|
Post by Colin B on Aug 25, 2016 7:35:37 GMT
I'm not trying to twist anyone's words Colin. If a conclusion has been reached on the most viable option, why is there an issue in reporting back to members openly how that conclusion has been reached? There is no issue, and it will happen when work is complete, which has been said more than once. We did hold a meeting to update, prior to a report coming out, but you never attended. I'm off to a day of meetings now, oddly enough some of them concerning OUFC, you know, doing my best for the club. You should try it some time............
|
|
|
Post by foley on Aug 25, 2016 8:45:55 GMT
I really think you have vastly under estimated the amount of work that we have done on this Charlie. There are a number of points that you, and others, have posted on here that read like "stating the case for the bleeding obvious" and of course we've considered them. It has NEVER been a case of "the kassam at all costs". It has always been about finding the best viable option for the club and its followers, and I stress the word viable. We need to get to the next stage of this before making things public shortly. So a little more patience is required. In which case Colin, there is a communication issue here. Originally, the report was to be sent to members on 24th July. On the announcement of the members meeting, I queried if that was still the case and Jem's response was: And in the published minutes it states: So, the clear inference is that the work is concluded. It seems that now the disparity between what is in the minutes and SODC's stated position has been highlighted, the work isn't actually concluded. So, if OxVox have come to a conclusion is there any reason not to "show your workings"? Or if work is still ongoing, giving an idea of timescales etc? Just a suggestion but why not contact Jem? He seems a very open guy who could probably clear things up for you. Rightly or wrongly there seems to be quite a lot of animosity on this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Jem on Aug 25, 2016 14:17:55 GMT
Hi all
Although I previously indicated we’d decided not to further extend the posts on this thread, I really do need to pick up on some of the points that people are making.
Myles has correctly pointed out that the dates set for publishing a report to members on the subject of 'stadium' have slipped. Dates/timescales are important to us and we hate missing them! As you should expect, we set ourselves targets for pretty much everything we do. It helps us focus.
The key areas requiring additional work include the ever thorny subject of ‘finance’ and the financial sustainability of a stadium – wherever it might be. If we were to publish without robust funding plans/options, people would quite rightly say, ‘’well, that’s all fine and dandy, but how are you going to pay for it?’’ (and then there’d be another 100 pages of posts!).
This work is ongoing and I’m afraid to put a time frame on completion is simply not possible just yet.
Another few points if I may.
WATER EATON
There has been much talk about WE. Firstly, I would like to confirm that I did in fact meet with the developer that Charlie refers to in an earlier post on this thread. He may have forgotten that. We met at the developers London offices and he was certainly credible. He showed me line drawings of the WE site, but did not/could not show me costings and any back up details ETC.
Just for clarification and separately to the above meeting, we were emailed a 25 page power point presentation which outlined various aspects of the WE opportunity. This was in bullet point format and certainly did not constitute a ‘report’, but was more aspirational in its content. Nothing wrong with that by the way, it's a good way of conveying a concept.
It is important to state that the current OxVox Committee have never discounted WE and did ask for details of correspondence, funding streams, minutes/notes ETC, to support the very top line power point presentation that we were provided with.
What we thought was a perfectly reasonable request for back up information was made by email on the 17th January 2106 (sorry, I’m a bit of an anorak and I keep everything!).
Disappointingly the response was that the developer held the intellectual property and that it was not, in the words of the team of the day, their ‘gift to give’. We followed up the request again by email on the 9th February, following a meeting with CM/MS to discuss how we could share information going forward.
Sadly this was to no avail and although we’d obviously always be keen to receive help/support from any quarter, the dialogue has been pretty limited since then. In truth, that is as much our ‘fault’ as anyone else’s, but rightly, or wrongly, we’ve chosen to independently focus on our own investigative work.
Furthermore, I think it’s worthy of note that the current OxVox committee did not inherit a detailed appraisal of WE and there does not appear to be one buried deep in the OxVox vaults! This is rather unfortunate, as the WE project was supposedly carried out in OxVox name. The bullet point/top line presentation has the OxVox logo on the front cover.
Moreover, the findings of the time do not appear to have been shared with the membership, are not in any minutes/notes and were not the subject of an open members meeting. Or if they were, we’re dammed if we can find them! I’m sure someone will correct me if I have got this wrong? Of course, it may have been deemed confidential or incomplete – we’d understand that. It is after all the position we are communicating/dealing with now!
We obviously still have a copy of the power point presentation and as you’d expect, we’ve tried to quantify the content and make use of it in our current work. We will not make public the presentation, because it references individuals and we feel that would be inappropriate. CM/MS might wish to do so though. That can be their choice.
SODC/PLANNING
There are also continuing posts about ‘planning’ and the SODC position. I’d hoped that we had clarified our thinking on that in my earlier post?
But, just to recap – OxVox have always known that the SODC position is consistent with their historic stated aims of not seeing building work on the Green Belt to the South of Grenoble Road. However, our understanding is that this may well be challenged and therefore could be the subject of a public enquiry.
Time will tell how this works out, but it is not dead and therefore we felt it perfectly sensible to talk about the opportunity it could potentially provide.
SUMMARY!
