|
|
Post by Severncider on Nov 27, 2015 14:04:05 GMT
So we've gone from zero investors to dozens of them, all desperate to give us money. No pushing at the back, please. Form an orderly queue outside Mr Higgs' office. Yes, you'll all get to see him. It is possible to read too much into the comment about 12(?) interested parties.
For fun, I mentioned privately the name Jed McCrory to NH and he confirmed he had contacted BRFC but was "blown out" , even though he was supposed to have been a "guest" in box 1 according to some people. Apparently he has been interested in MANY clubs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jon the Stripe on Nov 27, 2015 14:27:11 GMT
Hi - Good summary by SevernCider - FWIW i didn't want to go over what i heard last night as if i got something innocently wrong i would probably be jumped on so i left it for others to summarise - In reply to Orgasmics question 'why did i feel positive' well my opinion (and thats all it is) is that IF we win the court case we still have a chance to build UWE (but will require further investment) and IF we lose the case then i would like to think (hope!) the group of potential takeover people (consortium) would still be interested and build UWE! I must say in my opinion UWE Plan A is the only outcome that can give us a brighter future - Luckily in the meantime we have a manager who is doing a damn good job and on a sound footing by which i mean he gets value for money in his squad/player selection process which obviously is much needed at present - i could go into more of what i think etc but i think it may be purely conjecture/counter productive so i think i'll leave it there - UTG
|
|
|
|
Post by gassince1957 on Nov 27, 2015 14:45:13 GMT
I thought there were a queue of people just waiting to fire questions at NH last night? Wasn't this the night where NH was going to be put on the spot? Is there a summary available anywhere as to what was said? Nobby - I asked my question:-
Nick, I was going to ask a question about the Consortium, but you have denied there is one and even if there is you will no doubt quote the confidentiality clause.
My question is, although you are convinced that we will win the appeal against Sainsbury, what do you consider to be a win? Is it the full payment of £28m or a part payment to recover BRFC costs. If we do not win, how do you envisage clearing the substantial outstanding debt and is there a possibility that we could soon have a debt larger than the value of The Mem thereby trading as a company illegally?
I did not expect him to answer the first part of the question but fair play he did. He threw his arms up on hearing the word Consortium and went through his usual comments about not knowing who this Consortium is........ He said the club were in advanced talks with "an investor", these talks are progressing well and he hopes for a successful conclusion. He didn't say that at all - he said no investors have been able to prove they have the finance in place, whilst not denying he may be in talks he didn't indicate there are any advanced negotiations
So he DID confirm that there are talks ongoing, whether you want to call them with a "Consortium" or "some investors" makes no difference to me, he has confirmed these for any doubters, so we can put that to rest. Sort of, but not quite as emphatic as you are stating. I got the impression that no VIABLE investors have come forward yet
With regard to the Appeal. He said it is all or nothing, there is no halfway house. So it's £28m or nothing. He and his legal team are confident they will win and he does not expect that there will be any last minute offers from Sainsbury. To be honest, why would Sainsbury want to negotiate. Correct
He did add that, under the terms of the contract Sainsbury could eject us immediately from The Mem if they are forced to pay us the £28m. I don't think he said that, although it stands to reason Sainsbury's would fight dirty - bear in mind that, if the Appeal Court says the contract stands, part of the contract is that we stay at The Mem till UWE is ready He did make a comment about what the club would do in the event of that happening, but even though it was said openly, I will not repeat it as in my opinion Sainsbury may jump on that comment if they are still monitoring comments on social media.
To clarify a matter about the Appeal, he confirmed that the case would be held in front of three judges and that BOTH BRFC and Sainsbury's legal council will be in attendance at the hearing and they will both set out their arguments on why they feel the original decision was correct or not.
I will send a summery of the meeting later. There were about 18 points raised with an even split between questions to NH and DC.
You also asked what happens in the event we lose the appeal and NH confirmed there is a plan for that eventuality and that he was not prepared to go into the details - he seemed very confident that losing the appeal would not mean the end of the club or the end of the UWE stadium though. NH also said that the implications for Sainsbury's if Rovers win the appeal are huge - there are about 40 similar reneged contracts who would almost certainly then sue Sainsbury's on the basis that Case Law has established a precedent, so it follows Sainsbury's will throw everything at winning the appeal. The good thing is the appeal is just barristers and is not costing very much as all the hard work gathering evidence has already been done.
