|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Dec 24, 2018 1:04:22 GMT
Its not what the statement says but what it doesnt say hiding behind confidentiality agreements so as to avoid having to provide any details whatsoever to support the statement. Once again I think the owners are relying on the fact that most fans have no experience or knowledge of what a confidentiality / non disclosure agreement is and so will be inclined to take their word at face value. All I can say is that over about forty years in business I have probably only signed about twenty of these agreements which have usually concerned acquisitions and technology. To me it is totally inconceivable that everything relating to Rovers aspiration to achieve a new or redeveloped stadium and/or training ground is covered by confidentiality / non disclosure agreements. We all want to believe our owners are being sincere but experience tells me that in constantly harping back to this old chestnut they are abusing our trust and goodwill. I've signed lots of them - usually over petty drivel. I suppose I think their existence tends to be an indication regarding the people involved - a nervous and controlling tendency maybe |
|
|
|
Post by thegasman on Dec 24, 2018 4:54:42 GMT
Seems to me that our erstwhile owners apparently treat any body they may try to do any business with, with more respect than they do the fans. Confidentiality Agreements are utter bull5h1t, and shows how easily dismissive and contemptuous of the fans they are. I have to say, if it was my business/play thing, I would want the support and backing of 8000+ people over the need not to be willing to say "we looked at x site but it just wasn't feasible"
Have a good Christmas.
|
|
|
|
Statement
Dec 24, 2018 6:12:33 GMT
via mobile
Post by alloutofgas on Dec 24, 2018 6:12:33 GMT
Why not ‘Happy Christmas’ at the end?? PC crap.
|
|
|
|
Post by billyocean on Dec 24, 2018 6:24:23 GMT
Maybe the statement has been made now to explain why (because of the 'considerable cost' of the fabled plan) there will be no money available for new players in January ? The part that I find hardest to believe is that there is some huge piece of land in the Bristol area that no one is speculating about. The next hardest thing is believing that if this piece of land did exist,was available and could get planning for a stadium that the owners could afford to buy it,let alone afford to build a stadium. Anyway what happened to 'plan b' redeveloping the present stadium ? is that now history too? or is the 'waq shaq' the redevelopment? ^^ This. Couldn’t agree more. |
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Dec 24, 2018 7:21:53 GMT
Look, I am sure they want to build a new ground but are up against what the last board failed to achieve, and the board before that.
We’ve always had “plans” but they never, ever come up economically viable.
Why is this, when so many other clubs achieved it?
Is it the debt? Is it this millstone making all plans economically unviable?
Is it the local council? Who are well known to support the other team and not be friendly to our interests?
Is it anything to do with the fact our rivals have one of the most powerful men in Britain behind them and has shown he has a petty and vindictive hate of us?
It’s one of these reasons or a combination I am sure.
Whatever the weather, it is highly suspicious why a development project like rovers - a club who CAN get the fans in to fill a stadium, cannot get one. Even tiny, rubbish clubs have managed it, not us.
The mem redevelopment has never been viable. Neither was Ashton gate but they have a man who cares more about their club than money, and that’s a rare thing. Sad even so, given half of their fans care more about money than their club and want their money back any time they aren’t promoted.
There is something fishy about why we never seem to get anywhere getting a ground and these questions must be answered. I can’t see how 3 motivated regimes can fail plus all these “experts” can’t get anywhere.
