|
Post by charliesghost on Aug 20, 2016 7:44:22 GMT
Not questioning it at all. It's sometimes the way its put across, coming over like (as you put it) little kids bitter that they ain't allowed to play anymore. When was the last time you posted something positive about oxvox? Are you all still paid up members ? FWIW the person coming across as bitter and angry here is you, not me. You were trying to insinuate that several of us have not tried to help OxVox. When you are proven factually wrong, instead of graciously accepting it and stepping back, you just plough on. Mark, Myles and I all tried to help with this process. We were turned down. I'm not bitter about that - honestly, my life has bigger stuff going on, even concerning OUFC - but I certainly am not going to have someone who has done bugger all to help imply that I am being obstructive, when that is demonstrably not the case. As for 'never posting anything positive' about OxVox, what is this, a curiously insecure cult? I never posted anything 'positive' about OxVox when it was run by Mark or by Trevor, either. Why does one need to post 'positive' things about a fans membership group? I was a founder committee member of OxVox, and on FOUL/ SOUS etc, so I don't need any lessons from people like you on how to support OUFC. I do not agree with all the findings of this 'report' and am perfectly at liberty to say so, thanks very much! If you disagree with a point I make, play the ball and not the man and debate the point. That is supposed to be how a discussion forum works, you know...
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Aug 20, 2016 7:49:35 GMT
Good one!, I have no involvement on either side and have no reason at all to be bitter.
I haven't tired to insinuate that any of you haven't "tried to help". I have asked if the paper work (from oxvox) has been passed over. And as of yet I haven't been proven "factually wrong", as no one has bloody answered the question. All of you go on the defensive and create more and more spin. Fair enough on the positive comments, was a silly point.
|
|
|
Post by myles on Aug 20, 2016 8:03:41 GMT
I have asked if the paper work (from oxvox) has been passed over. So you're asking if the paperwork from OxVox has been passed on to, er, OxVox?! Putting this all aside, you're straying well away from the issues now. Regardless of what information was given to who and when, OxVox have now carried out a fresh study into the stadium situation. If they felt they didn't receive the proper assistance or information from any party then that is for them to say so. The fact that they appear to have come to an unequivocal conclusion suggests that wasn't an issue. The big issue here is that the is a huge disparity between what OxVox are reporting and the stated planning position of SODC. The stadium is the SINGLE BIGGEST ISSUE affecting the football club and OxVox owe it to their members to properly report back on this and allow members to ask questions. Tabbing it on to a different meeting at one of the least convenient times possible and not enabling people to see the findings in advance to have an informed discussion is simply not good enough.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Aug 20, 2016 8:07:09 GMT
I may well be straying Myles. But yet again you have just spun the question, without answering it! And while there might be concerning disparity, it wasn't the question I asked.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Sennett on Aug 20, 2016 8:11:04 GMT
I'm not interested in getting involved in petty squabbles but am happy to clarify a couple of things.
1) when I was head of OxVox we did work together with Charlie a feasibility study was created and presented to IL. So OxVox committee saw this as we created it!
2) Further to that an independent property consultant came up with the numbers and both of these have been presented to IL and DE.
These reports were not carried out to back water eaton they were carried out to see if the Kassam stadium was viable to purchase and if not where could we go. Our first thought was bmw, witney, Bicester, marsh lane etc. It was Hudspeth (head of the county council) who suggested WE as we'd never considered it. So the study came to the conclusion that a partnership with FIROKA was essential and they likely only way that a stadia could be acquired where the numbers worked was by moving away. After looking at all options WE was our suggested site. Far from a given but we did and still do believe it's achievable as does Kassam as does Hudspeth. We had chats with banks, investors, stadia companies, Kassam, councils, property experts, supporters direct, experts at raising football finance.
Now I'm not saying WE would definitely get planning permission but based upon running the numbers and talking to Kassam directly we concluded that it was not viable to purchase the Kassam Stadium.
I was at that meeting with Charlie in Jan and we both offered help. I still speak to Jem and others on the committee, Christ bradders is one of my best friends and godfather to my kids. So there's no ill feeling from me towards the work OxVox are doing. If they don't think our views add anything then who am I to argue.