I agree with you that NH was very open with his answers. |
|
|
|
Post by gassince1957 on Nov 27, 2015 14:49:03 GMT
Hi - Good summary by SevernCider - FWIW i didn't want to go over what i heard last night as if i got something innocently wrong i would probably be jumped on so i left it for others to summarise - In reply to Orgasmics question 'why did i feel positive' well my opinion (and thats all it is) is that IF we win the court case we still have a chance to build UWE (but will require further investment) and IF we lose the case then i would like to think (hope!) the group of potential takeover people (consortium) would still be interested and build UWE! I must say in my opinion UWE Plan A is the only outcome that can give us a brighter future - Luckily in the meantime we have a manager who is doing a damn good job and on a sound footing by which i mean he gets value for money in his squad/player selection process which obviously is much needed at present - i could go into more of what i think etc but i think it may be purely conjecture/counter productive so i think i'll leave it there - UTG You're talking rubbish!!  (You led into that one!) We'll not really know anything till the appeal is over - fingers crossed etc. |
|
|
|
Post by dinsdale on Nov 27, 2015 14:53:52 GMT
I'm surprised at the lack of postings regarding last night. I've seen the mob gradually building for the last few weeks. The tar was boiling, the pitchforks had been handed out and flaming torches lit the night. Serious questions were going to be asked. NH would suffer multiple Chinese burns in the attempt to drag information out of him. Oh yes, the baying mob could scent blood. What happened? They phoned in sick I have attended all meetings open to me and live tweeted from them for the purpose of the fans including 4 planning permission meetings. I'm not a member of or fan of the supporters club so i was not allowed to go. |
|
|
|
Post by gassince1957 on Nov 27, 2015 14:55:42 GMT
I have attended all meetings open to me and live tweeted from them for the purpose of the fans including 4 planning permission meetings. I'm not a member of or fan of the supporters club so i was not allowed to go. For a mere £10 you could have been there |
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Nov 27, 2015 14:56:15 GMT
Correct me please if i'm wrong on this, but i've just been told that because the agreement between us,UWE & Sainsbury was a 3 way agreement. if the Sainsbury Element of the contract is now dead, will that mean our agreement with UWE has also lapsed ? NH did confirm publically or to me privately that, yes it was a three way agreement.
I have no idea about your summation but NH was asked if there was any legal agreement with UWE about building the new stadium and he said there was no contract in force with UWE.
So if the UWE decide to go their own way we have no redress ? Where fcuked then |
|
|
|
Post by dave on Nov 27, 2015 14:59:27 GMT
Hi - Good summary by SevernCider - FWIW i didn't want to go over what i heard last night as if i got something innocently wrong i would probably be jumped on so i left it for others to summarise - In reply to Orgasmics question 'why did i feel positive' well my opinion (and thats all it is) is that IF we win the court case we still have a chance to build UWE (but will require further investment) and IF we lose the case then i would like to think (hope!) the group of potential takeover people (consortium) would still be interested and build UWE! I must say in my opinion UWE Plan A is the only outcome that can give us a brighter future - Luckily in the meantime we have a manager who is doing a damn good job and on a sound footing by which i mean he gets value for money in his squad/player selection process which obviously is much needed at present - i could go into more of what i think etc but i think it may be purely conjecture/counter productive so i think i'll leave it there - UTG I'll admit to being as surprised by anyone that things to be moving behind the scenes and hold my hands up that I was unconvinced by the lack of any particluar action / news. However, I still wonder how we can be a seen as a good investement IF Sainsburys dont lose. Its been discussed at length on here how much will need to be invested and I really struggle to see how they are going to get a retuen on an investement that will be in excess of £40/£50 million. I know there is a business plan for developing income streams at UWE but they are going to need to be something else to make a dent in the investment. There needs to be investement in the sqaud if the journey up the leageus is to be continued and this will also mean that the 'breakeven' attendance figure will aslo go up. It grates that the attendences are going down this season when they should, if investors are to be attracted, by going up or staying steady. Im sure city are trying to also tap into the potential fanbase that everyone says is there in Bristol but even in the championship playing against some big clubs they only attract crowds around 15k. I know im in the minority but I dont want to be rattling around in a sparkly new stadium attracting crowds of 6/7k. How do you see this proppsed investment actually working? |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Nov 27, 2015 15:01:02 GMT
NH did confirm publically or to me privately that, yes it was a three way agreement.