We all are, or should all be, on the same page in terms of trying our upmost to support our football club and do whatever we can to help achieve an exciting and sustainable future.
Oxvox will continue to play its part and when we have firm proposals and have got all our ‘ducks in a line’ we will make our proposals public. If anyone can add to the thinking, please make direct contact, share what you know and let us know what you feel you can add. We’ll then, if appropriate, build it into our work.
This post will also be sent to members by email ASAP and I apologise that I’m writing on a public forum ahead of communicating first to members. It was just felt that there was an immediate need to respond to the posts on this thread. Hope everyone can understand that.
We appreciate that this post will probably generate a lot of questions (and yet more posts!), but we will not respond via the forum. If anyone wants to pick up on any of the content, you’re always more than welcome to drop OxVox a line, or grab us at a game. We’re usually pretty easy to find!
Cheers
Jem COYY’s!
|
|
|
Post by old on Aug 25, 2016 14:32:17 GMT
I have received the email copy of the above direct from Oxvox and yet again it explains the situation in full. It's ironic really as members first knew about the RTB conducted behind closed doors only when it was deemed right to do so and when it was to late for members views to be asked or taken into consideration, something the 3 Musketeers need to remind themselves of.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Aug 25, 2016 14:34:17 GMT
Doubtful, mark and Charlie and Myles can't even come on here and answer a straight forward question, in a simple one word answer 😉 TBH I've not read through this whole quibble of a thread but surely Mark, Myles and Charlie have all intimated that the details regarding WE etc were held by Oxvox so is freely available for new board to peruse. That sounds like a YES to me. Please just move on so that some useful information can come to the fore. So as it turns out my suspicions were correct and the answer is ....... NO they haven't. Hence why none of them would answer the question, despite me repeating it again and again.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Aug 25, 2016 14:35:31 GMT
I have received the email copy of the above direct from Oxvox and yet again it explains the situation in full. It's ironic really as members first knew about the RTB conducted behind closed doors only when it was deemed right to do so and when it was to late for members views to be asked or taken into consideration, something the 3 Musketeers need to remind themselves of. Can we change that to the 3 mustmoveheres 😃
|
|
|
Post by londonroader on Aug 25, 2016 16:46:23 GMT
Hi all Although I previously indicated we’d decided not to further extend the posts on this thread, I really do need to pick up on some of the points that people are making. Myles has correctly pointed out that the dates set for publishing a report to members on the subject of 'stadium' have slipped. Dates/timescales are important to us and we hate missing them! As you should expect, we set ourselves targets for pretty much everything we do. It helps us focus. The key areas requiring additional work include the ever thorny subject of ‘finance’ and the financial sustainability of a stadium – wherever it might be. If we were to publish without robust funding plans/options, people would quite rightly say, ‘’well, that’s all fine and dandy, but how are you going to pay for it?’’ (and then there’d be another 100 pages of posts!). This work is ongoing and I’m afraid to put a time frame on completion is simply not possible just yet. Another few points if I may. WATER EATON There has been much talk about WE. Firstly, I would like to confirm that I did in fact meet with the developer that Charlie refers to in an earlier post on this thread. He may have forgotten that. We met at the developers London offices and he was certainly credible. He showed me line drawings of the WE site, but did not/could not show me costings and any back up details ETC. Just for clarification and separately to the above meeting, we were emailed a 25 page power point presentation which outlined various aspects of the WE opportunity. This was in bullet point format and certainly did not constitute a ‘report’, but was more aspirational in its content. Nothing wrong with that by the way, it's a good way of conveying a concept. It is important to state that the current OxVox Committee have never discounted WE and did ask for details of correspondence, funding streams, minutes/notes ETC, to support the very top line power point presentation that we were provided with. What we thought was a perfectly reasonable request for back up information was made by email on the 17th January 2106 (sorry, I’m a bit of an anorak and I keep everything!). Disappointingly the response was that the developer held the intellectual property and that it was not, in the words of the team of the day, their ‘gift to give’. We followed up the request again by email on the 9th February, following a meeting with CM/MS to discuss how we could share information going forward. Sadly this was to no avail and although we’d obviously always be keen to receive help/support from any quarter, the dialogue has been pretty limited since then. In truth, that is as much our ‘fault’ as anyone else’s, but rightly, or wrongly, we’ve chosen to independently focus on our own investigative work. Furthermore, I think it’s worthy of note that the current OxVox committee did not inherit a detailed appraisal of WE and there does not appear to be one buried deep in the OxVox vaults! This is rather unfortunate, as the WE project was supposedly carried out in OxVox name. The bullet point/top line presentation has the OxVox logo on the front cover. Moreover, the findings of the time do not appear to have been shared with the membership, are not in any minutes/notes and were not the subject of an open members meeting. Or if they were, we’re dammed if we can find them! I’m sure someone will correct me if I have got this wrong? Of course, it may have been deemed confidential or incomplete – we’d understand that. It is after all the position we are communicating/dealing with now! We obviously still have a copy of the power point presentation and as you’d expect, we’ve tried to quantify the content and make use of it in our current work. We will not make public the presentation, because it references individuals and we feel that would be