|
Post by manorlounger on Oct 12, 2016 21:00:49 GMT
All this discussion leads me to believe that some on here are a little jealous that others have some knowledge that they do not. I am just as curious as others to know how things are progressing but, I also understand that these sort of dealings are best kept confidential until concluded or when all the parties involved are happy to release information.
This will not be an easy transaction, there are so many angles to cover and a huge amount of diligence to pursue in order to satisfy that we are getting the right deal.
The first steps have been taken and progress appears to have been made. Can we all just calm down and wait patiently for news?
|
|
|
Post by uptheus on Oct 12, 2016 21:04:10 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. And to think you two use to be friends.
|
|
|
Post by Si Bradbury on Oct 12, 2016 21:05:22 GMT
We are friends, good ones. Friends can disagree, Sean.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Burrett on Oct 12, 2016 21:09:38 GMT
Somewhat sad to see various people I know, like and respect apparently locking horns on here. But as Si says, friends can disagree. Everyone wants the best for OUFC, everyone seems to accept that OxVox are acting in the best interests of OUFC and the fanbase. Nothing to see here.
|
|
|
Post by daveoufc on Oct 12, 2016 21:19:30 GMT
As Stewart mentioned are we all sure DE is ok with all this and is still prepared to just bankroll us up to the championship with little or no control over the stadium and future revenues.
|
|
|
Post by minime on Oct 12, 2016 21:21:08 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. Shall I, shan't I??? Nah!!!
|
|
|
Post by myles on Oct 12, 2016 21:42:51 GMT
It doesn't matter whether the Kassam is Oxvox preferred site. OUFC have stated that is their preference. Stewart, I agree with pretty much everything you've said in your post, apart from this bit. The whole purpose of the OxVox exercise was to draw an independent conclusion regarding the various stadium options. You are absolutely right in saying that at the end of the day it's the club's decision as to whether they continue to rent, buy the stadium, or look to move elsewhere. But if OxVox had drawn a different conclusion, then it should hold the club to account on its decision, particularly if that has implications for the long-term sustainability of the club - that's the whole point of a supporters' trust. Similarly if, as appears the case, OxVox's conclusion mirrors the clubs, then they would be in a position to support the club and see that through to fruition, if possible. But whichever course is taken needs to be done from a properly evidenced position. And, again, I just haven't seen that. Colin believes that a "full briefing" was given. I disagree. We don't know who OxVox have actually spoken to or when for one thing. Jem even acknowledged after that meeting that the full report is yet to come. So, yes, of course you are right - if Darryl steadfastly refuses to move, it really matters not one jot in practical terms what the OxVox view is. But if part of the solution is going with a community-owned model (or anything else for that matter), I really don't see it as being particularly controversial to press for the rationale as to why that is considered to be the right answer.
|
|
|
Post by Colin B on Oct 12, 2016 21:50:32 GMT
How can you disagree Myles? You weren't bloody well there!!!
|
|
|
Post by myles on Oct 12, 2016 21:56:59 GMT
How can you disagree Myles? You weren't bloody well there!!! Sorry Colin. I was assuming that the minutes of the meeting gave a full account. Perhaps you'd like to fill the members in on what wasn't included?
|
|
|
Post by uptheus on Oct 12, 2016 21:57:55 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.This would suggest that OxVox and DE have a different agenda, so I struggle to understand how DE can truly be happy?
|
|
|
Post by Colin B on Oct 12, 2016 22:05:04 GMT
How can you disagree Myles? You weren't bloody well there!!! Sorry Colin. I was assuming that the minutes of the meeting gave a full account. Perhaps you'd like to fill the members in on what wasn't included? What members? You're the only one asking.
|
|
|
Post by stewdonald on Oct 12, 2016 22:08:42 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.
|
|
|
Post by uptheus on Oct 12, 2016 22:19:29 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. Do you think the council are involved in the discussions with Kassam Stewart? And do you think that DE is truly happy with this solution, especially after putting 3 bids himself?
|
|
|
Post by stewdonald on Oct 12, 2016 22:45:20 GMT
I would think the Council would be in regular contact with Kassam as it is a site which seems to be under constant review. In the dealings I have had with property plays the council are always involved. What there view will be I am not sure but bearing in mind Kassam has hopes to develop the site I am sure there will be dialogue.
