Hadley's reveal new stadium design

[B.I.G]

You have faith in property developers?

No. Not really very relevant though.

 

[Taper]

This is absolutely not about trust or faith. It's more like game theory where we accept that all the players are rational actors, with self-interest at heart. The clear interests of the club are for this deal to go ahead and for all of us to ensure it does as promised in the application. The alternatives are fraught and uncertain. For me the loss of a semi-derelict bit of astro-turf is a very small price to pay for this. We are in this shit for historical reasons. If the current set of fans can see this through to the point where we're no longer owned by people with no interest in the club, then that will be something we can all be very proud of indeed.

 

[Taper]

I see Brand New Guy has posted on the EDF saying various, including "the Club does not benefit financially ... from bar takings." Mishi has rebutted this above I think/hope, so this could well be misinformation.

A more interesting point he raises though is as follows

".... Hadley Property Group are off the scene completely (thus rendering null and void the already virtually meaningless Memorandum of Understanding about building a stadium and handing the club over to fan ownership)."

I'm not sure whether the mou is "meaningless" or to what extent it is meaningful, but is this right in terms of it being null and void?

 

[YTC]

I see Brand New Guy has posted on the EDF saying various, including "the Club does not benefit financially ... from bar takings." Mishi has rebutted this above I think/hope, so this could well be misinformation.

A more interesting point he raises though is as follows

".... Hadley Property Group are off the scene completely (thus rendering null and void the already virtually meaningless Memorandum of Understanding about building a stadium and handing the club over to fan ownership)."

I'm not sure whether the mou is "meaningless" or to what extent it is meaningful, but is this right in terms of it being null and void?

He is right in the sense that a new MOU would need to be supplied and signed by Meadows, however the meddling and misinformation spread by Freinds of Greendale surely undermines their credibility as a decent organisation. Not that Stephen Govier gave them the best of starts PR wise.

 

[B.I.G]

Its a shame he didnt cross-post me calling him a deceitful cunt. I love this finances angle - we will be rich but with no where to play.

 

[BrandNewGuy]

FOG seem to be part of a concerted attempt to undermine both the development and the club as a whole

What makes you think we're part of a concerted attempt to undermine the club? Really?

 

[BrandNewGuy]

But the money from the bars are what helps pay players' wages, pay the bills & utilities, run the facilities..so yes, using the bar does help the Football Club. So please persevere...though that is up to anyone to choose where they drink, if they find other local hostelries more welcoming/friendlier/better service/value for money/whatever...

No, the club gets all directly football-related income and expenditure, but not bar takings. As such it's also responsible for player's wages but not utility bills.

 

[liamdhfc]

As I was happy to confirm at our commercial and community meeting the other night, which was hijacked by a person who wanted to know why we were raising money for the club and where it all went. And what I said was that the bars are run under a different limited company and accounted for separately not that the club does not benefit from the income that goes through the bars. Where the owners pay players wages from is their concern.
The next meeting will specifically exclude anybody that does not want to talk about raising sponsorship and new community initiatives. I will not allow it to be hijacked by questions about ownership, income streams and the owners.
Your take on it is spin for your own purposes; whatever they may be

 

[YTC]

As I was happy to confirm at our commercial and community meeting the other night, which was hijacked by a person who wanted to know why we were raising money for the club and where it all went. And what I said was that the bars are run under a different limited company and accounted for separately not that the club does not benefit from the income that goes through the bars. Where the owners pay players wages from is their concern.
The next meeting will specifically exclude anybody that does not want to talk about raising sponsorship and new community initiatives. I will not allow it to be hijacked by questions about ownership, income streams and the owners.
Your take on it is spin for your own purposes; whatever they may be

BrandNewGuy - mainly this, the fact he had a focus on the astro turf and was sent on behalf of what i'm lead to believe was an ex Lib Dem Councillor. And you spreading misinformation, of course. Oh, and lets not forget Mr. G

 

[YTC]

For the record, with whats happening between Hadley/Meadows etc, I'm not 100% behind the development. However this stinks from FOG.

 

[Taper]

Yes. And FoDKHWood too. Different cheeks of the same arse. Like Hadley/Meadows perhaps. Why is this grand old club plagued by such wankers.

 

[EDC]

He is right in the sense that a new MOU would need to be supplied and signed by Meadows, however the meddling and misinformation spread by Freinds of Greendale surely undermines their credibility as a decent organisation. Not that Stephen Govier gave them the best of starts PR wise.

Friends or fiends ??

 

[Lucy Fur]

No, the club gets all directly football-related income and expenditure, but not bar takings. As such it's also responsible for player's wages but not utility bills.

You seem very keen to quote as fact how the club is run, yet less keen to verify your facts first. Something of a theme for FOGD.

I think B.I.G. put it more succintly.

