Which would you choose?

Anything yellow and blue

Which would you prefer?

A
4
44%
B
5
56%
 
Total votes: 9

OtmoorYellow
Puberty
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:35 pm

Which would you choose?

Post by OtmoorYellow » Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:47 am

A: Staying at the Kassam Stadium, with Kassam as owner of both club and stadium, given Kassam’s history with the club

Or

B: Moving to a new stadium, with Tiger as owner of both club and stadium, given Tiger’s history with Reading

I’ve enabled the option to change your mind after voting

OtmoorYellow
Puberty
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by OtmoorYellow » Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:53 am

The problem I have with Tiger, is that he asset stripped Reading and then ran off with the money.

The one aspect about Kassam, and this is very much a moot point in my head, let alone on these pages, is that whilst he asset stripped the club, he has remained on the scene, claiming to not wish to sell the club down the river.

Personally, whilst I think he was ultimately a poor owner of the club, I do think he was given too much of a hard time, and the storming of the boardroom was not good for the club. Had we stuck with Kassam, would we now be in a better or worse position?

slappy
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2474
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:52 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by slappy » Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:13 am

Well you can see the stadium was a means to an end for Kassam, giving him the surrounding land. Getting crowds down low enough enabled him to get the cinema open all week round.

Keeping hold of it means that nobody else gets to asset strip it. Whether by demolishing the whole lot and building houses, or by filling in the corners or the fence end with flats like Leyton Orient or Southend. Meantime I imagine the conference side of things keeps the hotels busy, though perhaps visitors to the science park / city are more important these days?

Here's an idea - would Kassam ever take back control of the club, appoint a proper chief exec like Ashton and spend the money needed?
[edit] I didn't read the questions before answering, I thought it was stay at the Kassam stadium, or move with Tiger. So my last paragraph is covered by the poll.
Last edited by slappy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Myles Francis
Mid-life Crisis
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 3:17 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by Myles Francis » Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:21 am

Not the best of choices, obvs! But, for me, I think it's a case of better the devil you know. One of Kassam's issues has been the lack of corporate memory on the part of the club. He has had a succession of owners come to him making the same (in his eyes) derisory offer for the stadium, failing to understand the value of the stadium to him both as a business and as a piece of real estate, and fueling public opinion against him.

Would he be better second time around? I don't know. Do I trust him as owner of club and stadium than ST? Yes.

recordmeister
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1725
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:34 am
Location: London

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by recordmeister » Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:25 am

For me the big issue is with DE. Why on earth didn’t he sell to Stewart Donald (willy-wanging politics, apparently) which has taken the club from a solid and stable (ish) position to where it is today. What an awful decision from DE, who in his own way, asset stripped the club of future player sales income and ultimately something far more important: dignity.

Kairdiff Exile
Dashing young thing
Posts: 570
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:59 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by Kairdiff Exile » Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:54 am

I'm not sure I think much to either given that I don't believe either Mr Kassam or Mr Thanakarnjanasuth would (re)unite the football club and stadium entities - and that is the ONLY thing that would help to rebuild my trust in either of them. Without Oxford United owning its own stadium, I don't see how we can ever become a sustainable club again.

OtmoorYellow
Puberty
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by OtmoorYellow » Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:00 pm

I suspect DE selling to Tiger had nothing to do with willy waving or politics, but was simply down to how much money DE got out of it.

It is clear to me that Tiger’s due diligence on takeover was very unsatisfactory, and missed the arbitration risks. The only alternative argument for the lack of cash to pay these bills is that he expected an easy property deal to profit from.

DE should have sold to Donald and Sartori if DE truly had the interests of the club at heart.

Don’t forget that DE allegedly lost half his wealth in his divorce, which led to him selling OUFC.

Myles Francis
Mid-life Crisis
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 3:17 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by Myles Francis » Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:03 pm

Kairdiff Exile wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:54 am
Without Oxford United owning its own stadium, I don't see how we can ever become a sustainable club again.
I fundamentally disagree with this. I'm actually now more opposed to the club owning it's own ground than not. The caveat being that the ownership of the stadium should be in the hands of a trust or similar which is operated for the benefit of the club. In many ways, we are in the position we are because we owned our own ground and were able to secure an unsustainable level of finance against it.

Kairdiff Exile
Dashing young thing
Posts: 570
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:59 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by Kairdiff Exile » Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:09 pm

With respect, Myles, I think that's an argument against reckless unsustainable borrowing rather than owning our own ground!

We're in agreement though that by far the best scenario would be for Oxford United to play at a serviceable, league-standard ground owned by a benign trust in the hands of its supporters. How the ruddy hell we get there from our current position is quite another thing.
Last edited by Kairdiff Exile on Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Myles Francis
Mid-life Crisis
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 3:17 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by Myles Francis » Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:24 pm

Kairdiff Exile wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:09 pm
With respect, Myles, I think that's an argument against reckless unsustainable borrowing rather than owning our own ground!
Fair point. I'm just conscious that many clubs who have got into financial difficulty are those who own their own ground as having that asset to draw on allows transient chairmen to be reckless with their spending.

OtmoorYellow
Puberty
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by OtmoorYellow » Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:58 pm

I think Myles raises a good point and which represents an ideal position that we would no doubt all like to see.

Unfortunately, it does not recognise the practical realities of the cost and infrastructure required to own and run a stadium.

Dr Bob
Mid-life Crisis
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:16 pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by Dr Bob » Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:07 pm

OtmoorYellow wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:53 am
The problem I have with Tiger, is that he asset stripped Reading and then ran off with the money.
Not sure how he could do that to us, though...How the hell did we get from DE and relative stability, to a situation where Kassam is plausibly seen as a better owner than the one we have currently?. But if Kassam were, hypothetically, to regain control, the one thing I would not accept was his approach to hiring and firing managers. That has to be done by experienced insiders of the game, overseeing a transparent and open recruitment process. Oh, and some of his more petty penny-pinching habits (eg for away matches) Hmmm If you are giving us Option A versus Option B, I am now certain I want Option C.

OtmoorYellow
Puberty
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by OtmoorYellow » Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:21 pm

Dr Bob wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:07 pm
OtmoorYellow wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:53 am
The problem I have with Tiger, is that he asset stripped Reading and then ran off with the money.
Not sure how he could do that to us, though...
Well if Tiger were in a position to buy the existing stadium, or build a new stadium, he could easily retain the assets himself, whilst enforcing high rents on the club. Ergo the club could well be in a worse position than it is presently.

Myles Francis
Mid-life Crisis
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 3:17 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by Myles Francis » Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:31 pm

OtmoorYellow wrote:
Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:58 pm
Unfortunately, it does not recognise the practical realities of the cost and infrastructure required to own and run a stadium.
And this is why I think the KasStad is a dead duck in terms or providing a sustainable future for OUFC. If someone somehow managed to take control of the stadium, it simply doesn't have the year-round revenue raising ability that is needed. The vision presented by FK at the start would have worked - using the revenues generated by the leisure complex to subsidise the football club.

It's also why, if somebody had the vision to take the idea by the scruff of the neck and run with it, the Water Eaton proposal could have worked. That would have been a full retail and leisure complex of which the stadium would have been a small part, with 365-day revenues. Luton have taken a similar approach by buying a large plot of land adjacent to J10 of the M1 on which they will bid a large retail development, and that will support the building of the new stadium at Power Court.

Radley Rambler
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1976
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:36 pm

Re: Which would you choose?

Post by Radley Rambler » Wed Feb 20, 2019 3:42 pm

The very fact that this poll is even seen as a viable one shows how shambolic the past year has been.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests