|
Post by myles on Oct 10, 2016 20:23:45 GMT
We at last get rid of the high rent, we have an opportunity to maximise revenue, the ability to expand, and best of all it could be within a matter of months rather than years down the line. Until the framework of any deal is announced, this is pure conjecture. What is inescapable is that there will be costs related to buying (mortgage?) and maintaining the stadium. So how does a community trust afford that if they charge a nominal rent and hand over all commercial revenues? Not saying it can't be done, just pointing out again that the devil is in the detail and it'd be wrong to make assumptions at this point about rent, revenues, and so on.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 10, 2016 20:29:25 GMT
We have those costs now don't we ? We would certainly have those costs if we brought WE.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Oct 11, 2016 0:49:21 GMT
We at last get rid of the high rent, we have an opportunity to maximise revenue, the ability to expand, and best of all it could be within a matter of months rather than years down the line. Until the framework of any deal is announced, this is pure conjecture. What is inescapable is that there will be costs related to buying (mortgage?) and maintaining the stadium. So how does a community trust afford that if they charge a nominal rent and hand over all commercial revenues? Not saying it can't be done, just pointing out again that the devil is in the detail and it'd be wrong to make assumptions at this point about rent, revenues, and so on. I'm pretty sure that the club will continue to pay rent because, as you say, there will be financing costs to pay (interest and capital repayments). At the moment the Stadco generates cash for Kassam's companies but he pays minimal interest and no repayments. The ongoing structure of the stadium finances will need to be set up to ensure that any financing costs are covered. One key will be to minimise the interest costs which may be done through a variety of methods (eg Community, Share Issue, Loan Notes, Mortgage). There will be a lot of fine detail to sort out such as who will run the conferencing and other methods of revenue generation (maybe one of Kassam's companies will do this (lights blue touch paper) and rent that facility! It will be important to maintain all revenue streams initially then create new ones.
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Oct 11, 2016 11:02:57 GMT
Easy to say, but I don't think that that is fair. Firoz has long maintained this position in private. He told Senett the same years ago, and then told me the same two or three years ago. As such it is just a re-statement of a long-held position. The problem is that he wants to combine that with maximising his return!! So, like Boris Johnson, he is 'Pro cake - both eating and having it'. The options back then were either that somebody paid him 14 million for the lot (stadium plus car parks etc) or that he would sell 'the stands' for 8-10 million in return for being able to plaster development all over the surrounding area, thus limiting the future development of the stadium. This involved either building Hi-Rise car-parks (un-economic at 10 mill) or getting planing for building new car parks south of Grenoble Road (ruled out by SODC for forseeable future, since formalised). So that option petered out. Thank God. Because it would have set in cement a ghastly situation by which OUFC was condemned to play forever in a stadium not big enough for sustainable Championship football. To re-cap, the AVERAGE attendance in the Championship is now 18,000. To be sustainable as a lower mid-table side, you need 15/16,000. For that average, you need a stadium capacity of 18,000 minimum. And even that ain't enough. It would mean turning droves away 5 or 6 times a season. We have been away from the top two leagues now for such a long time that people have totally lost track of what is required, in a division where normal playing budgets are north of 10 million (ie more than three times our current one). The Championship is now a successful globally watched competition in its own right and there is precious little room in it for clubs attempting to imitate Brisbane Road. Gradually, and rather ruthlessly, the requirement is becoming clear. A fanbase and broader catchment area that enables minimum attendance of 12k and 20k for bigger matches..... and a stadium that can both accommodate that and enable such numbers to come, go and spend money. Signing up for any deal that pegs us back in a stadium that cannot accommodate Championship football would just be a re-run of the frustrations of the 80s and 90s, when the Manor meant that we were always fighting with one hand tied behind our back. We have a bit (not much) of leverage and, in my view, should not sacrifice that lightly. But, that all said, no-one should doubt that Firoz would rather sell to a trust. He would dearly love to solve his PR legacy issue without any financial sacrifice. I just wouldn't personally advise enabling that without ensuring that 'we' got a deal that, five years later, still looked like a good one. Not saying it's easy, mind...... Good luck - but please don't make the Merry mistake of forgetting that these stadium deals need to be thought through pretty thoroughly!!! Did he also tell u and senett, that he wouldn't sell to you ? You have said plenty of times that if someone can make the figures work then the kassam would be a viable stadium. But u never thought it would be possible. No it wouldn't be ready to house your 12-18k if we got promoted this season, but of course neither would WE. And if there's a deal