Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,066
|
Post by Angas on Aug 24, 2018 18:28:31 GMT
This has been pretty obvious for some time, even those still in denial know deep down they are kidding themselves. Begs the question that when Wael said funding was no issue and it would be funded through "investments" - was he knowingly trying to mislead or does he just live in a dreamworld? I could pick out numerous other examples. The other question is that when he says the training ground will "definitely happen" is he also misleading us? It appears that there isn't enough funding to build anything halfway suitable. I feel slightly sorry for him but if this is the new reality then he needs to stop this charade right now and come clean because it's getting embarrassing for him. If he went on 20man and gave a brutally honest summary of exactly where we are and how we got to this point and confirmed that he was actively looking for outside investment I would have a whole lot more respect for him than continuing with the nonsense of the past 2 years. I feel there could still be a way back. Begs more questions about the UWE which I have asked before. - Did DS simply not have the funds? - Did DS have the funds didn't didn't have the appitite for the risk? - Was the UWE really not in the long term interests of BRFC or did it just not provide a level of return in the short to medium term the DS required? - Was that level of return remotely realistic? - Have we just missed out on the greatest opportunity any of us are likely to see? None of the above has been satisfactorily answered and in amongst the truths, half truths and, frankly, flat out untruths, I'm not sure how anyone can have any confidence in anything that has been said or is said in the future. A complete and utter farce. Not wanting to be a pedant but I believe, if I remember correctly, that it was NH who introduced the new owners and added that now there would be no need for the Sainsbury’s money, to build the stadium. I don’t ever remember Wael saying he or they would build one but that we needed one. Maybe I’m wrong but I think they were very careful right from the start. I was almost certain Wael did say they didn't need the Sainsbury's money, but looking back I couldn't find any evidence of that at all. Only references, as you say, to NH making that comment. It was interesting listening back to this interview, two years on I seemed to hear with different ears and to be honest what he said then matches up pretty well with how things have developed. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35617294
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 19:22:48 GMT
I was almost certain Wael did say they didn't need the Sainsbury's money... So was I. Thanks for checking.
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,066
|
Post by Angas on Aug 24, 2018 20:04:43 GMT
I was almost certain Wael did say they didn't need the Sainsbury's money... So was I. Thanks for checking. I can't say I was able to check absolutely. It's surprisingly difficult to find much from that time. It's possible Steve Hamer said it, I might have another look to see about that. He would, presumably, have been speaking on behalf of the new owners.
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,066
|
Post by Angas on Aug 24, 2018 21:45:45 GMT
Much trawling later ... I can't find anything that shows anyone other than NH said the Sainsbury's verdict was no longer relevant. Some press articles state that UWE would happen regardless of the outcome of the court case, but none include a direct quote to that effect.
Toni Watola, in interview on the day we lost the court case, said Lee Atkins was "talking to financiers to help with the construction of the stadium".
Which all probably suggests that a) KP is right in his assertion and b) We always needed money from somewhere other than the coffers of the new owners.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2018 8:18:39 GMT
Tenuous, but I guess a lawyer has advised. probable advice 'it's worth sending a lawyer's letter - that puts lots of people off' Maxwell used those tactics and for quite a while it worked.
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Aug 25, 2018 10:56:04 GMT
Much trawling later ... I can't find anything that shows anyone other than NH said the Sainsbury's verdict was no longer relevant. Some press articles state that UWE would happen regardless of the outcome of the court case, but none include a direct quote to that effect. Toni Watola, in interview on the day we lost the court case, said Lee Atkins was "talking to financiers to help with the construction of the stadium". Which all probably suggests that a) KP is right in his assertion and b) We always needed money from somewhere other than the coffers of the new owners. But if the finance wasn't available post the Sainbury's verdict then why spend 18 months discussing the deal with the UWE? SH even went as far as suggesting if the UWE Governors had travelled to Jordan it was likely a deal could have been agreed. I never understood the logic of what he was suggesting but it implies that finance wasn't the issue.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,053
|
Post by eppinggas on Aug 25, 2018 11:30:50 GMT
It's tough to know which SH quote is the most bizarre. Top contenders: "we could become just like the Wimbledon crazy gang of the 80's"... or "...if the UWE Governors had travelled to Jordan it was likely a deal could have been agreed". I'm sure there are others. Anyway - at least he hasn't made any empty promises he can't fulfill with regard to opening the new all-singing, all-dancing, training facility on July 1st 2019. Do I qualify for a cease and desist letter? I feel left out.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2018 12:22:59 GMT
It's tough to know which SH quote is the most bizarre. Top contenders: "we could become just like the Wimbledon crazy gang of the 80's"... or "...if the UWE Governors had travelled to Jordan it was likely a deal could have been agreed". I'm sure there are others. Anyway - at least he hasn't made any empty promises he can't fulfill with regard to opening the new all-singing, all-dancing, training facility on July 1st 2019. Do I qualify for a cease and desist letter? I feel left out. Is this the same facility where the players would be moved in by March 2017?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2018 18:53:39 GMT
so to summarise, wael is FULLY commited to rovers, unfortunately he doesnt hold the purse strings
can we at least stop sh itty insults to wael ?
