|
Post by doobs on Aug 21, 2013 8:28:12 GMT
35k 'supporters' at Wembley suggests that a significant section of the voting public would support OCC involvement in the stadium purchase.
If it is not already the case then maybe the focus of fans groups should be on applying pressure to the council to become involved, especially if they truly do view it as a community asset...
|
|
|
Post by Si Bradbury on Aug 21, 2013 10:46:34 GMT
It's worth adding that the Supporters Trust have been having talks with a number of third parties about working together since the turn of the year. Some of those early discussions are promising and once the appeal process is concluded then the Trust can begin to start work on trying to help facilitate some kind of purchase. A number of grants are available for example and membership and fans will begin to be surveyed about how we can all push this process forward.
A number of comments recently have suggested or implied that the application is futile as there seems to be no sign of a sensible and viable business plan. It isn't cloak and dagger, we are trying to work in a professional manner on behalf of the membership and wider fanbase. The objective is to help facilitate a stadium deal at some point in the future.
We have built some strong relationships up in the last six months and that is promising.
On a side point about legal costs. It is my understanding that when this legislation was implemented in September 2012, the Government put aside a fund to cover costs from owners appealing a local council decisions on these CRTB nominations. OCC will be able to call upon the support and funds set aside by National Government if it goes to Tribunal/Judicial Review.
|
|
|
Post by Snake (RIP) on Aug 21, 2013 23:13:43 GMT
Ah, a Judicial Review. I was wondering when someone was going to mention that appeal route, so thank you Simon. Having sat in the High Court in London for days watching Oxford City Council’s barrister failing to stop an appeal against a decision to not award one to Nick Pentith, and later Les Wells and Tim Midgely’s being granted one and then looking at the eventual outcome of both cases (and putting aside the big Morrells legal argument running alongside) I would say that someone needs to be both smarter and have deeper pockets than the Firoka organisation if they want to win this kind of big time argument. i.e. the disputes don’t stop with a court judgement. My apologies if that sentiment is lost on the OxVox Committee but completely understandable as none of them will have been involved when it was going on, though some of them will have been there in the 85-88 seasons watching Oxford in what is now called the English Premier League. So, I’ll ask again, if there is no viable buyer then why p*ss off Kassam this way? If there REALLY is a way of buying the ground then why not let us all in on the secret and we can get behind the scheme/consortium/idea rather than making the deal more difficult and expensive in the future by hassling Firoka? It’s all jam tomorrow as per usual, which WPL have been promoting since the day Nick Merry and Jim Smith apparently took over the club but sent it into the Conference within weeks. As we now know the new ownership turned out to be a big fat lie as they were not the real backers and is on a par with the promised “team to be proud of” quote from Kassam. At the risk of repeating myself if Ian Lenagan doesn’t want to commit himself to the financial outlay then the supporters and the community and the Council should consider reclaiming Minchery Farm rather than pissing away good money on a pointless legal argument when the cash could be spent in better ways - like going towards the purchase of the stadium. Whether you respect him or loathe him, Kassam is loaded and if he is going to leave Us alone to get on with life and getting out of the Fourth Tier of English football he needs a respectable exit route in order to enhance his reputation in his much bigger business empire, and this kind of battle strikes me as a negative move. In essence, it’s adversarial and negative and expensive. Being top of a league is great for now but history suggest Oxford United should be at least 20-30 places higher in the football pyramid given the fanbase - www.oxkits.co.uk/league-history/OUFC%20league%20position%20chart.jpg
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on Aug 22, 2013 8:02:14 GMT
To play devils advocate Snake. When dealing with people like Kassam, you can't always be nice with him and you can't always work with him. With the way LW rode into the scene last year, it's fair to say the prospect of ground being sold from under out feet was high. Kassam says he is the custodian of the club, but his words and the actions of the Stadco for example don't always meet in the middle.
I do understand the legal costs both in money, goodwill and time, but as fans we are caught in-between the devil and the deep blue sea. Ultimately, if Kassam treated people better, then perhaps this situation would not occur?
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Aug 22, 2013 8:32:44 GMT
At least the council recognises the Asset of Community Value concept, so if the ground ever does come up for sale, they could go back to their original part owned public / part owned private concept. As Snake says, the amount required is peanuts compared to their overall wealth.
I wonder if they could ever do a Portsmouth and say the stadium is only worth £2MM or whatever and somehow get the price down to that.
And does the ACV protect the ground from being developed into houses etc?
Many other grounds around the country are council owned or part owned, and leased to the clubs for peanuts.
