Food for thought : Fri Dec 17, 2021 8:46 am  

Noting what FIL said about YC still being able to pull the rug by not developing Plot 8 got me thinking.

Although I think they will this time it is an interesting story to say the least where WMCD are concerned.

WMDC are one of the largest MDC's in the UK, yet for 10+ years a relatively small developer has run rings around them!

Even without Plot 8 NM has made them a fortune, just consider the rise in land prices over the last few years alone.

However, Plot 8 was the jewel and they hung on for ten years. Now I suspect the value of it is at such a high that they can no longer wait. I suspect they already have a blue-chip client ready and waiting. That's why they will let the 8 million go because it's worth it to them.

People keep attacking YC but they have done nothing wrong in a legal sense, it's the Council who have failed totally to protect the interests of the ratepayers, it's a total scandal and I don't think it's over yet for some involved individuals.

Anyway, that's by the by and I posted it more to reassure as much as it's possible for a novice like me to do so. We are getting 11 million roughly in total, it's not enough but it's a start.

What really tragic is that had the council forced this only 5 years ago, that 11 million at the time would probably have been enough to do all four sides of the ground.

As I say I'm not being a misery and in many ways, I'm happy enough with what we have got, and I support it all the way. Just felt it needed one more airing for the doubters. I can assure you, those like me have not forgotten but we need to be pragmatic as there may be more cash yet to be squeezed out of this if we play it cool.

Re: Food for thought : Sat Dec 18, 2021 11:27 am  

Fingers crossed. I’m looking forward to the flats going. If the catering in the new stand brings in the revenue we can get rid of that eyesaw and really have a lovely ground. I don’t want to get ahead of myself, but say all this first phase goes ahead and in 18 months it’s all done. Do we have any ball park time and cost figures to sort the opposite side and the flats??

Re: Food for thought : Sat Dec 18, 2021 12:06 pm  

Mable_Syrup wrote:

Fingers crossed. I’m looking forward to the flats going. If the catering in the new stand brings in the revenue we can get rid of that eyesaw and really have a lovely ground. I don’t want to get ahead of myself, but say all this first phase goes ahead and in 18 months it’s all done. Do we have any ball park time and cost figures to sort the opposite side and the flats??

I'm sure there are high level costs, but certainly no time frame. It will still cost a fair whack and there is no obvious source to tap into other than getting football involved.

Re: Food for thought : Sat Dec 18, 2021 12:08 pm  

Mable_Syrup wrote:

Fingers crossed. I’m looking forward to the flats going. If the catering in the new stand brings in the revenue we can get rid of that eyesaw and really have a lovely ground. I don’t want to get ahead of myself, but say all this first phase goes ahead and in 18 months it’s all done. Do we have any ball park time and cost figures to sort the opposite side and the flats??

That said eyesore or not I think the flats have been a financial life saver for the club, having sampled what's on offer in there, it's not hard to see why it's so popular and always fully booked pre Covid with the matchday experience, if we're being selective I'd much rather see a new West stand first, ideally they needs to go but until the club are in a position financially I'm sure they can be put to good use.

Re: Food for thought : Sat Dec 18, 2021 12:52 pm  

Here's more food for thought.

As long and tortuous as the road has been, had it been done properly and on time, perhaps the club would be run by people who are not as good at running it as the current people, with some more interested in their own agendas or glories, so all the benefits may have been squandered. If it happens now, it happens when the club is in the best shape off the field, in a ground the club owns, so we should be glad WMDC and Yorkcourt went the route they did.

In hindsight, I'm glad Box and Yorkcourt did what they did, because long-term and into the future, we might be better for it.

Just a different perpsective, with the benefit of hindsight,

Re: Food for thought : Sat Dec 18, 2021 1:16 pm  

There is a plan for the West stand and it’s relatively cheap and simple.

The problem with redeveloping an old stadium is to financially justify the cost. There is no point spending a million on say the west stand if it doesn’t generate more revenue. At the very least it would have to make enough extra money to pay off the investment.

It is possible that an improved West stand would attract extra away fans and thus pay its way.

It’s far harder to justify any development of the south stand at the moment for the following reasons.

1: The flats are still fit for purpose and do make money, they cost us nothing.

2: There is absolutely no pressing need to increase capacity, so any new stand would be a complete white elephant at present.

3: The clubs finances are nowhere near robust enough at the moment to invest, even partially.

However.

There is a way of doing it that I’m currently looking into and will submit to the club in the new year. But even if they are interested and the figures add up it at least five years off imho. In fact it could be more viable than the West stand but it’s all theoretical for now.

Re: Food for thought : Sat Dec 18, 2021 1:20 pm  

Slugger McBatt wrote:

Here's more food for thought.

As long and tortuous as the road has been, had it been done properly and on time, perhaps the club would be run by people who are not as good at running it as the current people, with some more interested in their own agendas or glories, so all the benefits may have been squandered. If it happens now, it happens when the club is in the best shape off the field, in a ground the club owns, so we should be glad WMDC and Yorkcourt went the route they did.

In hindsight, I'm glad Box and Yorkcourt did what they did, because long-term and into the future, we might be better for it.

Just a different perpsective, with the benefit of hindsight,

Personally I agree entirely, a blessing in disguise but others l know see it differently.

So long as it happens for me personally it’s the dream come true. I always wanted to stay at BV even when my head told me NM was the best option.
I did like the Thornes option, that for me was the real lost oppertunity.

Re: Food for thought : Sat Dec 18, 2021 3:20 pm  

vastman wrote:

Personally I agree entirely, a blessing in disguise but others l know see it differently.

So long as it happens for me personally it’s the dream come true. I always wanted to stay at BV even when my head told me NM was the best option.
I did like the Thornes option, that for me was the real lost oppertunity.

I agree about Thornes Park. I could have seen us become more like the Leeds or Warrington model, with a night at the Trin being the beginning of an evening out.

I was always fonder of the idea of staying at Belle Vue, on the basis that we would never lose fans but would likely gain some, whereas at Newmarket there was a chance of losing some support without a guarantee of gaining some. I could see the arguments, however, and we have to remember that the focus then was about franchising and ground quality, so it was an absolute must.

Re: Food for thought : Sat Dec 18, 2021 3:34 pm  

The better option of the lot IMO would have been the state of the art ( for the time). Stadium build at durkar alongside the cricket ground with their own dedicated slip road from the M1 . Mr Caddick was quick to buy and then build on the said land ear marked for ,what would have been the envy of all ,had it not been for someone pulling out a lease tying cricket to headingley for the foreseeable future . But alas along with the now infamous euro port ,another great opportunity passed the city by.

[PopTart]

Re: Food for thought : Sat Dec 18, 2021 3:37 pm  

JM said the flats are staying. That's not part of the redevelopment as far as I can see.

And I agree Slugger. It's a much better time to get what we want. It's cost a lot of people a lot of money but stability wise its much better.