Bristol R*vers dustbin thread

[Betty Swallocks]

Rovers playing home games 5/10 mins from Bris/Knowle West will be great fun. 

[Rudolf Hucker]

1 hour ago, Spoons said:

I hate to say I told you so…

I don’t really think that you do. 

[pongo88]

6 minutes ago, RedLionLad said:

It’s more St Phillips than Totterdown, but still closer to a lot of City fans than their lot.

Bristol Dogs is in St Phillips. Very appropriate 

[Roe]

No chance

[Shuffle]

54 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Where is their “heartland” these days?

Lockleaze? Fishponds?

Genuinely have no idea.

Certainly isn’t anywhere near the fruit market, as you say that’s Totterdown, they won’t have too many fans south of the river.

Stockwood is the only area south of the river where there are a few gas about. No idea why as Briz is 90% red. 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Shuffle

[pongo88]

Ignoring the ins and outs of planning applications, the crunch will be money. It appears that Rovers may be given land to build a stadium (leasehold or freehold) and will receive money from the sale of the current ground. Whatever they receive is unlikely to be sufficient to fully cover the build cost of a new stadium. York City’s new 8,500 capacity ground cost £44m and Brentford’s 17,000 capacity ground cost £71m. So it’s down to weather Wael is prepared to splash the cash. 

[Gazred]

This time next year a planning application will of gone in for houses, apartments, offices, shops, restraunts and bars on that site.

Why in their right mind would they want to build a football stadium that would take decades to get the money back in rent? Rovers would be bringing nothing more than their nomadic selves to the table, certainly not the tens of millions of pounds it's going to cost to fund a stadium there.

Wael isn't going to spend the cash, he barely provides life support as it is.

 

[GrahamC]

2 minutes ago, pongo88 said:

Ignoring the ins and outs of planning applications, the crunch will be money. It appears that Rovers may be given land to build a stadium (leasehold or freehold) and will receive money from the sale of the current ground. Whatever they receive is unlikely to be sufficient to fully cover the build cost of a new stadium. York City’s new 8,500 capacity ground cost £44m and Brentford’s 17,000 capacity ground cost £71m. So it’s down to weather Wael is prepared to splash the cash. 

As has been posted already I guess the answer to that is how much would they realise by selling the land in Horfield for housing.

I have no idea but seeing as prices in Bristol are high (falling recently though) I’d say a fair bit.

As an aside this looks like a reason they wouldn’t proceed with that “stand” they were allegedly going to have in place for the new season, I expect?

[Lanterne Rouge]

Bristol Rovers move closer to future stadium site - BBC News

So if the area is `going to be transformed into something positive for the city` what are the pikeys doing there?

Not that it will ever happen of course.

[myol'man]

Is there an artists impression?

Loves a good artists impression of da new Roverz stadium I do, & we've seen a few

[westonred]

I cant see the Council granting planning permission for a stadium so close to the City Centre when they have been trying to limit the number of vehicles entering this area for years 

Didn't BCC turn down their own Indoor Arena plans near this site as the road infrastructure was not adequate

Edited April 6, 2023 by westonred

[Eddie Hitler]

3 hours ago, Ska Junkie said:

So this is like one of those auctions that you have to pay beforehand to bid?

Essentially it means diddly squat then?

 

Having an option in place on the land is the first step before you can do anything else, without this it couldn't go anywhere. This process is called "land assembly" and it's a big tick that this stage has been achieved.

It is however a very complex plan, more complex than the ones I have worked on and they took ages to come to fruition, and that the original discussions for this took place in an ultra low interest rate environment with easy credit will already be making it look less good.

Whatever the outcome it won't be quick and I'd say that it's a coin toss, or maybe worse odds, as to whether Rovers end up with a new stadium there because they are only a side aspect of the scheme rather than its core.

I'd liken their new stadium to a developer setting aside land for playgrounds or agreeing to build a community centre; that isn't why they're undergoing the development but it will serve as a sweetener for planning.

[Eddie Hitler]

29 minutes ago, myol'man said:

Is there an artists impression?

Loves a good artists impression of da new Roverz stadium I do, & we've seen a few

 

This is the new ground as it currently stands in the planned design.  Though of course this is an artist's impression to get through planning and it won't actually look anywhere near this good when it is built.