to be done and the price comes down as it is fk leaving a legacy to a community trust, then surely that's the best option for the club. We at last get rid of the high rent, we have an opportunity to maximise revenue, the ability to expand, and best of all it could be within a matter of months rather than years down the line. Did fk ever agree to the idea of bashing down the stadium and part funding WE as the sweetener, or was that just the idea ? It could be a matter of months, or a matter of years! So, ERM, just like anything else then... Seriously, though, we (you) need to get over the idea that just owning a stadium - any stadium! - is the point of the entire exercise. The point should surely be the sustainability of Oxford United as a League 1 and then Championship football club. Everything else is irrelevant. We could 'buy' the stadium, still have significant funding costs AND have a ground unfit to sustain Championship football which we then cannot do anything about changing because of the development in the surrounds. Remind anyone of the Manor??? I actually didn't say that I couldn't see how it could be funded. I have always said that if the City Council funded the short fall between what it is worth to us and what FK wants, then it could be affordable (obviously). But some of us have 'been there before' with the City Council. He promises much, and talks a lot, but has never delivered for OUFC. If OxVox change that and get him to commit significant public funds then that would be a real achievement. So long as the quid pro quo is not OUFC support for development that would stunt forever our capacity for growth.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 11, 2016 11:22:57 GMT
I've never said it's just about owning the stadium though have I Charlie? And as daryl is also a very successful business man I'm sure he wouldn't have made 3 offers so far to buy a stadium that wouldn't work for him or the club in the long run !
And again, seeing as the major part of your planned funding for WE comes from fk giving us a sweetener for liking Grenoble rd, did he actually agree to this and a figure in your meetings? Or is that just the hopeful outcome ?
|
|
|
Post by foley on Oct 11, 2016 13:56:05 GMT
I've never said it's just about owning the stadium though have I Charlie? And as daryl is also a very successful business man I'm sure he wouldn't have made 3 offers so far to buy a stadium that wouldn't work for him or the club in the long run ! And again, seeing as the major part of your planned funding for WE comes from fk giving us a sweetener for liking Grenoble rd, did he actually agree to this and a figure in your meetings? Or is that just the hopeful outcome ? To be fair I reckon that Charlie's comments are pretty valid. The 3 offers made by DE may not end up being the final agreement that Oxvox come up with FK. I am sure that the council are heavily involved and FK will want his piece of the pie. I guess that the worry is if FK backs everybody into a corner so that they do accept a deal which is better than what we have but does not allow enough growth in the future. I am with Charlie in that we need a Stadium with a 20K capacity minimum to be able to compete at Championship level.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 11, 2016 14:22:26 GMT
I've never said it's just about owning the stadium though have I Charlie? And as daryl is also a very successful business man I'm sure he wouldn't have made 3 offers so far to buy a stadium that wouldn't work for him or the club in the long run ! And again, seeing as the major part of your planned funding for WE comes from fk giving us a sweetener for liking Grenoble rd, did he actually agree to this and a figure in your meetings? Or is that just the hopeful outcome ? To be fair I reckon that Charlie's comments are pretty valid. The 3 offers made by DE may not end up being the final agreement that Oxvox come up with FK. I am sure that the council are heavily involved and FK will want his piece of the pie. I guess that the worry is if FK backs everybody into a corner so that they do accept a deal which is better than what we have but does not allow enough growth in the future. I am with Charlie in that we need a Stadium with a 20K capacity minimum to be able to compete at Championship level. So am I, what I'm saying is de, oxvox and other obviously think that is realistic at the kassam or they wouldn't be trying to get it would they. It's looking very likely that the offers made by de won't be how the stadium transfer ends up. But he didn't exactly seem annoyed that the oxvox proposal may work did he. WE would be great I'd love to have a new stadium, designed with fan input, with all the trimmings around it that could keep Oufc in and around the championship for decades to come. That whole move however is still years away and possibly also as hard to achieve. That's why I'm asking if fk was onboard with the idea when talking to Charlie, or even him that suggested a figure that was what he would be willing to put forward as a golden handshake. If it was then great, oxvox could possibly use this as plan b if the current one fails, as it will be attractive to fk, if not and Charlie is largely basing his figures on what he believes could happen, then it's no further forward than de offers.
|
|
|
Post by ox4eva on Oct 11, 2016 18:39:31 GMT
Hope I am proved wrong but I bet in 12 months time nothing has changed!
|
|
|
Post by Mark Sennett on Oct 12, 2016 16:11:08 GMT
Really interesting posts. Anyone saying OxVox shouldn't be Involved at looking into a sustainable stadia option is wrong in my view. A trust should be doing just that if and where it can.
