Re: Tonights an Audience With Night : Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:31 am  

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote:

The Bank of Ireland effectively own the ground and I understand that there is a legal covenant within the deeds that means that Bank of Ireland can't kick 'a' Wakefield Rugby League club out while ever they wish to play there. Plus, they won't be in a rush to either. The longer they wait the better the economic situation becomes and therefore they will get a better price for the ground when they sell. They just need to keep renewing the planning permission, collect a rent from Wakefield and they will be happy.

This was my big question, didn't go last night but I can't prove that

Any explanation as to how it ended up with the Bank. How this affects our contribution and place in the Newmarket scheme.

To me this is a bigger worry than a new prop etc.

Re: Tonights an Audience With Night : Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:41 am  

If only the franchising was next year and not this.

Re: Tonights an Audience With Night : Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:41 am  

B V Bob wrote:

I've been trying not think about the ownership of the ground as it's the one point which may take the shine off the Glover take over. Did he say anything about who now owns Belle Vue? Can we stay past this year if not in Super League? Is he looking to buy the ground? If not what will we do if NW does not come off? For me Oakwell for a season would be OK but no longer.
I like everything that Glover has done so far but owning or having a very long lease on your own ground is the key to a long term future.

The message last night was that they're unable to unravel what happened with the ground sale and there is no value in raking over the coals; not sure I agree with that, but that's what was said. (I wouldn't be surprised by the way if there is lots of coal-raking going on in the background, but they won't do it in public.)

As for where we'll play; the message is that NM is the main target and lots of work is going on to make it happen, including a meeting with WMDC on 28th Feb to seek clarity on timescales and their ongoing commitment to the scheme.

AG said clearly that even in the event of playing at Oakwell next season on a temporary basis to satisfy a SL licence, he would be looking to continue to rent BV, for use as a head office, training ground etc etc.

Re: Tonights an Audience With Night : Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:11 am  

bren2k wrote:

AG said clearly that even in the event of playing at Oakwell next season on a temporary basis to satisfy a SL licence, he would be looking to continue to rent BV, for use as a head office, training ground etc etc.

Sounds sensible, as it sounds like they are keeping open the option of playing at Belle Vue until Newmarket happens should we get relegated. I would assume that Oakwell is a "super league only" option.

Re: Tonights an Audience With Night : Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:24 am  

What was said... was that:

- Andrew Glover through the purchase of WTWRLFC bought the lease on belle vue that ends on the 31st December 2011.
- If we get a licence we will more than likely be playing in Oakwell next year.
- If we don't get a licence then AG will look to : extend the lease of the ground(BV) for a while longer as it is a good base to run the clubs day to day business from. If not there are other options.. we have held talks with the majority of local clubs as to whether we can share with them... the answer was yes.. as they want his money. There's options to look elsewhere in the district purchasing temporary stands were mentioned and such.

So there's no definitive answer as to where we will be playing if we don't get a licence.. What I was assured of last night is that already they have looked at all avenues and have a plan a,b and c which will all work.

This club is now pro-active rather than reactive. !

Re: Tonights an Audience With Night : Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:30 am  

vastman wrote:

Proof?

Chump.

Re: Tonights an Audience With Night : Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:37 am  

bren2k wrote:

The message last night was that they're unable to unravel what happened with the ground sale and there is no value in raking over the coals; not sure I agree with that, but that's what was said. (I wouldn't be surprised by the way if there is lots of coal-raking going on in the background, but they won't do it in public.)

As for where we'll play; the message is that NM is the main target and lots of work is going on to make it happen, including a meeting with WMDC on 28th Feb to seek clarity on timescales and their ongoing commitment to the scheme.

AG said clearly that even in the event of playing at Oakwell next season on a temporary basis to satisfy a SL licence, he would be looking to continue to rent BV, for use as a head office, training ground etc etc.

I understand why they would say that but I agree with you things will be happening in the background.

I think it vital that the truth outs on this one. As you are aware I've not condemned Ted yet because I simply don't know the truth. However this issue needs resolution for ALL concerned and then our minds can be put at ease and we can truly move on.

I've no problem with the old regime getting a kicking (legally) if they indeed did wrong, or them being found not guilty if that's the case. What I do know is that if the real story doesn't get out ASAP it will stink the place up and knowing how some vicious minds work will eventually taint AG himself. That is divisive and destructive and will eat away at the credibility of the new club like a cancer - trust me.

One thing I know for certain is that 2-4 million quids worth of land does not just disappear. I suspect quite a few know exactly where it is in the deal, who owns it and how it got there. Even if the everyday fan is not entitled to know, surely the old shareholders are?

Re: Tonights an Audience With Night : Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:42 am  

kinleycat wrote:

Chump.

Takes one to know one old luv, god you're a drag at times

Re: Tonights an Audience With Night : Wed Feb 23, 2011 12:33 pm  

vastman wrote:

I understand why they would say that but I agree with you things will be happening in the background.

I think it vital that the truth outs on this one. As you are aware I've not condemned Ted yet because I simply don't know the truth. However this issue needs resolution for ALL concerned and then our minds can be put at ease and we can truly move on.

I've no problem with the old regime getting a kicking (legally) if they indeed did wrong, or them being found not guilty if that's the case. What I do know is that if the real story doesn't get out ASAP it will stink the place up and knowing how some vicious minds work will eventually taint AG himself. That is divisive and destructive and will eat away at the credibility of the new club like a cancer - trust me.

One thing I know for certain is that 2-4 million quids worth of land does not just disappear. I suspect quite a few know exactly where it is in the deal, who owns it and how it got there. Even if the everyday fan is not entitled to know, surely the old shareholders are?

I agree it should eventually come out but i get the feeling the club know who owns the ground now but dont really know how this happened.

Re: Tonights an Audience With Night : Wed Feb 23, 2011 1:03 pm  

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote:

You are Richard Wright and I claim my £5!

If anybody is holding things up at the moment it is Yorkcourt... what rubbish! They have been asked to provide additional environmental information and in effect reach a suitable position with Natural England and West Yorkshire Ecology on suitable habitat requirements, within the SUDs proposals, for the site. These guys are going to want the moon on a stick and Yorkcourt want the most economical drainage system possible... the answer will lie somewhere in the middle. They will probably end up having maybe three to four meetings with each other to go through the proposal to agree a scheme they can all agree on (Natural England & WYE will always agree reluctantly of course, but they will have to in the end). Also, within that there are statutory notice periods to advertise the agreed changes to the scheme. Three months is a realistic timetable and it is no good rushing this now, they just need to remove these two statutory objections and then to all intent and purposes the only major objector remains LCC.

James and everyone will continue to put as much pressure on MP's, council's, the Planning Inspectorate, as they should, but it will be what it will be now and the Planning Inspectorate and SoS office are in control of the process.

I was responding to snowies post about putting pressure on the council might hurry things along.

If your read my post I said "If anybody is holding it up". I was trying to put thing into perspective with regards any pressure on the council not suggesting that YC were deliberately holding things up. The point is no amount of pressuring the council is going to hurry things up, for the reasons I and yourself have stated. And as it stand it would seem that their will be no decision before license day.