|
|
Post by xtratime on Jul 12, 2016 17:15:15 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Jul 12, 2016 17:37:37 GMT
Like this:
“The great thing about the new stadium is that it brings a new audience to the game, including ladies because the facilities are better and safer, as well as boys and girls which is important. You create a far better sense of community and you are almost giving something back. It's a brave new world.
“There was a previous agreement but that had some issues attached that we weren't comfortable with,” Hamer said, when asked by XtraTime about negotiations with UWE back in May. “Those issues have now been addressed and all being well there will be no other hurdles that we have to surmount.
“UWE, without question, is the preferred site. Conversations are pretty advanced and have been for some time and both sides would be extremely disappointed if it didn't fulfill itself.”
|
|
|
|
Post by billyocean on Jul 13, 2016 5:29:08 GMT
Also "with the two parties involved attempting to reach a final agreement during the summer." suggests some news good or bad before September
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,361 
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jul 13, 2016 11:30:17 GMT
Also "with the two parties involved attempting to reach a final agreement during the summer." suggests some news good or bad before September The way Steve Hamer worded that, it woukd seem that we have agreed in principle on the issues that were not liked by our new owners. I would hope to hear something sooner than later BUT this is Bristol Rovers and so we have to be realistic on this. I've said it before but I won't believe it until it's built & I am sat in it, watching our first home game. |
|
|
|
Post by billyocean on Jul 13, 2016 12:18:15 GMT
I feel the same although I'll believe it only as i walk through the turnstile and hear Goodnight Irene  |
|
|
|
Post by 1883hanhamgas on Jul 13, 2016 18:05:54 GMT
ive said all the way along that wewill want to buy the land not rent it and ive heard that has been agreed but before we put a spade in we have to prove the funds are there....and that's where it is now ...awaiting funds
|
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Jul 13, 2016 19:35:02 GMT
I can't honestly see Wael spending £m's buying the club/clearing debts & loans, forcing UWE to sell the freehold then not be able to come up with the money, unless Brexit has effected investment but that seems unlikely at this level.
|
|
|
|
Post by ipswichrover on Jul 14, 2016 7:22:17 GMT
“There was a previous agreement but that had some issues attached that we weren't comfortable with,” Hamer said, when asked by XtraTime about negotiations with UWE back in May. “Those issues have now been addressed and all being well there will be no other hurdles that we have to surmount"
What is not completely clear from the above extract, is exactly when Mr Hamer said that there were no more hurdles to surmount. Did he say it very recently? Or in an interview several weeks ago? Or was that also something he said back in May? The wording above is ambiguous. If it is indeed a very recent quote, as someone has commented, it would be odd to give such significant news to a relatively minor sports site with nothing released via other more important media.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,599
|
Post by eppinggas on Jul 14, 2016 8:03:23 GMT
I can't honestly see Wael spending £m's buying the club/clearing debts & loans, forcing UWE to sell the freehold then not be able to come up with the money, unless Brexit has effected investment but that seems unlikely at this level. The commercial property market has taken a bit of a beating post-Brexit, certainly in terms of confidence. So unless a price has been agreed - Wael Al-Qadi should be in a stronger negotiating position. If the Al-Qadi wealth is principally in USD (or pretty much any currency other than GBP)... then they have just got themselves 10-15% discount. It's all positive. Everything has gone our way since Feb 19th. UTG. |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,361
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jul 14, 2016 12:28:46 GMT
ive said all the way along that wewill want to buy the land not rent it and ive heard that has been agreed but before we put a spade in we have to prove the funds are there....and that's where it is now ...awaiting funds Wouldn't that be ironic feet. Given we have had TRASH & others mess the process up then I wouldn't discount anything |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2016 14:57:24 GMT
ive said all the way along that wewill want to buy the land not rent it and ive heard that has been agreed but before we put a spade in we have to prove the funds are there....and that's where it is now ...awaiting funds Getting a multi-million pound project off the ground as a billionaire should mean that adequate funds are available, I think its now a case of more funds being required for the land purchase agreement and probably naming rights of the stadium, with UWE being cash rich I would imagine that the negotiations to complete the deal have proved more expensive than WAQ would have preferred. I would think that WAQ may have saved some money from this deal if it moves along soon given the current situation with brexit and currencies. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2016 15:07:45 GMT
ive said all the way along that wewill want to buy the land not rent it and ive heard that has been agreed but before we put a spade in we have to prove the funds are there....and that's where it is now ...awaiting funds Why wwould we want to buy the land? Genuine question. |
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Jul 14, 2016 15:43:52 GMT
ive said all the way along that wewill want to buy the land not rent it and ive heard that has been agreed but before we put a spade in we have to prove the funds are there....and that's where it is now ...awaiting funds Why wwould we want to buy the land? Genuine question. Slightly frivolous - but also serious - answer - and I can't remember who first said it - "Because they don't make it anymore". Got to be an appreciating (££££) asset in the future surely? |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2016 16:07:34 GMT
Why wwould we want to buy the land? Genuine question. Slightly frivolous - but also serious - answer - and I can't remember who first said it - "Because they don't make it anymore". Got to be an appreciating (££££) asset in the future surely? Not easily flog onable, though, with a football stadium on it. I guess it would be mortgageable if the club wanted money at some stage in the future, and there wouldn't be the slight potential for a rent hike way off in the future, but otherwise I struggle with the advantage. |
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Jul 14, 2016 16:38:24 GMT
Slightly frivolous - but also serious - answer - and I can't remember who first said it - "Because they don't make it anymore". Got to be an appreciating (££££) asset in the future surely? I guess it would be mortgageable if the club wanted money at some stage in the future, and there wouldn't be the slight potential for a rent hike way off in the future, but otherwise I struggle with the advantage. I could say it didn't bother Sainsburys.....north or south in Bristol.....but really don't want to open that tin of worms again. Honestly, really, I don't! |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2016 19:50:51 GMT
Not easily flog onable, though, with a football stadium on it. I guess it would be mortgageable if the club wanted money at some stage in the future, and there wouldn't be the slight potential for a rent hike way off in the future, but otherwise I struggle with the advantage. I could say it didn't bother Sainsburys.....north or south in Bristol.....but really don't want to open that tin of worms again. Honestly, really, I don't! Well it seems odd that a significant concern in developing a new stadium is how easy it will be to knock down and the %age gain on the funds that would have been tied up in owning the land. |
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Jul 14, 2016 20:36:34 GMT
I could say it didn't bother Sainsburys.....north or south in Bristol.....but really don't want to open that tin of worms again. Honestly, really, I don't! Well it seems odd that a significant concern in developing a new stadium is how easy it will be to knock down and the %age gain on the funds that would have been tied up in owning the land. I have no experience in developing a new stadium and no knowledge of any of the discussions going on behind the scenes save the few utterances bandied around here. But as a general principle it is surely better to have freehold rather than leasehold? Don't know who said it was a significant concern ( not me that's for sure) about how easy it was to knock down but one of the issues we have had in the past (Eastville,Trumpton) was not having anything to bargain with in terms of real estate (just being tenants) and little money to make up any shortfall until we actually owned The Mem which gave us a bargaining chip to play with. Having an appreciating asset ( land in this case) has to be part of any investment decision, surely? Paying out loadsamoney on something that you don't fully own is always going to be a bit dodgy? Really don't know if this is/has been an issue in the discussions but would hope it has been discussed. But what UWE would get out of selling the land is confusing me. Maybe I am more confused than I thought! |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2016 22:56:18 GMT