inappropriate. CM/MS might wish to do so though. That can be their choice. SODC/PLANNING There are also continuing posts about ‘planning’ and the SODC position. I’d hoped that we had clarified our thinking on that in my earlier post? But, just to recap – OxVox have always known that the SODC position is consistent with their historic stated aims of not seeing building work on the Green Belt to the South of Grenoble Road. However, our understanding is that this may well be challenged and therefore could be the subject of a public enquiry. Time will tell how this works out, but it is not dead and therefore we felt it perfectly sensible to talk about the opportunity it could potentially provide. SUMMARY! We all are, or should all be, on the same page in terms of trying our upmost to support our football club and do whatever we can to help achieve an exciting and sustainable future. Oxvox will continue to play its part and when we have firm proposals and have got all our ‘ducks in a line’ we will make our proposals public. If anyone can add to the thinking, please make direct contact, share what you know and let us know what you feel you can add. We’ll then, if appropriate, build it into our work. This post will also be sent to members by email ASAP and I apologise that I’m writing on a public forum ahead of communicating first to members. It was just felt that there was an immediate need to respond to the posts on this thread. Hope everyone can understand that. We appreciate that this post will probably generate a lot of questions (and yet more posts!), but we will not respond via the forum. If anyone wants to pick up on any of the content, you’re always more than welcome to drop OxVox a line, or grab us at a game. We’re usually pretty easy to find! Cheers Jem COYY’s! That is forward thinking chaps, lets hope these issues are sorted by then
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2016 17:16:55 GMT
TBH I've not read through this whole quibble of a thread but surely Mark, Myles and Charlie have all intimated that the details regarding WE etc were held by Oxvox so is freely available for new board to peruse. That sounds like a YES to me. Please just move on so that some useful information can come to the fore. So as it turns out my suspicions were correct and the answer is ....... NO they haven't. Hence why none of them would answer the question, despite me repeating it again and again. My apologies, sounds like Oxvox got screwed over by the developer or whoever it was who collated the report.
|
|
|
Post by randomox on Aug 25, 2016 18:37:22 GMT
Jem - as an OXVOX member of many years who doesn't attend any meetings, can I say thank you for the fantastic levels of transparency and communication you now demonstrate. We are all aware you and the rest of the committee still have matters you need to keep in confidence but I feel that I now know far more of what is going on than I ever have before!!
|
|
|
Post by Mark Sennett on Aug 25, 2016 19:53:38 GMT
Thanks for the lengthy reply Jem and I hope you're well. Just want to pick up on a couple of points if I may as I wasn't able to make the meeting as I was on holiday.
1) OxVox never carried out a feasibility study on water eaton. Charlie was commissioned by Ian Lenagan to look at stadium options. OxVox because of our excellent relationship with OUFC was kept fully in the loop (in for Charlie came to a committee meeting to update us) and in some areas asked for assistance. This included meeting Mr Kassam more than once, councillors, property developer and writing a PowerPoint on benefits of water eaton, which I'm glad you still have!
The property developer is Mayfair based and lives in oxfordshire. He carries out a professional report that included meeting land owners, commercial partners, councils, Negotiating with Mr Kassam and much more. He creates a report that detailed land values, costings, planning concerns, and revenue packages and presented this to Ian Lenagan and later Darryl Eales. He also talked me through it.
As you said he also met with you in what you both said was a positive meeting and talked you through his findings. He did this work for free and any other developer would have charged a substantial fee for the work so he took a risk talking it through with two club owners and two separate OxVox chairs! But he did so as he wanted it to move forwards but was not willing to put it in writing to the trust in case it leaked or got used!! Understandable as he's a businessman!
You're also right that you and Terry met with Charlie and I at a pub earlier this year where Charlie talked through the developer's work again and said he was happy to help in any way he can. It's my understanding you've not had any further contact with the developer since last year when you met and I know he's happy to talk to you anytime. If you Haven't still got his details I'm happy to send them on as I'm obviously happy to help any way I can.
2) moving back to your recent meeting I'd like to add a couple of extra points if that's ok as I couldn't make the meeting. In your excellent notes you wrote: 'it is very much the conclusion of OxVox that the most sensible option for a long term, sustainable home for OUFC, is where it is now. The Kassam Stadium on Grenoble Road'.
I look forward to seeing the final report and I really appreciate the time you've all put into it so far. Appreciate certain things will be confidential so you can't reveal all just yet. But as you admit the financials still need to be worked out how can you draw a conclusion when the work isn't finished?
3) planning - you're spot on wth everything you've posted on this subject and don't disagree with a word of the process you've outlined and I hope you're right!!! But as you've said there can be exceptional circumstances on green belt sites and you're confident houses will be built opposite the Kassam then you must be equally confident that planning would be granted as an exceptional circumstance on green belt for a stadium at water eaton? especially as this would allow the Kassam stadium site to potentially be developed for housing as well.
4) as for not releasing information to the members on water eaton the concept was made public. The numbers were not created or in oxvox possession so we couldn't release any details to members and it was left with Ian Lenagan to make a decision and he at that same time decided to sell the club! But the new owner has also met with the property developer to go through this and you'd have to ask the club their views on it.
