|
Post by old on Oct 13, 2016 12:14:41 GMT
With a new landlord (some kind of OxVox Community Trust) then the club would be able to make money from the stadium on match days. That is currently unavailable to them. Profit from the restaurant, profit from the bars, and food for the exec boxes just for starters. Exactly that, plus if the rent is literally to cover costs then it will be way lower. There is also inconvenience from conference centre and advertising, even possibly a stadium sponsor. I think daryl was also on record before saying he would like the stadium to be in some kind of trust so that it could never be split from the club again. I may have made that up but I'm sure I've heard him or at least mark Ashton say it previously As I have said before, until the figures are known to DE and in the public domain we are all making assumptions based on our hopes and concerns.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 13, 2016 12:19:17 GMT
Exactly that, plus if the rent is literally to cover costs then it will be way lower. There is also inconvenience from conference centre and advertising, even possibly a stadium sponsor. I think daryl was also on record before saying he would like the stadium to be in some kind of trust so that it could never be split from the club again. I may have made that up but I'm sure I've heard him or at least mark Ashton say it previously As I have said before, until the figures are known to DE and in the public domain we are all making assumptions based on our hopes and concerns. Totally, just trying to point out that some of the more negative concerns might not actually be there
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Oct 13, 2016 13:29:31 GMT
Some questions? Why would Kassam "suddenly" want to sell the ground into community ownership? As Charlie has said, to be sustainable at Championship level, the club needs a lot bigger capacity ground with the associated match day revenues. Perhaps Kassam has realised that if he does an Orient by filling the corners in with flats, then the club and ground will never be attractive to an ambitious takeover. So rather than make money doing that, he can sell the ground and leave it to the community option to increase the ground capacity. This also gives him a sliver of reputation back.
What bids has Eales made? To have had two bids rejected and once on the table, they must be different in fundamental ways. eg the purchase price, what's included, time frame to pay. Someone suggested that it might or might not include car parks/ conference facilities ?
How would the community bid be financed? Anywhere near the £13MM from ten years ago isn't going to be floating around. But perhaps if it was done by deposit of say £8MM and then the club's existing rent is used to pay off a loan on the rest?
|
|
|
Post by thesecretposter on Oct 13, 2016 13:43:31 GMT
I don't really know the ins and outs but in practical terms Oxvox will have to take their direction on a new site from the council and the club. The club are saying we don't want to move so the council are hardly going to jump through hoops for a supporters trust when they say where else can we put a stadium even though the club don't want to move. Unless the club are the driver behind moving, the council just wouldn't entertain it would they - and even then they may not. The club needs to make a considered argument for a move. What council moves a football club off land owned by another private individual on land that is not council owned when the club doesn't want to move. It just wouldn't happen. That simply means in my mind the council won't support a move so therefore staying is the only option Oxvox could reach. Are there arguments that other sites will be better - absolutely there are. Redevelop Court Place Farm, Build at the top of the A34 by Bicester on the train line or Water Eaton and various other sites. Do the council want to do that - I doubt it. Do the club want to try and do that - well they are in favour of staying put. Or they have explored it already and don't think it works. Against that backdrop how an earth could Oxvox say moving away is viable. A new 15,000 stadium with naming rights, grants and Kassam paying the club to leave with better transport links and other benefits is a no brainer - surely it is more important that the council and the club tell us why they think staying put is the best or only option rather than Oxvox. Stop being so logical Stewart. We don't do that here!
|
|
|
Post by minime on Oct 13, 2016 14:22:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by finlandia on Oct 13, 2016 14:45:42 GMT
So what happens if the ground is owned by a trust and the stadium company part, conference centre, etc, loses money. Who takes that debt? It wouldn't be DE so who would be liable? Would DE be happy to keep his soft debt if he only owned a small portion on the stadium? Why would he invest cash into the club without any security of stadium ownership?
|
|
|
Post by foley on Oct 13, 2016 15:17:58 GMT
So what happens if the ground is owned by a trust and the stadium company part, conference centre, etc, loses money. Who takes that debt? It wouldn't be DE so who would be liable? Would DE be happy to keep his soft debt if he only owned a small portion on the stadium? Why would he invest cash into the club without any security of stadium ownership? I am assuming that in order for it to be a community asset, funds will be raised for the Stadium and debt will be kept to a minimum. On the basis that the Stadium nets a profit of I believe £570K (? is that after interest?), then you would hope that if the Council and OUFC get involved it would generate significant more profit (filling the restaurant before games, holding more functions there etc). IF it is a community asset then my assumption is that the club would pay significantly less rent (OK that is an assumption). If I am remotely right, then if the ground is expanded to include the 4th stand (generating far more revenue if we get to the Championship), OUFC share in the additional profits generated by an expansion of the activity in the restaurant/ other facilities, then DE may well be far more comfortable than he is at the moment. The issue of course is how is the stadium funded? I would hazard a guess that the Council, local businesses. other fundraising/share issue? and some debt would be used, but Oxvox will no doubt explain when there is further detail. I would think that the OCC comments are a positive.
