Re: Not this again : Sun Feb 28, 2016 3:31 am  

From what I was told earlier today. This really is a non story. People that think the club are behind with the rent don't know that facts. I'm not going to get into all of them on here. But the club isn't behind with but it is in a dispute with the council over money owed to the club over the last 3/4 years and are currently been advised by solicitor and the rfl. The football club work fromthe old offices at the corner of the south stand and all sell club merchandise from their, despite the fact they don't have a license to sell any merchandise from the shay as that is part of their rent agreement and part of the reason it's lower than the rugby clubs.

Re: Not this again : Sun Feb 28, 2016 6:29 am  

Faxtastic123 wrote:

they don't have a license to sell any merchandise from the shay as that is part of their rent agreement

But they do.
They open up the floor space next door to the Fax shop and sell from in there on match days.
They just keep it looking like a building site so it's not finished.

Re: Not this again : Sun Feb 28, 2016 6:33 am  

Not wanting to get embroiled in this again but if Town don't want to rent space for merchandising then surely they should not be allowed to run a pop-up stall in pedestrian walkways to flog their wares. Is this not a health and safety issue let alone extracting the urine from their tenancy agreement.

Re: Not this again : Sun Feb 28, 2016 10:27 am  

Pity the two clubs didn't work closer together and shared the facilities to halve the costs-the shop for example could sell for both clubs -open more and have half the staff/overhead costs. The stadium's main asset is the pitch -that's reason for it being there and how Town and Fax make their living- by playing. If we are using it less than the football then why are we paying more rent?That would seem to be the crux of the matter to me and why the club are in dispute.

Re: Not this again : Sun Feb 28, 2016 10:51 am  

Faxtastic123 wrote:

From what I was told earlier today. This really is a non story. People that think the club are behind with the rent don't know that facts. I'm not going to get into all of them on here. But the club isn't behind with but it is in a dispute with the council over money owed to the club over the last 3/4 years and are currently been advised by solicitor and the rfl. The football club work fromthe old offices at the corner of the south stand and all sell club merchandise from their, despite the fact they don't have a license to sell any merchandise from the shay as that is part of their rent agreement and part of the reason it's lower than the rugby clubs.

They should get health and safety in to inspect Town's offices.

Re: Not this again : Sun Feb 28, 2016 12:17 pm  

The usual poo stirring from the Pubteam lot. This issue has been going on for years. IF it was such a huge issue as the Pubteam/Courier are making out, then I very much doubt we would be able to use The Shay. As per normal, its just the jealous pubteam lot looking to cause problems at the start of the Rugby season and dont like it that we have sponsors/people prepared to help us with a electronic scoreboard-one that was promised by the Council by the way. They do not like it that our players trained in Portugal. Just ignore the trolls.
The fact is, the Pubteam use The Shay, far more than we do and use just as much facilities and utilities as us, if not more. As usual, FC Pubteam are trying to cut corners and not pay for things. If they choose not to have a proper shop and run a jumble sale service, thats not the Councils problem. Each club should pay the same and if they choose not to use certain facilities, then that is the problem of the club. Maybe if the Pubteam lot did not cry so much the pitch would be dry and would not need so much work doing on the drainage.

Re: Not this again : Sun Feb 28, 2016 12:39 pm  

Living The Dream wrote:

Pity the two clubs didn't work closer together and shared the facilities to halve the costs-the shop for example could sell for both clubs -open more and have half the staff/overhead costs. The stadium's main asset is the pitch -that's reason for it being there and how Town and Fax make their living- by playing. If we are using it less than the football then why are we paying more rent?That would seem to be the crux of the matter to me and why the club are in dispute.

As I have said on a few occasions before, when Malcolm ran the club shop he offered (very kindly) to stock Towns merchandise and sell it on their behalf. No proceeds going to Fax or cost to Town. They refused.
That I think sums up just one of their many complexes.

Re: Not this again : Sun Feb 28, 2016 12:41 pm  

The Lucky Black Cat wrote:

The usual poo stirring from the Pubteam lot. This issue has been going on for years. IF it was such a huge issue as the Pubteam/Courier are making out, then I very much doubt we would be able to use The Shay. As per normal, its just the jealous pubteam lot looking to cause problems at the start of the Rugby season and dont like it that we have sponsors/people prepared to help us with a electronic scoreboard-one that was promised by the Council by the way. They do not like it that our players trained in Portugal. Just ignore the trolls.
The fact is, the Pubteam use The Shay, far more than we do and use just as much facilities and utilities as us, if not more. As usual, FC Pubteam are trying to cut corners and not pay for things. If they choose not to have a proper shop and run a jumble sale service, thats not the Councils problem. Each club should pay the same and if they choose not to use certain facilities, then that is the problem of the club. Maybe if the Pubteam lot did not cry so much the pitch would be dry and would not need so much work doing on the drainage.

I love it.

Re: Not this again : Mon Feb 29, 2016 12:04 am  

dazednconfused wrote:

But they do.
They open up the floor space next door to the Fax shop and sell from in there on match days.
They just keep it looking like a building site so it's not finished.

The prime site next to the Club shop should be cleared out and let by the Stadium to some organisation that would make the place look more respectable . It looks like a bomb site and as it`s the front of the bulding drags the whole look of the stadium down as it now appears to be a dumping ground . It has slowly got worse as it has waited for Halifax Town to decide wether or not to take up the option of whether they are to move in there , leaving the stadium with not just one eye sore ( the cabin across that are still used as offices and the prime front spot of the stadium ) On a matchday they open it up and create what in there words is a " pop up shop " which consist of half a dozen large boxes which they sell out of .It can`t be against their lease otherwise the Stadium Manager and employees wouldn`t walk past without batting an eyelid .
As Halifaxjohn has said Malcom offered on more than one occasion to sell Towns wares but they declined .

Re: Not this again : Mon Feb 29, 2016 2:52 am  

johnny freeman fan club wrote:

The prime site next to the Club shop should be cleared out and let by the Stadium to some organisation that would make the place look more respectable . It looks like a bomb site and as it`s the front of the bulding drags the whole look of the stadium down as it now appears to be a dumping ground . It has slowly got worse as it has waited for Halifax Town to decide wether or not to take up the option of whether they are to move in there , leaving the stadium with not just one eye sore ( the cabin across that are still used as offices and the prime front spot of the stadium ) On a matchday they open it up and create what in there words is a " pop up shop " which consist of half a dozen large boxes which they sell out of .It can`t be against their lease otherwise the Stadium Manager and employees wouldn`t walk past without batting an eyelid .
As Halifaxjohn has said Malcom offered on more than one occasion to sell Towns wares but they declined .

Happy Birthday Linda, don't be depressed, life begins at 40.