 

[Dredd]

It's genuinely an awful spot to drive and park at. Maybe they are relying on people using Bristols fantastic train infrastructure 

[milo1111]

Just now, Dredd said:

It's genuinely an awful spot to drive and park at. Maybe they are relying on people using Bristols fantastic train infrastructure 

Or the amazing buses

[RedRock]

4 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

Having an option in place on the land is the first step before you can do anything else, without this it couldn't go anywhere. This process is called "land assembly" and it's a big tick that this stage has been achieved.

It is however a very complex plan, more complex than the ones I have worked on and they took ages to come to fruition, and that the original discussions for this took place in an ultra low interest rate environment with easy credit will already be making it look less good.

Whatever the outcome it won't be quick and I'd say that it's a coin toss, or maybe worse odds, as to whether Rovers end up with a new stadium there because they are only a side aspect of the scheme rather than its core.

I'd liken their new stadium to a developer setting aside land for playgrounds or agreeing to build a community centre; that isn't why they're undergoing the development but it will serve as a sweetener for planning.

Why should The Sags get free land? Lummydaze, the useless Mayor can’t even bang a few administrative neighbours heads together to allow us to use the LA Park & Ride for Bristol’s premier sport and entertainment facility. 

Nobody could argue that a professional football ground is essential, even vaguely connected, to needs generated by the development. 

My bet would be the developer merrily goes along with this until they get to an advanced stage/ have planning permission and then they’ll just dump the ground with the submission of further application. 

Only chance is if the City Council have some land holding essential to the development…. but that then comes back to the first question… why should The Sags benefit and not Bristol’s Ratepayers? 

[Eddie Hitler]

8 minutes ago, RedRock said:

Why should The Sags get free land? Lummydaze, the useless Mayor can’t even bang a few administrative neighbours heads together to allow us to use the LA Park & Ride for Bristol’s premier sport and entertainment facility. 

Nobody could argue that a professional football ground is essential, even vaguely connected, to needs generated by the development. 

My bet would be the developer merrily goes along with this until they get to an advanced stage/ have planning permission and then they’ll just dump the ground with the submission of further application. 

Only chance is if the City Council have some land holding essential to the development…. but that then comes back to the first question… why should The Sags benefit and not Bristol’s Ratepayers? 

 

It's land at the Fruit Market site in exchange for the land of and around the Memorial Stadium rather than for free.

[glynriley]

31 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

Having an option in place on the land is the first step before you can do anything else, without this it couldn't go anywhere. This process is called "land assembly" and it's a big tick that this stage has been achieved.

It is however a very complex plan, more complex than the ones I have worked on and they took ages to come to fruition, and that the original discussions for this took place in an ultra low interest rate environment with easy credit will already be making it look less good.

Whatever the outcome it won't be quick and I'd say that it's a coin toss, or maybe worse odds, as to whether Rovers end up with a new stadium there because they are only a side aspect of the scheme rather than its core.

I'd liken their new stadium to a developer setting aside land for playgrounds or agreeing to build a community centre; that isn't why they're undergoing the development but it will serve as a sweetener for planning.

Nice

[Lanterne Rouge]

36 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

 

I'd liken their new stadium to a developer setting aside land for playgrounds or agreeing to build a community centre; that isn't why they're undergoing the development but it will serve as a sweetener for planning.

And then presumably they`ll do what most developers do and not build any of the stuff they`ve promised to

[Jim Davey]

Bumped into a couple of crayola taste testers earlier , done deal according to them 20,000 plus stadium on its way

[Lanterne Rouge]

Just now, Jim Davey said:

Bumped into a couple of crayola taste testers earlier , done deal according to them 20,000 plus stadium on its way

They weren`t the same two that filmed themselves telling the world that they were now the sixth richest club in the league a few years back?

Unlucky da shit.

[Eddie Hitler]

11 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

And then presumably they`ll do what most developers do and not build any of the stuff they`ve promised to

 

Yes, taking the money and running is often the way.

The standard MO is for the devleoper to set up a separate company for each new scheme so that if one collapses then it won't bring down the rest; DevCo1, DevCo2 etc.  There;'s nothing shady or underhand about this as long as everyone trading with it knows that they are dealing with the particular DevCo and not the developer itself.  Meaning that if that DevCo goes bust and it owes you money then hard luck, you have no claim against the developer. Not nice but them is the rules.

