Stadium matters

Anything yellow and blue
Matt D
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1435
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 10:45 pm
Location: Stayed at the Manor.

Re: Stadium matters

Post by Matt D » Mon Oct 10, 2016 1:46 pm

joepoolman wrote:Do OxVox really think this is going to happen, or are they just using it to boost their profile/membership?
I very much doubt oxvox would do this just as a profile-boosting exercise so think we have to take it seriously.

to me, a community trust would not be putting the ground in the club's hands, but some other entity which is run by oxvox or some other vehicle that represents community interests. that to me is the most desirable situation: the ground is run not for someone's profit, with sympathy towards OUFC, but equally is then harder to use as a pawn in any future OUFC takeover.

but as GY says, where would the money come from, and what conditions would come with it?

which then prompts a question about why a statement now. the oxvox report on OUFC's ground was held up by ongoing discussions. it would be very exciting news if some genuine progress has been made here. here's hoping.

slappy
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2279
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:52 pm

Re: Stadium matters

Post by slappy » Mon Oct 10, 2016 1:59 pm

Also why would Kassam suddenly be interested in selling up? He gets a good profit out of Stadco, conferences drive revenue for the hotels etc. It seemed like only six months ago there was talk of flats in the corners like Orient. Perhaps it's that money needs spending on the stadium as it is nearly 20 years old? Or he wants to offload the Priory too? Or he has another business that he thinks he can make more money from?

Also as stated by others, where would the money come from for this? Stewart Donald seems to be concentrating on Eastleigh and whilst he may be approached as a keystone funder, I get the feeling he doesn't like subsidising OUFC when he isn't the owner.

Kernow Yellow
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2716
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 5:16 pm

Re: Stadium matters

Post by Kernow Yellow » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:01 pm

I share all of GY's concerns. And I'm not reassured at all by the club statement on the matter, which seems to be an odd mix of stuff. Reading between the lines DE seems to be saying that if FK won't sell the ground to him then he needs to get a move on and do a deal with OxVox or 'The Community', whatever the hell that means, as the club isn't sustainable at present. Which is stating the obvious, but a bit worrying if DE is starting to articulate it.

If FK has been rejecting and/or not responding to 'funded offers' from DE, then that might explain some of the recent frostiness too.

OUFC4eva
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2324
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Stadium matters

Post by OUFC4eva » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:39 pm

I think GY is being a little harsh on the Donald family.

They have helped the club enormously in the past 6-7 years and SD
is a good bloke. Eastleigh FC have got a dream owner haven't they?

He's injected millions and converted it to shares and will issue even more
Shares taking his investment up to GBP 10M. Listen to this:

https://audioboom.com/boos/5142176-list ... -spitfires

GodalmingYellow
Senile
Posts: 5178
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am

Re: Stadium matters

Post by GodalmingYellow » Mon Oct 10, 2016 4:05 pm

OUFC4eva wrote:I think GY is being a little harsh on the Donald family.

They have helped the club enormously in the past 6-7 years and SD
is a good bloke. Eastleigh FC have got a dream owner haven't they?

He's injected millions and converted it to shares and will issue even more
Shares taking his investment up to GBP 10M. Listen to this:

https://audioboom.com/boos/5142176-list ... -spitfires
Where have I been harsh on the Donald family? I've only referred to them as a possible investor. The subsequent comment was about third parties who have shown no interest in the club, which therefore doesn't apply to the Donald family. I chose my words carefully to precisely avoid that accusation!!

OUFC4eva
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2324
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Stadium matters

Post by OUFC4eva » Mon Oct 10, 2016 4:41 pm

I am glad you clarified that!

Kernow Yellow
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2716
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 5:16 pm

Re: Stadium matters

Post by Kernow Yellow » Tue Oct 11, 2016 9:32 am

Kairdiff Exile wrote:
Kernow Yellow wrote:And the refusal to call the stadium by its proper name shows that relations have broken down rather alarmingly.
Yes, I'd noticed that. Not sure to what extent it's a pointed snub at Kassam or just a marker that the club is no longer his plaything - but I suspect you're right that it's more of the former than the latter.
And now they're both airing their dirty washing in public. Far from being excited by the OxVox stadium announcement, I can't help but feel we're further than ever from getting what we really need.

GodalmingYellow
Senile
Posts: 5178
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am

Re: Stadium matters

Post by GodalmingYellow » Tue Oct 11, 2016 10:24 am

Kernow Yellow wrote:
Kairdiff Exile wrote:
Kernow Yellow wrote:And the refusal to call the stadium by its proper name shows that relations have broken down rather alarmingly.
Yes, I'd noticed that. Not sure to what extent it's a pointed snub at Kassam or just a marker that the club is no longer his plaything - but I suspect you're right that it's more of the former than the latter.
And now they're both airing their dirty washing in public. Far from being excited by the OxVox stadium announcement, I can't help but feel we're further than ever from getting what we really need.
Oh dear. That's never a good thing.

If DE is being accused of not paying, but claims he is up to date, rather than give quotes to the local rag, he should be phoning Kassam up to ask what the problem is.

Hopefully, this is all just a mix up on communications.

slappy
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2279
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:52 pm

Re: Stadium matters

Post by slappy » Tue Oct 11, 2016 10:54 am

As mentioned in the opening post on this thread, Oxvox are aware of issues regarding the stadium service charge, and Kassam says certain things which have been paid in the past are now being disputed, whereas Eales says these don't add up to much anyway.