But I suspect they much prefer dishing out cash to Oxford City at the moment, which is the one which is more obviously "community" for its casual teams etc.
|
|
|
Post by godalmingyellow on Aug 22, 2013 9:03:05 GMT
Given the economic climate and a long history of disputes between club and city council, not to mention that Kassam walked all over the city council, and with Oxford United being a (significant) minority activity for people in the county, I can't see why the city council would be remotely interested in splashing the cash to buy the stadium at the present massively inflated price. There would just be too much negative publicity for them.
The only time they would consider it was if it was on the basis of a future financially neutral trading position for Stadco, so they could justify the purchase on grounds of increasing land value and security for council funds.
|
|
|
Post by Si Bradbury on Aug 22, 2013 9:10:35 GMT
At least those "multi" rabid dogs over on the new alternative forum are having a good old attempt at once again scaremongering this and posting inaccuracies to fit the pathetic and continued OxVox agenda. www.yellowvoice.co.uk/post/Judicial-Review-6488314Grown men, one of which is alleged to be multi-posting and talking to himself, it really is very sad. The moderators have made that site a farce to the minority of excellent posters who have migrated there. To address these silly claims: 1) The CRTB is not a mess. These current events are an expected chain of events, with the possibility that Firoka may need to seek a Judicial Review. 2) The Mandate - how many times do we need to address this? 3) The scare-mongering claim that OxVox (either the committee or membership) need to fund this or are 'inflaming' the situation is again disingenuous at best. How are we inflaming anything? The council made a decision based on a piece of legislation which was implemented. The "appeal" is raised by Firoka to make sure that the OCC correctly applied the legislation. If the decision is upheld, and I suspect it would be, then Firoka can take his "appeal" to a "judicial review". Yes we could ask the nomination to be rescinded but having had (and some people will get very upset about this) so much positive responses to the announcement, the subsequent decision, the flow of positive messages at the time, during and in the past few weeks, it clearly isn't something the large majority want. Back to the sensible and thoughtful comments of Snakey, whilst there may not be someone with their cheque book out presently, who knows anyway, the CRTB does offer the club/supporters a level of protection. If we woke up tomorrow and a Scotish Rugby Team or some greedy property developer had done a deal, then I think rightly the vast majority of supporters would be questioning how that was allowed to happen and why couldn't the club/fans/etc have done something. Afterall, Firoz is the custodian of the stadium for the football club - so what's the issue? Your ideology about regeneration is something I think people would like to see happen. A CRTB keeps that alive to an extent. Your comments about fans and community reclaiming the stadium is something I also wholeheartedly agree on - another reason to have a CRTB in place to enable that option to be pursued.
|
|
|
Post by godalmingyellow on Aug 22, 2013 11:41:47 GMT
Leave them to it BB. I reckon there are 3 or 4 decent sensible posters and the rest are made up of multis from 3 or 4 others. Its an insignificance of a forum.
|
|
|
Post by pottersrightboot on Aug 22, 2013 12:13:14 GMT
Kassam will do whatever is necessary to preserve the value of his asset. The RTB development obviously hampers him and from a cost benefit perspective, (always important to him), he will wheel out his legal big guns at the judicial review stage - if it comes to it.
I am concerned about how the legal costs are funded if we get to this stage - like Snake - and to hear that Supporters Direct 'may' fund the costs is not that comforting. If there is a limit to their funding , as I suspect, who picks up the bill then?
Better maybe to win the PR 'hearts and minds campaign' and paint FK as the greedy ogre.
However , ultimately he is the owner of the ground, he is wealthy, he is ruthless and at some stage if the fans are going to have some influence/some stake in a new purchase they are going to have to sit down with him to negotiate. Kassam may feel that after this latest development he may say 'over my dead body' to a supporter influenced bid. Wise words from Snake.
I feel that the youthful exuberance and enthusiasm of the Oxvox committee , which is to be admired, may not be enough to deal with such a slick business operator. The approach from here on in is going to require a lot of due thought and attention.
I can understand why some supporters are hacked off with the way this is unfolding. However, despite the risks, personally it is good that Kassam is being confronted.