A few points I'd like to ask. After the positive words made by Kassam and OxVox, I'm keen now to see the report OxVox is carrying out on stadia options.
Eales has said there's no reason a deal can't be tied up for the ground in 12 weeks or even by end of the season. So with the fact that this is now a proposed community project (something I 100% back) is there a plan in place to make this happen, especially due to the club's keenness to make it move fast?
If so what are the details how will it be funded? I appreciate that certain conversations with stakeholders must remain confidential but as this is a community project there's no reason why a plan around how it's to be funded, managed etc can't be released for the community to comment on.
It's great that Kassam wants to sell as a community asset (something he's told OxVox for years in meetings that he'd be keen on if the figure was right) but how can we help make this happen?
The key thing i'd like to understand is how the OxVox report concludes that the Kassam stadium is the right place for oufc's future as the recent email and meeting stated. This has no relevance to water eaton or any other site I'm interested as to why OxVox has concluded that that Kassam is the right option.
A key Issue with the Kassam is that any deal is not the right deal. You have to find a deal that's right and affordable for both parties and enables the club to keep moving up the leagues and being sustainable.
For example if Firoz sold for £8m on paper that looks good as there's justification behind his value of circa £12m and a bank's of circa £6m. But if that £8m deal meant the whole site would have houses, there's no space for the corners to be filled in, no 4th stand/space for only a small stand then the club would be seriously constrained in terms of attendance revenue.
It should also be noted that on the last set of accounts simply merging OUFC and stadco would not make OUFC break even!
There's also the additional costs of building a 4th stand and redeveloping back of the east stand and outstanding reparations on the stadium, which all in could easily cost £5m+ how would that be paid for? If we can't expand the ground we could be looking at relocating anyway if we were then in the championship. If that's the case then why would we look at spending £8m-£13m on the Kassam when we will have to look again down the line for a new ground? Why wouldn't we just look now for a new ground? No this is not me saying WE or any other site is the answer but asking why is the Kassam the answer and if it is the answer have we properly looked at the business model for how it helps OUFC move up the leagues and become a sustainable business?
That then asks the question of parking etc at the ground. So even a discounted deal for the Kassam may not be a good deal as it limits our capacity and revenue earning potential for the club, which is already losing a lot of money and being kindly propped up by Eales.
Perhaps the most interesting comments are from the chairman as he's revealed bids have gone in. We have no idea if these were fair offers and why they were rejected.
There's also Kassam's comments that the club owes him money and OxVox's recent email stating legal actions was going on between OUFC and stadco. Will this not potentially have negative effects on a deal? Is this why Eales isn't part of discussions direct with OxVox (although it's great he supports their community ownership plans)?
If the council was to offer to help fund it what assurances could be given that the loan/grant was forthcoming? It surely won't be easy to pass that through an electorate during times of austerity?
So I guess my point is I'm really interested in three things:
1) why has OxVox come to the conclusion that the Kassam is the right option (and it may well be!!)
2) what's the plan for how this can actually become a reality and what's the timescales
3) when is the OxVox report coming out on the feasibility of acquiring the Kassam and how it will be funded along with the business plan? Also how did the committee draw the conclusion that the Kassam is the right option before concluding the report? Again they may be correct with their view but would be good to understand the thought process and see the steps taken to draw this conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 12, 2016 16:18:32 GMT
How do u know adding Oufc and stadco's accounts would make us profitable ? Do u know the finer details of fk business ? If so out of interest, what does stadco turn over , and likely net profit should Oufc take it over.
On your 3 other points oxvox has already said they won't be commenting further until there is something to communicate.
|
|
|
Post by sideshowrob on Oct 12, 2016 17:00:28 GMT
He said merging the clubs and stadco would not make us profitable on the current accounts (para 9).