Ultimately we all want the same thing a sustainable and prosperous club. You know I'm keen to help thus why I stood for committee again! I think the confusion on my part lies in reading your notes giving the committee's view before the work is finished. So really looking forward to seeing and talking through the whole findings when finished!
Hope to see you on Saturday at Sheff Utd, which is almost a home game for you!!!
|
|
|
Post by finlandia on Aug 25, 2016 20:27:59 GMT
And so it begins
|
|
|
Post by MJB on Aug 25, 2016 21:03:07 GMT
Plenty of Colombo style "One more thing" business going on in my his thread.
|
|
|
Post by essexyellows on Aug 26, 2016 7:28:33 GMT
Its all pie in the sky until we have a substantial pot of money and/or a viable revenue stream. Its akin to the difference between a property you own and a property you rent, as it goes we are good tenants who pay the rent and don`t trash the place however the landlord is making a rather good return on his investment so is in no rush to sell. Can we raise the funds to buy the property and then maintain it to our standards? Doubt it at the moment.
All the rest of this just looks like a contest to see who can get the most fingers in the pies for their own benefit, or piddle the highest up the wall after they previously failed....a "Mayfair based, Oxfordshire dwelling property developer" isn`t going to help us out from the goodness of their heart...... they will be looking for the return.
Having said that I would doff my cap to Jem and the current team for keeping us Oxvox members very well informed, they are probably learning you can`t please all the people all the time!
|
|
|
Post by old on Aug 26, 2016 7:35:58 GMT
It's obvious to the vast majority of supporters that the current Oxvox committee are engaged in taking the stadium situation forward. It's also appears to be at a critical stage and the constant interference from the 3 musketeers is not helping the situation. Jem has made it clear that he and his committee are not prepared to engage in further dialogue until there is something to report. The current committee have been very honest and informative with not only the membership, but the wider fan base and 99.9% of us fully understand their position. With this in mind could the long drawn out ramblings of ex officers, ex committee members and the infamous gost, please walk away and allow our excellent negotiating team (Oxvox) to get on with the job.
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Aug 26, 2016 7:53:44 GMT
So, there have been two reports/investigations/appraisals (call them what you will) to look into stadium options.
One was commissioned by Ian Lenegan a number of years ago, carried out by a property developer (sadly we know no more about him/her - perhaps someone could give us some more information about their credentials?) and appears to be subject to some confidentiality as it wasn't made public at the time (or subsequently) and would appear from this quote "but was not willing to put it in writing to the trust in case it leaked or got used", that it's unlikely it will see the light of day. That's a real shame as it would be good to compare the findings of the two reports and compare/contrast their methods and scope.
The second, commissioned by OxVox, is being carried out by a global specialist in stadium development, is yet to be finished but at the OxVox meeting recently members were given some initial findings but as there are some confidentiality/sensitivity issues the final report hasn't yet been made public, however it would appear that the report is not that far away from being published in full.
In the meantime we wait with bated breath...
|
|
|
Post by foley on Aug 26, 2016 8:18:03 GMT
So, there have been two reports/investigations/appraisals (call them what you will) to look into stadium options. One was commissioned by Ian Lenegan a number of years ago, carried out by a property developer (sadly we know no more about him/her - perhaps someone could give us some more information about their credentials?) and appears to be subject to some confidentiality as it wasn't made public at the time (or subsequently) and would appear from this quote " but was not willing to put it in writing to the trust in case it leaked or got used", that it's unlikely it will see the light of day. That's a real shame as it would be good to compare the findings of the two reports and compare/contrast their methods and scope. The second, commissioned by OxVox, is being carried out by a global specialist in stadium development, is yet to be finished but at the OxVox meeting recently members were given some initial findings but as there are some confidentiality/sensitivity issues the final report hasn't yet been made public, however it would appear that the report is not that far away from being published in full. In the meantime we wait with bated breath... To be fair we have been waiting with baited breath ever since IL purchased the club without the ground and Mt Merry told us that the Stadium would be purchased at a later date (if my memory serves me right) I think that the apparent spat on this site is unfortunate as all supporters need to work together if there is any hope (with DE who I believe will do what he can in order to finally resolve this never ending story) Jem made clear in his post that he will not debate this further on an internet thread. ' If anyone wants to pick up on any of the content, you’re always more than welcome to drop OxVox a line, or grab us at a game. We’re usually pretty easy to find!'To me that is pretty clear.
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Aug 26, 2016 8:26:03 GMT
So, there have been two reports/investigations/appraisals (call them what you will) to look into stadium options. One was commissioned by Ian Lenegan a number of years ago, carried out by a property developer (sadly we know no more about him/her - perhaps someone could give us some more information about their credentials?) and appears to be subject to some confidentiality as it wasn't made public at the time (or subsequently) and would appear from this quote " but was not willing to put it in writing to the trust in case it leaked or got used", that it's unlikely it will see the light of day. That's a real shame as it would be good to compare the findings of the two reports and compare/contrast their methods and scope. The second, commissioned by OxVox, is being carried out by a global specialist in stadium development, is yet to be finished but at the OxVox meeting recently members were given some initial findings but as there are some confidentiality/sensitivity issues the final report hasn't yet been made public, however it would appear that the report is not that far away from being published in full. In the meantime we wait with bated breath... To be fair we have been waiting with baited breath ever since IL purchased the club without the ground and Mt Merry told us that the Stadium would be purchased at a later date (if my memory serves me right) I think that the apparent spat on this site is unfortunate as all supporters need to work together if there is any hope (with DE who I believe will do what he can in order to finally resolve this never ending story) Jem made clear in his post that he will not debate this further on an internet thread. ' If anyone wants to pick up on any of the content, you’re always more than welcome to drop OxVox a line, or grab us at a game. We’re usually pretty easy to find!'To me that is pretty clear. Agree with everything you've said there.