The club will NOT exploit its full potential until the FK factor is removed.
|
|
|
Post by foley on Aug 22, 2013 12:40:18 GMT
Leave them to it BB. I reckon there are 3 or 4 decent sensible posters and the rest are made up of multis from 3 or 4 others. Its an insignificance of a forum. Wise words. BB I would really not worry about what is said on the YV forum. Whilst there may be 3-4 sensible posters on there, the majority of it is from a different planet. I expect that a few may have an occasional look to check that what they read the first time was for real.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Sennett on Aug 22, 2013 12:46:07 GMT
PRB - I think you're mixing up scenarios. Should the decision be upheld following this appeal (run by the council itself) then Firoka have one more route of appeal and independent tribunal. The costs of this would not fall to OxVox and the council's costs to represent its case would be covered by a central pot. The only cost to OxVox would be should we wish to hire a solicitor to represent us rather than Supporters Direct. Supporters Direct have said should this be the case they would look to cover it. If for any reason they didn't agree to this in advance we'd have two options: 1) Let supporters direct represent us for free or ask the membership do they wish us to hire a solicitor with Trust funds. Personally i wouldn't recomend using trust funds for a solicitor. So there would be NO COST for Oxvox unless the membership actually voted in favour of us paying for legal representation should Supporters Direct not be able to cover it. All this would be agreed in advance.
Should Firoka be successful in their appeal next Thursday then OxVox could seek a judicial review. This would have a cost and again Supporters Direct would look to cover it. IF they won't cover it then there's two option we inform the membership of the cost and let them vote on it to use trust funds OR we don't bother with a judicial review.
So there will never be a cost for OxVox unless members actually request there to be in the event Suppporters Direct can't cover the costs.
|
|
|
Post by saddletramp on Aug 22, 2013 14:42:14 GMT
Kassam will do whatever is necessary to preserve the value of his asset. The RTB development obviously hampers him and from a cost benefit perspective, (always important to him), he will wheel out his legal big guns at the judicial review stage - if it comes to it. I am concerned about how the legal costs are funded if we get to this stage - like Snake - and to hear that Supporters Direct 'may' fund the costs is not that comforting. If there is a limit to their funding , as I suspect, who picks up the bill then? Better maybe to win the PR 'hearts and minds campaign' and paint FK as the greedy ogre. However , ultimately he is the owner of the ground, he is wealthy, he is ruthless and at some stage if the fans are going to have some influence/some stake in a new purchase they are going to have to sit down with him to negotiate. Kassam may feel that after this latest development he may say 'over my dead body' to a supporter influenced bid. Wise words from Snake. I feel that the youthful exuberance and enthusiasm of the Oxvox committee , which is to be admired, may not be enough to deal with such a slick business operator. The approach from here on in is going to require a lot of due thought and attention. I can understand why some supporters are hacked off with the way this is unfolding. However, despite the risks, personally it is good that Kassam is being confronted. The club will NOT exploit its full potential until the FK factor is removed. Im sorry,can someone please explain to me how the RTB devalues the stadium ? As I see it. Kassam has a buyer who is prepared to pay £13 mill for the stadium,the RTB is activated,if Oxvox don't come up with an equivalent amount the sale goes through. Is this right? if it is,i don't see how the stadium is devalued.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Aug 22, 2013 15:02:02 GMT
Kassam will do whatever is necessary to preserve the value of his asset. The RTB development obviously hampers him and from a cost benefit perspective, (always important to him), he will wheel out his legal big guns at the judicial review stage - if it comes to it. I am concerned about how the legal costs are funded if we get to this stage - like Snake - and to hear that Supporters Direct 'may' fund the costs is not that comforting. If there is a limit to their funding , as I suspect, who picks up the bill then? Better maybe to win the PR 'hearts and minds campaign' and paint FK as the greedy ogre. However , ultimately he is the owner of the ground, he is wealthy, he is ruthless and at some stage if the fans are going to have some influence/some stake in a new purchase they are going to have to sit down with him to negotiate. Kassam may feel that after this latest development he may say 'over my dead body' to a supporter influenced bid. Wise words from Snake. I feel that the youthful exuberance and enthusiasm of the Oxvox committee , which is to be admired, may not be enough to deal with such a slick business operator. The approach from here on in is going to require a lot of due thought and attention. I can understand why some supporters are hacked off with the way this is unfolding. However, despite the risks, personally it is good that Kassam is being confronted. The club will NOT exploit its full potential until the FK factor is removed. PRB are you suggesting that not a lot of thought and attention have not been invested in this so far? Snake suggests that we need to rush into doing something with regard to trying to buy the Stadium. The reason that very little can be divulged at the moment is because a great deal of thought and attention is being invested in working out what is feasible and what is not. The suggested £13M that Kassam is reported to demand means that it is not just a case of raising a bit of cash then going to the bank and getting a mortgage for the rest (I know you already know all of this). Also some of us have far more important issues to deal with whilst donating our time on behalf of those who sit on their arses and criticise/time waste (not you). Sadly not enough thought and attention was invested when the last three of four owners (and their hangers on) became involved and that is why so much is needed now!
|
|
|
Post by ZeroTheHero on Aug 22, 2013 15:03:53 GMT
As far as I understand (!) the only possible downside for FK is that he has to give six months notice of any potential sale. So if someone was desperate to get hold of a three sided football stadium built out of breezebocks at very short notice then it might be a disadvantage. On the plus side for him, a buyer comes along and says he'll pay £13million for the stadium. OxVox (or similar) then have six months to get a competitive offer in place. After which FK can sell to whoever he wants - in fact maybe his buyer might be prepared to pay £14million to outbid the OV offer.
