club. The key to the UWE is surely who owns the stadium - BRFC or another company controlled by the directors. If the latter it could be sold and anyway the club would have to rent the stadium. Who also gets the match day revenue and other associated fees? Coventry got caught with this one.
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Jul 2, 2014 6:05:02 GMT
My guess is that NH has got wind of second thoughts by Sainsbury's and has asked his local MP contacts to do something as a last minute bid to try and preserve the project. I don't see the MPs doing this for no reason and their letter is well written and trying to drag in the wider community. I think this probably looks like the end of the UWE - Sainsbury's will pay little attention to the MPs when their profits are at stake.
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Jun 14, 2014 13:11:38 GMT
Went to my first game 60 years ago - a dreadful 1-1 draw (it was a warning). So it's since the Bert Tann (no buy, no sell) days. Once bitten you can't walk away. I was in London for twenty years and saw the gas when they were there and then near Swansea so got to matches a bit more often. I've been abroad for the last ten years which is just as well - it's bad enough from here!
|
|