 

[willie local]

East Dulwich forum is saying the latest covenant busting planning application has been refused. Realistically this is only a temporary respite and Meadows will be appealing and working other angles too to get them lifted, as well as pushing on with the main planning application.
What came out of today's meeting with Meadows? I'd assumed all previous promises were off the table since the morphing owner company and the latest sneaky application.
I don't believe fans or the council would let the club get shut down by the developers, whatever they call themselves. There'd be one hell of a fight back and we would win it.
I also don't believe we're as helpless as some are saying. We should be using this forum to discuss ideas for plan B and how to action them, so here's my vague outline.
1. Protect the club with a ACV to make it harder to shut down.
2. Talk to the Councillors and ask them to make it very clear to whoever owns the stadium now or in the future that the covenants are permanant and planning will never be granted to build and that the club can not be used as a hostage to get permission.
3. Once these ground rules are clear, the stadium is only worth what they paid for it and the council can buy the land off the developers with one of their super low rate mortgage deals they can get. Long lease for the club from the council.
4. Stadium regeneration could maybe then come from a P.P. enterprise.
5. Fan ownership will be a bit longer in the pipeline.

PS. Sorry about the previous rimmer joke.

 

[willie local]

Community application to get a ACV

Community Right to Bid | Southwark Council

 

[BrandNewGuy]

You seem very keen to quote as fact how the club is run, yet less keen to verify your facts first. Something of a theme for FOGD.

I think B.I.G. put it more succintly.

"No, the club gets all directly football-related income and expenditure, but not bar takings. As such it's also responsible for player's wages but not utility bills." This is what I was told by the club's General Manager this afternoon, and bears out the ownership structure outlined by Radical-Cliff yesterday morning.

 

[B.I.G]

East Dulwich forum is saying the latest covenant busting planning application has been refused. Realistically this is only a temporary respite and Meadows will be appealing and working other angles too to get them lifted, as well as pushing on with the main planning application.
What came out of today's meeting with Meadows? I'd assumed all previous promises were off the table since the morphing owner company and the latest sneaky application.
I don't believe fans or the council would let the club get shut down by the developers, whatever they call themselves. There'd be one hell of a fight back and we would win it.
I also don't believe we're as helpless as some are saying. We should be using this forum to discuss ideas for plan B and how to action them, so here's my vague outline.
1. Protect the club with a ACV to make it harder to shut down.
2. Talk to the Councillors and ask them to make it very clear to whoever owns the stadium now or in the future that the covenants are permanant and planning will never be granted to build and that the club can not be used as a hostage to get permission.
3. Once these ground rules are clear, the stadium is only worth what they paid for it and the council can buy the land off the developers with one of their super low rate mortgage deals they can get. Long lease for the club from the council.
4. Stadium regeneration could maybe then come from a P.P. enterprise.
5. Fan ownership will be a bit longer in the pipeline.

PS. Sorry about the previous rimmer joke.

As sceptical as I am about Southwark council buying us. I would suggest your identity might help garner support for rallying round your ideas.

 

[B.I.G]

"No, the club gets all directly football-related income and expenditure, but not bar takings. As such it's also responsible for player's wages but not utility bills." This is what I was told by the club's General Manager this afternoon, and bears out the ownership structure outlined by Radical-Cliff yesterday morning.

Did you ask if we need a lease to play yet?

 

[willie local]

You want my full name and address before you comment on suggestions like getting the bloody ACV sorted? Anything else B.I.G? You're not coming across as the most calm and reasonable voice on the thread so far.

 

[B.I.G]

You want my full name and address before you comment on suggestions like getting the bloody ACV sorted? Anything else B.I.G? You're not coming across as the most calm and reasonable voice on the thread so far.

Identify yourself as much or little as you like.

 

[B.I.G]

If people know who you are they are more likely to take you seriously. I will be talking about it tomorrow at the game. Feel free to come and chat.

 

[willie local]

Thanks. I'm not in Winchester though.

 

[EDC]

If people know who you are they are more likely to take you seriously. I will be talking about it tomorrow at the game. Feel free to come and chat.

You'll be incoherent by then.

 

[B.I.G]

You'll be incoherent by then.

Then me and them will be talking equal sense!

 

[willie local]

Brilliant. So anyone even darling to suggest an alternative approach is talking incoherent nonsense then? Let's stick to the developers plan then, and call anyone who disagrees with it, for whatever reason cunts.

 

[B.I.G]

Brilliant. So anyone even darling to suggest an alternative approach is talking incoherent nonsense then? Let's stick to the developers plan then, and call anyone who disagrees with it, for whatever reason cunts.

Or we could discuss it.

Let's start with Southwark Council not coming to our aid last time the doors were nearly shut?

Or that Southwark Council have shown no interest in buying the freehold? Let alone how they would justify buying for 5 million.

Is Southwark council going to buy the club as well as the freehold? Or would Nick McCormack simply decide to retain ownership of the club rather than sell?

Sounds like some valid queries.

 

[B.I.G]

I might as well add who is going to ensure we are granted a lease from the freeholder if say Southwark council don't spend the money and buy the freehold?

 

[B.I.G]

Or why you think an ACV prevents the owner of the football club either running it into the ground by keeping all the money?

 

[B.I.G]

Or you could state if you are opposed to the some of thr ground being moved onto the five a side pitches? Or are they sacrosant?

 

[B.I.G]

Or explain why anyone should listen to you rather than the football committee or supporters trust?