RobertT
Offline
Posts: 11800
|
|
« Reply #15 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 11:42:46 » |
|
Just seen them at the top of the stands, nice! Nice video on there as well.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Frasier3
|
|
« Reply #16 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 11:43:41 » |
|
Well done Bill P. This is a major commitment he is making to STFC, the fans and the wider community. I expect the council will also be keen to do business with him.
He has demonstrated his ability and intentions clearly and whilst the consortium continue to get around the delaying tactics MD puts in the way fans need to continue to show their support for the consortium in increasing numbers.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Amir
|
|
« Reply #17 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 11:49:28 » |
|
Without wanting to be a killjoy, is it realistic to suggest putting profits from the redevelopment back into the club? From my understanding some of the profit would have to be used to pay off SSW, otherwise there would be no real incentive for him to go. Admittedly I know sweet FA about the negotiations, it's just that was how I thought things would take place?
Still a great offer though, and making sure future profits would go back into the club is a brilliant idea.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
deltaincline
|
|
« Reply #18 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 11:52:02 » |
|
Well, thats a very good bit of positive news. I really like the comment about ring fencing any revenues for the good of the football club. Bang-on Mr Power! I wonder if Smarmes is able or allowed to make a similar or better claim of their own proposal to move the club to fucking Chippenham??? Despite the best efforts of Maverick and others elsewhere the consortium do seem to be several streets ahead of the board (OK, not too difficult to do, granted). They may not have the vital shares in the club yet, but they do have a lot going for them; Swindon MP on side. The Council, local residents and thousands of town fans who dont trust Diamandis, Smarmes, Bowden or Grey. Given a straight choice between Bill Power, Mike Wilkes, the trust people with their (workable) redevelopment plans, an MP and the council and residents groups all backing them, or>> Diamandis, Lying Grey, Lying Smarmes, 'more money than you can shake a stick at' Holt, Mike 'I'm a life-long- town-fan-me' Bowden - apparently without the goodwill of an MP, or the council, or the resident groups and with fans actively campaigning to oust them - as well as them threatening to move the club to fucking chippenham if their photocopy of the trusts redevelopment proposal isn't accepted..... I think the chances of a club statement being released ahead of their favoured slot on a friday afternoon just increased. Well done Bill Power!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8746
|
|
« Reply #19 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 11:56:25 » |
|
I think the chances of a club statement being released ahead of their favoured slot on a friday afternoon just increased. Reg will be pleased
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
The_Plagiarist
|
|
« Reply #20 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 11:58:53 » |
|
deltaincline, great post POWER TO THE ORANGE REVOLUTION!!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
deltaincline
|
|
« Reply #21 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 12:02:19 » |
|
Without wanting to be a killjoy, is it realistic to suggest putting profits from the redevelopment back into the club? From my understanding some of the profit would have to be used to pay off SSW, otherwise there would be no real incentive for him to go. Admittedly I know sweet FA about the negotiations, it's just that was how I thought things would take place?
Still a great offer though, and making sure future profits would go back into the club is a brilliant idea. I think the consortiums plan was to buy out the Wills wasn't it? From what Bill Power has said, any revenue from the extra facilities would then go to the club as Wills would be long gone. Can someone from the consortium confirm that point without giving too much info away?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sharky
|
|
« Reply #22 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 12:03:03 » |
|
This may sound sily, and correct me if I am missing something here, but why redevelop the Nationwide stand (as new as it already is) when you could flip this design 180degrees and redevelop the Arkells instead, which should be the heart of the stadium as opposed to the run down bit as it will be (considering its uses - changing rooms, facility rooms, directors areas etc.)
Just an idea thats all.....i'd rather see three new stands and the nationwide than three new stands and the arkells with seats missing and the rest dodgy colours!
Either way, a fabulous offer from Mr Power!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Iffy's Onion Bhaji
petulant
Offline
Posts: 15863
|
|
« Reply #23 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 12:12:41 » |
|
this is brilliant news! what a great way to start my afternoon how can the board say BP and the consortium is not good for the club now?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Summerof69
Offline
Posts: 8598
|
|
« Reply #24 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 12:15:55 » |
|
Has anything been heard from Bowden lately, because it's gone very quiet ? I think the statment will be out around 4.58pm on Friday, just before the phone in on RS, saying about the massive 'fatal flaw' the Trust plans are and that Bowden is an expert in his field and he knows what he's talking about. :-))(
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
yeo
Offline
Posts: 3651
|
|
« Reply #25 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 12:19:19 » |
|
I dont get it.
I read that piece and it just seems like a bit of spin to me.
The consortium were always going to redeveop the stadium as far as I knew so whats different about this storie?
That BP is going to partly fund it but not take any profit?How does he propose to do this by loaning the money building the stadium then getting that loan money back from what?
Maybe im reading it wrong but its not really exciting news is it?
|
|
|
Logged
|
/ W56196272
|
|
|
pauld
Aaron Aardvark
Offline
Posts: 25436
Absolute Calamity!
|
|
« Reply #26 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 12:21:31 » |
|
Without wanting to be a killjoy, is it realistic to suggest putting profits from the redevelopment back into the club? From my understanding some of the profit would have to be used to pay off SSW, otherwise there would be no real incentive for him to go. Admittedly I know sweet FA about the negotiations, it's just that was how I thought things would take place?
Still a great offer though, and making sure future profits would go back into the club is a brilliant idea. I think the consortiums plan was to buy out the Wills wasn't it? From what Bill Power has said, any revenue from the extra facilities would then go to the club as Wills would be long gone. Can someone from the consortium confirm that point without giving too much info away? Well, to some extent that would be subject to negotiation (assuming the board ever allow negotiations to get under way), but Bill's pledge is specific to the Consortium guys taking a profit - it wouldn't preclude (for example) the Wills family being guaranteed a slice of development profits as part of a takeover package or a development partner (e.g. St Modwen) being able to make a legitimate profit - but it does allay any fears people may have had that this is just a "cash-grab" aimed at taking over the club to make a fast buck on a ground redevelopment.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Amir
|
|
« Reply #27 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 12:34:58 » |
|
That BP is going to partly fund it but not take any profit?How does he propose to do this by loaning the money building the stadium then getting that loan money back from what?
I would guess from the housing/hotel part of the development. As Paul says though, it allays fears that they could be in it for the quick buck(someone mentioned to me that they were suspicious of his motives at the Walsall game), so whether there is a profit to be made is neither here nor there in a way. The second part is of more interest to me anyway, as it could potentially stop anyone with impure motives in the future profiting from our club.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
deltaincline
|
|
« Reply #28 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 12:42:03 » |
|
Well, to some extent that would be subject to negotiation (assuming the board ever allow negotiations to get under way), but Bill's pledge is specific to the Consortium guys taking a profit - it wouldn't preclude (for example) the Wills family being guaranteed a slice of development profits as part of a takeover package or a development partner (e.g. St Modwen) being able to make a legitimate profit - but it does allay any fears people may have had that this is just a "cash-grab" aimed at taking over the club to make a fast buck on a ground redevelopment.
Thans for comming back so quick. Apreciated. Yeovil; Dont be so fucking grumpy! How the fuck can you call Powers statement 'spin'? Doesn't it at least strike you as ironic that Bill Power can make an offer like this when the current board have never come anywhere near even hinting at something like it in over 5 years at the helm? I predict you'll witness real 'spin' on the official site later today or tomorrow
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #29 on: Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 12:44:08 » |
|
I think the chances of a club statement being released ahead of their favoured slot on a friday afternoon just increased. Reg will be pleased Noooooooo.......its got to be Friday :x
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|