Gritstone Tup Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 35 minutes ago, Crewton said: Firstly, what makes you think that the City Council would easily wave through the redevelopment of PP, even for residential development (which is questionable anyway, given what it's built on)? They've always said they wouldn't, and what seasoned developer is going to take a punt on that changing? The land alone isn't worth £21m without planning consent. Secondly, fans were willing to pay £400 for seats from Upton Park because it was WHam's traditional home. I doubt you'd find many that would pay a tenner for a seat from the London Stadium. Thirdly, only the East and West stands at Highbury were retained, and the redevelopment costs were substantial, but it was financially worthwhile because it was inner-city London right next to a tube station, not remediated industrial land at Wilmorton. Without a tenant able to pay a rent, Pride Park makes no sense as a purchase - and what Derby fan (as David Clowes is reputed to be) would buy it in the knowledge that he might have to knock it down to get his money back? There are countless examples of councils waving through a change of use for redevelopment on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 Anyone have a resume of this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 Just now, RoyMac5 said: You have to know what the other possibilities are. The EFL should also be made aware of the real financial situation, not just, well we're looking for another Alonso/Kirchner/Sheik to pay more than the Club is worth. So are you saying that Q was stopping high bids or adequate bids being explored from potential bidders . That theory is for the birds . Steve Gibson put a stop to it all with his 50 Million claim. To think the EFL now want to help after trying to destroy us is also for the birds . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanjwitham Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 19 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said: No, as @Sparklesaid, Q don't know if there is a work-around as it seems they've not asked. Or they have asked and the EFL have refused to give a clear answer - the Quantuma statement doesn't actually say whether they have asked or not. Honestly there's very little chance that the EFL will give a clear answer anyway. At best it will be "it will depend on the exact circumstances", but it's probably going to be "we don't engage in hypotheticals, please refer to the EFL insolvency policy". Caerphilly Ram, atherstoneram, Curtains and 1 other 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 Just now, Curtains said: So are you saying that Q was stopping high bids or adequate bids being explored from potential bidders . That theory is for the birds . Steve Gibson put a stop to it all with his 50 Million claim. To think the EFL now want to help after trying to destroy us is also for the birds . What? I'm saying that Q needs to explore options and admit we might not get option 1 or 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strawhillram Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Curtains said: Why would they as they don’t want to tempt fate. . Option 1 or 2 has to be done the other option is unthinkable especially as Boycie is getting a Forest tattoo on his “#$e a good place for it . . . "Frest" until he bends over Edited June 20, 2022 by StrawHillRam atherstoneram, Will Hughes Hair, Curtains and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 Just now, RoyMac5 said: What? I'm saying that Q needs to explore options and admit we might not get option 1 or 2. I’m sure they have and will but not with EFL interfering atherstoneram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteHorseRam Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 38 minutes ago, Crewton said: Firstly, what makes you think that the City Council would easily wave through the redevelopment of PP, even for residential development (which is questionable anyway, given what it's built on)? They've always said they wouldn't, and what seasoned developer is going to take a punt on that changing? The land alone isn't worth £21m without planning consent. Secondly, fans were willing to pay £400 for seats from Upton Park because it was WHam's traditional home. I doubt you'd find many that would pay a tenner for a seat from the London Stadium. Thirdly, only the East and West stands at Highbury were retained, and the redevelopment costs were substantial, but it was financially worthwhile because it was inner-city London right next to a tube station, not remediated industrial land at Wilmorton. Without a tenant able to pay a rent, Pride Park makes no sense as a purchase - and what Derby fan (as David Clowes is reputed to be) would buy it in the knowledge that he might have to knock it down to get his money back? PP being pulled down would be quite a thing - for this to happen we would have to have been liquidated I think. I think the symbolism of that happening to one of the founding clubs with massive support would make it a top story in the media. It would be a big reputational hit for anyone who had been involved in such an appalling outcome business wise, or even been on the Council and let it happen. Crewton 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 16 minutes ago, Turk Thrust said: Are you sure curb? Surely liquidation would automatically terminate a player's contract and the player becomes a free agent and therefore entitled to sign for another club? Nope they become the property of the EFL who will sell them and receive money to distribute to football debts which includes transfer fees pension contributions lost matchday income for other clubs etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanjwitham Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 1 minute ago, Curtains said: To think the EFL now want to help after trying to destroy us is also for the birds . The EFL want exactly what they've wanted all along - for all of this to go away, so they carry on with their cushy existence, without having an independent regulator shoved where the sun don't shine. They only went after us to stop getting sued by 'Boro. They buried their heads in the sand over the claims, because they didn't want to deal with being seen to favour either party. They're trying to "help" now, while also passing the blame onto Quantuma as much as possible, so they don't get blamed if it all goes pear-shaped. Will Hughes Hair, Curtains, jono and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gritstone Tup Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 24 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said: I see people are still reading 'between the lines' to draw conclusions and make accusations for themselves to get angry at. And for other people to then take as fact to get angry at, also. People making stuff up, or repeating things which have already been disproven, when called out on it revert to claiming that this counts as defending the administrators. Not spewing out any old rubbish that comes into your head, instead looking at things logically and sensibly is taken to be 'making excuses', do that and you get accused of being part of the problem and facilitating the shysters. In some bizarre twist you're the one acting like a 10 year old. Apparently screaming