If it’s the debt then we will always be in this position; unless some miracle manager gets us to the prem. fat chance
|
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Dec 24, 2018 7:24:35 GMT
Have a look on Google maps. If you combine the CSSC area with just one of the fields from the adjoining Muller Road Recreation Ground, there is ample room to build a 20K stadium. The Mem could then be turned into the training ground. Keep the West Stand, knock down rest, and you have excellent facilities for a pitch that can be used by the Development Squad and Academy teams. The big problem with CSSC Ground is access - just a couple of one way lanes. You'd need to purchase and knock down a few houses. sounds too good to be true and so easy amazed no one has ever considered it before. As philton said, it has been considered before. It's been discussed on here and other social media forums, before we heard that the CSSC was closing. After the pending closure was announced it was discussed on social media again. At that time someone sent Wael a message to see if it was an option. I'm not sure on the word perfect reply, but Wael apparently said something along the lines of: if only it was that simple/easy. Google maps (especially if you change to satellite view) shows you could get The Mem site into a combined CSSC and Muller Road Recreation Ground over 3 times. I'm sure that overall size of a combined CSSCG and MRRG is larger than the UWE site. |
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Dec 24, 2018 7:31:51 GMT
Have a look on Google maps. If you combine the CSSC area with just one of the fields from the adjoining Muller Road Recreation Ground, there is ample room to build a 20K stadium. The Mem could then be turned into the training ground. Keep the West Stand, knock down rest, and you have excellent facilities for a pitch that can be used by the Development Squad and Academy teams. The big problem with CSSC Ground is access - just a couple of one way lanes. You'd need to purchase and knock down a few houses. Truth is there's no site within 5 miles of the Mem where you could build a decent stadium and training ground. Apart from the airfield which is probably all spoken for anyway. No. |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Dec 24, 2018 13:54:49 GMT
Look, I am sure they want to build a new ground but are up against what the last board failed to achieve, and the board before that. We’ve always had “plans” but they never, ever come up economically viable. Why is this, when so many other clubs achieved it? Is it the debt? Is it this millstone making all plans economically unviable? Is it the local council? Who are well known to support the other team and not be friendly to our interests? Is it anything to do with the fact our rivals have one of the most powerful men in Britain behind them and has shown he has a petty and vindictive hate of us? It’s one of these reasons or a combination I am sure. Whatever the weather, it is highly suspicious why a development project like rovers - a club who CAN get the fans in to fill a stadium, cannot get one. Even tiny, rubbish clubs have managed it, not us. The mem redevelopment has never been viable. Neither was Ashton gate but they have a man who cares more about their club than money, and that’s a rare thing. Sad even so, given half of their fans care more about money than their club and want their money back any time they aren’t promoted. There is something fishy about why we never seem to get anywhere getting a ground and these questions must be answered. I can’t see how 3 motivated regimes can fail plus all these “experts” can’t get anywhere. If it’s the debt then we will always be in this position; unless some miracle manager gets us to the prem. fat chance The answer is equity. When Rovers had 29 million cash equity from Sainsburys to put into the UWE project it was viable. For the UWE there had to be the security of knowing equity was going in which could not be taken out and that is why we constantly heard from Nick Higgs that "no debt can be attached to the stadium". If you were thinking of setting up a small business with a mate and wanted to risk 10 000 of your savings in it how would you feel if he said he would only loan the money and he wanted to have the van registered in his name so that if it all went belly up he could sell the van to get his money back ? If he had special skills which were critical to the success of the business you might consider it a reasonable deal. But, as we have discovered, Wael and Dwane Sports have no special skills or expertise to bring to the table and it looks as though they think they can create a deal where others put up the cash and take the risk while they sit pretty with their charge over the land. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2018 14:15:19 GMT