Darryl - i don't know what he will think. I haven't spoken with him for a long time and even longer on the stadium. If I had put 3 offers in to my landlord and he hadn't told me I couldn't buy it I would definitely be annoyed. I think Darryl will have to see what the deal looks like before he knows if he is happy. I am sure he would have preferred just to get the deal done privately and have full control and you can't blame him for that. He funds the club and wants control I would think and that is fair enough.
I am worried for OUFC. The fact he can't have that at this stage and has been turned down 3 times. This coupled with Kassam not telling him directly and also disputing costs may have consequences and affect Darryl's thought process. You couldn't blame him for that either but he might be fine with it. It is a very delicate situation. Would I be fine with it - absolutely not. Have Oxvox done the right thing - definitely as at least now there is clarity on the situation which would not have happened without there involvement. At least now everyone knows the situation even if they don't know the detail or numbers - that is down to Oxvox.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Sennett on Oct 12, 2016 23:15:40 GMT
Sean - Bradders remains one of my closest friends and we certainly haven't fallen out. We don't disagree on much actually! As a member I'm just asking questions I want to ask. No agenda at all I've know and been friends with Jem, Colin Simon etc for years and while we may disagree on things I'd never have anything Negative to say about any of them as people. They know me like I k is then we all care passionately about OUFC prospering and moving forwards that's the only agenda if this doesn't happen none of us gain anything!
But I stand by my questions and hopefully they will get addressed and I've got only admiration for OxVox working hard to represent their members on all vital issues.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Oct 13, 2016 0:38:51 GMT
Mark/Myles and others do you really feel that when Oxvox put forward their reasons for considering the current stadium to be the best option that will satisfy everyone? We all know that it won't because in any situation like this there is never going to be a perfect answer. I would love to see us in a 20k+ seater state of the art stadium playing in the Championship or higher. However, a move would be a massive project that only the club could take on. I would prefer that Oxvox focus their time on moving the stadium purchase forward rather than their valuable time being taken up in needless squabbles.
Daryl Eales and before him Ian Lenegan were aware of the detail of the move to WE but both chose not to go down this route. When Eales took over wasn't Lenegan supposed to be looking at the ground purchase/move as his ongoing role? That seemed to have been dropped long ago. If Firoz Kassam felt that a move was the best option surely he would not be negotiating over the sale of the current ground but would see the massive opportunity to make a killing out of an empty stadium site and possibly part of the new site. He seems to have rejected that option too. If the Council were keen on a move away from the current site to help them meet their housing targets surely they would be pushing for that option too? It does not sound like they are.
I believe that Daryl Eales was fully aware of the fact that Oxvox were looking at the purchase of the stadium via a trust. He attended the members meeting didn't he? If that is correct then did he ask Oxvox not to pursue this whilst he was trying to buy the stadium? Is he being mischievous by making his recent statements? Did he feel that Oxvox would not get anywhere so did not take them seriously? Are his recent comments as much to do with his frustrations of dealing with Kassam as any negativity towards a Community Trust Purchase? Any owner would prefer to own all aspect of the club so they have absolute control but past history of our club and many others suggests that this is often not the best option for the long term sustainability of the club. Surely the fans will always want the best for the club and will not hinder the progress of an owner if they demonstrate sound intentions.
We have to consider the state of the club since Merry and Co (Lenegan?/Thomas?) signed the ridiculous deal to purchase the club without the stadium. The owners have been held back by their lack of progress in sorting out the resultant mess. They have a landlord who does the minimum possible with the highest charges possible whilst resorting to litigation/arbitration when the two do not agree. For almost a decade the club's owners have supposedly been negotiating to buy the stadium yet nothing has happened. Do we really want the current situation to prevail? There is now the opportunity to change this situation and hopefully give the fans some control in the future of the club that has been run on a far from stable basis for nearly half a century. I am sure that the Eales and Lenegan have/had decent intentions for their time at the helm of the club but they have both vented some frustration at the dealings with the current landlord. Surely a Community Trust must be a much brighter prospect than the current situation. As fans we need to focus our energy on persuading Daryl Eales that this is the best option for the club. We don't need to muddy the waters by harping on about other options that seem to have been clearly put to bed. Maybe the membership need to be asked to vote on the way forward to put an end to any unnecessary time/energy wasting (or not)?