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 12, 2016 17:11:05 GMT
He said merging the clubs and stadco would not make us profitable on the current accounts (para 9). Yeah, which implies he knows what stadco's accounts are ?
|
|
|
Post by myles on Oct 12, 2016 17:31:54 GMT
He said merging the clubs and stadco would not make us profitable on the current accounts (para 9). Yeah, which implies he knows what stadco's accounts are ? All limited company accounts are a matter of public record. It's not exactly rocket science! And for the record, for the year to 24th September 2015, StadCo made a profit of £545k. On a more general point, whenever myself, Mark, or Charlie post something you (and others) are all over it like a rash demanding evidence, evidence, evidence. Why do you not do the same for OxVox? I still haven't seen any rationale as to WHY the KasStad is the answer to the question. Where is the setting out of the various options? The pros and cons of each? Who has been spoken to (and when)? What are the financial implications? etc etc As I've said before, the Kassam may be the right answer, but let's see the workings - that was what was promised. It's now been nearly three months since the OxVox report was due to be published and it is yet to see the light of day. Mark's first question 1) is absolutely key here. If the "community" are expected to buy into (emotionally as well as financially) a plan, there needs to be some flesh on the bones, and it needs to come sooner rather than later.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 12, 2016 17:36:13 GMT
Not like a rash at all, like I said out of interest, that's a fairly decent profit, but obviously not great for us as that includes our 500k ish rent I take it?
I also look forward to seeing the findings from oxvox, but as with me on your posts, ur on them like a rash 😉 when they have clearly said they will announce their findings ASAP. Not forgetting that as of yet u never released your findings or passed over the information to the new board, let alone members ! And that's over 3 years not months .
|
|
|
Post by Jem on Oct 12, 2016 18:13:14 GMT
Yeah, which implies he knows what stadco's accounts are ? All limited company accounts are a matter of public record. It's not exactly rocket science! And for the record, for the year to 24th September 2015, StadCo made a profit of £545k. On a more general point, whenever myself, Mark, or Charlie post something you (and others) are all over it like a rash demanding evidence, evidence, evidence. Why do you not do the same for OxVox? I still haven't seen any rationale as to WHY the KasStad is the answer to the question. Where is the setting out of the various options? The pros and cons of each? Who has been spoken to (and when)? What are the financial implications? etc etc As I've said before, the Kassam may be the right answer, but let's see the workings - that was what was promised. It's now been nearly three months since the OxVox report was due to be published and it is yet to see the light of day. Mark's first question 1) is absolutely key here. If the "community" are expected to buy into (emotionally as well as financially) a plan, there needs to be some flesh on the bones, and it needs to come sooner rather than later. Bloody hell Myles, are you Sennett and Methven all there sitting on the same sofa, or do you have some sort of permanent Skype link?! Lol!
|
|
|
Post by myles on Oct 12, 2016 18:21:46 GMT
Bloody hell Myles, are you Sennett and Methven all there sitting on the same sofa, or do you have some sort of permanent Skype link?! Lol! We all hang out in the void at the back of the East Stand....
|
|
|
Post by Jem on Oct 12, 2016 18:24:10 GMT
Bloody hell Myles, are you Sennett and Methven all there sitting on the same sofa, or do you have some sort of permanent Skype link?! Lol! We all hang out in the void at the back of the East Stand.... I thought as much! Lol!
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 12, 2016 18:25:09 GMT
Bloody hell Myles, are you Sennett and Methven all there sitting on the same sofa, or do you have some sort of permanent Skype link?! Lol! We all hang out in the void at the back of the East Stand.... Didn't know Charlie's nick name was east stand 😉😂
|
|
|
Post by Colin B on Oct 12, 2016 18:29:07 GMT
We all hang out in the void at the back of the East Stand.... Didn't know Charlie's nick name was east stand 😉😂 Reply of the month!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Colin B on Oct 12, 2016 18:31:54 GMT
Bloody hell Myles, are you Sennett and Methven all there sitting on the same sofa, or do you have some sort of permanent Skype link?! Lol! We all hang out in the void at the back of the East Stand.... Well it does resemble Dr Evil's lair. Which probably explains why minime always pops up on these threads as well.