|
|
|
Post by pottersrightboot on Aug 26, 2016 8:33:15 GMT
Can we not try and cut out the personal stuff on the thread? It's not really relevant. I've always thought - from a distance - that WE was pie in the sky. The future is Grenoble Road - despite its current imperfections.
Why?
It would be a very decent stadium if we had a sensible fourth stand. The look and feel of the stadium has already improved with Eales as tenant e.g.great pitch, attractive ad behind the goal, better general tlc. That old wind tunnel/scabby pitch/hell hole argument has long gone.
Club ownership of ground will create attractive additional revenue flows.
And OUFC cannot really progress beyond L1 without control over stadium /stadium revenues. Now is the time to act with the club on the up on field.
The key issue for me is finding the money to buy out the landlord.
It is not an easy deal - there are planning/parking/development/environmental issues aplenty. But it's the best deal we have.
The other route is a 25 page power point presentation!
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Aug 26, 2016 9:34:59 GMT
Its all pie in the sky until we have a substantial pot of money and/or a viable revenue stream. Its akin to the difference between a property you own and a property you rent, as it goes we are good tenants who pay the rent and don`t trash the place however the landlord is making a rather good return on his investment so is in no rush to sell. Can we raise the funds to buy the property and then maintain it to our standards? Doubt it at the moment. All the rest of this just looks like a contest to see who can get the most fingers in the pies for their own benefit, or piddle the highest up the wall after they previously failed....a "Mayfair based, Oxfordshire dwelling property developer" isn`t going to help us out from the goodness of their heart...... they will be looking for the return. Having said that I would doff my cap to Jem and the current team for keeping us Oxvox members very well informed, they are probably learning you can`t please all the people all the time! Yes, I think that that sums up the situation very well. The situation is vexed and complex, and - unless something substantial has changed - defies such broad brush, un-supported statements such as: "The answer is obviously the Kassam Stadium." Ian Lenagan assumed that that was the case, but wanted serious professional advice on it. So he asked me to find a professional property expert (not a developer, by the way, but a consultant/ adviser/ fund manager) who could help really get to grips with the detail surrounding the Kassma Stadium site. After a lot of work on detailed valuations under different circumstances - which he did un-paid - he came to the conclusion (much as you do above) that it simply is not viable to 'buy' the Kassam Stadium, because it works so well for Uncle Firoz that the fair asking price, from a prop co financial point of view, was not workable for OUFC. Fundamentally, paying £450,000 a year rent is a better deal than buying it for £15 million - or even £13 million. Even adding in F&B and conf revenue would not square the circle, and financing it would be perilous and potentially ruinous. His advice was that the only solution would be to enter a wrap-around partnership with Firoz that would enable FK to realise true commercial value whilst also enabling the football club to have control of its own stadium. It was THEN that attention turned to what that wrap-around deal might look like. ie what would be the turn key that would enable all parties to benefit financially. And the professional advice was that the critical thing was the value of the Kassam Stadium site WITHOUT Oxford United there as sitting tenants. As a full developable site for housing, it would be worth £30 million plus (so double what it is worth with us there), but OUFC would be responsible for enabling that additional £15 million and should therefore inhe3rit a substantial chunk of that value. That, in turn, would provide the financial 'flex' to enable a new stadium to be built AND for FK to realise full value, in a partnership deal. It is THEN that attention turned to what a new site might look like. And, having inspected a couple of obvious possibilities, YCT trustee Ian Hudspeth recommended land directly adjacent to the then yet-to-be-built railway station at Water Eaton. It would be sold as an Oxfordshire-wide project, providing a county-wide sports facility reachable by train from all over AND would enable Oxford City Council to meet its housing quota with a massive new housing development at Grenoble Road, INSIDE the City boundary, and thus irrelevant of SODC planning. That development, in turn, would be popular in the district councils, including Cherwell, as it would reduce the amount of quota they had to accept from Oxford City Council's continuous failure to find sites for houses to be built on. So it was a Win-Win-Win-Win. The attention was then turned to detailed financing, and this is where OxVox came in. They were asked to research both the available grants for a new stadium (not available on purchasing an existing stadium) and the possibility and structure of a fans' bond. This, they did. Meanwhile, the property adviser was asked to have detailed talks with the landowners at Water Eaton and with Firoz Kassam. This, he did. Successfully. Tony Davison, Commercial Director, was asked to find potential stadium sponsors. This he did, successfully, and had two companies bidding against each other for the rights, at figures circa £5 million upfront for a seven year deal. These conclusions - both on the un-viability of purchasing the Kassam Stadium and the wrap-around partnership with Firoz - were presented to the then Board (the Lenagan family), who accepted them. They then sold the club, and suggested to the new ownership that they meet with the property adviser, a meeting that then happened. When Jeremy Faulkner then became chairman of OxVox, he was offered the same chance, which he took. That