I have a different view than the findings of the report and at the end of the day that's life. But what has become apparent if there was any chance at all to purchase the Kassam Stadium then doing petty things like calling the stadium Grenoble Road will go no way to getting Firoz on side. Trust me I know the man! Like it or not we need to work with him as he doesn't need to sell as he does very well out of owning the ground!
Also these plans would hinge on needing space to develop the other side of the road and that won't happen as SODC have once again publicly stated. So all this once again reinforces my view that acquiring the Kassam stadium either won't happen or isn't viable.
That's my view and I completely respect all other views. If Eales, Kelvin and Lenagan can't find a way to acquire the ground from Kassam in nearly 10 years it would suggest to me the numbers don't stack up
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Aug 20, 2016 8:17:01 GMT
Thanks mark, I don't want petty squabbles either, just a simple yes or no answer to a simple question. In my opinion, and I'm sure yours the stadium is key to the future of Oufc. Charlies point that I haven't done anything in the past is correct. I hope when I'm at a stage in my personal life that I have the spare time I will be able to, and am great full for you guys giving up your time to help the club as much as I am anyone currently doing so. It was a small point that I picked up on long ago, that I thought was strange as to why an out going committee would not pass on work they had done to the new one. That's all nothing else, no hidden agendas. If it's been done then a simple yes, 10 pages ago would have answered the question
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Aug 20, 2016 8:35:17 GMT
For anyone to suggest that we be nice to Kassam and not resort to petty actions such as referring to the stadium as "Grenoble Road" all the while the man is screwing the club and fans alike is ludicrous. Whether we are nice or not, he will not do us any favours. He is a sharp businessman adept at bending any law to suit and using any tactic that gets him the result he desires. Any notion at all that he will sell the ground to OUFC at a price to suit the club is based in cloud cuckoo land. He will sell when there is a profit and advantageous position to be gained and not before.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Sennett on Aug 20, 2016 8:56:46 GMT
I agree he will only sell in a deal that suits him. For too long the question has been what's a good deal for OUFC. The only way to do this is see what an acceptable deal is for Kassam and if the numbers then work for pitch and so far they don't unless something major has changed. My point about the pettiness about calling it Grenoble road is that it just miffs him. He has no need to sell but obviously would at a certain figure (often reported!). But while he's your landlord pissing him off does not help create a partnership for the existing land and that site or a potential other. Having a bad relationship with him when there isn't a strategy and end target helps nobody
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Aug 20, 2016 9:00:37 GMT
Agree with that, it seems to have started about the time there was obviously a falling out over catering and corporate prices. While it good that were not being bent over and taking what ever he demands, it's not going to help in negotiations. He will just dig his heals in further and demand more
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Aug 20, 2016 9:28:07 GMT
That the club itself has adopted the use of the term "Grenoble Road" is indication, to me at least, that we are past the stage of being nice to Kassam. I welcome the honest approach. We know he is a scum bag, lets just acknowledge that and seek other ways to resolve the stadium issue. He will have been called far worse in the past and will face just as bad in the future. It's not something I imagine he is the least bit worried by. I hardly think that he sits back in his Monaco pad browsing this forum and shedding tears. One hope is that he no longer has friends on the council. The recent criticism of his neglect of the priory may be the tip of the iceberg. If his influence at council level is no more then there is hope. He may have to move on and relinquish his strangle hold over the club. (a long shot maybe, but would be good)
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on Aug 20, 2016 11:19:12 GMT
I do laugh at Kassam's assertion that he is custodian of the club. Ultimately, he is a businessman that will sell when it suits (and I have no problem with that). A custodian of something wouldn't take the attitude that he does at certain things and would ultimately try and help resolve issues.
The club are between the devil and the deep blue sea with the stadium. I have absolutely no faith that the various councils will come up with a plan that allows us to move. History dictates the talk is talked, but it's hard to get them to walk it.
|
|
|
Post by foley on Aug 20, 2016 11:26:03 GMT
Er you can't kick OUFC out as they have 10 years remaining of the lease (I believe) Not if it gets sold they don't as you only have that lease agreement with Kassam (or Stadco). Why do you think that a Right to buy, or whatever it is called (basically being given 6 months notice of any potential sale), was obtained? Totally disagree. Of course Kassam can sell to whoever he wants. But whoever buys can NOT simply kick the club out. The lease of 25 years will remain unless there is a break clause (I would be very surprised if even Merry/ IL agreed to that)
|
|
|
Post by foley on Aug 20, 2016 11:30:03 GMT
I am not sure what to conclude from this thread.
