Re: Peter box : Sat Jan 05, 2019 7:59 pm  

I'm just wondering if 88m hasn't been getting many calls for the Superbowl land he wants to develop. Might want to be rid of the whole lot and use the money elsewhere, which opens up avenues for others to take advantage of. He's had it for quite a while and I've heard and read nothing about any takers for it. I could be completely wrong mind.

Re: Peter box : Sat Jan 05, 2019 8:19 pm  

Sacred Cow wrote:

A major obstacle to an amicable agreement has recently been removed. It's not mischief making, it's the BV revamp is closer to being a reality than at any time in the last decade at least.

I’d be interested to hear what major obstacle has recently been removed?

Re: Peter box : Sat Jan 05, 2019 8:26 pm  

The Devil's Advocate wrote:

You need to keep off that Cas forum, you'll be getting as paranoid as them.

Regarding any forthcoming announcements, I'm sure there's no smoke without fire, but the £15M seems a bit of a red herring.

You’re right no smoke without fire we’ve had many false dawns but this one seems to have some substance. I agree about the 15m “I wish” can’t see it been anywhere near that. Enough to buy ground back and start developing a SL acceptable ground is what I reckon.

Up the Trin

Re: Peter box : Sun Jan 06, 2019 10:26 am  

Wakefield City wrote:

You’re right no smoke without fire we’ve had many false dawns but this one seems to have some substance. I agree about the 15m “I wish” can’t see it been anywhere near that. Enough to buy ground back and start developing a SL acceptable ground is what I reckon.

Up the Trin

As I’ve stated before it’s whats not being said that’s interesting. Six month ago we were ready to go to the courts according to both the club and the Trust. Crowd funding was ready for launch it seemed like a matter of weeks before battle commenced.

Since then a wall of silence. Hopefully a good silence.

Despite being a founder of SWAG and happy to support NM I always preferred BV but I never thought it would be an option even though its the best option for us imo. I’m probably alone on that with my peers with the possible exception of Jinjer but I was always open minded to almost any possibility. Let’s just hope all those who matter are because the clock really is ticking and the options diminishing.

Re: Peter box : Sun Jan 06, 2019 10:38 am  

The Devil's Advocate wrote:

You need to keep off that Cas forum, you'll be getting as paranoid as them.

Regarding any forthcoming announcements, I'm sure there's no smoke without fire, but the £15M seems a bit of a red herring.

It's not paranoia mate but cynicism, being involved with SWAG the whole saga has worn me down, I can't imagine how TRB, Sandal cat etc are coping with it.

Re: Peter box : Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:36 pm  

Irish Whiskey has been known to help jinger

Re: Peter box : Sun Jan 06, 2019 3:44 pm  

JINJER wrote:

It's not paranoia mate but cynicism, being involved with SWAG the whole saga has worn me down, I can't imagine how TRB, Sandal cat etc are coping with it.

I think TRB is semi retired now.

Re: Peter box : Sun Jan 06, 2019 3:53 pm  

vastman wrote:

As I’ve stated before it’s whats not being said that’s interesting. Six month ago we were ready to go to the courts according to both the club and the Trust. Crowd funding was ready for launch it seemed like a matter of weeks before battle commenced.

Since then a wall of silence. Hopefully a good silence.

Despite being a founder of SWAG and happy to support NM I always preferred BV but I never thought it would be an option even though its the best option for us imo. I’m probably alone on that with my peers with the possible exception of Jinjer but I was always open minded to almost any possibility. Let’s just hope all those who matter are because the clock really is ticking and the options diminishing.

BV would be my preferred option also. I never wanted NM, although I would have gone there if it had materialised.
I don't think bringing BV up to standard would cost as much as a brand new stadium,although you're surely still talking millions.

Re: Peter box : Sun Jan 06, 2019 4:09 pm  

Trinity1315 wrote:

BV would be my preferred option also. I never wanted NM, although I would have gone there if it had materialised.
I don't think bringing BV up to standard would cost as much as a brand new stadium,although you're surely still talking millions.

A re-vamped BV will never be as good as a new stadium I can't dispute that. However with effort it could work and if nothing else it won't lose us any fans, we are at the bare bones now so we can only gain.

It has three big advantages IMO that shouldn't be overlooked - it's familiar, everyone who could be interested in RL knows where is, it's got history. Secondly it's easy to get to especially from town where you can arrive by bus or train and have a few pints, NM would only offer that to VIP's. Car parking isn't great but it's not dreadful either and there are ways around that. Finally due to the new by-pass I have no doubt that the Agbrigg area will see an upturn with a lot of new industry nearby - it will never be beautiful but the statdium along with the by-pass will hopefully reverse the decline.

It's catch 22 but I think if anyone could make a revamped BV pay then MC could, he's just about made the current pile of rubble viable which in itself is an amazing effort.

Basically it can work if you make it work, whether it's better than NM or moving out of the city is a different issue imo.

Re: Peter box : Sun Jan 06, 2019 4:25 pm  

Can we say balne lane is a non runner? Perfect location imo ??