Is it the local council? Who are well known to support the other team and not be friendly to our interests? Every stadium plan Rovers have ever put in front of BCC has been approved, so no mileage in that. Of course, it's possible that this latest invisible plan may have been within BCC boundaries, but personally I don't believe things on faith, faith is just an excuse people use for holding to beliefs when they don't have good evidence, and I only grant trust, tentatively, where it's earned, so at this stage, I don't have sufficient evidence to believe that such a plan exists. Summary; I have no reason to think that BCC's planning dept have held us back in any way. |
|
|
|
Statement
Dec 24, 2018 14:23:27 GMT
via mobile
Post by a more piratey game on Dec 24, 2018 14:23:27 GMT
Look, I am sure they want to build a new ground but are up against what the last board failed to achieve, and the board before that. We’ve always had “plans” but they never, ever come up economically viable. Why is this, when so many other clubs achieved it? Is it the debt? Is it this millstone making all plans economically unviable? Is it the local council? Who are well known to support the other team and not be friendly to our interests? Is it anything to do with the fact our rivals have one of the most powerful men in Britain behind them and has shown he has a petty and vindictive hate of us? It’s one of these reasons or a combination I am sure. Whatever the weather, it is highly suspicious why a development project like rovers - a club who CAN get the fans in to fill a stadium, cannot get one. Even tiny, rubbish clubs have managed it, not us. The mem redevelopment has never been viable. Neither was Ashton gate but they have a man who cares more about their club than money, and that’s a rare thing. Sad even so, given half of their fans care more about money than their club and want their money back any time they aren’t promoted. There is something fishy about why we never seem to get anywhere getting a ground and these questions must be answered. I can’t see how 3 motivated regimes can fail plus all these “experts” can’t get anywhere. If it’s the debt then we will always be in this position; unless some miracle manager gets us to the prem. fat chance The answer is equity. When Rovers had 29 million cash equity from Sainsburys to put into the UWE project it was viable. For the UWE there had to be the security of knowing equity was going in which could not be taken out and that is why we constantly heard from Nick Higgs that "no debt can be attached to the stadium". If you were thinking of setting up a small business with a mate and wanted to risk 10 000 of your savings in it how would you feel if he said he would only loan the money and he wanted to have the van registered in his name so that if it all went belly up he could sell the van to get his money back ? If he had special skills which were critical to the success of the business you might consider it a reasonable deal. But, as we have discovered, Wael and Dwane Sports have no special skills or expertise to bring to the table and it looks as though they think they can create a deal where others put up the cash and take the risk while they sit pretty with their charge over the land. It's a bit the ManU model - leverage the wotsits out of the relatively predictable income streams and wider community goodwill |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Dec 24, 2018 14:46:06 GMT
The answer is equity. When Rovers had 29 million cash equity from Sainsburys to put into the UWE project it was viable. For the UWE there had to be the security of knowing equity was going in which could not be taken out and that is why we constantly heard from Nick Higgs that "no debt can be attached to the stadium". If you were thinking of setting up a small business with a mate and wanted to risk 10 000 of your savings in it how would you feel if he said he would only loan the money and he wanted to have the van registered in his name so that if it all went belly up he could sell the van to get his money back ? If he had special skills which were critical to the success of the business you might consider it a reasonable deal. But, as we have discovered, Wael and Dwane Sports have no special skills or expertise to bring to the table and it looks as though they think they can create a deal where others put up the cash and take the risk while they sit pretty with their charge over the land. It's a bit the ManU model - leverage the wotsits out of the relatively predictable income streams and wider community goodwill But comparing Rovers with Manchester United is like comparing the two men and a van with British Aerospace. One is a worldwide brand with income streams and potential which interests the big players the other is, to use Father Jack's description, "a bag of spanners" The 29 million from Sainsburys would have got Rovers up a step to a level where we could be of interest to the big players... if that is what we want. But if 1000 fans are going to read an open letter to the board, sign it, and then be content with the response received yesterday then my conclusion is that we don't want it. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2018 14:55:48 GMT