The things that I do agree with are:
- the Stadium is the most important thing for the long term viability of the Club - The club/ Oxvox plus anybody else with knowledge HAVE to be working together. It is too important for vendettas/ squabbles to get in the way of the main objective here. Unfortunately what seems to be coming from this thread is that is not happening.
|
|
|
Post by minime on Aug 20, 2016 11:41:59 GMT
The only way to do this is see what an acceptable deal is for Kassam EXACTLY - and again, I will ask the same question AGAIN, has anyone asked him outright and if so what was the response? It's like pulling teeth on here sometimes. No wonder people get p*ssed off
|
|
|
Post by minime on Aug 20, 2016 11:44:29 GMT
Not if it gets sold they don't as you only have that lease agreement with Kassam (or Stadco). Why do you think that a Right to buy, or whatever it is called (basically being given 6 months notice of any potential sale), was obtained? Totally disagree. Of course Kassam can sell to whoever he wants. But whoever buys can NOT simply kick the club out. The lease of 25 years will remain unless there is a break clause (I would be very surprised if even Merry/ IL agreed to that) The break in clause would be the sale of the property. OUFC have the agreement with the (current) owner NOT the property or any future owner
|
|
|
Post by Barts on Aug 20, 2016 18:09:03 GMT
Totally disagree. Of course Kassam can sell to whoever he wants. But whoever buys can NOT simply kick the club out. The lease of 25 years will remain unless there is a break clause (I would be very surprised if even Merry/ IL agreed to that) The break in clause would be the sale of the property. OUFC have the agreement with the (current) owner NOT the property or any future owner But there is also the fact that the ground can only be used as a sporting venue. Unless OUFC get another home first the council would not give permission for a change of use whether kassam or anyone else owns it.
|
|
|
Post by minime on Aug 20, 2016 18:31:28 GMT
Notes from Oxvox minutes - 4th August "The findings are that the stadium does lend itself very well to a significant capacity increase and a figure of 25,000+ is very achievable without needing to demolish any of the existing stands" Why the hell would OUFC want and need a 25,000 seater stadium at considerable cost whether that is at the Kassam or WE? Where are these additional 16-17,000 supporters going to come from? Why not initially build a new ground or extend the Kassam to 15,000 to start with and then when OUFC get decent and a decent fan base is there that require 25,000 seats (LMAO!) then you can gradually increase what you have and the cost for this is more evenly spread out over a number of years / seasons rather than in one lump sum. Some one out there is in cloud cuckoo land! Season Total Games Av gate 2010-11 167,380 23 7,277 2011-12 171,378 23 8,411 2012-13 136,957 23 5.955 2013-14 136,240 23 5,923 2014-15 141,531 23 6,154 2015-16 165,860 23 7,211 TOTAL 919,346 138 6,662 Where is the need for a 25,000 seater stadium. Just on the off chance that you get Man Utd at home in the 3rd rnd of the FA Cup??? Someone needs to give their head a wobble! Go on then, I'll have a nibble.. Aren't you a west brom fan? What were their gates in the late 80s early 90s? 8-10k in what is now the championship. It's not just west brom, many clubs in the premiership/championship have a bigger following than they did 30 years ago. Thirty years ago anyone saying west brom would bid £20m on a player would also have been accused 'living in cloud cuckoo land' Teams evolve, now I'm not saying we'll get 25000 in the next few years, but you end up spending more money having too keep redeveloping the stadium. Yep, you're right. I remember being at the Hawthorns in the 80's against Sunderland as part of a 6,000 crowd and 8-9,000 v Sheff Utd, but prior to the 80's we were getting 25-35,000 so our fan base was and always have been there or there abouts. The 80's were diabolical for attendances at 99.9% of the clubs. Without being disrespectful, Oxford's have never been anywhere near 25,000. If you manage to get to the Premiership (or even the championship for that matter) then for the first year or two, with huge away support (because contrary to popular belief not every premiership or championship side takes 3-4,000 away from home) then you may get a season where you may get close to averaging