wh
Youth Teamer
Posts: 44
|
Post by wh on Nov 13, 2008 10:01:15 GMT
|
|
bj
Squad Member
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Posts: 182
|
Post by bj on Nov 13, 2008 12:16:11 GMT
As an ex Kays employee, I have happy memories of hours of tennis on the Cinderella and I would hate it to become a housing site. My front teeth are out in the middle somewhere after making a mistake whilst wicketkeeping. Unfortunately the ball fell out of my mouth, otherwise we'd have won the match!
My main concern is the Bank. If NW gets put on the back burner as Plan B I can see the Bank running out of patience and pulling the plug. Would that mean SGL being auctioned off for a substantially lower figure as long as it covered the banks £900k plus 10.7% ? The Bank would obviously prefer to have 10.7% of £7m, but in the current climate I assume they want quick cash as opposed to longer term returns. Would this scenario put us into Administration? If so, would that be a bad thing? Has Mr Ward spoken to the Bank?
Logistically my concern lies in the size of The Cinderella. The acreage appears to be roughly the same as the NW stadium - but as well as a stadium it has to acommodate a gym and large swimming pool?
Early days I know. But I reckon there is some merit to it as long as we move debt free.
|
|
cogg
Squad Member
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Posts: 208
|
Post by cogg on Nov 13, 2008 12:59:13 GMT
If you are saving the pavilion, you have my vote ;-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2008 13:20:09 GMT
Early days I know. But I reckon there is some merit to it as long as we move debt free. Totally agree, and this is a major stumbling block with Nunnery Way. Because the whole scheme is dependent upon outside forces (St. Modwens enabling development) NO-ONE can give any assurances that we will move to Nunnery Way debt-free. The latest discussion I had showed a £500,000 hole, which according to the project manager would be filled with cash from St. Modwens (as a loan? or a donation, cos if its a donation then why not donate a further 2 acres to be developed for non-football revenue??) And I've never factored in Capital Gains Tax on the sale of the asset, which must run to around £500,000. In fact the only assurance I've been given is that there will be no cash in the bank!!
|
|
|
Post by gobby cow on Nov 13, 2008 13:30:31 GMT
I am really excited by this new ground proposed by the SHAG group.
Having gone to their open meeting they had some excellent ideas then and they seem to be coming up with even more. I expected the present board to pinch some of them in the hope of modernising themselves but they have just carried on regardless.
I just hope the shareholders realise the future the club could have if we had some directors who actually put the club first before their egos and bank balance!
2012 is sooner than Nunnery Way will be finished and you can quote me on that Booby!
|
|
|
Post by steve89 on Nov 13, 2008 13:56:21 GMT
I don't know the ins and Out of all that been going on with the board (not sure they do either) but one thing I think they have right is the site for the ground. Nunnery way or that area seems ideal to me. The chances of a ground in St Johns I would say would be very slim. Having lived just 5 minutes walk from the Cinderella ground for a good 10 years I cannot see the local residents ever agreeing it was a good idea. Admittedly Kays was an eye sore but I wouldn't say it was noisy, had bright lights in the evenings or even just people travelling in and out. Also surely to provide enough room for parking and the rest of the facilities talked about a decent bit of the Kays site would need to be bought as well ? . Nice idea but I can never see it happening sadly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2008 14:22:43 GMT
I don't know the ins and Out of all that been going on with the board (not sure they do either) but one thing I think they have right is the site for the ground. Nunnery way or that area seems ideal to me. The chances of a ground in St Johns I would say would be very slim. Having lived just 5 minutes walk from the Cinderella ground for a good 10 years I cannot see the local residents ever agreeing it was a good idea. Admittedly Kays was an eye sore but I wouldn't say it was noisy, had bright lights in the evenings or even just people travelling in and out. Also surely to provide enough room for parking and the rest of the facilities talked about a decent bit of the Kays site would need to be bought as well ? . Nice idea but I can never see it happening sadly. Blimey, when campaigning against the Western Bypass, the residents in the area complained bitterly of the noise from trucks arriving and leaving at Kays 7 days a week from early morning to late evening. And there's nowt brighter than car retail showrooms, where lights blaze 24 hours (as recommended by the manufacturers in their retail design directives) Nunnery Way though could be an idea site, for a standalone football ground, maybe supported by a non-retail enabling development as part of the stadium structure, as defined by the Local Plan. Trouble is the infrastructure costs are so high, £1.5 million before a stand can be built. One advantage of Cinderella, which is overlooked, is that it is flat!! IF Nunnery Way can be proven to work financially without dependency on enabling development, then it should be pursued. But however hard I try, using the figures provided by club officers and project team members, I can't get it to add up to anywhere near zero!!