|
|
|
Post by myles on Oct 12, 2016 18:34:43 GMT
We all hang out in the void at the back of the East Stand.... Well it does resemble Dr Evil's lair. Which probably explains why minime always pops up on these threads as well. Terrible when people have the temerity to ask questions or express a different opinion isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by lucabrasi on Oct 12, 2016 18:56:21 GMT
Bloody hell Myles, are you Sennett and Methven all there sitting on the same sofa, or do you have some sort of permanent Skype link?! Lol! We all hang out in the void at the back of the East Stand.... It's not a void, It's a fabulous magical area where banners and flags are spontaneously formed.
|
|
|
Post by Colin B on Oct 12, 2016 19:03:03 GMT
Well it does resemble Dr Evil's lair. Which probably explains why minime always pops up on these threads as well. Terrible when people have the temerity to ask questions or express a different opinion isn't it? Depends who they are and what their agenda is?
|
|
|
Post by myles on Oct 12, 2016 19:08:56 GMT
Depends who they are and what their agenda is? Not sure what your agenda is Colin, but I'm only hoping that the best solution is found for the club's long-term sustainability - whatever that solution may be. Much better that than rushing into a short-term solution to try and prop up an unsustainable position, don't you think?
|
|
|
Post by Colin B on Oct 12, 2016 19:22:49 GMT
Do you really think we are that stupid Myles? Do you really think all of this work has been put in for a short term solution?
Jesus H Christ man, stop taking us for fools.
|
|
|
Post by foley on Oct 12, 2016 19:28:17 GMT
Depends who they are and what their agenda is? Not sure what your agenda is Colin, but I'm only hoping that the best solution is found for the club's long-term sustainability - whatever that solution may be. Much better that than rushing into a short-term solution to try and prop up an unsustainable position, don't you think? So do you know that or are just speculating? My impression of Jem and Oxvox are that they are hardly the type to settle on a 'short term solution and prop up an unsustainable position'? Unless there is something that you know that I don't?
|
|
|
Post by myles on Oct 12, 2016 19:52:55 GMT
So do you know that or are just speculating? My impression of Jem and Oxvox are that they are hardly the type to settle on a 'short term solution and prop up an unsustainable position'? Unless there is something that you know that I don't? I very much hope that is the case and have no reason to suspect otherwise. It was meant more as a general comment than an accusation. The point being that we are still none the wiser as to why the KasStad is the solution. I'm well aware that I'm sounding like a stuck record on this, but I don't think the things I've mentioned above are really that much to be asking for, are they? But rather than a substantive response, there are vague insinuations of having an "agenda" instead.
|
|
|
Post by Si Bradbury on Oct 12, 2016 20:27:22 GMT
Really interesting posts. Anyone saying OxVox shouldn't be Involved at looking into a sustainable stadia option is wrong in my view. A trust should be doing just that if and where it can. A few points I'd like to ask. After the positive words made by Kassam and OxVox, I'm keen now to see the report OxVox is carrying out on stadia options. Eales has said there's no reason a deal can't be tied up for the ground in 12 weeks or even by end of the season. So with the fact that this is now a proposed community project (something I 100% back) is there a plan in place to make this happen, especially due to the club's keenness to make it move fast? If so what are the details how will it be funded? I appreciate that certain conversations with stakeholders must remain confidential but as this is a community project there's no reason why a plan around how it's to be funded, managed etc can't be released for the community to comment on. It's great that Kassam wants to sell as a community asset (something he's told OxVox for years in meetings that he'd be keen on if the figure was right) but how can we help make this happen? I've been on the committee for a good eight years, with a one year 'rest', occupying officers roles, something I've greatly enjoyed. I can't genuinely recall Firoz Kassam saying he wants to sell as a community asset. I can't recall him telling the Trust that in any meetings we've had with him, in fact, we didn't have hardly any meetings with him. Remind me when he told us that? I do remember Kelvin trying to do a deal. I do remember Lenagan wanting to do a deal. I remember the Water Eaton proposal. I do recall me and you being summoned by Firoz shortly after we got the Community Right to Bid approved, having a 'frank' and 'professional' discussion with him, talked about going to court and then onto the subject of Water Eaton with him and this figure he was going to pay Oxford United to do-one. I know that, because he reminded the Trust recently of those events. I'd also say we've had more official meetings with him in 4 months than we have had in 6-7 years. To clarify to the forum, the Trust pushed for this stadium topic to be made public last week, Kassam agreed. Our relationship is good and professional. Some discussions, as you'd expect, remain confidential. Something that those who have been on this committee, dealing with difficult subjects, can vouch and understand. As for the claim a deal can be done in a short space of time, I think we all know that is never going to happen or even possible unless Kassam decides to sell to a businessman, which he has said in the press, he doesn't intend to do.