I have no idea about your summation but NH was asked if there was any legal agreement with UWE about building the new stadium and he said there was no contract in force with UWE.
So if the UWE decide to go their own way we have no redress ? Where fcuked then They'd be pretty stupid to go anywhere else until the appeal has been heard. And they no doubt are aware of the consortium talk. So there are two chances to get a free 22,000 seater stadium on their campus. |
|
|
|
Post by dinsdale on Nov 27, 2015 15:04:28 GMT
I have attended all meetings open to me and live tweeted from them for the purpose of the fans including 4 planning permission meetings. I'm not a member of or fan of the supporters club so i was not allowed to go. For a mere £10 you could have been there Happy to sit one out, big critic of BRSC. Done my stint for a bit just making the point that not all board critics are simply keyboard warriors |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 27, 2015 15:20:14 GMT
"no contract in force" so we've spent millions on a project where the UWE could have/can still just walk at any moment?? Let's just hope they want the staduim as much as we do!
I still find it a bit hard to believe we've now 12 potential investors all lined up to hand over £50m, when a few months ago NH seemed to be suggesting nobody was interested and w/o Sainsbury money the project was dead.
|
|
|
|
Post by dave on Nov 27, 2015 15:36:59 GMT
"no contract in force" so we've spent millions on a project where the UWE could have/can still just walk at any moment?? Let's just hope they want the staduim as much as we do! I still find it a bit hard to believe we've now 12 potential investors all lined up to hand over £50m, when a few months ago NH seemed to be suggesting nobody was interested and w/o Sainsbury money the project was dead. Also TG, how many of those 12 have been able to prove they have the finance in place or access to the finance, which is clearly an essential piece of information. Accoring to a gassince1957 post NONE of them. |
|
|
|
Post by Severncider on Nov 27, 2015 15:39:46 GMT
Nobby - I asked my question:-
Nick, I was going to ask a question about the Consortium, but you have denied there is one and even if there is you will no doubt quote the confidentiality clause.
My question is, although you are convinced that we will win the appeal against Sainsbury, what do you consider to be a win? Is it the full payment of £28m or a part payment to recover BRFC costs. If we do not win, how do you envisage clearing the substantial outstanding debt and is there a possibility that we could soon have a debt larger than the value of The Mem thereby trading as a company illegally?
I did not expect him to answer the first part of the question but fair play he did. He threw his arms up on hearing the word Consortium and went through his usual comments about not knowing who this Consortium is........ He said the club were in advanced talks with "an investor", these talks are progressing well and he hopes for a successful conclusion. He didn't say that at all - he said no investors have been able to prove they have the finance in place, whilst not denying he may be in talks he didn't indicate there are any advanced negotiations
So he DID confirm that there are talks ongoing, whether you want to call them with a "Consortium" or "some investors" makes no difference to me, he has confirmed these for any doubters, so we can put that to rest. Sort of, but not quite as emphatic as you are stating. I got the impression that no VIABLE investors have come forward yet
With regard to the Appeal. He said it is all or nothing, there is no halfway house. So it's £28m or nothing. He and his legal team are confident they will win and he does not expect that there will be any last minute offers from Sainsbury. To be honest, why would Sainsbury want to negotiate. Correct
He did add that, under the terms of the contract Sainsbury could eject us immediately from The Mem if they are forced to pay us the £28m. I don't think he said that, although it stands to reason Sainsbury's would fight dirty - bear in mind that, if the Appeal Court says the contract stands, part of the contract is that we stay at The Mem till UWE is ready He did make a comment about what the club would do in the event of that happening, but even though it was said openly, I will not repeat it as in my opinion Sainsbury may jump on that comment if they are still monitoring comments on social media.