|
|
|
Post by Bstander on Nov 13, 2008 16:20:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by creaner on Nov 13, 2008 16:52:08 GMT
"They claim the Nunnery Way site is the “best and only realistic option for the club’s new stadium, having been identified as such by Worcester City Council and the club and properly tested by government inspector at a public inquiry, which also assessed other potential stadium sites”. The statement added “the new stadium at Nunnery Way would secure the long term future of the club and allow the club and the city to fulfill its ambition of hosting league football”. Two bold statements, I assume the figure in the latest accounts substatiate those claims. No doubt all will be revealled....
|
|
wh
Youth Teamer
Posts: 44
|
Post by wh on Nov 13, 2008 18:44:40 GMT
I don't know the ins and Out of all that been going on with the board (not sure they do either) but one thing I think they have right is the site for the ground. Nunnery way or that area seems ideal to me. The chances of a ground in St Johns I would say would be very slim. Having lived just 5 minutes walk from the Cinderella ground for a good 10 years I cannot see the local residents ever agreeing it was a good idea. Admittedly Kays was an eye sore but I wouldn't say it was noisy, had bright lights in the evenings or even just people travelling in and out. Also surely to provide enough room for parking and the rest of the facilities talked about a decent bit of the Kays site would need to be bought as well ? . Nice idea but I can never see it happening sadly. Blimey, when campaigning against the Western Bypass, the residents in the area complained bitterly of the noise from trucks arriving and leaving at Kays 7 days a week from early morning to late evening. And there's nowt brighter than car retail showrooms, where lights blaze 24 hours (as recommended by the manufacturers in their retail design directives) Nunnery Way though could be an idea site, for a standalone football ground, maybe supported by a non-retail enabling development as part of the stadium structure, as defined by the Local Plan. Trouble is the infrastructure costs are so high, £1.5 million before a stand can be built. One advantage of Cinderella, which is overlooked, is that it is flat!! IF Nunnery Way can be proven to work financially without dependency on enabling development, then it should be pursued. But however hard I try, using the figures provided by club officers and project team members, I can't get it to add up to anywhere near zero!! I heard today that Robert Stern's mini/bmw dealership are closing down which doesn't bode well when we potentially have 3 or 4 more showrooms to shift at NW.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2008 19:39:42 GMT
Maybe they've already bought their new unit at Nunnery Way ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2008 19:54:09 GMT
“the new stadium at Nunnery Way would secure the long term future of the club and allow the club and the city to fulfill its ambition of hosting league football”
How do they make that one out? We stay in debt - but minus our only asset, brilliant.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2008 20:07:07 GMT
Whose ambition of hosting League football? They don't even know what the majority of the fanbase even want! how could they? they've never bothered to ask the question!!
|
|
|
Post by Tim Munslow on Nov 13, 2008 20:25:58 GMT
I live on the West side of the river and the Cinderella ground would, from a personal point of view, be a wonderful site.
However, as I understand it, the rail stop has already been discounted by the rail authorities, so that's a non-starter. And I would like to know this: what proportion of the population of Worcester lives West of the river. I'm guessing perhaps 30%?
Are you going to tell me the remaining 70% will see any merit on having to go all the way to St Johns to watch City? I think our attendances would decline even more.
No, it's a non-starter as far as I am concerned, viewed in the best interests of the club's future.
|
|
|
Post by tim on Nov 13, 2008 22:18:22 GMT
St Johns is a lot nearer for the majority of people than Nunnery Way!
|
|
cogg
Squad Member
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Posts: 208
|
Post by cogg on Nov 13, 2008 22:18:33 GMT
"All the way to St Johns " !!! ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) ?? FFS! I know Worcester has a miserable, cynical, glass half empty attitude but I think most people travel a little more than you give them credit for Tim
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2008 22:26:24 GMT
Does being the "wrong side of the river" have an impact on the cricket ground? I live the other side of the river, and its closer to Cinderella ground than it is to SGL, and certainly further to go to Nunnery Way. There are two bridges over the river, the days of having to take the ferry are long gone, although its still an option! I'm still not sure how I manage it, but sometimes I even get as far as McDonalds in St. Johns, as its quicker and easier to get there from St Peters than it is to go to the one on Blackpole. I use the Homebase in St. Johns rather than the one at Blackpole (if I can't get what I need in the one on Bath Road. I even use the refuse tip near Malvern as opposed to the one on Blackpole Road as its quicker to get to. That darned river poses little obstacle. "All the way to St. Johns!" I can remember when we lived in Broadway Grove, and my dad would drive "all the way" to SGL, and he'd return via the bridge at Holt Heath sometimes! and that was 35 years ago in a manky Morris Minor with an old sink unit bolted in to form the floor!!