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Oct 13, 2016 15:55:23 GMT
Maintained and run in a proper fashion with the cooperation of both Oxford City and County councils and the community at large, there is no reason to doubt the ability of the stadium as a whole to make a profit. Greater opportunity for OUFC to utilise the facilities in general with more events and involvement from all the local business partners, the Academy etc would also generate more income. The necessity to expand the capacity of the ground with not just a 4th stand but filling the corners and increasing the overall seating areas (and a standing terrace?) with more corporate areas to increase revenue on match days, would also benefit all. I'm sure all of this has been thought of and considered.
|
|
|
Post by finlandia on Oct 13, 2016 16:02:29 GMT
Ok, but it's all if's and buts.
Worse case if it makes a loss, who is liable? Who will cover one off large costs if any arise? What if DE calls in his soft debts (we must assume he was happy to take these on, but only if he owned the stadium. Where is the cash coming from? What happens if the trust company goes bust? Just playing devils advocate.
We shouldn't assume anything about making a profit - I'm guessing the large rent/service charge play a large part in the profit. With a lower rent; the profit margin drops significantly. So once again, who will pay for players, increase in budget? It's unrealistic for that person to be DE if he hasn't got the stadium to offset his liabilities.
|
|
|
Post by mcf86 on Oct 13, 2016 16:06:05 GMT
But would the 'Community at large' include individual business people such as say Stewart Donald? And would DE be excluded? The community at large inclusion is opening another can of worms, potentially.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 13, 2016 16:15:02 GMT
Whether fk likes it or not, Oufc will be the major stakeholder/ primary tenant in any trust. So fair to assume, unless he giving it away for nothing that Oufc will need to put a a large chunk of money. That means de will involved
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Oct 13, 2016 16:44:32 GMT
Meh Kassam Stadium not fit for purpose now. And never will be - unless you spend many millions bringing it up to the standards that the modern-day supporter expects/will expect in ten years. Car parking, traffic etc other issues which damn it as a venue for a prosperous club.
|
|
|
Post by eighteen93 on Oct 13, 2016 17:04:31 GMT
Ditto Brighton who average 25,000.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 13, 2016 17:13:53 GMT
And it's already improving with the go ahead for a train station, and improvements to bus services
|
|
|
Post by shaunrice on Oct 13, 2016 17:20:51 GMT
I don't believe a word that comes out of his mouth. He is only out for one thing and that's to make himself money. The day that man does anything in the interests of OUFC and not to make himself money. I'll don my oxford shirt and stand in the town end! He's even using the fourth stand to nit pic at a few quid we might owe. OMFG if there was ever proof money can't make you rich!
|
|
|
Post by shaunrice on Oct 13, 2016 17:25:45 GMT
Plus he has a habit of falling out with our chairman? Others I might understand but DE!
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 13, 2016 17:27:01 GMT
Isn't it then a bit weird that he won't sell to daryl for cold hard cash, but possibly to a community trust for less. Assuming there is no free land on offer from the council
|
|
|
Post by whitstablexile on Oct 13, 2016 18:02:26 GMT
FK's approach to DE and the club is simply corporate shin kicking.
It's just the opening salvo from a perceived position of power to try and strengthen his hand. The disagreement with the club about charges and his apparent reluctance to sell to an individual are just a ruse to provide him with an exit route should the negotiations with oxvox et al fail to meet his expectations.
Expect this and you won't be disappointed. Or surprised.
DE has gently exerted some pressure by revealing the 3 bids and setting a 'reasonable' timescale in the press. Again, a bit of shin kicking to try and bring public opinion to bear.
Personally I'd be surprised if the current negotiations are successful. I hope they are, trust me. However this is business for FK and this is how he rolls.
|
|
|
Post by Boilerplate on Oct 13, 2016 18:52:23 GMT
And it's already improving with the go ahead for a train station, and improvements to bus services I can't find any news on this, where have you seen it?
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 13, 2016 18:57:42 GMT
Can't remember think there's a load about it in the kassam v watereaton thread. If u type in Oxford science park train station, there a lot about the plans but can find the one saying it was going ahead at the min
|
|
|
Post by uptheus on Oct 13, 2016 20:07:20 GMT
We are friends, good ones. Friends can disagree, Sean. I was saying it as a joke Simon, but I felt your comment about the amount of meetings you've had with Kassam over the last few months compared to when Mark was OxVox's chairman over a much longer period was a bit of a dig or that's how I read it. But like so say, it was light hearted.!!