and shouting, accusing people of saying things they haven't, painting them into a position they don't hold and citing their attitude as one of the reasons we're in this mess (now that's insulting) is very mature, however. The repeated outrage at the EFL being 'blackballed' when it's simply not the case. The notion that the administrators should cut dead any potential bid from any third party who doesn't want to engage on this with the EFL at this stage could well be something that helps liquidate us if it leaves us with no bidders, or a bidder who doesn't particularly mind picking up the pieces after liquidation! It's just such an ill thought out idea, as well as being mildly hypocritical, but as long as it's the opposite of what the administrators do it must be good, it must be right. The cost of the club is rising with each loan that gets given out, interest etc is a direct result of there not being a firm offer to take forward using the set out criteria. That being the case the 'bidders' (a term which can be used very loosely given their continued reluctance to actually bid) have shot themselves in the foot. Not being willing to match CK's bid in February/March, taking their ball and going home when a PB was in place and not being ready with a bid for if/when it fell apart, - people on here will tell you that they could see it coming a mile off, but apparently the other bidders couldn't? - going in with lowball offers etc It's all lead to this, unfortunately. You’re correct in many ways but the bottom line is always money. Any potential buyer will always judge its value on a worst case scenario and what all assets are worth should it all go wrong. As unpalatable as it is to some, the redevelopment of PP will be in those calculations and we can only hope it isn’t the prime motivation of a potential buyer. I’m going to guess that one stumbling block is that MM will have clauses in place excluding redevelopment in any sale of the stadium, so he dosent miss out on a big pay day himself. May Contain Nuts 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 12 minutes ago, Curtains said: Why would they as they don’t want to tempt fate. . Option 1 or 2 has to be done the other option is unthinkable especially as Boycie is getting a Forest tattoo on his “#$e Ignoring Boycie birth mark - the reality exists that only CK met what the administrators are asking for so exploring all the options is an alternative reality of our situation which shouldn’t be ignore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 10 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said: You have to know what the other possibilities are. The EFL should also be made aware of the real financial situation, not just, well we're looking for another Alonso/Kirchner/Sheik to pay more than the Club is worth. That’s the reality RoyMac5 as there are three big potential bidders in the business world who are not offering what is being asked but are willing to buy us. r_wilcockson and RoyMac5 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gritstone Tup Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 47 minutes ago, Crewton said: Firstly, what makes you think that the City Council would easily wave through the redevelopment of PP, even for residential development (which is questionable anyway, given what it's built on)? They've always said they wouldn't, and what seasoned developer is going to take a punt on that changing? The land alone isn't worth £21m without planning consent. Secondly, fans were willing to pay £400 for seats from Upton Park because it was WHam's traditional home. I doubt you'd find many that would pay a tenner for a seat from the London Stadium. Thirdly, only the East and West stands at Highbury were retained, and the redevelopment costs were substantial, but it was financially worthwhile because it was inner-city London right next to a tube station, not remediated industrial land at Wilmorton. Without a tenant able to pay a rent, Pride Park makes no sense as a purchase - and what Derby fan (as David Clowes is reputed to be) would buy it in the knowledge that he might have to knock it down to get his money back? I’m simply outlining how easy it is to redevelop and make a profit. PP being a newer ground and without restrictions would be far cheaper to adapt for new use. From memory Highbury had some sort of covenant/listed status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 9 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said: Or they have asked and the EFL have refused to give a clear answer - the Quantuma statement doesn't actually say whether they have asked or not. Honestly there's very little chance that the EFL will give a clear answer anyway. At best it will be "it will depend on the exact circumstances", but it's probably going to be "we don't engage in hypotheticals, please refer to the EFL insolvency policy". Yet isn’t the EFL wanting to look at all the bids looking at hypotheticals ? CBRammette and atherstoneram 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Curtains said: I’m sure they have and will but not with EFL interfering Lol. How could you get the EFL to potentially agree to another option, without interfering?! They hold the power to take away our Golden share - we have to include them in the on-going negotiations, sooner rather than later. Oh and all this is Mel's fault, he racked up our huge debts. Edited June 20, 2022 by RoyMac5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 6 minutes ago, Sparkle said: Ignoring Boycie birth mark - the reality exists that only CK met what the administrators are asking for so exploring all the options is an alternative reality of our situation which shouldn’t be ignore I guarantee Q are exploring all options it’s not in their interest not to . The cynical amongst us might think they aren’t but they have to by law. atherstoneram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 2 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said: Lol. How could you get the EFL to potentially agree to another option, without interfering?! They hold the power to take away our Golden share - we have to include them in the on-going negotiations, sooner rather than later. Oh and all this is Mel's fault, he racked up our huge debts. That’s it then I’ll go and enjoy the Sun in Spain . Adios for now my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 5 minutes ago, Sparkle said: That’s the reality RoyMac5 as there are three big potential bidders in the business world who are not offering what is being asked but are willing to buy us. I see Nixon is going on about the stadium plus bid again. And involving them in paying June's wages as they'd eventually be part of the whole deal. Nixon is exceling himself today in saying lots and saying nothing (trust me on that I'm an expert ? ? )! Steve How Hard?, De22Ram and IslandExile 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 1 minute ago, Curtains said: I guarantee Q are exploring all options it’s not in their interest not to . The cynical amongst us might think they aren’t but they have to by law. Would be nice but they could have stated that as exactly what option one and option two are they didn’t state what option three was Curtains 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account.
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now