|
|
|
Post by Colin B on Oct 12, 2016 20:31:52 GMT
So do you know that or are just speculating? My impression of Jem and Oxvox are that they are hardly the type to settle on a 'short term solution and prop up an unsustainable position'? Unless there is something that you know that I don't? I very much hope that is the case and have no reason to suspect otherwise. It was meant more as a general comment than an accusation. The point being that we are still none the wiser as to why the KasStad is the solution. I'm well aware that I'm sounding like a stuck record on this, but I don't think the things I've mentioned above are really that much to be asking for, are they? But rather than a substantive response, there are vague insinuations of having an "agenda" instead. Those that came to the OxVox meeting earlier in the year (you know Myles, the one we chose to hold once we knew you were on holiday) were given a full briefing and the opportunity to ask questions. Since then certain things have moved on and are now bound by confidentiality, as is often the case in these situations. I'm not going to breach that confidentiality, maybe you should try it yourself someday Myles. We are a volunteer committee, with jobs and businesses to run, and there's enough work to do without feeling the need to defend myself against you and your little gang. I would say if you want to make a difference then stand for election to the OxVox committee, but we all know what happened when you tried that don't we..........
|
|
|
Post by stewdonald on Oct 12, 2016 20:52:16 GMT
It doesn't matter whether the Kassam is Oxvox preferred site. OUFC have stated that is their preference. Buying the Kassam as long as the deal is right is the most important thing. There is nothing to stop the club exploring other options regarding sites for a new stadium once purchased - if the deal is done right it may be even more advantageous.
Dont get lost on the scenery there are some major developments here that people are not discussing. From what I can see, if you combine all the statements then the you can summarise as below - assuming everyone is genuine:-
1) Kassam will only sell to a community bid 2) The club and Kassam are in dispute involving litigation regarding the service charge 3) Darryl has found out, and not from the owner directly, that he cannot buy the club. 4) Darryl has put in three offers 5) By deduction Darryl was unaware of Kassam's unwillingness to accept a private individuals bid. 6) Kassam appears in no hurry to sell 7) Darryl appears keen to have a quick conclusion.
Point 5 is absolutely the key issue and its implications are massive. DE, by his own admission, did not explore the stadium situation pre the purchase of OUFC and he did not see it as a priority. Having now spent a large sum of money he has realised that stadium ownership or more importantly control of it for the club is essential if OUFC are to maximise it's potential. Having realised this - he has submitted three bids not realising the owner will not sell to him. He finds this out second hand rather than from Firoz. He also happens to be in dispute with him at the same time over charges. He now has to accept that the stadium situation and subsequent control is completely out of his hands, despite bringing success, his own finance and time. He can try and involve himself with the bid subject to everyone agreeing and him being happy with that scenario.
If I was him I would be gutted and amazingly frustrated but he may take a more philosophical view on the basis he did not research things before purchase. From an Oxvox viewpoint they have finally got Kassam to confirm he will sell. I expect some terms on this may be known - even if confidential - so they have achieved a positive development. I would imagine it will take a long time though to get any deal over the line based on Kassam's statement. Whether though the club should move or explore other sites is almost irrelevant when DE wants to stay - if he wanted to move presumably he would have explored that option - and may well have done - before offering to buy the Kassam.
So the real issue is what does it mean for the club if DE can't influence a stadium purchase and has to accept a community ownership with a likely slow timescale. Then if he accepts that vision what will the deal look like when it is done and what are the financial implications for him and the club.
However on what Oxvox have done - you cannot ask anymore really can you? They don't own the club and based on the people I know like Jem/Colin and Simon are just OUFC through and through. They have a good balance of knowledge and have worked, like people before them, tirelessly to try and progress things. If they get to the stage of a fully fledged community bid we will know all the details - till then Myles lots of this I reckon just doesn't matter as the only people who can really sanction a move of venue is the club and they have said they want to stay.
|
|