that, but then the novelty wears off and the attendances drop. So, on that basis, would it be deemed realistic for OUFC to have an independent report produced and presented to the board based on a capacity of 25,000? No, of course not. No Business Plan on this planet would make sense to build a 25,000 seater at a cost of £25-30m just on the basis that Oxford MIGHT have a season in the Championship. Oxford don't even have any historical data to form part of that business plan either nor the funds or guarantor. For me, what you have to do is concentrate on the now (because it is happening) not on 10 years down the line as it may never happen. Therefore, a 15,000 seater at Water Eaton (or where ever) should be built (if possible) where OUFC control their own destiny OFF the pitch and not controlled by a w*nker called Kassam who couldn't give a flying f*ck about the club apart from to fleece it for every penny it has. If you then find yourself having a decent season or two and the crowds pick up then that 15,000 can be extended to 20,000 and then 25,000 if and when you need it. It's initially cheaper to build an initial 15,000 and then extend when needed that it would be to build a 25,000 stadium from scratch which, for the foreseeable, would be less than half full. If you want to compare clubs, WBA's capacity is 26,850. Rarely do we get anywhere near that (today we got 23,000 and that was against Everton) despite being one of the easiest grounds to get to in the country, having a much much bigger (and football interested) catchment area, being in the Prem and (I am not being disrespectful here) having a much bigger and fruitful history that Oxford have had, having much more money than Oxford does, having (arguably) much better caliber of player Oxford does.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Aug 20, 2016 18:34:02 GMT
The report doesn't say we should make it 25k it's says it has the potential.
|
|
|
Post by eighteen93 on Aug 21, 2016 8:52:06 GMT
...and West Brom have Tony Pulis as their Gaffer.
Who really wants to watch his brand of football?
|
|
|
Post by minime on Aug 21, 2016 14:26:31 GMT
...and West Brom have Tony Pulis as their Gaffer. Who really wants to watch his brand of football? Best post on this thread bar none! It certainly doesn't help the cause, but then loosing away to Fleetwood away doesn't help yours either!
|
|
|
Post by foley on Aug 21, 2016 17:39:10 GMT
Totally disagree. Of course Kassam can sell to whoever he wants. But whoever buys can NOT simply kick the club out. The lease of 25 years will remain unless there is a break clause (I would be very surprised if even Merry/ IL agreed to that) The break in clause would be the sale of the property. OUFC have the agreement with the (current) owner NOT the property or any future owner Come on think about it. Most retailers lease their property. Are you seriously suggesting that Jack Wills could byt all of the M&S branches and kick them out? Are you suggesting that a very wealthy Swin*** fan could but the stadium and kick out OUFC? No. The agreement is with the Company who owns the Stadium, If you purchase the Stadium you still have the lease obligation. You can't simply kick somebody out because it is a new owner. Contracts do not simply disappear because of a new owner. That just won't happen UNLESS there is a break clause which I doubt there is
|
|
|
Post by foley on Aug 21, 2016 17:44:06 GMT
I am not sure that we have the Club's view on all of this.
DE has said that he can't afford the Stadium. Oxvox obviously think that the Stadium should be a community asset (makes sense) but who pays and will pour friend FK play ball?
Personally I have concerns about the long term sustainability of the club. We are in (short term) good hands but that will not last forever (let's hope Mr Eales does not get knocked over by a bus)
|
|
|
Post by Barts on Aug 21, 2016 19:48:36 GMT
Now I'm in no way in the know here, but I don't think the money is the problem. I think its getting the right deal through with kassam.
Whichever way we look at it, it's a good money maker for him, so we have to reach a deal where in his opinion its worth losing £500000 a year for. Even if he was to sell for £13m what's he going to do with that money?
IMO he wants land. What's more valuable, £13m cash, or say £10m worth of land that he can build on? Maybe even less than £10m.
And that's why again Imo he won't sell too OUFC on there own.
