Re: Stadium Statement : Fri Jul 16, 2010 3:37 pm  

Gaslight wrote:

So what if planning permission was refused?

They pay it back to the Bank but if they do not have the cash bad old Mr Box comes to the rescue and pays £150,000 to the Co Op Bank. See he isn't all that bad is he?

Re: Stadium Statement : Fri Jul 16, 2010 3:38 pm  

chissitt wrote:

The last line is so wrong it's untrue Surfworld money is for Cas so there's whatever they were putting in, the cost of the Jungle there's more money there then Wakey could dream of putting in, 4m council money then whatever Wakey could afford, the seats will be Amber & Black unless the council pay for them not to be.

They pay it back to the Bank but if they do not have the cash bad old Mr Box comes to the rescue and pays £150,000 to the Co Op Bank. See he isn't all that bad is he?

Thanks for explaining that

Re: Stadium Statement : Fri Jul 16, 2010 3:41 pm  

chapster wrote:

to be honest 150k in the current carve up is hugely irrelevant.
were stuffed methinks.

the wakey land is valued £2m but was once thought to be worth £8M before the crash, Cas land is of a like value. However this land is not being given as such, it is only being pledged as a capital assest to borrow against. So if cas need this to complete they are going to be in debt before their first game. I also think even with this land they will fall short in their funding.

As for wakey I am still lead to believe we can complete a more modest stadium but still suitable without this pledged land.

Let cas have this land and get on with it, we will get on with Newmarket. Like I have said before our developer is no mug, he owns newmarket and he will develop it eventually, box may slow it down but he will not stop it forever.

Playing at Glasshoughton will kill us off so don't even consider it. One other point who in their right mind believes that the RFL will hand out 2 licences to 2 mid table teams playing in a small town with a 40,000 population.

So yes we are stuffed if we are weak and swallow this Glasshoughton bait. But we still have an excellent developer on board who owns the land at Newmarket so all is not lost we could still come out of this on top.

Re: Stadium Statement : Fri Jul 16, 2010 3:42 pm  

Gaslight wrote:

The last line is so wrong it's untrue Surfworld money is for Cas so there's whatever they were putting in, the cost of the Jungle there's more money there then Wakey could dream of putting in, 4m council money then whatever Wakey could afford, the seats will be Amber & Black unless the council pay for them not to be.


Thanks for explaining that

think your missing the point mate, big style, feasibility studies have an awful knack of proving nothigs feasible! think both sets of fans should face facts. its one ground at best but more than likely none!

Re: Stadium Statement : Fri Jul 16, 2010 3:45 pm  

[quote="chapster"]think your missing the point mate, big style, feasibility studies have an awful knack of proving nothigs feasible! think both sets of fans should face facts. its one ground at best but more than likely none![/quote]
Thats just talking daft!

Re: Stadium Statement : Fri Jul 16, 2010 3:50 pm  

[quote="bigalf"]
daft? tell me why? a feasibility study will not only look in to capital spend but long term sustainability, without 2 sets of clubs in say glasshoughton in SL which no one surely thinks will get red hall approval, you have a say 20 million pound project with investments from partners, now one of things about the word investment is that these partners will expect a return say 2 mill per year for say 25 years?? ( the extra 5 being the intrest) You seriously then telling me the 2 clubs never mind a single club or a merged club could give that return without going under???? er no.

Like I said get real, sorry if thats daft!

Re: Stadium Statement : Fri Jul 16, 2010 3:55 pm  

Gaslight wrote:

The last line is so wrong it's untrue Surfworld money is for Cas so there's whatever they were putting in, the cost of the Jungle there's more money there then Wakey could dream of putting in, 4m council money then whatever Wakey could afford, the seats will be Amber & Black unless the council pay for them not to be.

You were that busy laughing at my post you forgot to read the first line, so I will write it for you again are you ready and dont laugh please.
Course you've got the funding thats why your ground is getting built, oh wait a minute, Care to comment or do you want to ignore it again.

Fully wrote:

It is pretty obvious to me that neither has the full amount of money or the council wouldn't be contemplating a groundshare, simples.

Would you care to comment on that part of Fully's post or are you still rolling on the floor laughing. Gaslight you are so full of Kryptonite its unbelievable promise me one thing, you will keep coming on this board because whenever you are down and need cheering up you only have to read the cr@p what comes out of your mouth regarding Stadiums'

Re: Stadium Statement : Fri Jul 16, 2010 3:58 pm  

chapster wrote:

think your missing the point mate, big style, feasibility studies have an awful knack of proving nothigs feasible! think both sets of fans should face facts. its one ground at best but more than likely none!

If I was a betting man I would have a shilling on you Chappie old boy

Re: Stadium Statement : Fri Jul 16, 2010 4:00 pm  

Just worked my way through 26 pages of argument and counterarguement. My prediction: neither stadium will be built and neither of us will end up with a franchise. Only a few seem to see the bigger picture that having separate stadiums is never ever going to happen. I may be in a minority but as long as it's with 30 mins drive I don't care where the stadium is as long as I get to watch my team there. The fundamental truth here is unless both clubs can get their respective heads around groundshare, neither are going to happen IMO.

Frankly, if the intransigent views on here are anything to go by we can both forget about SL indefinately. Surely it is not beyond the wit of man to devise a plan which both clubs can support i.e. neutral name, equal partnership, good transport links for both sets of fans.

ATEOTD the survival of both clubs is of paramount importance and to throw that away bickering and refusing to compromise would be a travesty.

Re: Stadium Statement : Fri Jul 16, 2010 4:04 pm  

Gaslight wrote:

How many roads go INTO Newmarket?

Away fans, or are they not allowed to come to games anymore? not to mention a lot of home fans go to games by train.

SPONSORS, if you haven't noticed, now a days in RL, teams have writing and logos on the kits, advertising company's in return for money, having a stadium next to the 2nd most visited visitor attraction in the UK will enhance potential sponsorship deals.

Objectors, Newmarket possibly getting called in for Government review etc, none of this would happen at Glasshoughton

Sounds a hell of a lot like you're clutching at straws, but I expect nothing else from you.

Both MIGHT be feasible, but only if Leeds council don't get their way with the kicking & screaming about Newmarket.


5 roads into the area, 3 of which have 2 lanes so 9 lanes for traffic, that is a lot of road for people to get in, what is ESCAPE? and Freeport for that matter?

There have already been the road studies, with the new road being put in diverting traffic there will be far less traffic jams then you are trying to make out, but as I remember one of the main complaints about Newmarket is...traffic.

This Leeds CC objection you refer to is ONE Councillor. Don't kid yourselves, it would be nice to have him on board but any impact he has on the scheme is tiny.

As for the roads into Glasshoughton your having a laugh surely. There may be two of them but they are feeding Xscape and the retail park and general traffic as well. How congested will they become on a friday match day. Stanley junction is the least used junction on the M62 FACT, so traffic is no issue.

This silly Cas mentallity of trying to big up their own scheme by rubbishing (most of it false) ours is getting tiresome in the extreme. If you want a stadium at Glasshoughton fine, b*gger off an build it WHAT'S STOPPING YOU.

We will do the same at Newmarket so long as the Council offer us the same support - REMEMBER IT'S NOT US WANTING A GROUND SHARE IS IT - so put you money where your mouth is and back both. Thank you.