Jump to content

Natchfever

Members
  • Posts

    4722
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Natchfever

  1. 10 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said:

     

    But aren’t “they” paying him interest from the money taken against the charge..? Effectively borrowing more money to pay interest on the monies already borrowed, all stacking up against the ground..?

    My thoughts are that when the money taken against the charge runs out they are ****** unless they can raise cash via a January sale of their talented squad members.

  2. 1 hour ago, BrightCiderLife said:

    I've seen a few posts in which people say that WAQ's charge over the Mem means NLBRFC2015 either don't own it or that it's value has been reduced. Neither is wrong exactly, but also neither is an accurate description of the effect of a charge.

    Essentially, it works the same as a mortgage. The charge doesn't change who owns the land. However, if it is sold, the charge holder (WAQ/Dwayne Sports) gets paid first. We're told the charge is to cover the £10m loan meaning the charge holder gets the first £10m of any sum paid to buy the ground. It does not devalue the property. Same as if you sell a house with a mortgage, the bank gets its cut first, and you get whatever is left (proceeds of sale). 

    It is, however, unlikely the ground would be sold. If the club is sold, WAQ/DS will be bought out and their loan repaid, meaning the charge will be removed. The new owners can then charge or sell their new asset as they wish. 

    The charge doesn't change who owns the Mem or its value, except that in effect, the charge holder 'owns' the first £10m and so the value to the seller (not the buyer) is reduced by the same amount. 

    Using the mortgage analogy presumably if they default on interest payments it opens the door for the lender to take ownership of the borrowers assets?

    • Like 2
  3. 38 minutes ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

    I think the Emirates Stadium is only 60k, Old Trafford is 75k.

    How big a club do these deluded idiots think they’re going to be??

    Dortmund obviously. Club of the people. The blue and white quartered wall, the Horfield experience....

    • Haha 1
  4. 6 minutes ago, Red34 said:

    It really is the level of delusion...  They're discussing how it'd be nice if stadiums can be upgraded to 80k if they reached the Champions League:

    http://gaschat.co.uk/thread/11049/on-scenes?page=16

    I mean we're a lot closer to it and I still don't think I'll see the day City are regularly playing in the Champions League.  It'd be really, really nice and I wish it would happen, but I'm realistic enough to realise it's probably not!

    Surely another one of ours - just checked the persons odd monicker and its Welsh for "incompetence" 

    • Like 2
  5. 2 minutes ago, bert tann said:

    Peg, my proposal was for Stephen Lansdown to consider funding a trust set up to purchase the Mem under the assets of community value scheme. As part of this deal Rovers would essentially become a fan owned club using the Bundesliga model and would lease the stadium from the Trust. The financial structure of "new Rovers" would mean we would not be a direct threat to City in spending terms but we would provide some competition, we would preserve a Bristol sporting institution and the Mem would be saved as a sporting venue and community asset.

    The alternative is for the Mem to be sold for commercial development and for Dwane Sports to potentially make a profit from their involvement with Rovers. The assets of community value scheme cannot prevent them selling the land to the highest bidder but imagine the pressure which Bristolians, in a united front, could exert on them  to sell to the Trust for the £10 million they are owed and walk away.

       

    The alternative would be for a sporting institution despised by many City fans who remember the underhand attempts to steal our ground in 82, and opposed the world cup bid, then shafted a true sporting institution (Bristol Rugby) to the extent that it has still not recovered, to be allowed to crash and burn.

    Rovers didn't give one f uck about the Mem being preserved when it thought they had a deal with Sainsbury's.

    I don't personally want competition in the city. Leeds and Newcastle seem to manage ok without it.

    City would gain nothing from helping you lot out Bert, and it does you no credit banging the drum on this subject on a forum that tolerates gasheads and actually welcomes you personally.

    I  have many Gas friends but nothing would would please me more than for Rovers to disappear - and they feel exactly the same in reverse.

    Let it rest mate.

     

    • Like 12
    • Thanks 2
  6. 1 hour ago, Cheesleysmate said:

    Just imagine if this were actually true?! What an absolutely bunch of ruthless ***** that would make Wally & Co!! The destroyed Sags wouldn't be able to go all Tote End Aggro over it either because they would have all ****** off back to Jordan. Surely that would make the Al-Qadi family the greatest bunch of honorary Teds that ever lived?!!

    Agent Wally.

     

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  7. 52 minutes ago, bert tann said:

     

    I think we can all agree that Stephen Lansdown is not in it to line his pockets but because his aim is to make Bristol a thriving sporting city. 

    And helping our community form  the first British professional football club organised on the lines of the Bundesliga model would be a great achievement.  

    Jeremy Wade standard fishing Bert 

  8. 13 hours ago, cidercity said:

    On asschat someone mentions there is a sag pub a few minutes walk from the 3Lions, now I lived in bemmi for 24 years and my mother is still living there now and I do not know of a sad sag pub anywhere in bemmi. Anybody know what the numptyis on about.