Slightly frivolous - but also serious - answer - and I can't remember who first said it - "Because they don't make it anymore". Got to be an appreciating (££££) asset in the future surely? Not easily flog onable, though, with a football stadium on it. I guess it would be mortgageable if the club wanted money at some stage in the future, and there wouldn't be the slight potential for a rent hike way off in the future, but otherwise I struggle with the advantage. Seth, I think your missing another consideration when asking why buy the land? Without going into anymore detail, there is no doubt that the UWE will be much more than a stadium. Revenue from a newly built hotel, restaurant's, shops will be profitable from the land owners perspective. Maybe the stadium is built on its own initially, but there should be no doubt that the vision for the club is to create a day and/or weekend experience. From a purely selfish point of view I hope the live music element of the plans are also at the forefront. With thousands of students on site it's a winner, as would be a post match saturday night live band or two, and a hotel to crash in at 2am. Plenty of reasons why owning the land and buildings is a no brainer IMO. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2016 0:07:58 GMT
Not easily flog onable, though, with a football stadium on it. I guess it would be mortgageable if the club wanted money at some stage in the future, and there wouldn't be the slight potential for a rent hike way off in the future, but otherwise I struggle with the advantage. Seth, I think your missing another consideration when asking why buy the land? Without going into anymore detail, there is no doubt that the UWE will be much more than a stadium. Revenue from a newly built hotel, restaurant's, shops will be profitable from the land owners perspective. Maybe the stadium is built on its own initially, but there should be no doubt that the vision for the club is to create a day and/or weekend experience. From a purely selfish point of view I hope the live music element of the plans are also at the forefront. With thousands of students on site it's a winner, as would be a post match saturday night live band or two, and a hotel to crash in at 2am. Plenty of reasons why owning the land and buildings is a no brainer IMO. Good answer. My original q was a genuine one, so thanks for that. As a piece of land with a stadium on it, which I was visioning, the tenure seemed no big deal; what you've said, however, makes perfect sense - I was visioning the wrong thing! I remember something being said about a hotel over the road and extra land at some stage, come to think of it. If the idea is for a 'leisure destination' including a stadium (and a Four Seasons Stoke Gifford) then I can see they'd want full control and positioning at the end of all revenue streams. Thanks for elaborating. |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jul 15, 2016 0:30:44 GMT
Not easily flog onable, though, with a football stadium on it. I guess it would be mortgageable if the club wanted money at some stage in the future, and there wouldn't be the slight potential for a rent hike way off in the future, but otherwise I struggle with the advantage. Seth, I think your missing another consideration when asking why buy the land? Without going into anymore detail, there is no doubt that the UWE will be much more than a stadium. Revenue from a newly built hotel, restaurant's, shops will be profitable from the land owners perspective. Maybe the stadium is built on its own initially, but there should be no doubt that the vision for the club is to create a day and/or weekend experience. From a purely selfish point of view I hope the live music element of the plans are also at the forefront. With thousands of students on site it's a winner, as would be a post match saturday night live band or two, and a hotel to crash in at 2am. Plenty of reasons why owning the land and buildings is a no brainer IMO. But most successful operators of hotels, restaurants and shops as well as night clubs, concert venues and sports arenas don't own the land on which their premises are built. The revenue these businesses gain is dependent on their business model and whether they have the expertise and finance to implement their plans not on whether they own the land. The crux of the matter here is the difference between risk capital and debt capital. The original project was based upon Rovers risking all of the cash gained from the sale of the Mem on building the UWE Stadium. The UWE themselves made it clear that they wanted the stadium but only on the basis that no debts were attached to it. They wanted a clean operation on their doorstep and not one which could find itself in constant turmoil due to financial instability. If 100% of the capital needed for the project was being supplied by the operators as equity (risk) capital then the UWE had the best possible chance of their aims being met. But the new owners appear to want to finance the project with debt capital. Therefore they firstly need to gain the agreement of the UWE to this method and secondly to source the debt capital. The providers of debt capital will clearly prefer Rovers to have the security of land ownership because in the event of them having to call in the debt it will be a much smoother process if they have complete control of the situation and do not have to gain the agreement of a separate landowner for any action they wish to take. |
|