To clarify a matter about the Appeal, he confirmed that the case would be held in front of three judges and that BOTH BRFC and Sainsbury's legal council will be in attendance at the hearing and they will both set out their arguments on why they feel the original decision was correct or not.
I will send a summery of the meeting later. There were about 18 points raised with an even split between questions to NH and DC.
You also asked what happens in the event we lose the appeal and NH confirmed there is a plan for that eventuality and that he was not prepared to go into the details - he seemed very confident that losing the appeal would not mean the end of the club or the end of the UWE stadium though. NH also said that the implications for Sainsbury's if Rovers win the appeal are huge - there are about 40 similar reneged contracts who would almost certainly then sue Sainsbury's on the basis that Case Law has established a precedent, so it follows Sainsbury's will throw everything at winning the appeal. The good thing is the appeal is just barristers and is not costing very much as all the hard work gathering evidence has already been done.
I agree with you that NH was very open with his answers. GasSince1957 - as JTS said, one can only provide a summery of how anyone thought the question was answered and not everyone has the same interpretation of the answer.
I am in a difficult position as NH had a long chat with me and another after the meeting and I have probably incorporated some of his comments into what was said publically.
When I provide the summery of the other questions and answers, I will try to stick to what was said publically.
Thanks for your input
|
|
|
|
Post by Jon the Stripe on Nov 27, 2015 16:35:23 GMT
Hi - Good summary by SevernCider - FWIW i didn't want to go over what i heard last night as if i got something innocently wrong i would probably be jumped on so i left it for others to summarise - In reply to Orgasmics question 'why did i feel positive' well my opinion (and thats all it is) is that IF we win the court case we still have a chance to build UWE (but will require further investment) and IF we lose the case then i would like to think (hope!) the group of potential takeover people (consortium) would still be interested and build UWE! I must say in my opinion UWE Plan A is the only outcome that can give us a brighter future - Luckily in the meantime we have a manager who is doing a damn good job and on a sound footing by which i mean he gets value for money in his squad/player selection process which obviously is much needed at present - i could go into more of what i think etc but i think it may be purely conjecture/counter productive so i think i'll leave it there - UTG I'll admit to being as surprised by anyone that things to be moving behind the scenes and hold my hands up that I was unconvinced by the lack of any particluar action / news. However, I still wonder how we can be a seen as a good investement IF Sainsburys dont lose. Its been discussed at length on here how much will need to be invested and I really struggle to see how they are going to get a retuen on an investement that will be in excess of £40/£50 million. I know there is a business plan for developing income streams at UWE but they are going to need to be something else to make a dent in the investment. There needs to be investement in the sqaud if the journey up the leageus is to be continued and this will also mean that the 'breakeven' attendance figure will aslo go up. It grates that the attendences are going down this season when they should, if investors are to be attracted, by going up or staying steady. Im sure city are trying to also tap into the potential fanbase that everyone says is there in Bristol but even in the championship playing against some big clubs they only attract crowds around 15k. I know im in the minority but I dont want to be rattling around in a sparkly new stadium attracting crowds of 6/7k. How do you see this proppsed investment actually working? Cheers Dave - Appreciated. And in answer to your closing question - not a bloody clue! That's for the clever people/mad business men to decide/plan mate! Nick has already alluded to what will happen over a 3/4 year period if others takeover and i think the same applies to whoever is in charge whether he or A N Other the fact is further investment will be required short term as i believe The UWE Project will cost circa £50 million pounds!!! Without as you say on the pitch investment being included and a stadia that serious will require Championship football to thrive Having said that up and down the country and across the world business's/individual's do get involved for some strange reason and that explains (sadly in my opinion) why Planet Football has gone into orbit! - UTG |
|
|
|
Post by gassince1957 on Nov 27, 2015 16:39:59 GMT
GasSince1957 - as JTS said, one can only provide a summery of how anyone thought the question was answered and not everyone has the same interpretation of the answer.
I am in a difficult position as NH had a long chat with me and another after the meeting and I have probably incorporated some of his comments into what was said publically.
When I provide the summery of the other questions and answers, I will try to stick to what was said publically.