|
|
|
Post by DazaB on Nov 13, 2008 23:05:27 GMT
Are you going to tell me the remaining 70% will see any merit on having to go all the way to St Johns to watch City? I think our attendances would decline even more. A load more people would go to St Johns to watch the City ahead of Nunnery Way if walking distance were the only factor...
|
|
|
Post by DazaB on Nov 13, 2008 23:06:38 GMT
Sorry, hadn't read Jeremy's post, the top of which, mine is a repeat of.
|
|
|
Post by alwaysnextyear on Nov 14, 2008 1:51:16 GMT
The Board didn't respond to the Cinderella Ground plan at all, they just re-affirmed their view that Nunnery Way was the only option in their opinion. The numbers don't stack up, it will correctly be opposed at every level of the planning process as it is contrary to the Local Plan, and it's far less than the original envisaged size and design. What wonderful aspects of the deal are not in the public domain ?
|
|
|
Post by dave on Nov 14, 2008 8:37:22 GMT
Whose ambition of hosting League football? They don't even know what the majority of the fanbase even want! how could they? they've never bothered to ask the question!! Therein for me lies the problem. Jeremy you have on a number of occasions stated that you do not want City to get promoted to a level where segregation is the norm. You would be happy for City to stay a non-league club forever, but some of us want to see a Football League club playing in the City we call home. In an ideal world I would love to see Worcester City FC competing for major honours at home and in Europe, isn't that what most football fans want, to watch a side that win games and gain promotions? For example Hull City fans must be in dreamland at the moment, three promotions in a short space of time and they are in the top flight beating Arsenal! I am becoming more and more convinced that the SAG are not interested or lack the ambition to see City progress and become a football league club in the next 10-20 years. If we have a choice between those who would hold the Club back, or those with an ambition to see the Club get into the Football League, I know which way I would vote personally.
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Nov 14, 2008 9:08:19 GMT
Dave, I don't think you should base the ambitions or otherwise of SAG based on Jeremy's comments. He is not on the list of their proposed directors & therefore you should treat his comments as personal opinions not SAG policy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2008 9:55:10 GMT
Whose ambition of hosting League football? They don't even know what the majority of the fanbase even want! how could they? they've never bothered to ask the question!! Therein for me lies the problem. Jeremy you have on a number of occasions stated that you do not want City to get promoted to a level where segregation is the norm. You would be happy for City to stay a non-league club forever, but some of us want to see a Football League club playing in the City we call home. In an ideal world I would love to see Worcester City FC competing for major honours at home and in Europe, isn't that what most football fans want, to watch a side that win games and gain promotions? For example Hull City fans must be in dreamland at the moment, three promotions in a short space of time and they are in the top flight beating Arsenal! I am becoming more and more convinced that the SAG are not interested or lack the ambition to see City progress and become a football league club in the next 10-20 years. If we have a choice between those who would hold the Club back, or those with an ambition to see the Club get into the Football League, I know which way I would vote personally. Yes but Hull City have been a football league club ever since 1906, so its hardly a good comparison, for that you should have chosen Wimbledon! Blimey Hull City fans have enjoyed FA Cup semi-finals before now (Arsenal did beat them on that occasion). There is however some good comparisions to be drawn from Hull City. Firstly, ask those Hull fans in dreamland just how it felt to be evicted from their ground by the bailiffs!!, and bear in mind that it was only after a Boardroom takeover led by Adam Pearson that the club was able to start improving there financial position. Clearly with no shareholder action, the tired old board would have taken the club to liquidation - so a decent comparison there! Its also interesting to note that having taken Hull to the Championship Pearson sold out as he felt he personally couldn't take the club any further - so he clearly worked within expectations, and had a foresight to allow someone else in to carry on the task. Also consider the KC Stadium - not owned by the football club, it is a community facility used by the football club and the rugby club owned by Hull City Council, built by the council when they sold their stake in Kingston Communications For every Hull there is a Wealdstone, a Maidstone, a Scarborough, a Brighton, a Bournemouth. And yes a Wimbledon, now ironically a community run profitable club who are in the same division as ourselves, and are a perfect example of why most fans of non-league clubs enjoy watching non-league football ( their fans have a choice - almost - of supporting their old side renamed MK Dons playing lower league football at a spanking new stadium in MK, or supporting the side in which they feel some ownership playing Blue Square South) Sorry Dave but give me a cold Monday night v Bognor Regis Town sharing a chinwag and a teabag with Ealing on the Brookside, over an uncomfortable, unfriendly, intimidating fixture with Arsenal at a time and date to suit the Sky TV schedules any day! Dave, I think you are living the dream, like Peter Ridsdale, and Anthony Hampson (he talks of the dream of this new stadium) as opposed to living the reality of expectation, and how to achieve it. Forget WCFC playing