If the Community Purchase is to happen then a lot of work on the fine detail will be needed to progress this situation as quickly as possible. The last thing we need is for this to drag out for years. Lets get this moving forward at speed (with due diligence) and help move the club forward.
|
|
|
Post by old on Oct 13, 2016 6:03:50 GMT
Scoob
Your statement :-
"We have to consider the state of the club since Merry and Co (Lenegan?/Thomas?) signed the ridiculous deal to purchase the club without the stadium"
If Kassam continues to insist that he will not sell to an individual or the club, this will always be the case. If or when DE has had enough and wants out, then any potentionial purchaser would find they can only purchase a loss making business. Maybe we should consider backing DE in his attempt to buy the stadium for the secured future of the club. Just another opinion which you may or may not agree with.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on Oct 13, 2016 7:46:28 GMT
Kassam's attitude is odd. He won't sell the ground to an individual (fine) but then makes it hard for any individual to run the club on a sustainable basis. He's a big part of the circle of stupidity that has held the club back.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Oct 13, 2016 8:18:42 GMT
Scoob Your statement :- "We have to consider the state of the club since Merry and Co (Lenegan?/Thomas?) signed the ridiculous deal to purchase the club without the stadium" If Kassam continues to insist that he will not sell to an individual or the club, this will always be the case. If or when DE has had enough and wants out, then any potentionial purchaser would find they can only purchase a loss making business. Maybe we should consider backing DE in his attempt to buy the stadium for the secured future of the club. Just another opinion which you may or may not agree with. Of course I respect any opinion made in a well thought out manner and I get what you are saying but Kassam has been happily taking over 1/2 million from the stadium for many years and there is little incentive for him to sell. He refused to sell at a viable price to Lenegan and it appears that is the same now. He is well known for digging his heels in. What I don't get is why Eales, if he was so keen to buy the stadium, didn't confidentially communicate this to Oxvox but announced it after the joint announcement at the weekend? Is a Community Trust ownership of the stadium really that bad? There are many ways that this could be structured including a lease/licence to the club so they carry out all day to day activities. This would be little different to ownership. Of course there are varying degrees of activity from that to the trust controlling all revenue streams. The main advantage of Trust Ownership will be to prevent the Stadium being mortgage to cover any future club owner's overspending and will ensure the club continues to exist without the upheavals of the past (and many other clubs). This needs to be discussed and is why I would prefer that we, the fans, focus on one direction that we can all get behind.
|
|
|
Post by old on Oct 13, 2016 8:43:42 GMT
Scoob. Can't disagree with most of what you say, however until we are party to the terms that would be offerd to the club and the future owners of the stadium it's difficult to make a judgment. The fact that the club have made a minimum of 3 offers to Kassam that have been confirmed would suggest that the club would prefer to have100% control of the stadium and therefore any profits that would bring. My real concern is that DE will walk if the terms mean he will still be running a loss making business which he has publicly made known.
Is a CommunityTrust Ownership that bad, the answer has to be I don't know but is this the best option for the club and it's owners? Yes better than the current situation, but better than the club owning the stadium? That's the $m question. What is certain there is a fully funded offer on the table and therefore a reasonable timescale is achievable to bring this to a conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 13, 2016 8:50:40 GMT
Going to get confusing between Oufc community trust and stadium trust 😳. Would the current trust be one of the stake holders? Possibly a question for Charlie, who knows more about that, if your still involved with it ?
|
|
|
Post by KLYellow on Oct 13, 2016 10:12:15 GMT
What happened with the land on Roman Way where United train? Is it still owned by the council as I thought BMW bought it?
|
|
|
Post by old on Oct 13, 2016 10:14:13 GMT
And you think Brexit is complicated.