Thanks for your input
I didn't get involved in any "before and after" talks with NH - interesting that the private discussion differed from the public comments. I enjoyed the meeting and felt that all the questions to NH and DC and BB were answered as fully as was possible, accepting that some things remain "behind closed doors". |
|
|
|
Post by Jon the Stripe on Nov 27, 2015 16:39:50 GMT
"no contract in force" so we've spent millions on a project where the UWE could have/can still just walk at any moment?? Let's just hope they want the staduim as much as we do! I still find it a bit hard to believe we've now 12 potential investors all lined up to hand over £50m, when a few months ago NH seemed to be suggesting nobody was interested and w/o Sainsbury money the project was dead. Also TG, how many of those 12 have been able to prove they have the finance in place or access to the finance, which is clearly an essential piece of information. Accoring to a gassince1957 post NONE of them. In fairness Dave this is where the confidentially agreement thingy's deny us the truth as for all we know all 12 could have funds in place but NH is bound by those agreements not to tell us - UTG |
|
|
|
Post by Jon the Stripe on Nov 27, 2015 16:48:20 GMT
I have attended all meetings open to me and live tweeted from them for the purpose of the fans including 4 planning permission meetings. I'm not a member of or fan of the supporters club so i was not allowed to go. Fair point and i must say in Dins defence at the last Q&A he summed up/wrote up what was happening live on here and got a right roasting and some abuse as well (and some praise in fairness) which was why there was no way i was gonna do it last night  |
|
|
|
Post by gassince1957 on Nov 27, 2015 18:48:47 GMT
Also TG, how many of those 12 have been able to prove they have the finance in place or access to the finance, which is clearly an essential piece of information. Accoring to a gassince1957 post NONE of them. In fairness Dave this is where the confidentially agreement thingy's deny us the truth as for all we know all 12 could have funds in place but NH is bound by those agreements not to tell us - UTG Jon - NH was very specific that none of the "Dirty Dozen" were able to prove they have the funds i.e. to buy the club and maintain the club they would have to borrow even more money (NH didn't say that about investors needing to borrow money - it's my own view.) I don't think this was stated due to the Confidentiality Agreements - NH advised they were more about the fact that the club had to release confidential details to the possible investors which are not to be put in the public domain. Accepted there is likely to be a view that NH may be economic with the truth, although I don't feel that to be the case, but many people on the forums won't believe a word he says unfortunately. |
|
|
|
Post by Jon the Stripe on Nov 27, 2015 18:56:30 GMT
In fairness Dave this is where the confidentially agreement thingy's deny us the truth as for all we know all 12 could have funds in place but NH is bound by those agreements not to tell us - UTG Jon - NH was very specific that none of the "Dirty Dozen" were able to prove they have the funds i.e. to buy the club and maintain the club they would have to borrow even more money (NH didn't say that about investors needing to borrow money - it's my own view.) I don't think this was stated due to the Confidentiality Agreements - NH advised they were more about the fact that the club had to release confidential details to the possible investors which are not to be put in the public domain. Accepted there is likely to be a view that NH may be economic with the truth, although I don't feel that to be the case, but many people on the forums won't believe a word he says unfortunately. I respect your thoughts there but it comes down to our own perceived meanings of any remarks made - maybe NH's terms of proving finance is readily available are different to others - either way its conjecture either way and we have to make our own minds up i'm afraid FWIW i aint no rose tinter and i aint no board basher i'm pretty middle of the road i just say what i see/hear/feel at the time mate and i'll praise or criticise if that's how i feel after hearing/seeing anything etc - UTG |
|
|
|
Post by Severncider on Nov 27, 2015 19:34:16 GMT
I am formulating a record of all the questions and answers and will put it on a new thread in due course.
To enlarge on my comment that talks were "advanced". Before the AGM, as I mentioned earlier, NH came over to a few of us and one of the questions we asked was - if the negotiations are successful, what time frame was he looking at to start building work at UWE. He said between February and June.
Now I believe it is madness to quote dates as these have a habit of "biting you on the bum" when the quoted date is not met. Also, the initial date seems unduly optimistic as even if Contracts were signed by the end of December, the February date is a bit ambitious.
This was only said to a few of us before the meeting, so my "advanced stage" answer was based on this. It would have been interesting if others had asked the same question in the Q & A what NH would have said. I tend to believe that he would have given the same answer.
|
|
(You led into that one!)