The possible alternative is that we wake up one morning to find that FK has sold the stadium to a property developer / rugby club / other football club /other company without so much as a by your leave.
But he's the custodian of the stadium for the club, so I'm sure he'll wait until someone wins the lottery and then will sell to 'us', without doing such a thing.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Aug 22, 2013 15:08:31 GMT
Spot on ZTH. Anyone would think by the amount of waffle that is being generated by the subject that the stadium was some great big crock of gold that everyone wants a piece of!
|
|
|
Post by finlandia on Aug 22, 2013 15:20:11 GMT
Don't think it's waffle, just fans wanting to ensure that they aren't dragged into a lengthy appeal/counter appeal process. They have also picked up the subtle change of language about costs of appeals as its now 'may' cover any costs.
|
|
|
Post by John Lennon on Aug 22, 2013 15:26:52 GMT
Don't think it's waffle, just fans wanting to ensure that they aren't dragged into a lengthy appeal/counter appeal process. They have also picked up the subtle change of language about costs of appeals as its now 'may' cover any costs. Some if it is personal though. Genuine concerns of fans should be heard. But a dislike of Mark Sennett has more to do with it than genuine concerns. And some of it, is waffle.
|
|
|
Post by finlandia on Aug 22, 2013 15:37:26 GMT
Agree that some is personnel and that is not acceptable. However, given the events of the last few days, communication needs to be improved and there also has to be a watertight strategy moving forward.
|
|
|
Post by pottersrightboot on Aug 22, 2013 15:39:38 GMT
Don't think it's waffle, just fans wanting to ensure that they aren't dragged into a lengthy appeal/counter appeal process. They have also picked up the subtle change of language about costs of appeals as its now 'may' cover any costs. Some if it is personal though. Genuine concerns of fans should be heard. But a dislike of Mark Sennett has more to do with it than genuine concerns. And some of it, is waffle. Disagree. Personal stuff is irrelevant. Kassam has obviously been wound up by this RTB business and he is a dangerous adversary. That's not waffle, that's reality.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2013 15:43:55 GMT
When was the last time anybody actually asked Kassam what the price of the stadium would be?
|
|
|
Post by John Lennon on Aug 22, 2013 15:43:58 GMT
I can understand your point of view.
I think OxVox have been open on here about this, and have answered questions put to them. These are volunteers with children, and I admire the time and effort they still put in
|
|
|
Post by pottersrightboot on Aug 22, 2013 15:44:31 GMT
Spot on ZTH. Anyone would think by the amount of waffle that is being generated by the subject that the stadium was some great big crock of gold that everyone wants a piece of! Why 'waffle'? Without club and ground under common control the club cannot exploit its true potential! We will never get higher than halfway up L1 until then. The issue for discussion is this; is it right that the RTB route be taken if you have someone like Kassam, who is as tough as old boots, as landlord?
|
|
|
Post by finlandia on Aug 22, 2013 15:48:59 GMT
I think the have been open up to a point. I think that the last few days may have been a bit of a reality check about FK.
Now I'm not saying that its wrong, but we have to be careful as this would be a test case. fK will not want to lose and will have the financial clout to get the decision revoked.
OxVox will be on there own as the club will have to stay publicly indiferrent to the RTB. So it's imperative that a strategy that covers all areas has been discussed and agreed with not only Oxvox members but with the fan base as a whole.
|
|
|
Post by pottersrightboot on Aug 22, 2013 15:53:45 GMT
As far as I understand (!) the only possible downside for FK is that he has to give six months notice of any potential sale. So if someone was desperate to get hold of a three sided football stadium built out of breezebocks at very short notice then it might be a disadvantage. On the plus side for him, a buyer comes along and says he'll pay £13million for the stadium. OxVox (or similar) then have six months to get a competitive offer in place. After which FK can sell to whoever he wants - in fact maybe his buyer might be prepared to pay £14million to outbid the OV offer. The possible alternative is that we wake up one morning to find that FK has sold the stadium to a property developer / rugby club / other football club /other company without so much as a by your leave. But he's the custodian of the stadium for the club, so I'm sure he'll wait until someone wins the lottery and then will sell to 'us', without doing such a thing. The RTB is clearly a crutch for Kassam. He is unable to sell a valuable asset under normal sensitivities of non disclosure. It's akin to a covenant on the property. It might dissuade potential purchasers from paying a decent price quickly. I think it is good for us that RTB is in place but now Kassam has signalled intent to dispute, as other's note, future strategy must be watertight. As an Oxvox member I am not prepared to give the committee a mandate to proceed on an untrammelled basis on this difficult and sensitive matter. It must be put to general member vote.
