Application No. 14/04174/X

It makes it more likely that those lawyers can find a get-out in the contract - but that get-out has to exist.  Even the best lawyers cannot change 100s of years of legal precedent and basic contract law, and the size of the contract is immaterial in the face of the law. 

This isn't Russia or China.

Well let's hope that's right.

It does seem like we have gone UWE or bust here - and in fact possibly both....Personally I'm deeply skeptical that the UWE is going to be the answer to all our problems but hey-ho as we've committed all our eggs to it I don't think gasheads have any choice but to desperately hope that it comes to fruition and delivers everything people say it will.  The longer this has dragged on the less confident I am that either will happen though unfortunately.

Simply having the stadium is not enough to secure a future - it is a total and utter myth that new stadiums secure the financial future of football clubs.  A classic case of correlation not causation.  Football club's with new stadiums tend to have been progressive, well run clubs but not uniquely and those that weren't were pushed to the wall by their new stadiums.  Coventry Oxford and Darlington are classic examples (and if we need funding from Kassam or Reynolds like figure to make this work.......). But it doesn't have to be that extreme people seem to have selective memories on this because they go to nice shiny new stadiums and wish we had one and think it's basically a good thing.  Leicester, Derby, Coventry, Notts County and Plymouth are all examples of clubs that effectively bankrupted themselves with new grounds or ground developments - Blackpool seem to have gotten themselves around this, Bolton (used to be held up as the prime example of regeneration driven by new stadium) are currently showing that a shiny new ground is all very well but it doesn't equal long term financial security.  I don't see the stadium as the magic bullet and I point to plenty of clubs with crap grounds who are doing better than us on and off the pitch.  I'm certainly at the stage where I can no longer get excited about the UWE.

Surely that's an issue for another day as if we don't sell the Mem to Sainsbury's then the whole clubs future could be at stake if we are then saddled with £10m+ of debts and stuck at the mem, if we do ever build the UWE then hopefully most of our debts will have been cleared. Regardless I can't see NH still be here in the long term and with GD already gone perhaps we cn get our act together when it comes to running the club as a vialbe business.

Absolutely, especially the 'going to be pretty interesting to see' bit, although I'm dubious that Sainsbury's would cave in to pressure from those BCC, BRFC and local media in North Bristol to build a major store it doesn't want.

My point was in reply to Topper saying:
'If Sainsbury's were confident they could break the contracts they would have just ignored Rovers request to proceed with the delivery hours appeal and just said "sue us"'
as if this that weren't exactly what has happened.  Throw 'they have done' rather than 'they would do' into that sentence and it reverses the conclusion:
'As Sainsbury's are confident they can break the contracts, they just ignored Rovers request to proceed with the delivery hours appeal and just said "sue us".

No idea what you are trying to say as Sainsbury's have proceeded when they could have fought the injunction, if they weren't prepared to fight that why should they want to fight possbily a lost cause?

I doubt it.  I also think there's a danger of overestimating BCC's determination for this to go through.  I think they're generally in favour, but not at all costs, and with some voices adamantly against - and the antis have the strongest held views (since Steve Comer's exit via the ballot box).

I genuinely don't know how I would vote if I were a non-Gas, non-directly local (we know the local councillors are against) member of the committee.
If we say no, the UWE scheme collapses - v bad / calamitous for BRFC: big shame, let's say 'yes'.
On the other hand, we've given them reasonable planning permission in line / better than any other supermarket in the city', which seems fair enough: so that's a 'no', then.
On the third hand, we're being held to ransom here over something that shouldn't matter to them but would be detrimental to local people: as a Tribune of the people, stuff that.
Come to that, it's a pretty fetid ransom, because even if we say 'yes' the thing's not going to be built anyway, so BRFC will not be set to soar by our largesse.  All we'll have done is set a precedent for longer delivery hours at a theoretical large supermarket in a particularly built up area, whereas we've previously drawn the line at about 8pm at sites with better access.  There's no benefit to the city at all: that'll be a 'hell, no' then.
Then again, I'm fed up with this dragging on, and if it helps BRFC get a few quid out of Sainsbury's....

anyway in the meantime if you put six pillars and a load of corrugated iron roofing at the tent end (identical to the blackthorn end) you would up the capacity by a few thousand and it would not cost much then you would have the option to add seating in the future if ever needed, tart up the clubhouse a bit and we have a more than adequate ground already,if you look at the mem and the surrounding land there is not that much to play with unless you build over the car park so were never going to have some facilities but we have the main ones so what i am saying is that if everything goes wrong and we get nothing out of this sainsburys fiasco then the mem compared to some of the other clubs we have visited in league 2 and 1 is not that bad.

Orient managed to redevelop, mind you they actually got it done as opposed to faffing around.