Personally, I’ve not seen any direct 5h1tty insults aimed at him. Care to say who has please ? first page 9th post, plenty more i cant be bothered to look, facebook is rife with them too
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2018 8:42:03 GMT
The 9th post was mine. I stand by the post,what I said about a Walter Mitty type fantasist is my personal opinion based on his interviews and his behaviour since buying the club. However I also said that he seemed like he might be playing for time but I didn't know why,that could be explained IF the post about a consortium wanting to buy DS out is true.
I have had my doubts about these owners for a long time but I have hoped for Rovers sake that I was wrong. I think that they could become very divisive to the fans,we might even end up at away games being segregated from the home fans and then segregated into 2 groups ourselves (again I hope not ).
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Aug 27, 2018 10:39:26 GMT
Good evening Henbury, going off on a bit of a tangent here … On the p.5 of 'New Stand' thread, on the gaschat forum, you mention that TG has brought in an extra £250K of sponsorship: www.gaschat.co.uk/thread/12657/new-stand?page=5Can you put some more meat on the bones please? How that figure is arrived at: Shirt sponsorship? Stand sponsorship? Anything else? How it's broken down? Asking here as I don't have an account there. Many thanks. Hello young man ! I picked up the information from a facebook group (will try to find it again). The person who posted it sounded if he knew a lot about football club finance (talked a lot about the flow of funds). he said the new stand(s) are self financing by sponsorship deals and seat sales are mostly profit. Also talked about the shirt sponsorship deals with the betting companies being about double what we would get from the previous method of sponsorship Hope this helps Will post a link when i filter out the dross that is facebook Thanks for the reply. I was hoping for more of a breakdown in where the extra 250k comes from. I'll try to work it out... Let's look at the shirt sponsorship first: - The information you picked up was we have doubled income from the previous method. - Last year I estimate the 1883 draw brought in 120K (86 companies, with some entering more than once); so double that is near to 250K, but just because you raise 250K doesn't mean that figure is purely 'extra' sponsorship. Next the stands: - Sponsorship of the South West Stand was one part of this year's 1883 draw prizes, so no additional extra sponsorship money. Bear in mind we've (finally) replaced the old scaffolding South West stand with a slightly larger pre-fabricated stand, which must have cost 10K judging by the new Family Stand. - We hear the new Family Stand is being sponsored by Bristol Energy to the tune of 10K. But that covers the costs of purchase and build, so isn't really 'extra' cash. Then the Programme adverts: - This year 10 full size pages. - Last year 9 full size pages / 5 half pages / 3 third pages / 6 quarter pages. - You might be able to help on this one HG as I remember you posted before about the difference in prices this year. - IF we have increased income on programme sponsorship, I can't imagine it would be by a great deal. Is there anything I've missed out? I can't think of anything else - the advertising boards must be the same as previous years, and some were part of this year's 1883 draw. To compare the 1883 draws … 2017/18 season: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/2017/april/1883-draw-deadline-today/2018/19 season: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/contentassets/b9609ed7ee8c4c7b9d1177d3602142cd/1883-flyer-south.pdfFinally, working it out a different way, a bit of maths knowing the numbers of entries to the 1883 draw. Season 2017/18 = 86 companies. Season 2018/19 = 66 companies. @ 1,250 pounds x 20 = 25K less ( Difficult to be precise as I don't know how many companies entered the draw more than once, and this doesn't take into account the extra revenue the 20 additional companies used to bring into spending at the games. Nor does it take into account how many of the spare 200 hospitality spaces in a year, by having 20 fewer companies in the draw, the club is able to sell). Going by one stand being cost neutral, one costing 10K, the extra programme income being unknown, the draw income being 25K less, that would mean to achieve an extra 250K in sponsorship that the kit sponsorship came to 285K. Would combined Football Index, Mint Bet, and Bristol Waste really come to 285K? My question would be: is the figure of 250K extra sponsorship really net additional income on previous sponsorship, or just commercial spin?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2018 11:20:47 GMT
The 9th post was mine. I stand by the post,what I said about a Walter Mitty type fantasist is my personal opinion based on his interviews and his behaviour since buying the club. However I also said that he seemed like he might be playing for time but I didn't know why,that could be explained IF the post about a consortium wanting to buy DS out is true.