|
|
|
Post by Si Bradbury on Aug 22, 2013 16:08:16 GMT
As an Oxvox member I am not prepared to give the committee a mandate to proceed on an untrammelled basis on this difficult and sensitive matter. It must be put to general member vote. Something which has been made pretty clear by members of the committee since the Appeal was formally announced. Furthermore, this appeal was always likely to happen based on the agents that were employed by Firoka during the consultation period. Likewise, a judicial review is also likely to happen should the decision be upheld. Firoka are appealing the decision has been correctly applied. In addition, note 18 of the Assessment, stated "The agents, on behalf of the Kassam Stadium, does not dispute the Stadium is an Asset of Community Value". The argument from the agents was how much of the stadium should be included under an ACV.
|
|
|
Post by ZeroTheHero on Aug 22, 2013 16:10:47 GMT
Of course - it's good for 'us' in that we will at least have some notice, and bad for the landlord in that he can't cut a quick deal (as I said). I'm having trouble thinking of hundreds of people who might be queueing up to buy the stadium though. You seem to be very worried about upsetting our landlord - who has not exactly been the very soul of friendly generosity over the years anyway. But as you say, you are glad the RTB is in place, so let's leave that - it's where we are.
As to the future progress of this, the appeal was expected and (if I understand correctly) won't cost OxVox anything. Surely that's OK? When it comes to judicial reviews etc I'm not so clear. But again, should that happen then that is the time to ask, if money needs to be spent. To roll over and withdraw the RTB just because Kassam is appealing (never thought I'd write that!!) seems lily-livered in the extreme - he was always going to do that.
I too am an OV member and see no need for any further mandate at the present, but would want to be kept updated (as is being done) and perhaps to be consulted depending on how matters progress.
(To clarify - this was a rely to PottersRightBoot)
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Aug 22, 2013 16:16:39 GMT
Some if it is personal though. Genuine concerns of fans should be heard. But a dislike of Mark Sennett has more to do with it than genuine concerns. And some of it, is waffle. Disagree. Personal stuff is irrelevant. Kassam has obviously been wound up by this RTB business and he is a dangerous adversary. That's not waffle, that's reality. The waffle is the suggestion that this was not considered when the CRTB process was initiated. Do you and others think that the Committee felt that Kassam would be delighted at having this order placed on the stadium? This order is not just about Kassam and the current situation of the club/stadium it is designed to protect the future and would allow Oxvox time to put forward a big against a potential purchaser that could further damage the fortunes of the club. In no way was it done to wind Kassam up but to protect the interests of the fans. Kassam has been wound up in far more serious ways by the fans in the past. An appeal was expected and this is part of the process as I am sure you are fully aware. There is no problem in consultation with the membership but I am not convinced that the majority fully understand what the CRTB actually is. There have been equally important issues in the past where previous Oxvox Committees failed to act but the current one is attempting to make a difference rather than meekly accepting the Status Quo. It also has to be borne in mind that OUFC seem to have an improving relationship with the Stadco/Kassam as seen by the matchday experience so the CRTB has not adversely affected the "club" in any way.
|
|
|
Post by pottersrightboot on Aug 22, 2013 16:41:50 GMT
What do you mean you have 'no problem in consulting with the Oxvox membership'. Oxvox is not set up for the committee's edification.
Damn right you have no problem, you are answerable to us!
Also, don't like the casual reference to previous Oxvox committees not being as effective as the current incarnation. We had plenty of s****te to put up with back in the day as well, you know. Unnecessary comment.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Aug 22, 2013 16:59:47 GMT
There is nothing casual in that comment I can assure you.
Your suggestion was that the current committee have a problem consulting the membership and my comment was purely to confirm that is not the case. I also have the right to walk away and that option is very close!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2013 17:11:02 GMT
Still don't really understand the thinking of the people moaning about not being consulted about the RTB.
Is it in OxVox's rules that the membership should be polled before the committee make EVERY decision? Were the committee not elected to make decisions on behalf of the membership? And if the membership consider that too many decisions are "wrong", can they not oust the committee at the next election?
As for the whole RTB saga, would not most OUFC fans consider it a positive thing?
We all know there are political and personal undercurrents at play here. Shop steward PRB is just stoking the fires.
|
|