It's a bit the ManU model - leverage the wotsits out of the relatively predictable income streams and wider community goodwill But comparing Rovers with Manchester United is like comparing the two men and a van with British Aerospace. One is a worldwide brand with income streams and potential which interests the big players the other is, to use Father Jack's description, "a bag of spanners" The 29 million from Sainsburys would have got Rovers up a step to a level where we could be of interest to the big players... if that is what we want. But if 1000 fans are going to read an open letter to the board, sign it, and then be content with the response received yesterday then my conclusion is that we don't want it. Yep. Was half way through writing something similar. Utd are a global brand, at one time they were paying down the debt at around £1m a week. The problem we face is, who can do what? Our SC is, let's use it again, a 'bag of spanners' we have no other support groups, who is going to organise what, and to what end exactly? We protest that these owners are securing their own losses against their own asset and we don't yet know what they will do when the debt exceeds the value of the asset.Not very catchy is it? The £29m wasn't £29m, it was a deposit on a new facility, which had no explanation that I was ever aware of as to how we made up the difference between £29m and circa £45m. |
|
|
|
Post by fatherjackhackett on Dec 24, 2018 14:56:12 GMT
It's a bit the ManU model - leverage the wotsits out of the relatively predictable income streams and wider community goodwill But comparing Rovers with Manchester United is like comparing the two men and a van with British Aerospace. One is a worldwide brand with income streams and potential which interests the big players the other is, to use Father Jack's description, "a bag of spanners" The 29 million from Sainsburys would have got Rovers up a step to a level where we could be of interest to the big players... if that is what we want. But if 1000 fans are going to read an open letter to the board, sign it, and then be content with the response received yesterday then my conclusion is that we don't want it. You really don’t get it do you? I have two arguments. The first is that proper fan action consists of doing a fair bit more than just having a whine on various internet platforms and social media. I’d be more than happy to sign up to any meaningful fan action that takes place in real life, as a veteran of doing things going back to organising against Thatchers plans for ID cards 30 years ago I remain convinced that persuading people face to face is the only way to do things. Also, seeing how effective the likes of Blackpool fans have been in getting organised convinces me that there is no enthusiasm for such things here, staying in the pub is far more important. Secondly, I will call out time and time again the sheer rank hypocrisy of those who attack the owners and current board, yet turned a blind eye to 30 years of woeful underinvestment in BRFC because they are ‘one of us’. Sorry if this is in some way offensive, I’m just not a great fan of double standards. |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Dec 24, 2018 15:07:30 GMT
It's a bit the ManU model - leverage the wotsits out of the relatively predictable income streams and wider community goodwill But comparing Rovers with Manchester United is like comparing the two men and a van with British Aerospace. so I am suggesting that, following your input above, they are trying to apply the ManU financing model to our two men and their van strip out whatever is left of the £15m equity (as a 'management charge', or similar), and leave the 'club' with the stadium and training ground and probably some financial obligations which aren't there currently with WAQ as the Prez it does look a big ask, but investment bankers are not known for their lack of ambition |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Dec 24, 2018 15:56:01 GMT
But comparing Rovers with Manchester United is like comparing the two men and a van with British Aerospace. One is a worldwide brand with income streams and potential which interests the big players the other is, to use Father Jack's description, "a bag of spanners" The 29 million from Sainsburys would have got Rovers up a step to a level where we could be of interest to the big players... if that is what we want. But if 1000 fans are going to read an open letter to the board, sign it, and then be content with the response received yesterday then my conclusion is that we don't want it. You really don’t get it do you? I have two arguments. The first is that proper fan action consists of doing a fair bit more than just having a whine on various internet platforms and social media. I’d be more than happy to sign up to any meaningful fan action that takes place in real life, as a veteran of doing things going back to organising against Thatchers plans for ID cards 30 years ago I remain convinced that persuading people face to face is the only way to do things. Also, seeing how effective the likes of Blackpool fans have been in getting organised convinces me that there is no enthusiasm for such things here, staying in the pub is far more important. Secondly, I will call out time and time again the sheer rank hypocrisy of those who attack the owners and current