I have had my doubts about these owners for a long time but I have hoped for Rovers sake that I was wrong. I think that they could become very divisive to the fans,we might even end up at away games being segregated from the home fans and then segregated into 2 groups ourselves (again I hope not ).
i wasnt aiming at you specifically, more in general.
|
|
|
Post by badbloodash on Aug 27, 2018 11:30:55 GMT
The 9th post was mine. I stand by the post,what I said about a Walter Mitty type fantasist is my personal opinion based on his interviews and his behaviour since buying the club. However I also said that he seemed like he might be playing for time but I didn't know why,that could be explained IF the post about a consortium wanting to buy DS out is true.
I have had my doubts about these owners for a long time but I have hoped for Rovers sake that I was wrong. I think that they could become very divisive to the fans,we might even end up at away games being segregated from the home fans and then segregated into 2 groups ourselves (again I hope not ).
Bit like the old tote end Celtic or rangers tiswas or swapshop
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2018 11:39:01 GMT
Hello young man ! I picked up the information from a facebook group (will try to find it again). The person who posted it sounded if he knew a lot about football club finance (talked a lot about the flow of funds). he said the new stand(s) are self financing by sponsorship deals and seat sales are mostly profit. Also talked about the shirt sponsorship deals with the betting companies being about double what we would get from the previous method of sponsorship Hope this helps Will post a link when i filter out the dross that is facebook Thanks for the reply. I was hoping for more of a breakdown in where the extra 250k comes from. I'll try to work it out... Let's look at the shirt sponsorship first: - The information you picked up was we have doubled income from the previous method. - Last year I estimate the 1883 draw brought in 120K (86 companies, with some entering more than once); so double that is near to 250K, but just because you raise 250K doesn't mean that figure is purely 'extra' sponsorship. Next the stands: - Sponsorship of the South West Stand was one part of this year's 1883 draw prizes, so no additional extra sponsorship money. Bear in mind we've (finally) replaced the old scaffolding South West stand with a slightly larger pre-fabricated stand, which must have cost 10K judging by the new Family Stand. - We hear the new Family Stand is being sponsored by Bristol Energy to the tune of 10K. But that covers the costs of purchase and build, so isn't really 'extra' cash. Then the Programme adverts: - This year 10 full size pages. - Last year 9 full size pages / 5 half pages / 3 third pages / 6 quarter pages. - You might be able to help on this one HG as I remember you posted before about the difference in prices this year. - IF we have increased income on programme sponsorship, I can't imagine it would be by a great deal. Is there anything I've missed out? I can't think of anything else - the advertising boards must be the same as previous years, and some were part of this year's 1883 draw. To compare the 1883 draws … 2017/18 season: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/2017/april/1883-draw-deadline-today/2018/19 season: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/contentassets/b9609ed7ee8c4c7b9d1177d3602142cd/1883-flyer-south.pdfFinally, working it out a different way, a bit of maths knowing the numbers of entries to the 1883 draw. Season 2017/18 = 86 companies. Season 2018/19 = 66 companies. @ 1,250 pounds x 20 = 25K less ( Difficult to be precise as I don't know how many companies entered the draw more than once, and this doesn't take into account the extra revenue the 20 additional companies used to bring into spending at the games. Nor does it take into account how many of the spare 200 hospitality spaces in a year, by having 20 fewer companies in the draw, the club is able to sell). Going by one stand being cost neutral, one costing 10K, the extra programme income being unknown, the draw income being 25K less, that would mean to achieve an extra 250K in sponsorship that the kit sponsorship came to 285K. Would combined Football Index, Mint Bet, and Bristol Waste really come to 285K? My question would be: is the figure of 250K extra sponsorship really net additional income on previous sponsorship, or just commercial spin? May all count for nothing anyway if we had to compensate Mintbet?