|
|
|
Post by foley on Oct 13, 2016 20:08:26 GMT
Ok, but it's all if's and buts. Worse case if it makes a loss, who is liable? Who will cover one off large costs if any arise? What if DE calls in his soft debts (we must assume he was happy to take these on, but only if he owned the stadium. Where is the cash coming from? What happens if the trust company goes bust? Just playing devils advocate. We shouldn't assume anything about making a profit - I'm guessing the large rent/service charge play a large part in the profit. With a lower rent; the profit margin drops significantly. So once again, who will pay for players, increase in budget? It's unrealistic for that person to be DE if he hasn't got the stadium to offset his liabilities. Why on earth would it make a loss? If so then I guess that it would depend on the constitution of the new trust that owns the Stadium. That is something that would have to be discussed but it is a pretty negative thing to worry about at this stage... My estimate is that there are costs that would be offset against the income at the moment. I am suspecting that this would include interest. If there is little debt then overall I would be very surprised if revenue can't be increased significantly together with profits and a reduction in rent for OUFC. That surely has got to be the objective of Oxvox?
|
|
|
Post by finlandia on Oct 13, 2016 21:16:56 GMT
Why is it negative? It's business planning - take out the rent and Firoka just breaks even.
My concern is having enough cash to act as contingency funds. Where is this all coming from?
|
|
|
Post by uptheus on Oct 13, 2016 21:32:42 GMT
I wonder if Kassam would sell to an individual if they offered him £30m?
|
|
|
Post by minime on Oct 13, 2016 22:36:57 GMT
Would there be any reason for the trust to not (be able to) sell to DE once it has Ownership?
|
|
|
Post by minime on Oct 13, 2016 22:41:03 GMT
Surely once Ownership is obtained then it HAS to be run as a business.
As with ANY business, there has to be a contingency for IF and when the brown stuff hits the fan as well as an exit strategy.
But you have to remember that as a business there is a real chance it could make a loss and so you have to be prepared for that. Ignoring that fact will undoubtedly lead to failure.
|
|
|
Post by finlandia on Oct 14, 2016 4:52:23 GMT
Surely once Ownership is obtained then it HAS to be run as a business. As with ANY business, there has to be a contingency for IF and when the brown stuff hits the fan as well as an exit strategy. But you have to remember that as a business there is a real chance it could make a loss and so you have to be prepared for that. Ignoring that fact will undoubtedly lead to failure. And that's my point - Who would own any debt if this happened?
|
|
|
Post by KLYellow on Oct 14, 2016 5:59:32 GMT
Some more thoughts.....
We dont know what offer DE made, whether it was just stadium or everything. As this is football and we have experienced with football transfers, its possible DE has made bids of 8 then 10 million? Possibly FK values the club, now being in Div 1 and say 14 million and the "current bid on the table" is for 12 million. Both are business people and maybe FK is concerned that DE is trying to make money out of this when FK could do so.
In respect to OxVox's bid. I dont know how "community ownership" works. Theoretically they are in discussion with OCC or some other body to help fund the purchase. Could a council "loan" or "grant" funds to OXVOX/OUFC to make the stadium council owned?
I posted earlier about Roman Way. I read now, that last year BMW bought Roman Way for around 5 million from the council. This was for plant expansion. Part of the agreement was Roman Way was designated for Sports, and other facilities had to be made available which I believe they were. Although the stadium is owned by Kassam, would the same rules apply if it was to be converted into say, housing?
There is obviously a lot going on and it seems the recent publications in the press etc are only creating more questions than answers. So maybe we should just let DE/FK and Oxvox carry on and update us when there is something concrete.
I do have one question. There seems to be a lot of "playing fields" in an around Oxford. Do you we really need all these? Would one of these sites be possible for a new stadium if Grenoble Road was sold for housing or other commercial purposes? Places I can think of the top of my head include Court Farm, Stratfield Brake, Roman Way, Horspath Road.
|
|
|
Post by outsidethebox on Oct 14, 2016 9:01:24 GMT
Much as i dislike the Grenoble Road ground, the fact is that it's 70% ish built already thereby avoiding many of the bigger planning issues that a new site would involve. If it can be bought at the right price within a framework that avoids potential further development problems and spats over things like use of car parks then it's probably the best way to go.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Oct 14, 2016 10:02:24 GMT
Mr Price said he wanted to see the move happen as soon as possible and added it could allow many more community activities to be held at the stadium. He said: “A community trust owning the stadium would be a very good idea. “The club is a huge asset and if the stadium became a community asset it could potentially be opened to other uses. “That could be as a conference venue, a venue for youth activities and you would have a potential for the playing surface to be used too. ----------------- Hardly "chucking their weight behind the scheme", no mention of them backing this financially, more like saying it sounds like a good idea (with my inference that the council don't have to pay for it but the community get some benefit). Clearly he also doesn't know that the stadium already is used as a conference venue, and as for saving £6K on hiring out the venue for kids finals, well I'm sure that will get the council to chuck millions at it.
|
|