Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2021 9:59:47 GMT
Instead of calling the company 'Dwayne Sports' I wonder what peoples view would have been if WAQ had called it 'Bristol Rovers Holdings ltd'.
I assume this discussion would not be happening?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2021 11:26:46 GMT
Instead of calling the company 'Dwayne Sports' I wonder what peoples view would have been if WAQ had called it 'Bristol Rovers Holdings ltd'. I assume this discussion would not be happening? Have they changed it from Dwane?  There was a reason Bristol Rovers 1883 Ltd was chosen as the previous holding company. ACRAMAN (295) LIMITED would have raised the same eyebrows. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2021 12:29:34 GMT
Instead of calling the company 'Dwayne Sports' I wonder what peoples view would have been if WAQ had called it 'Bristol Rovers Holdings ltd'. I assume this discussion would not be happening? Have they changed it from Dwane? There was a reason Bristol Rovers 1883 Ltd was chosen as the previous holding company. ACRAMAN (295) LIMITED would have raised the same eyebrows. Didn't ever know that - interesting when typed into Google |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Sept 22, 2021 14:45:50 GMT
Are you sure ? I thought the date for that has passed. As usual, i can always be wrong I might have misread what Swiss wrote but I thought a grant application could be made after construction had commenced? Might not be a bad idea because it doesn't look like the SC are going to part with their £50k and the money is obviously required. Always happy to stand corrected. I think you will find the grant application must be made before any work has started. The reason being that the usual purpose of a grant is to allow a worthwhile project to proceed in a case where lack of funding would otherwise have prevented it going ahead. If work on a project had already started then it would clearly be going ahead anyway so a grant couldn't be justified. But Rovers could try to make the case that phase 2 is a separate project and apply in respect of that. |
|
|
|
Post by Bath Gas on Sept 22, 2021 15:07:26 GMT
Instead of calling the company 'Dwayne Sports' I wonder what peoples view would have been if WAQ had called it 'Bristol Rovers Holdings ltd'. I assume this discussion would not be happening? Have they changed it from Dwane? There was a reason Bristol Rovers 1883 Ltd was chosen as the previous holding company. ACRAMAN (295) LIMITED would have raised the same eyebrows. Please bear with me, I'm incredibly dense about this sort of thing.  Were the same people directors of both the above, and it was just a name change which took place? |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2021 15:35:21 GMT
Have they changed it from Dwane? There was a reason Bristol Rovers 1883 Ltd was chosen as the previous holding company. ACRAMAN (295) LIMITED would have raised the same eyebrows. Please bear with me, I'm incredibly dense about this sort of thing. Were the same people directors of both the above, and it was just a name change which took place? Acraman was just an off the shelf company. They all have strange names until you buy them and change them to the name you wish to trade under. The directors of Bristol Rovers 1883 Ltd at its inception were the same as the Football Club board of directors. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2021 15:36:37 GMT
I might have misread what Swiss wrote but I thought a grant application could be made after construction had commenced? Might not be a bad idea because it doesn't look like the SC are going to part with their £50k and the money is obviously required. Always happy to stand corrected. I think you will find the grant application must be made before any work has started. The reason being that the usual purpose of a grant is to allow a worthwhile project to proceed in a case where lack of funding would otherwise have prevented it going ahead. If work on a project had already started then it would clearly be going ahead anyway so a grant couldn't be justified. But Rovers could try to make the case that phase 2 is a separate project and apply in respect of that. Thanks for confirming that Swiss, we must assume that all available grants were applied for and received. |
|
|
|
Post by Bath Gas on Sept 22, 2021 15:40:18 GMT
Please bear with me, I'm incredibly dense about this sort of thing. Were the same people directors of both the above, and it was just a name change which took place? Acraman was just an off the shelf company. They all have strange names until you buy them and change them to the name you wish to trade under. The directors of Bristol Rovers 1883 Ltd at its inception were the same as the Football Club board of directors. Ah, got it! Thank you. |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Sept 22, 2021 15:43:20 GMT
I think you will find the grant application must be made before any work has started. The reason being that the usual purpose of a grant is to allow a worthwhile project to proceed in a case where lack of funding would otherwise have prevented it going ahead. If work on a project had already started then it would clearly be going ahead anyway so a grant couldn't be justified. But Rovers could try to make the case that phase 2 is a separate project and apply in respect of that. Thanks for confirming that Swiss, we must assume that all available grants were applied for and received. But subject to a NDA ? |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2021 15:51:33 GMT
Thanks for confirming that Swiss, we must assume that all available grants were applied for and received. But subject to a NDA ? It cannot be confirmed or denied for legal reasons. |
|
Were the same people directors of both the above, and it was just a name change which took place?