more or less takes us up to this time last year. My involvement was no longer active or relevant. I am not a property expert, nor am I part of the club, nor was I on the committee of OxVox. So my part had been played. In January, I offered my involvement to Jem, and offered again to go and see the property adviser with him for a second meeting now that the 'discovery process was underway, but he turned my involvement down. But I am still a member, a founding committee member no less!, of OxVox, and - as a private citizen and fan - am still of course interested in what happens. All of us - Mark, Myles, Jem, Trevor etc - have rattled the buckets outside the Manor Ground thru SOUS to FOUL to OxVox, and have decades behind us of trying to help the club we love. None of us have ever made a penny out of it, and indeed on a private basis I have contributed upwards of £20,000 in recent years in various ways and been responsible for bringing to the club the trust and OxVox well over £100,000 in sponsorships from other parties. That is not willy-waving. It is establishing that I have the club's interests at heart, and should be entitled to have my say on these matters, just as much as anyone else. And my say is straightforward. I had it proved to my satisfaction that simply purchasing the Kassam Stadium would never happen - or not happen in a straightforward way. So when I see an assertion that such a purchase is by far the best option, un-supported as yet by any evidence other than 'trust us, we know', I query that. Because it runs counter to the professional advice that I have been given on the matter. Now, it is of course true that in the intervening two and a half years things may have changed. Firoz may have decided for reasons I am unaware of to sell the stadium at a lower price - perhaps he just doesn't want the hassle. And it may be that a sugar daddy has appeared on the horizon with a bag of cash to throw at it with no strings attached etc. Or it may be that, after years of false promises, Oxford City Council has decided to make up for their disastrous decisions of 18 years ago, and are going to fund it themselves. It may be that the club itself has its own plans - I have no inside information there. All these things are possible. But until there is a plan to be presented which - even keeping names discreet - outlines some of these changes in the landscape, then I will continue to be sceptical. Gently so, I hope. And never personally critical of the efforts of those who are trying to achieve things. And always willing - indeed, very keen - to have my scepticism proven un-founded. But I fear that it will not be done off the back of someone, anyone, saying "Trust me on this one" without supporting available evidence. I guess, in retrospect, that OxVox felt that they had to say something, despite not really being ready, so jumped their own gun a bit, when it might have been better to kick the can down the road a while longer until there was something more substantial to say. Whilst irritating members who had been promised something by July, waiting a while before publishing findings and conclusion together might have obviated the vacuum into which awkward buggers like me have jumped, asking ruddy questions!
|
|
|
Post by essexyellows on Aug 26, 2016 10:49:22 GMT
Well said Charlie, think that is by far the more eloquent version than mine! Apologies for misrepresenting the property expert.
|
|
|
Post by nottsyellow on Aug 27, 2016 8:27:10 GMT
To stay at the Kassam Stadium means we either:- Continue to rent from Kassam which means we will never, ever, ever progress. Buy the stadium - but to buy the Stadium itneeds a willing and co-operative seller. Being realistic, would Kassam ever do a deal? Kassam may verbally agree to start negotiations to sell, but I bet he will string the negotiations out for 10+years. Surely, it is best to start actively searching for a new site and cut all links with Kassam. It will take at least 8 years from find site, get planning permission to build it, by which time our 25 year lease will nearly be up.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Aug 27, 2016 8:29:53 GMT
The lease may be the thing that actually works in our favour. If it looks like it's ticking down and the council ain't going to give him anything else from the site he might actually give it up
|
|
|
Post by old on Aug 27, 2016 8:43:31 GMT
The question in Kassams mind is "to sell or not to sell" looking purely from a monetary view if Kassam took £15,000000 his return at today's interest rates would yield around £75k a year. How much does he bring in from renting the stadium to OUFC and in addition the match day revenue ? It's a no brainer based on return on investment. Whatever the current situation there is only one man in the driving seat and we all know who that is. Let Jem and his team get on with what they are trying to do and stop interfering. They have a difficult task dealing with the stakeholders and outside interference will only hamper their quest.
|
|
|
Post by headingtonutd on Aug 27, 2016 10:09:24 GMT
I'm not sure honest and open discussion is interference? Perhaps if there had been more disclosure and open debate some years back we wouldn't be in the situation we are now. I agree the bloodletting and squabbling was frustrating to say the least but actually it seems we are starting to talk the problem through now and to my mind it is such a complex one it needs all parties talking.
Sadly the things that are hardest to control are the ones that are holding us back. I am a property developer and even on a small scale the inconsistencies between different local councils, local and OCC and OCC and government policy are staggering. Assurances at one stage of a project can quickly turn to flat refusal at the next. Dealing with Kassam is clearly tortuous and as has been said many times before, he holds all (or most) of the cards, owns the table, the room the game is played in and takes all the drinks money while the game is being played!