    4 or 5 decent middle aged chaps pop into the Colliers on a Sunday afternoon. They are liked by the City contingent and I have personally spent plenty of time in their company. They do not spout shit incidentally as that wouldn't be healthy. If 10% of the hostelry constitutes a Rovers pub, then that's simply gaslogic again.

  9. 22 minutes ago, harrys said:

    To be fair every club has it's share but in Rover's case this sort of stuff has been going on for as long as I can remember, going back to the 70's Rovers were known to having a large far right following 

    Correct. Many of their "lads" at the time were card carrying NF members.

    • Like 1
  10. 1 hour ago, Gashead2017 said:

    So you agree with the basics that Bristol RFC got a better deal from Rovers than they could elsewhere plus they were no real fears the owners would eventually evict them should they ever want to develop the ground.  

    Are you mad ? The reason Bristol got relegated one season and never recovered to this day is because Rovers wanted them out so the ground could be redeveloped. A commitment was made to Newport to play at Rodney Parade and of course the 15ers backed out of doing anything, leaving Bristol who had budgeted a large chunk of budget for renting elsewhere rather than on quality players up shit creek.

  11. 39 minutes ago, myol'man said:

    I see Bristol football as more like Nottingham than Stoke. One underachieving Championship club, the other a League One/League Two yo-yo club

    Yep

    Nottingham YoYo club invited to open the Juventus stadium by the European super power who copy their famous kit.

    Bristol yo yo club invited to play Sabadell who happen the wear the same kit.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 2
  12. 13 hours ago, Gashead2017 said:

    Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but the correct version appears to be :

    "The rugby club were in serious financial difficulties so we agreed to a 50% share of the ground at at a cost of £2.3m. In 1998, Bristol's financial issues became worse and they wanted to sell to Amtrack, reputedly for £1m. That agreement fell through as Amtrack pulled out so we triggered a clause in the ground share agreement where we could buy the remaining 50% for £100,000."

    Although I agree with the views we didn't learn from previous mistakes as I've no idea how we now owe £10m to a family of bankers from Jordanian who apart from the odd Rolex watch show no real signs of being wealthy. But at least the believers still think Wael will build us a new 22,000 seat stadium and a state of the art academy!! 
     

     

    How much of that dosh went into Arthur Homes pocket, you know the lifelong gashead fronting up for the rugby club?

    Quite telling the number of rugby fans who have no love for football are absolutely delighted at the state Rovers are in, and they were very close to the action at the time of the Holmes stitch up.

    • Like 1
  13. 13 hours ago, Gashead2017 said:

    To be fair to Harleyhas this a fair post rather than a "cracker"? I sense a lot of genuine Gashead feel the same following the news the UWE was dead, the real danger is we become the Port Vale to your Stoke, I think most genuine Bristolian football fans would sooner a bit of rivalry than one totally dominant club like is now the case in the Potteries.

    Ummmm....nah mate.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  14. 44 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

     

    From the shots below , we had room for the SS and Lansdown to expand. The Atyeo was already revamped to a point and the Dolman structure was already there. It allowed for the 2 new builds plus the work on the Dolman to be done and keep the stadium open.
    I'm no expert, but looking at their site , I imagine their ground would have to be flattened and built from scratch to maximise the space, which would be limited. Either turning it 90 degrees or at least centring it on the site. So they have to move for a year 18 months and pay rent and build a stadium which minimum cost is £1000 a seat. The only plus that the revamp has is all revenue would be for the club, UWE would have been a joint venture, but that's a hell of a lot of pies to recoup your £20m , sorry world class stadium so nearer £45m .

    36062731890_2f34371a39_b.jpg36062732180_6269ece17d_b.jpg

    I think they could in theory, build a stand behind where the centenary stand is one season and then shift the pitch towards it creating space on the other side. That would reduce capacity to about 8,000 im guessing but they hardly need that now anyway so maybe they wouldnt have to move. They woiud be stuck with the tents behind one goal but subject to natural light issues could possibly increase the size of the stand behind the other goal.

  15. 3 hours ago, Bristol Rob said:

    A rumour (that I've just made up), is that Rovers are going to start charging fans to use the toilets.

    Rovers fans are OUTRAGED.

    Wally has been quoted as saying 'it's about time fans understood how difficult it is having to go in to football without spending a penny'.

    Well they often chant "The Shit The Shit we gotta get rid of The Shit " do they think it gets rid of itself? Costs money..

    • Haha 1
  16. 2 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

    That would make perfect sense. The UWE and a world class athletics set up would be great for the region, and just the sort of thing that SL has been trying to do. With the added bonus of really pissing off the squatters and making Wael look anything but a billionaire .

    It would be great but must ensure the middle bit is fully used every Saturday otherwise the caravans will be lurking outside waiting for a chance to get in there and claim it.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...