board, yet turned a blind eye to 30 years of woeful underinvestment in BRFC because they are ‘one of us’. Sorry if this is in some way offensive, I’m just not a great fan of double standards. This is in no way offensive to me. My biggest gripe is that for too many Gasheads defending mediocrity is seen as a virtue and a sign of loyalty. Those who highlight the deficiencies are classed as negative and yet I think it should be the other way around. Defend mediocrity and we will forever get mediocrity but in criticising mediocrity we are taking the first positive step towards effecting a change to excellence. The big challenge is to find something positive to put to fans as an alternative and which can be sold to them face to face as you say. The very few forum fans who know me or those who know of me will have guessed about the dilemma I faced for many years. Of course I should have liked to have come back to Bristol with substantial financial backing and confronted our leaders with a plan to make Rovers a better club and one which did not always have to accept second best. It wasn't to be and I am sorry about that but, as Wareham Gas has posted recently, surely there must be others in their thirties or forties who are just as fed up with the Rovers mediocrity as I am and want to do something about it. We need to look at other models which have worked and in particular, IMO, the Hearts and Swansea City models. Both of these clubs when faced with disaster were able to find a group of fans with the will and ability to get things done. A few weeks ago I posted about the possibility of the Supporters Club, Presidents Club and business owning fans who sponsor the club coming together to formulate a plan to protect the interest of Bristol Rovers but once again it fell flat and there was no response. If we don't even want to talk about it then I guess the chances of doing anything are quite slim but to me it is much more stimulating to think about positive options than to meekly accept mediocrity. |
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Dec 24, 2018 16:49:11 GMT
Look, I am sure they want to build a new ground but are up against what the last board failed to achieve, and the board before that. We’ve always had “plans” but they never, ever come up economically viable. Why is this, when so many other clubs achieved it? Is it the debt? Is it this millstone making all plans economically unviable? Is it the local council? Who are well known to support the other team and not be friendly to our interests? Is it anything to do with the fact our rivals have one of the most powerful men in Britain behind them and has shown he has a petty and vindictive hate of us? It’s one of these reasons or a combination I am sure. Whatever the weather, it is highly suspicious why a development project like rovers - a club who CAN get the fans in to fill a stadium, cannot get one. Even tiny, rubbish clubs have managed it, not us. The mem redevelopment has never been viable. Neither was Ashton gate but they have a man who cares more about their club than money, and that’s a rare thing. Sad even so, given half of their fans care more about money than their club and want their money back any time they aren’t promoted. There is something fishy about why we never seem to get anywhere getting a ground and these questions must be answered. I can’t see how 3 motivated regimes can fail plus all these “experts” can’t get anywhere. If it’s the debt then we will always be in this position; unless some miracle manager gets us to the prem. fat chance The answer is equity. When Rovers had 29 million cash equity from Sainsburys to put into the UWE project it was viable. For the UWE there had to be the security of knowing equity was going in which could not be taken out and that is why we constantly heard from Nick Higgs that "no debt can be attached to the stadium". If you were thinking of setting up a small business with a mate and wanted to risk 10 000 of your savings in it how would you feel if he said he would only loan the money and he wanted to have the van registered in his name so that if it all went belly up he could sell the van to get his money back ? If he had special skills which were critical to the success of the business you might consider it a reasonable deal. But, as we have discovered, Wael and Dwane Sports have no special skills or expertise to bring to the table and it looks as though they think they can create a deal where others put up the cash and take the risk while they sit pretty with their charge over the land. If we accept this latest plan actually existed then surely equity was not an issue if the owners got as far as discussing purchasing land for a stadium & training ground, as that alone must have a similar value to the Mem then there's the stadium build cost on top. You'd hope using from what they learnt from the failed UWE project they'd know what returns they could expect how viable the deal would be. Although if it is all a smoke scene to cover up the fact they've made no progress then you do have to wonder how we'll ever find the equity/finance to build a stadium, or even continue to fund the present debt/annual losses. |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Dec 24, 2018 18:29:45 GMT
The answer is equity. When Rovers had 29 million cash equity from Sainsburys to put into the UWE project it was viable. For the UWE there had to be the security of knowing equity was going in which could not be taken out and that is why we constantly heard from Nick Higgs that "no debt can be attached to the stadium". If you were thinking of setting up a small business with a mate and wanted to risk 10 000 of your savings in it how would you feel if he said he would only loan the money and he wanted to have the van registered in his name so that if it all went belly up he could sell the van to get his money back ? If he had special skills which were critical to the success of the business you might consider it a reasonable deal. But, as we have discovered, Wael and Dwane Sports have no special skills or expertise to bring to the table and it looks as though they think they can create a deal where others put up the cash and take the risk while they sit pretty with their charge over the land. If we accept this latest plan actually existed then surely equity was not an issue if the owners got as far as discussing purchasing land for a stadium & training ground, as that alone must have a similar value to the Mem then there's the stadium build cost on top. You'd hope using from what they learnt from the failed UWE project they'd know what returns they could expect how viable the deal would be. Although if it is all a smoke scene to cover up the fact they've made no progress then you do have to wonder how we'll ever find the equity/finance to build a stadium, or even continue to fund the present debt/annual losses. The figures will never add up until Dwane Sports capitalise their loan and demonstrate to potential investment partners that they are totally committed to their Bristol Rovers project. If the plan did exist I suspect that lack of financial commitment was the reason it failed. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2018 22:04:58 GMT
Seems to me that our erstwhile owners apparently treat any body they may try to do any business with, with more respect than they do the fans. Confidentiality Agreements are utter bull5h1t, and shows how easily dismissive and contemptuous of the fans they are. I have to say, if it was my business/play thing, I would want the support and backing of 8000+ people over the need not to be willing to say "we looked at x site but it just wasn't feasible". Have a good Christmas. Unsure why this cogent* post was not more noticed. It is indeed baffling why football club owners show more respect for 'business partners' by whom they are supposedly disappointed, than they do the eight thousand paying punters who keep the whole show on the road every other week. But there it is. I've got to be honest, I don't know what cogent means, but it sounded good, and I've had a drink, and it's too late at night to look up words in the dictionary. By 'cogent', whatever the duck that means, I meant succinct, meaning, key, and worthy. I'll look 'cogent' up tomorrow. |
|
|
|
Statement
Dec 25, 2018 1:01:14 GMT
via mobile
Post by billyocean on Dec 25, 2018 1:01:14 GMT
Ever since they understood that UWE wasn’t going to get them what they wanted, DS have been looking to get out with the least financial (and maybe reputational) damage.
All of the BS about confidentiality is simply a facade to the unpalatable truth.
The facts are that nothing has happened with the training ground other than trying to sell it for housing development. Nothing has happened with the redevelopment of the mem unless you count the Waq Shack, electronic ticketing or the bar redecoration as part of the mem redevelopment (obviously none of them are).
DC knew the score and said it wouldn’t happen whilst he’s there. I read this as it will never happen under the current ownership.
Would love to eat my words and see some exciting new stadium and training ground plans in 2019 but what you’ll get is more of the same until they sell: there’s hard work going on behind the scenes. The Wizard of Oz.
|
|
|
|
Post by emperorsuperbus on Dec 25, 2018 23:05:32 GMT
To be very honest about how I feel. I look forward to Boxing Day clash with Walsall I imagine just the same as if it’s championship clash with reading, or a L2 clash at PortVale. I can’t imagine feeling any different win lose or draw
For the last fifty years a gashead, win lose or draw I am happy to come back for more. Over those fifty years, the DNA of the club has been third tier football. We have never had first tier DNA. Over last fifty years we’ve never really had second tier DNA.
I don’t really want the DNA of this club to change, because I sort of fear I might not enjoy it as much. Does anyone share this feeling.
It’s not about settling for mediocrity, because the last fifty years hasn’t been mediocrity, it’s been fun.
Life is all about compromise. Going to work and putting up with s**t there for the money is a compromise. Marriage is a compromise. Having kids a further compromise. But each compromise brings its own rewards.
|
|