Europe, the first task is to get to back on planet Earth and figure out how to pan out the cashflow to get to the end of the season. If you want to talk about lack of ambition, then ask why ther present board have shown no amibition to run SGL as a business since the B&Q plans? Why there is no anbition to generate revenue from the Social Club (WCFC = £40k debt to club, AFC Wimbledon = £300,000 revenue per annum!) I love non-league football, that tier under the professional game which emcompasses thousands of player, thousands od volunteers, and an attraction which is so distanced from professional football that it almost constitutes a different game. If WCFC were one of the biggest teams in non-league football and maintained that position then I'd be a happy man supporting a successful club. What any of this has got to do with SAG I don't know. You would need to talk to them about their ambitions
|
|
niels
City Legend
Posts: 1,741
|
Post by niels on Nov 14, 2008 9:56:58 GMT
I even use the refuse tip near Malvern as opposed to the one on Blackpole Road as its quicker to get to. No wonder it always takes me ages to get into the tip. I don't pay my Poll Tax just for you foreigners to come across the border to dump your rubbish. GERRRRROFFFF MOI TIP!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2008 10:46:08 GMT
Dave, I don't think you should base the ambitions or otherwise of SAG based on Jeremy's comments. He is not on the list of their proposed directors & therefore you should treat his comments as personal opinions not SAG policy. It raises an important question though, what do the supporters of WCFC want? After all, the club can be run to achieve different things, depending upon expectations. A decent Chairman will always set out the business plan to achieve certain goals, and in the case of a football club needs to know what those goals are. If European football in 20 years is the expectation, then the business plan is going to very different to an expectation of "Blue Square South survival" To be honest any group, SAG, BAG, FAGHAG or whatever, even the present board, who came in saying, "we've got massive ambitions for this club, we're going to live the dream, San Siro 2020 here we come!!" would be setting themselves up for a mighty fall. Yes my view is personal, but one thing I will say about SAG is that from what I've heard they certainly do not lack ambition (within reasonable expectation of delivery) as will be revealed prior to the General Meetings.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2008 10:48:28 GMT
I even use the refuse tip near Malvern as opposed to the one on Blackpole Road as its quicker to get to. No wonder it always takes me ages to get into the tip. I don't pay my Poll Tax just for you foreigners to come across the border to dump your rubbish. GERRRRROFFFF MOI TIP! I select only my highest quality rubbish for the Malvern tip!! Its a handy site over there, Morrisons, Matalan, Boots, plus a fine Scottish restaurant. If it wasn't the wrong side of the river , it could make a good site for a football stadium ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
Post by birdfeeder on Nov 14, 2008 11:31:24 GMT
I even use the refuse tip near Malvern as opposed to the one on Blackpole Road as its quicker to get to. No wonder it always takes me ages to get into the tip. I don't pay my Poll Tax just for you foreigners to come across the border to dump your rubbish. GERRRRROFFFF MOI TIP! I go there as well,and we pay Council tax in Worcester you Country bumkins are a bit behind us City folk if you are still paying Poll tax.
|
|
|
Post by birdfeeder on Nov 14, 2008 11:39:21 GMT
Dave, I don't think you should base the ambitions or otherwise of SAG based on Jeremy's comments. He is not on the list of their proposed directors & therefore you should treat his comments as personal opinions not SAG policy. It raises an important question though, what do the supporters of WCFC want? After all, the club can be run to achieve different things, depending upon expectations. A decent Chairman will always set out the business plan to achieve certain goals, and in the case of a football club needs to know what those goals are. If European football in 20 years is the expectation, then the business plan is going to very different to an expectation of "Blue Square South survival" To be honest any group, SAG, BAG, FAGHAG or whatever, even the present board, who came in saying, "we've got massive ambitions for this club, we're going to live the dream, San Siro 2020 here we come!!" would be setting themselves up for a mighty fall. Yes my view is personal, but one thing I will say about SAG is that from what I've heard they certainly do not lack ambition (within reasonable expectation of delivery) as will be revealed prior to the General Meetings. As a fully paid up member of the Royal order of FAGHAGS I totally agree.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2008 13:33:30 GMT
Dave, what on earth has convinced you that this current board have any ambition at all? What have they done to give that impression? Look at the way they've run the social club and catering. They don't care. Even if the ground move were to be a sound move which will leave us cash happy - why not utilise the facilities we have to make more money? They are hopeless and will destroy this club.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2008 14:06:43 GMT
Dave, what on earth has convinced you that this current board have any ambition at all? What have they done to give that impression? Look at the way they've run the social club and catering. They don't care. Even if the ground move were to be a sound move which will leave us cash happy - why not utilise the facilities we have to make more money? They are hopeless and will destroy this club. Mr Boddy can be very convincing at times! I know, I've been there!!!
|
|