Dynamite Red Posted November 2, 2009 Report Share Posted November 2, 2009 Some might find this of interest. http://charlie-boltons-southville-blog.blo...for-footie.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted November 2, 2009 Report Share Posted November 2, 2009 Some might find this of interest. http://charlie-boltons-southville-blog.blo...for-footie.html I believe this is from the same source as the person asking questions of the city council under the freedom of information act. I think he is a raving Gashead solicitor trying to stir the $hyte. The values quoted are I think, what the land would/could be worth once developed so if they don't get developed by BCFC then there value is much lower. The car park is leased to city and as such is worthless to the council until the lease is up (apart from the income). The allotments are just that allotments, unless we develop them then there is no more value than as allotments and they haven't been in use for years. The extra cost of a rapid transport detour around the stadium is equal to the extra cost ineeded if we weren't putting the roads in for it to run on, so absolutely no difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 2, 2009 Report Share Posted November 2, 2009 I believe this is from the same source as the person asking questions of the city council under the freedom of information act. I think he is a raving Gashead solicitor trying to stir the $hyte. I am certain it is Keith Mahoney behind the email, the style is too similar. http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=120089 Pity he doesn't have the balls to do it publicly. Remember folks, all good city fans must stop doing any business with gas loving Meade King solicitors and be sure to tell them why. I wonder why Charlie Bolton doesn't name names? Could it be that he's an anti-football hippie who was delighted to receive such an email? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted November 2, 2009 Report Share Posted November 2, 2009 I am certain it is Keith Mahoney behind the email, the style is too similar. http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=120089 Pity he doesn't have the balls to do it publicly. Remember folks, all good city fans must stop doing any business with gas loving Meade King solicitors and be sure to tell them why. I wonder why Charlie Bolton doesn't name names? Could it be that he's an anti-football hippie who was delighted to receive such an email? They are on Charlies site $hit stirring as they did before with Tesco. You must question their motives, I think I smell GAS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slartibartfast Posted November 2, 2009 Report Share Posted November 2, 2009 They are on Charlies site $hit stirring as they did before with Tesco. You must question their motives, I think I smell GAS It's amazing isn't it. The lengths these gash will go to. Do ANYTHING for their club, bar watch them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 The same sort of lefty blogger can be found everywhere. Nothing is ever right, there's always some hidden agenda ect ect. I just feel a touch sorry for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanhamreds Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 some people just have nothing better to do, here's more like him! http://www.brfcforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=87049 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 some people just have nothing better to do, here's more like him! http://www.brfcforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=87049 Bless them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tompo Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Perhaps BCFC should do what Charlton did a few years ago. Get a couple of candidates to stand in local elections. Turnout in local elections is usually very low and councillors find it too easy to get elected/re-elected without having to work too hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf Hucker Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 some people just have nothing better to do, here's more like him! http://www.brfcforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=87049 It makes me smile that their most vociferous objector is ScottishGas who as his name suggests is based north of the border yet has developed a sudden interest in fiercely defending the flora and fauna in Aston Vale. Yeah right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Wouldn't it be a pity if there was some sort of fault with the rovers forum that lasted a day or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Wouldn't it be a pity if there was some sort of fault with the rovers forum that lasted a day or two. What are you suggesting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Ian M Posted November 3, 2009 Admin Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 It makes me smile that their most vociferous objector is ScottishGas who as his name suggests is based north of the border yet has developed a sudden interest in fiercely defending the flora and fauna in Aston Vale. Yeah right! In fairness he is actually a professional hippy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 What are you suggesting? I'm surprised you're running it on IIS, it's a piece of crap well known to fall over for days on end sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Ian M Posted November 3, 2009 Admin Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 What are you suggesting? Are they aware that their forum is hosted on a server called Atyeo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff65 Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 The argument goes along the lines of this: Council who are no experts have asked an independent company whether the project will break even or make a loss or even be in profit - the independent company says that