It seems to me that any solution starts with giving FK something he wants in return for his cooperation. The right deal gets him something he can't get without us and makes him a willing partner in the deal. I have never met the man but I don't suspect anything he does has not been thought through to maximise his position. I don't envy those tasked with pulling this all together which is why I think it's important that there is dialog across all parties with a stake in this issue, which of course includes the supporters.
OxVox present and past have done a fantastic job keeping us in the decision making process and clearly Charlie and many others have put themselves not only at personal expense but also in the firing line from some of the more entrenched supporters.
All I would say is let's keep talking and use the best resource this club has which is a willing and engaged supporter base and see what we can do to help. Of course we all see things differently but I suspect none of us wants anything other than for us to have our own ground and control of our financial stability.
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Aug 30, 2016 10:08:45 GMT
The question in Kassams mind is "to sell or not to sell" looking purely from a monetary view if Kassam took £15,000000 his return at today's interest rates would yield around £75k a year. How much does he bring in from renting the stadium to OUFC and in addition the match day revenue ? It's a no brainer based on return on investment. Whatever the current situation there is only one man in the driving seat and we all know who that is. Let Jem and his team get on with what they are trying to do and stop interfering. They have a difficult task dealing with the stakeholders and outside interference will only hamper their quest. I never thought I'd say this, but you have hit the nail on the head with your first point (even if your second one is facile and trite). That is precisely the sort of calculation we did three years ago - or someone did on our behalf.... In fact, it is even worse than just the low ROI. There is also a significant Capital Gain that would be crystallised and taxed at that point. So, in short, there is no incentive for him to sell at all. Even £15 million in cash is not a great deal for him. The level at which it starts to become a positive financial move for Firoz is at about £20 million. And the only way he can realise that level is by selling the site whole for housing development (planning would be a given, being brownfield and inside the City boundary). That would bring in £30 million, and - by enabling it - OUFC would receive £10 million. That was the plan that our property expert came up with. Add that £10 million - or £8 million, being conservative - to stadium naming rights of £5 million, stand naming rights of £800,000 and available new build grants of £3.4 million, a supporters bond of £1.5 million and you have nearly £20 million BEFORE borrowings and BEFORE any enabling permissions and BEFORE any conference revenues. So for anyone who thinks that a new stadium is financial pie in the sky, please believe me that it is far more financially likely than buying the Kassam Stadium. Unless, of course, a new sugar daddy is about to be announced. I think that I know most such personalities in Oxfordshire, and if it is to be one of them, then they are as yet unaware of it. The other solution - other than Firoz deciding that he is so grateful for us calling his stadium Grenoble Road that he is going to let us have it cheap - is that Oxford City Council might fund the 'shortfall', which I reckon to be around £6 million. They could also guarantee the bank loan. If they do those things, then I will gleefully and gladly eat my trilby, my Ox horn baseball hat and plastic Panama. Because the Grand Old Duke of Oxford - aka Bob Price - has led people up that hill before, only to quietly march them back down again once he's secured his own objectives.
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Aug 30, 2016 10:23:57 GMT
The question in Kassams mind is "to sell or not to sell" looking purely from a monetary view if Kassam took £15,000000 his return at today's interest rates would yield around £75k a year. How much does he bring in from renting the stadium to OUFC and in addition the match day revenue ? It's a no brainer based on return on investment. Whatever the current situation there is only one man in the driving seat and we all know who that is. Let Jem and his team get on with what they are trying to do and stop interfering. They have a difficult task dealing with the stakeholders and outside interference will only hamper their quest. I never thought I'd say this, but you have hit the nail on the head with your first point (even if your second one is facile and trite). That is precisely the sort of calculation we did three years ago - or someone did on our behalf.... In fact, it is even worse than just the low ROI. There is also a significant Capital Gain that would be crystallised and taxed at that point. So, in short, there is no incentive for him to sell at all. Even £15 million in cash is not a great deal for him. The level at which it starts to become a positive financial move for Firoz is at about £20 million. And the only way he can realise that level is by selling the site whole for housing development (planning would be a given, being brownfield and inside the City boundary). That would bring in £30 million, and - by enabling it - OUFC would receive £10 million. That was the plan that our property expert came up with. Add that £10 million - or £8 million, being conservative - to stadium naming rights of £5 million, stand naming rights of £800,000 and available new build grants of £3.4 million, a supporters bond of £1.5 million and you have nearly £20 million BEFORE borrowings and BEFORE any enabling permissions and BEFORE any conference revenues. So for anyone who thinks that a new stadium is financial pie in the sky, please believe me that it is far more financially likely than buying the Kassam Stadium. Unless, of course, a new sugar daddy is about to be announced. I think that I know most such personalities in Oxfordshire, and if it is to be one of them, then they are as yet unaware of it. The other solution - other than Firoz deciding that he is so grateful for us calling his stadium Grenoble Road that he is going to let us have it cheap - is that Oxford City Council might fund the 'shortfall', which I reckon to be around £6 million. They could also guarantee the bank loan. If they do those things, then I will gleefully and gladly eat my trilby, my Ox horn baseball hat and plastic Panama. Because the Grand Old Duke of Oxford - aka Bob Price - has led people up that hill before, only to quietly march them back down again once he's secured his own objectives. Charlie, what were the estimated total costs for building a new stadium at WE? I know that Brighton's Falmer stadium (and they as a club) gets mentioned a lot as a model to follow, but that cost £93m, so I'm wondering where the other £73m might come from, assuming that the costs are similar?
