New beginnings - 25% Truth, 80% Bollocks

[Batch]

Has this ever been posted before?

The old architects but gives a good idea of what this lot wants. Flats, and lots of them.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vQSsnjFxGLUV7P32QatW1EacSHcOejmY/view

Not saying I agree with the idea. But it could be a way of financing bigger plans

But would all the profit go into the club? It might, but it might not.

[theakston2k]

Not saying I agree with the idea. But it could be a way of financing bigger plans

But would all the profit go into the club? It might, but it might not.

Very short-termist though, would have a massive impact on what you could do to the ground in the future. Also look at Accrington, they had all their function rooms shut down due to noise complaints, noise issues would almost certainly become an issue.

[Freddies Ferret 2.0]

I've voted no

[The Grim Reaper]

I’ve also voted no.

[Lethbridge70]

I’ve voted NO

[Batch]

Very short-termist though, would have a massive impact on what you could do to the ground in the future. Also look at Accrington, they had all their function rooms shut down due to noise complaints, noise issues would almost certainly become an issue.

Fair point

[Outletred]

1) Don’t trust this lot to deliver on a project of this magnitude

2) Cannot see Clem securing the funding

3) The ROI and business plan is fantasy land

For this reason I’ve voted no

[Arch Stanton]

I voted no. There’s more chance of me growing another head than these chancers making a decent job of the development

[RobertT]

The clear and obvious issue is the competency of those involved and the financials.  Without clear insight into how guard rails could be applied, it's like voting for Hannibal Lecter to look after your kids while leaving a bottle of Chianti in the kitchen, open and breathing.

The plans are not terrible, so that bit is tough.  I think I'd prefer them to come back with a scaled down option - ignore the boxes, do the rest and expand to include more of the general admission areas.  That should cost less, be far less likely to create issues with structural changes on the existing steel and concrete works and create less concern over the financing and long term impact as a result.  It would leave a good starting point for any future owner if that was all that got done before new owners are found and not leave a significant amount of funding in question.  I also think it would have much easier to swallow business case - positive impacts on existing fans and revenue increase on 5k attendees as well as the 7 day a week opportunities vs. the boxes which become tricky to use beyond matchdays, only benefit a few people and turf out a bunch with a riskier construction project.  This approach would also allow development to occur while the stand is still in use.

[Bob's Orange]

Not sure if its mentioned on here, but it 'appears' that you can vote multiple times. This isn't the case, it's basically designed that if you change your mind, or want to put different verbiage on your reasoning you can. Therefore the final entry will be the one that matters.

This is probably obvious, but I thought worth sharing as a few people had mentioned to me it looked like you could vote multiple times.

[Wobbly Bob]

A soft no.
But a no is a no.
Assuming a rejection, what happens if the club still want to persevere with it.
Some form of arbitration within the parameters of the JV?

Would the appointment of an independent project manager with full oversight change some of the nay's into yea's?

Just concerned about the build itself, if the club then fuck up the running of any finished article then that's up to them.

[Riddick]

It will be interesting to see the overall vote and its relationship to the people here that have shared how they have voted.

[Nemo]

It will be interesting to see the overall vote and its relationship to the people here that have shared how they have voted.

If will. I'm pretty sure it'll be closer than we're making it look, but I don't think it'll pass. It'll probably be 52:48 one way or the other as the universe seems to like that...

[Ƭ̵̬̊: The Artist Formerly Known as CWIG]

Or 55/45 no, as is tradition north of the border.

[stfcjack]

I've voted no.

Not something I did happily though, voting down something that club has been screaming out for does feel unusual, but there's no way this lot can be trusted. Nor do I believe they have the means or capabilities. Have we actually heard Clem talk once about this? I don't think we have.

The general vibe is that this will be an overwhelming defeat for the club. What will they do next? Try again? Blame the fans for halting progress? Or decide they won't be able to go any further and leave? I hope it's that latter. Will be an interesting couple of months for sure.