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Aug 27, 2018 14:23:02 GMT
A superb piece of research ... May all count for nothing anyway if we had to compensate Mintbet? Not sure how much sponsorship for back of the shirt would have been - I can't imagine a huge amount: 20K, 30K?. The word from TG was that MintBet had donated the sponsorship to Bristol Rovers Community Trust, and that seemed to suggest no compensation given. However, the update stated that they " … will continue to support the club next season as a headline sponsor … ". The sponsorship deals were said to be for a season, so that makes me wonder whether the arrangement this year has been extended for next season, to appease, and that might mean we may miss out on any back of the shirt money next season. Initial announcement of back of the shirt sponsorship: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/2018/july/mintbet-sponsorship-announced-shirt/Statement update: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/2018/august/mintbet-sponsorship/
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2018 14:38:46 GMT
May all count for nothing anyway if we had to compensate Mintbet? Not sure how much sponsorship for back of the shirt would have been - I can't imagine a huge amount: 20K, 30K?. The word from TG was that MintBet had donated the sponsorship to Bristol Rovers Community Trust, and that seemed to suggest no compensation given. However, the update stated that they " … will continue to support the club next season as a headline sponsor … ". The sponsorship deals were said to be for a season, so that makes me wonder whether the arrangement this year has been extended for next season, to appease, and that might mean we may miss out on any back of the shirt money next season. Initial announcement of back of the shirt sponsorship: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/2018/july/mintbet-sponsorship-announced-shirt/Statement update: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/2018/august/mintbet-sponsorship/Could it be that transferring the sponsorship was just part of the compensation package? The update ends by saying that Rovers look forward to working with them over the course of 'the season', sounds like 1 year to me. Wouldn't it be nice if everybody just told things exactly as they are, then there wouldn't be any guessing and speculation It's no better than when Higgs was in charge.
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Aug 27, 2018 15:15:45 GMT
May all count for nothing anyway if we had to compensate Mintbet? Not sure how much sponsorship for back of the shirt would have been - I can't imagine a huge amount: 20K, 30K?. The word from TG was that MintBet had donated the sponsorship to Bristol Rovers Community Trust, and that seemed to suggest no compensation given. However, the update stated that they " … will continue to support the club next season as a headline sponsor … ". The sponsorship deals were said to be for a season, so that makes me wonder whether the arrangement this year has been extended for next season, to appease, and that might mean we may miss out on any back of the shirt money next season. Initial announcement of back of the shirt sponsorship: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/2018/july/mintbet-sponsorship-announced-shirt/Statement update: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/2018/august/mintbet-sponsorship/How gullible does TG think Gasheads are if they are going to fall for that nonsense, is any company really going to donate an advertising spot on the back of our shirts for 46 league games to a community trust? My guess is we've come to a deal of some kind with them just to save face.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2018 15:39:35 GMT
How gullible does TG think Gasheads are if they are going to fall for that nonsense? Absent Gashead ownership of BRFC, why should he care? Whatever proportion of BRFC ownership due to Gasheads via the sharescheme was given/donated away. Tom answers to the owners, Dwane Sports, so BRFC economics are essentially none of our business. Is any company really going to donate an advertising spot on the back of our shirts for 46 league games to a community trust? Seems most unlikely, I agree. A right old mess, I suspect. But Gasheads' only choice is whether to buy tickets/merchandise/refreshments.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 16:25:17 GMT
The 9th post was mine. I stand by the post,what I said about a Walter Mitty type fantasist is my personal opinion based on his interviews and his behaviour since buying the club. However I also said that he seemed like he might be playing for time but I didn't know why,that could be explained IF the post about a consortium wanting to buy DS out is true.
I have had my doubts about these owners for a long time but I have hoped for Rovers sake that I was wrong. I think that they could become very divisive to the fans,we might even end up at away games being segregated from the home fans and then segregated into 2 groups ourselves (again I hope not ).
Bit like the old tote end Celtic or rangers tiswas or swapshop Only at games where there were no opposing fans ! I always wondered how anyone could prefer Swapshop to Tiswas, Sally James ! the way she used to look at the camera as if to say 'I know why you're watching this you mucky ******' I am not keen on celebreties but I would have liked to have met her.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2018 17:59:00 GMT
Not sure how much sponsorship for back of the shirt would have been - I can't imagine a huge amount: 20K, 30K?. The word from TG was that MintBet had donated the sponsorship to Bristol Rovers Community Trust, and that seemed to suggest no compensation given. However, the update stated that they " … will continue to support the club next season as a headline sponsor … ". The sponsorship deals were said to be for a season, so that makes me wonder whether the arrangement this year has been extended for next season, to appease, and that might mean we may miss out on any back of the shirt money next season. Initial announcement of back of the shirt sponsorship: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/2018/july/mintbet-sponsorship-announced-shirt/Statement update: www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/2018/august/mintbet-sponsorship/How gullible does TG think Gasheads are if they are going to fall for that nonsense, is any company really going to donate an advertising spot on the back of our shirts for 46 league games to a community trust? My guess is we've come to a deal of some kind with them just to save face. Glad it wasn't just me thinking this.
|
|