- This topic has 220 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Very suspicious of any new bidders at this stage.The question I have yet to see a satisfactory answer to is why have they left it so late when someone else has had a bid accepted and exclusivity ? Are they just trying to disrupt the process? If the Spanish bid fails I have a feeling they will disappear without trace.
The council have stated that there is no issue with the lease the delays are more to do with the EFL fit and proper checks they make so I thought, fine.
Till I read this remark from the council which debunks that statement.“The issue that seems to be around at the moment is we’re trying to ‘protect’ the Warriors.”
So YES there is a delay and YES it is regarding the rugby and I’d guess its def the lease and possibly their rent which has fcuk all to do with them.
All a joke this, kick them fcukin out let them play over Fosters fieldsExcept we can’t afford the stadium without them. With both clubs paying the same rent, the stadium loses circa £1m a year.
The council own the land on which the DW is built. If the new owners try to shaft the Warriors (eg by doubling their rent or reducing the length of the lease), the council could well be within their rights to “review” the ground rent at the same point, where “review” = double or treble it.
As Egg has said, both clubs need to use the DW just to make it a minor-loss making venture. Without one of them, the stadium becomes a big money pit.
The council has always slayed to their side.did the klumps ever pay anything towards the re laying off the new pitches in the past.
.The council have stated that there is no issue with the lease the delays are more to do with the EFL fit and proper checks they make so I thought, fine.
Till I read this remark from the council which debunks that statement.“The issue that seems to be around at the moment is we’re trying to ‘protect’ the Warriors.”
So YES there is a delay and YES it is regarding the rugby and I’d guess its def the lease and possibly their rent which has fcuk all to do with them.
All a joke this, kick them fcukin out let them play over Fosters fieldsI’m not sure how you get to that conclusion from reading that statement. She’s basically denying the rumours that are going around.
The council has always slayed to their side.did the klumps ever pay anything towards the re laying off the new pitches in the past.
Yes
The problem is the longer this goes on the more it’s going to affect our long term future.Certain local parties might be happy with that outcome and will keep it going for as long as it takes.We need it resolving this week ,no excuses !
Well they rightly should have to with the pittance of rent they been paying for yrs.
Both clubs pay the same “pittance of rent”
Well they rightly should have to with the pittance of rent they been paying for yrs.
Both clubs pay the same “pittance of rent”
I think this is a key point.Latics will own the stadium but are expected to pay the same rent.I don’t get it.
Since forever as Latics don’t actually own the stadium.
Going forward Phoenix that will depend on how the Spanish want to set the companies up. If it is the same as is now then they wouldn’t get away with charging the rugby more rent than the football club i’d imagine.
If they decide to combine the two and Latics then own the stadium, then the rent would probably go up but you would expect it could only possibly double.
.- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