Kairdiff Exile
Puberty
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:59 pm

Re: Stadium matters

Post by Kairdiff Exile » Tue Oct 11, 2016 11:19 am

I had exactly the same thought as KY when I saw this morning's story. Whatever the issue might be, slinging mud at each other via the back page of the Fail is not going to improve matters. Lots of PR posturing going on, but I don't see matters being resolved any time soon.

The only positive I can see, which isn't a new thing, is that we must be able to draw some conclusion from the fact that Firoz hasn't sought to build further developments on the site in recent years. He could have applied for permission to build flats in the corners, or to build more retail/hotel units on the overflow car park - but he hasn't. I'd infer that his preferred option is still to sell the football club bits of the site on, lock stock and barrell, and just retain ownership of the Holiday Inn and and the Bowlplex which are probably the only bits that make him a half-decent revenue. If that's the case, then maybe Eales, OxVox, Stewart Donald et al need to put their heads together and work out a way to buy the rest, and develop the bits they can develop into housing to make it worth the short-term investment.

Not straightforward by any means, and still requires a lot of bunce up front - but given Eales' strategy thus far, it may well be their/our best chance. I doubt it'd end up with the ground being owned in trust, but it's possible to envisage, in five year's time, Eales being able to sell on the club and ground as one entity, with lots of new accommodation around the place, and still recoup his investment.

Myles Francis
Mid-life Crisis
Posts: 877
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 3:17 pm

Re: Stadium matters

Post by Myles Francis » Tue Oct 11, 2016 12:47 pm

Kairdiff Exile wrote:I'd infer that his preferred option is still to sell the football club bits of the site on, lock stock and barrell, and just retain ownership of the Holiday Inn and and the Bowlplex which are probably the only bits that make him a half-decent revenue. If that's the case, then maybe Eales, OxVox, Stewart Donald et al need to put their heads together and work out a way to buy the rest, and develop the bits they can develop into housing to make it worth the short-term investment.
Just to put a little flesh on these bones.... In the latest accounts (year to September '15) for StadCo and the Leisure complex, they made profits of £545k and £805k respectively. So the stadium does provide FK with a half-decent revenue already, particularly when you add in the value of land on which the complex sits. He's not going to give this up without some sort of quid pro quo.

Regarding the comment about developing the bits they can, I'm not sure what bits they would be? The corners between the stands perhaps? In which case, are we not simply restricting the potential for future capacity growth in the interests of making the deal "affordable" in the meantime? Plus a fourth stand will still need to be built. If we end up with a 14-15k capacity ground with the corners filled in, we can pretty much kiss goodbye to any notion of sustainability at Championship level.

And whilst we're on the "s" word, whilst the stadium is clearly a piece in that puzzle, it's not the magic bullet some seem to think it is. Take a look at the accounts over the past few years, strip out the rent for the stadium, and see what the losses still are. Depending on any deal going forward, there MAY be scope to increase revenues from catering etc, and there MAY be some sort of rent reduction, and there MAY be some sort of reduction in maintenance and service charges. But at the moment I struggle to see how the club is going to benefit from all of this without simply passing on the unsustainability to the community trust or whoever will next own the stadium.

Kairdiff Exile
Puberty
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:59 pm

Re: Stadium matters

Post by Kairdiff Exile » Tue Oct 11, 2016 1:59 pm

Well that's me told! Serves me right for not doing my homework first :lol:

Old Abingdonian
Dashing young thing
Posts: 665
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 10:05 am
Location: Blakeney, Gloucs

Re: Stadium matters

Post by Old Abingdonian » Tue Oct 11, 2016 1:59 pm

I'm no expert on matters of commerce, but I saw a note a couple of weeks ago that Eales was entering some kind of formal litigation with Kassam over the maintenance of the stadium. Now I took this to be in relation to issues such as the non-functioning floodlights. If this were the case, it would explain why Kassam thinks the club owe him money (they've probably withheld it), and why Eales thinks they don't (it's not owed because the services provided do not meet the SLA or whatever).

I see why posters feel it unwise to pull the cat's tale, but Eales may see things differently - especially after being stonewalled on the fourth stand.

The other question which interests me is the two bids which Eales says Kassam has turned down - were these realistic? Surely if Eales wanted to put in a bid which was likely to succeed, he could afford to do so, and be able to work out what the right price would be. Or was he testing the temperature of the water? Or seeking credit with the fans and wider public?

Myles Francis
Mid-life Crisis
Posts: 877
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 3:17 pm

Re: Stadium matters

Post by Myles Francis » Tue Oct 11, 2016 2:30 pm

Kairdiff Exile wrote:Well that's me told! Serves me right for not doing my homework first :lol:
That's you in detention! :wink:

No personal slight intended of course - just trying to fill in the blanks a bit. And no, not the ones in the corners of the stands....

OUFC4eva
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2324
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Stadium matters

Post by OUFC4eva » Sun Oct 16, 2016 9:02 am

Old Abingdonian wrote:I'm no expert on matters of commerce, but I saw a note a couple of weeks ago that Eales was entering some kind of formal litigation with Kassam over the maintenance of the stadium. Now I took this to be in relation to issues such as the non-functioning floodlights.
Writing in yesterday's match programme U's MD Greig Box Turnbull
stated:

"Meanwhile, as a last resort, we have gone to arbitration over the service
charge the club pays in relation to our use of the stadium.
This is a fee the club pays in addition to rent, to cover our portion
of cost of shared services, from utilities to maintenance. We are more
than happy to pay a service charge, but one that is wholly fair and reflects
the club's usage of the services.The process of arbitration is expected to be
concluded in the coming weeks."

Ka££am will surely face difficulties over the lack of maintenance for sure.
Best wishes to Greig and Darryl with the arbitration hearing.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kairdiff Exile and 3 guests