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Aug 30, 2016 13:11:55 GMT
The question in Kassams mind is "to sell or not to sell" looking purely from a monetary view if Kassam took £15,000000 his return at today's interest rates would yield around £75k a year. How much does he bring in from renting the stadium to OUFC and in addition the match day revenue ? It's a no brainer based on return on investment. Whatever the current situation there is only one man in the driving seat and we all know who that is. Let Jem and his team get on with what they are trying to do and stop interfering. They have a difficult task dealing with the stakeholders and outside interference will only hamper their quest. I never thought I'd say this, but you have hit the nail on the head with your first point (even if your second one is facile and trite). That is precisely the sort of calculation we did three years ago - or someone did on our behalf.... In fact, it is even worse than just the low ROI. There is also a significant Capital Gain that would be crystallised and taxed at that point. So, in short, there is no incentive for him to sell at all. Even £15 million in cash is not a great deal for him. The level at which it starts to become a positive financial move for Firoz is at about £20 million. And the only way he can realise that level is by selling the site whole for housing development (planning would be a given, being brownfield and inside the City boundary). That would bring in £30 million, and - by enabling it - OUFC would receive £10 million. That was the plan that our property expert came up with. Add that £10 million - or £8 million, being conservative - to stadium naming rights of £5 million, stand naming rights of £800,000 and available new build grants of £3.4 million, a supporters bond of £1.5 million and you have nearly £20 million BEFORE borrowings and BEFORE any enabling permissions and BEFORE any conference revenues. So for anyone who thinks that a new stadium is financial pie in the sky, please believe me that it is far more financially likely than buying the Kassam Stadium. Unless, of course, a new sugar daddy is about to be announced. I think that I know most such personalities in Oxfordshire, and if it is to be one of them, then they are as yet unaware of it. The other solution - other than Firoz deciding that he is so grateful for us calling his stadium Grenoble Road that he is going to let us have it cheap - is that Oxford City Council might fund the 'shortfall', which I reckon to be around £6 million. They could also guarantee the bank loan. If they do those things, then I will gleefully and gladly eat my trilby, my Ox horn baseball hat and plastic Panama. Because the Grand Old Duke of Oxford - aka Bob Price - has led people up that hill before, only to quietly march them back down again once he's secured his own objectives. Trilby and plastic Panama maybe, but come on ox horn hat 😃 way to common surely
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Aug 31, 2016 6:51:56 GMT
I never thought I'd say this, but you have hit the nail on the head with your first point (even if your second one is facile and trite). That is precisely the sort of calculation we did three years ago - or someone did on our behalf.... In fact, it is even worse than just the low ROI. There is also a significant Capital Gain that would be crystallised and taxed at that point. So, in short, there is no incentive for him to sell at all. Even £15 million in cash is not a great deal for him. The level at which it starts to become a positive financial move for Firoz is at about £20 million. And the only way he can realise that level is by selling the site whole for housing development (planning would be a given, being brownfield and inside the City boundary). That would bring in £30 million, and - by enabling it - OUFC would receive £10 million. That was the plan that our property expert came up with. Add that £10 million - or £8 million, being conservative - to stadium naming rights of £5 million, stand naming rights of £800,000 and available new build grants of £3.4 million, a supporters bond of £1.5 million and you have nearly £20 million BEFORE borrowings and BEFORE any enabling permissions and BEFORE any conference revenues. So for anyone who thinks that a new stadium is financial pie in the sky, please believe me that it is far more financially likely than buying the Kassam Stadium. Unless, of course, a new sugar daddy is about to be announced. I think that I know most such personalities in Oxfordshire, and if it is to be one of them, then they are as yet unaware of it. The other solution - other than Firoz deciding that he is so grateful for us calling his stadium Grenoble Road that he is going to let us have it cheap - is that Oxford City Council might fund the 'shortfall', which I reckon to be around £6 million. They could also guarantee the bank loan. If they do those things, then I will gleefully and gladly eat my trilby, my Ox horn baseball hat and plastic Panama. Because the Grand Old Duke of Oxford - aka Bob Price - has led people up that hill before, only to quietly march them back down again once he's secured his own objectives. Charlie, what were the estimated total costs for building a new stadium at WE? I know that Brighton's Falmer stadium (and they as a club) gets mentioned a lot as a model to follow, but that cost £93m, so I'm wondering where the other £73m might come from, assuming that the costs are similar? Falmer came with huge - and I mean huge - logistical issues. From memory, it had to be excavated out of the chalk, or something like that. Water Eaton is just a green field, next to a park n'ride and a train station. We had the cost, including buying the land, estimated at 26 million, having spoken to the company that built, from memory, Rotherham's New York Stadium. That would have given us a 16k stadium, with capacity to expand to 25k, plus a conference centre plus the land for the academy/ training ground adjoining (25 acres, I think)...
|
|