For that reason we need the council involved in some way to try and offset some land to him as part of any deal.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on Aug 21, 2016 20:17:40 GMT
So OUFC need to raise money and buy some prime real estate somewhere. And swap it for a 3 sided under maintained football stadium? Sounds like a good deal...
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Aug 21, 2016 21:02:31 GMT
So OUFC need to raise money and buy some prime real estate somewhere. And swap it for a 3 sided under maintained football stadium? Sounds like a good deal... And this is why FK knows he has all the aces. The City council is weak and has no stomach for a real fight. There is an underlying need and obligation on the part of the council for more housing. Sodc has stated its case that the green belt is a non starter. WE has all sorts of issues. If the club want the stadium then it is on FKs terms.
|
|
|
Post by minime on Aug 21, 2016 21:17:41 GMT
So OUFC need to raise money and buy some prime real estate somewhere. And swap it for a 3 sided under maintained football stadium? Sounds like a good deal... And this is why FK knows he has all the aces. The City council is weak and has no stomach for a real fight. There is an underlying need and obligation on the part of the council for more housing. Sodc has stated its case that the green belt is a non starter. WE has all sorts of issues. If the club want the stadium then it is on FKs terms. And what are his terms? Either... - No one knows because no one has had the foresight to ask him, so nobody will know whether a deal is actually realistic or what playing field Oxford are actually on Or... - Someone has asked him but not saying, which i think is stupid, unless a deal is being concluded If a deal was possible then surely the deal would have been done or in the process of doing and if it wasn't possible then why not say why it's not possible in the hope someone hears or reads and makes it possible?
|
|
|
Post by minime on Aug 21, 2016 21:20:22 GMT
I am not sure that we have the Club's view on all of this. DE has said that he can't afford the Stadium. Oxvox obviously think that the Stadium should be a community asset (makes sense) but who pays and will pour friend FK play ball? Personally I have concerns about the long term sustainability of the club. We are in (short term) good hands but that will not last forever (let's hope Mr Eales does not get knocked over by a bus) The club have never said anything significant in regards to any potential deals for the Stadium with Kassam bar the odd "We're in talks" or "talks are ongoing" etc The only time you hear anything of note is when he sticks up the price of the odd cup of coffee by a few quid! But surely this is what Oxvox should be pushing the board (or DE himself) on
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Aug 21, 2016 21:21:24 GMT
And this is why FK knows he has all the aces. The City council is weak and has no stomach for a real fight. There is an underlying need and obligation on the part of the council for more housing. Sodc has stated its case that the green belt is a non starter. WE has all sorts of issues. If the club want the stadium then it is on FKs terms. And what are his terms? Either... - No one knows because no one has had the foresight to ask him, so nobody will know whether a deal is actually realistic or what playing field Oxford are actually on Or... - Someone has asked him but not saying, which i think is stupid, unless a deal is being concluded If a deal was possible then surely the deal would have been done or in the process of doing and if it wasn't possible then why not say why it's not possible in the hope someone hears or reads and makes it possible? Buggered if I know! But, you can bet that they include a shed load of cash and the prospect of making more. Why should he sell?
|
|
|
Post by minime on Aug 21, 2016 21:23:53 GMT
So OUFC need to raise money and buy some prime real estate somewhere. And swap it for a 3 sided under maintained football stadium? Sounds like a good deal... LOL
|
|
|
Post by minime on Aug 21, 2016 21:29:02 GMT
And what are his terms? Either... - No one knows because no one has had the foresight to ask him, so nobody will know whether a deal is actually realistic or what playing field Oxford are actually on Or... - Someone has asked him but not saying, which i think is stupid, unless a deal is being concluded If a deal was possible then surely the deal would have been done or in the process of doing and if it wasn't possible then why not say why it's not possible in the hope someone hears or reads and makes it possible? Buggered if I know! But, you can bet that they include a shed load of cash and the prospect of making more. Why should he sell? Exactly. He doesn't need to. I've been saying for years he holds ALL of the aces. Regardless of what happens it's a win win for him. But OUFC need to do what is best for them, not him, if possible. If he wont sell then it's £500k+ per year for the rest of the lease or go find some land, build on it and move away from the Kassam and to be honest it's been that scenario for years now so why has there been no significant movement to get this resolved one way or another?
|
|