A few years back I was picking up something from a house on a new estate and as I had struggled to find it because I couldn't see the steet signs I aksed when they were going up, she said that the developer hadn;t bothered to put them up and had gone now so they weren't getting them!

These were presumably private / unadopted roads so the council had no responsibility for their upkeep let alone the signage.

Where the streets have no name....

 

 

 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Eddie Hitler
couple of typos

[Kid in the Riot]

2 hours ago, Gazred said:

This time next year a planning application will of gone in for houses, apartments, offices, shops, restraunts and bars on that site.

Why in their right mind would they want to build a football stadium that would take decades to get the money back in rent? Rovers would be bringing nothing more than their nomadic selves to the table, certainly not the tens of millions of pounds it's going to cost to fund a stadium there.

Wael isn't going to spend the cash, he barely provides life support as it is.

This is what I am still struggling with, and why Rovers will have to put up more money than just the sale of the Mem to help finance the new stadium. 

And that's what I just cannot see, Wael and family committing many more millions into a project dependent on third parties, which may ultimately never happen. 

I'd heard that the family are already very nervous about supporting a top 10 L1 wage bill for Barton, and that is shown in their recently released £3.7m loss. 

The family are open to selling Rovers, and maybe a new consortium might be interested in part financing a new stadium. But there's so many if's and but's.

As with the UWE project, it's like a house of cards, and only takes one party to pull the plug and it's over. 

[Lanterne Rouge]

2 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

Yes, taking the money and running is often the way.

The standard MO is for the devleoper to set up a separate company for each new scheme so that if one collapses then it won't bring down the rest; DevCo1, DevCo2 etc.  There;'s nothing shady or underhand about this as long as everyone trading with it knows that they are dealing with the particular DevCo and not the developer itself.  Meaning that if that DevCo goes bust and it owes you money then hard luck, you have no claim against the developer. Not nice but them is the rules.

A few years back I was picking up something from a house on a new estate and as I had struggled to find it because I couldn't see the steet signs I aksed when they were going up, she said that the developer hadn;t bothered to put them up and had gone now so they weren't getting them!

These were presumably private / unadopted roads so the council had no responsibility for their upkeep let alone the signage.

Where the streets have no name....

 

 

 

Factor in the funny handshakes and mutual back scratching that goes on it should be no surprise to anyone that savvy developers have the council on strings (to use a Derby County analogy).

[SecretSam]

2 hours ago, GrahamC said:

As has been posted already I guess the answer to that is how much would they realise by selling the land in Horfield for housing.

Do they have planning for resi? It's not a given. 

[SecretSam]

1 hour ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

Having an option in place on the land is the first step before you can do anything else, without this it couldn't go anywhere. This process is called "land assembly" and it's a big tick that this stage has been achieved.

It is however a very complex plan, more complex than the ones I have worked on and they took ages to come to fruition, and that the original discussions for this took place in an ultra low interest rate environment with easy credit will already be making it look less good.

Whatever the outcome it won't be quick and I'd say that it's a coin toss, or maybe worse odds, as to whether Rovers end up with a new stadium there because they are only a side aspect of the scheme rather than its core.

I'd liken their new stadium to a developer setting aside land for playgrounds or agreeing to build a community centre; that isn't why they're undergoing the development but it will serve as a sweetener for planning.

You in the business, Eddie?

[Kid in the Riot]

6 minutes ago, SecretSam said:

Do they have planning for resi? It's not a given. 

As good as. The residents around there will be far happier with a resi use than a stadium full of bin-dipping, inbreds, or a supermarket. 

[Lanterne Rouge]

3 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

As good as. The residents around there will be far happier with a resi use than a stadium full of bin-dipping, inbreds, or a supermarket. 

Just getting rid of the portaloos would be a win for the locals you would imagine. What must they smell like in August?

[SecretSam]

5 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

As good as. The residents around there will be far happier with a resi use than a stadium full of bin-dipping, inbreds, or a supermarket. 

What if the inbreds move into the houses?

[Lanterne Rouge]

Just now, SecretSam said:

What if the inbreds move into the houses?

What? Squat in them? They do have previous for it.