|
|
|
Post by mcf86 on Oct 13, 2016 10:24:53 GMT
The plot thickens and thickens, so many whys and wherefores, ifs and buts. I bet someone is pleased. Hard to imagine how DE is feeling about the situation, he's been pretty 'cool' (Publicly) about the insistence by fk that he will not sell to a business man/individual and sees (Apparently) the future of the stadium only as a 'community' club. But, in private I guess DE will be feeling less than cool about matters, he's invested heavily in the club in hard cash as well as time and energy, and maybe he didn't see the 'community club' angle coming and that is/was not in his plans. So how can Darryl continue to fund the club now, knowing that there's virtually no chance of obtaining the stadium and therefore no chance of realising the vision he had for OUFC? If DE, and possibly followed by his team manager, were to decide to 'move on' it could spell disaster for matters on and off the pitch at the club. This could be just what fk is aiming for, he doesn't want to see Oxford Utd being successful as it doesn't fit in with his plans, so he's set out to divide and conquer the current excellent relationship between the boardroom at Oxford Utd and the supporters - and therefore if successful in this it would make DE re-think his position? There needs to be clarity on the situation before the uncertainty filters onto the pitch, all parties need to come together asap and thrash out a deal that satisfies all concerned. Easier said than done though.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 13, 2016 10:32:05 GMT
I dunno about that, daryl has been more than happy to move the club forward while renting, it's only now that the relationship has become strained that he decided to try and buy it. That suggests that he wouldn't be to unhappy about a similar model of renting from a community trust but at a lower cost and with mouth more freedom to other things to make the club money. The way I see it daryl now knows where he stands, worse case if oxvox fail or can't get anywhere with the talks then the kassam suddenly can't be the preferred option, all of a sudden daryls "plan b" suddenly becomes plan a and we then have to start looking at other sites, kassam still wouldn't have to sell to him, but both would then come out of it happy. I don't necessarily think not buying the stadium would mean he will walk away.
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Oct 13, 2016 10:41:35 GMT
I dunno about that, daryl has been more than happy to move the club forward while renting, it's only now that the relationship has become strained that he decided to try and buy it. That suggests that he wouldn't be to unhappy about a similar model of renting from a community trust but at a lower cost and with mouth more freedom to other things to make the club money. The way I see it daryl now knows where he stands, worse case if oxvox fail or can't get anywhere with the talks then the kassam suddenly can't be the preferred option, all of a sudden daryls "plan b" suddenly becomes plan a and we then have to start looking at other sites, kassam still wouldn't have to sell to him, but both would then come out of it happy. I don't necessarily think not buying the stadium would mean he will walk away. I think that the 'issues' facing the club are not so much because we don't own the stadium, but because of who does. Extortionate tea and coffee costs, not willing to budge on the restaurant revenue split, 4th stand, bar revenues, food in the executive boxes, the list goes on. Those issues would surely be a lot easier to resolve if the stadium was 'owned' by a trust who had the interests of the football club at heart rather than their own profit.
|
|
|
Post by old on Oct 13, 2016 10:42:00 GMT
Maybe maybe not, but what is certain is DE cannot continue to run a club losing money like it is. DE is on record as saying the current situation is unsustainable.
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Oct 13, 2016 10:57:43 GMT
Maybe maybe not, but what is certain is DE cannot continue to run a club losing money like it is. DE is on record as saying the current situation is unsustainable. 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.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Oct 13, 2016 11:07:54 GMT
Maybe maybe not, but what is certain is DE cannot continue to run a club losing money like it is. DE is on record as saying the current situation is unsustainable. 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
|
|
|
Post by foley on Oct 13, 2016 11:39:01 GMT
I am worried for OUFC. The fact he can't have that at this stage and has been turned down 3 times. This coupled with Kassam not telling him directly and also disputing costs may have consequences and affect Darryl's thought process. You couldn't blame him for that either but he might be fine with it. It is a very delicate situation. Would I be fine with it - absolutely not. Have Oxvox done the right thing - definitely as at least now there is clarity on the situation which would not have happened without there involvement. At least now everyone knows the situation even if they don't know the detail or numbers - that is down to Oxvox. Yes I am worried as well. This is a pivitol part of OUFC's existence in my view. I have said many times how IL/NM let the club down with their farcical decision to but the club without the ground, and look now at what that decision has done. There are a lot of games going on (DE suggesting that the deal should happen this season and Si above saying that there is little chance of this (which I tend to believe based on what FK has said) What DE thinks of all of this who knows? He is pretty upfront and I am sure that we will find out soon, but losing him would plunge the club potentially into turmoil. Whatever happens, I am not sure that thsi situation can go on for the years that FK suggests could happen
|
|