the scheme will break even as the ground which is to built on was purchased at inflated prices recently so the initial value of the land should be considered less and thus when built on the land will be worth more than and when BCFC show this increase in value the value is lower than it should be because they have a wrong starting point in the valuation of the land in the first place - the officers report says initially BCFC said they would have a shortfall of £48m but after reviewing the independent report they revised that to £30.5m shortfall - all of which is I think coming from SL - but as no one has revealed the detailed financial plans of the project we cant be sure. This still leaves a difference of £30.5m between what BCFC thinks is a deficit and what the Council thinks is a break even project - now this is all down to BCFC and the new income that they will generate from the stadium, restaurant, pub and hotel. The Council says are well you will have all this new income and you have not included that as an asset so over time with the new income that you generate over and above what you get at Ashton Gate then the project becomes breakeven, the club says this is total tosh as the club are losing money each and every year and just because you lose less money then you cant include this as an asset and we dont accept this as an asset. My personal feeling is that they are correct in this a loss is a loss is a loss and no way can ever a loss be seen as an asset it's a liability someone has to make up the loss, so this year we see SL will have to pump in 6.5m into the club compared to £2.5m last year, if next season the loss is only £2m have we suddenly got more assets - no, it just means that the SL has to pitch in with another £2m. I think the planning officers see the extra revenue and see that as an asset but over all it's not an asset worth depending on as the club accounts show that without the money SL pumps in, the group would not continue as a going concern. This is one of the arguments against the Southlands housing in that it is only worth 4.5% of the total and as such cant be considered an enabling development because the overall project is on course to break even - on the other hand if you consider the project to be £30.5m in deficit then the turnover of £10m (profit of £5.5m) on that part of the project is vital this project and Southlands should be considered an enabling development. With regards to Charlie: there will land given to the club amounting to £16.8m to £23m - or as was pointed out in the freedom of information request that the land wont be given and a fair market value will be achieved. In addition BCFC have asked that they dont pay for some 106 agreements of £7,370,000 because the project is not a break even project and they think the project is in deficit of £30.3m as it is - the difference between the £30.3m and the break even from the Council is the extra revenue earned at the new site compared to Ashton Gate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 I'm surprised you're running it on IIS, it's a piece of crap well known to fall over for days on end sometimes. MSSQL back end.. to be honest it runs very well without issues at all. The performance of php execution times is exceptional too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 MSSQL back end.. to be honest it runs very well without issues at all. The performance of php execution times is exceptional too. I think you misread my post Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 I think you misread my post Tom Doh! Same server for OTIB though.. actually now that's a thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedZepperin Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Get a couple of candidates to stand in local elections. Step forward Messrs R. Goblin and N. Darkside! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 He looks an intelligent lad doesn't he????? Nice to see he's given us all his contact numbers as well. :noexpression: MM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olé Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 I wonder why Charlie Bolton doesn't name names? Could it be that he's an anti-football hippie who was delighted to receive such an email? I posted a response on his blog, which I've copied below, in case he removes it. To say that I'm less than impressed with my own councillor giving airtime to these type of anonymous attacks, is an understatement. Completely shows him up for what he wants, not an open reasoned debate in the interests of locals, but any old anonymous pot shot against it. Charlie, you are my local councillor, you also on a number of occasions in the past year have campaigned directly outside my front door (literally, I had to step round you once) - as a result I spoke to you on one of these occasions and had a friendly chat about the area. However, quite frankly I am completely disgusted to see you're now using your platform as local councillor to publish content that you openly acknowledge you have not substantiated and in which you fail to identify the source, affording anonymity and freedom to the originator of these claims. How can we know their own vested interests? How can we gauge their basis for such argument? At least the football club and people of BS3 are open about their views and intentions, whichever outcome they support. While your role in holding this project to account given your green credentials is neither a surprise nor an annoyance to me (we may not agree, but I support your right to take the plans to task, that is what you're there for) what I find deeply unsettling is you are now instead simply acting as a puppet for any anonymous attacks, so long as they damage this proposal. Rather takes the shine off your handling of this matter as it suggests you'll use any stick to beat the project with, as opposed to actually pursuing valid concerns. Can you not see what an embarrassing disservice that is to your electorate? By choosing to simply publish anonymous material like this verbatim, at such a sensitive time, and without a shred of justification of your own, you betray yourself as nothing more than a rabble rouser for the 'no' argument with zero interest in fair or balanced assessment of local issues and the views of local people, instead a stooge for anonymous pressure groups. As our representative I see that as an abuse of trust and will never vote for you, much less welcome your presence in future outside my home! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 By the way, does anyone recognise the gas troublemaker who may have been the email author? http://meadeking.co.uk/keithmahoneycv.html I had some indication that he may be rather well known to some fans who followed city during a different era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AJ Sylvester Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 By the way, does anyone recognise the gas troublemaker who may have been the email author? http://meadeking.co.uk/keithmahoneycv.html I had some indication that he may be rather well known to some fans who followed city during a different era. Ah, now someone mentioned this fella before. If I'm not mistaken he has lobbied FOR the Rovers redevelopment but AGAINST the new City stadium. Hmmm.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AJ Sylvester Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 This email is SO SO SO far out and misinformed it's really not even worth tearing apart. To steal a phrase from Barney Frank "arguing with (it) would be like arguing with a dining room table". Not worth the energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flaxbourton Red Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 I posted a response on his blog, which I've copied below, in case he removes it. To say that I'm less than impressed with my own councillor giving airtime to these type of anonymous attacks, is an understatement. Completely shows him up for what he wants, not an open reasoned debate in the interests of locals, but any old anonymous pot shot against it. calm down he did qualify it I have received the following email (along with other councillors) about the planning applciation at Ashton Gate. I have no idea if it is true, but it suggest a quite extraordinary level of subsidy for the football club.... it's charlie's blog and it's up to charlie what he sticks on it he hasn't stuck it on any offical party or council website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olé Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 calm down he did qualify it I have received the following email (along with other councillors) about the planning applciation at Ashton Gate. I have no idea if it is true, but it suggest a quite extraordinary level of subsidy for the football club.... it's charlie's blog and it's up to charlie what he sticks on it he hasn't stuck it on any offical party or council website. Perfectly calm thanks. I am well aware of how he introduced the piece, that is why I responded, it may be his 'blog' but he regularly publishes on local issues and points people in the area to it. To seek that level of trust from his ward, and then start posting up anonymous emails he can't substantiate, is laughable. If he has no idea if it is true, why is he suggesting an extraordinary level of subsidy for the football club? Why has someone who campaigned on the grounds of the area being damaged by a supermarket and other impact to his ward, suddenly just resorted to chain emails with details he apparently knows little about? Why has his self-styled local issue suddenly become any old stick to beat us with? And no, he didn't qualify it. If he qualified it we'd know whether the accusations were seen as valid by the relevant council or planning officers and, more importantly, who the 'expert' is, where he lives, and what his interest was. So much for Southville councillor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flaxbourton Red Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Perfectly calm thanks. I am well aware of how he introduced the piece, that is why I responded, it may be his 'blog' but he regularly publishes on local issues and points people in the area to it. To seek that level of trust from his ward, and then start posting up anonymous emails he can't substantiate, is laughable. If he has no idea if it is true, why is he suggesting an extraordinary level of subsidy for the football club? Why has someone who campaigned on the grounds of the area being damaged by a supermarket and other impact to his ward, suddenly just resorted to chain emails with details he apparently knows little about? Why has his self-styled local issue suddenly become any old stick to beat us with? And no, he didn't qualify it. If he qualified it we'd know whether the accusations were seen as valid by the relevant council or planning officers and, more importantly, who the 'expert' is, where he lives, and what his interest was. So much for Southville councillor. that's blogs for you or is it 'blogs'? read em - don't read em -start your own- your decision, but don't have a little hissy over them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff65 Posted November 4, 2009 Report Share Posted November 4, 2009 Original Email from Kevin Jones - presumably the same Kevin Jones who is contributing to the Bristol Rovers Supporters Club Share Scheme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 4, 2009 Report Share Posted November 4, 2009 Original Email from Kevin Jones - presumably the same Kevin Jones who is contributing to the Bristol Rovers Supporters Club Share Scheme Ah bless, you'd think the blue few would save their energy for supporting their club rather than piss poor attempts to sabotage ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.