Ice Rink

IMO the football club is a community asset, probably the biggest asset the area has

Quoted from realist

The difference is that GTFC is a commercial venture and the use of public funds for such a venture is an emotive and divisive  issue.
The ice rink is a community asset which gets public support.  Quite simple really

The report was quite clear there is no public money going to be spent the land is to be sold at the market rate, the public purse gets a nice Captial receipt to spend on whatever it sees fit.

Quoted from realist

If you say it often enough you might believe it.    I was hoping this topic might remain factual for once but you have spoilt that.

Do you mean the "facts" according to realist? The least apt name you could have chosen.

Thought our new "Community Stadium" project was suppose to include a new "Community" ice rink???

Another pipe dream from la.la land  

Quoted from Swansea_Mariner

The report was quite clear there is no public money going to be spent the land is to be sold at the market rate, the public purse gets a nice Captial receipt to spend on whatever it sees fit.

The report mentioned selling land to fund the stadium. I think this means the land owned by the borough being sold for the project.  I could be wrong but it is quite difficult to understand things from the report

Quoted from realist

The report mentioned selling land to fund the stadium. I think this means the land owned by the borough being sold for the project.  I could be wrong but it is quite difficult to understand things from the report

How about you try reading it properly then and 'get your facts right'. I'll even help you out see paragraph 7.2 of the cover report under financial implications  p 8


The amount will be an additional capital receipt available for reinvestment into council priorities.

That  means they can spend the money on whatever they like, such as school buildings, pavilions, adult social care facilities, tarmac for the road etc.


Land sold to fund the stadium = the land on which Blundell park stands.

It's not the best report in the world for many reasons which are irrelevant to this specific point, but I can't see how you can miss that, it's even shown in the limited financial inforinformation provided with the sensitivity tables.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

That's not what I said. I simply pointed out why people might be more keen to sign up to the ice rink campaign.

Different issue but, as you've raised it. What the club have failed to do is show how the new ground will make it more self-sufficient financially. Or even why it can't be self-sufficient at BP. Sure we all know that there might be more revenue streams at the new site or more people might come, or that BP is old and is more expensive to run. But as for evidence, there's zilch. It's not even clear who will own the new ground or benefit from additional revenue.

Well they may not have specified specific amounts but surely revenue from car-parking, training pitches and conference facilities will help. At the moment these are three areas where town get no income at all.

Maybe I should have said it's a shame the clubs fans can't all unite in the effort for a new ground? Naff all chance of the town getting behind it if us as fans can't agree!

The problem is that our council build things but fail to maintain them until they get into a poor state and have to be closed. For example Scartho Baths, The Ice Rink, Public toilets, The Central Library etc etc. I know they have been squeezed for funds but somehow find money for other schemes some of which no-one wants. It may be it is easier to get grants to construct new but difficult to get help to maintain what we have.

Quoted from oldun

The problem is that our council build things but fail to maintain them until they get into a poor state and have to be closed. For example Scartho Baths, The Ice Rink, Public toilets, The Central Library etc etc. I know they have been squeezed for funds but somehow find money for other schemes some of which no-one wants. It may be it is easier to get grants to construct new but difficult to get help to maintain what we have.

I wonder how much NELC's budget has been squeezed by over the 'austerity years'. That crazy paving in Victoria St seems to have cost a fair packet which might have funded backlog maintenance on one building.

Some of the mistakes concern capital projects going back decades. My old man always used to complain about the fact Scathe Baths was built too small (40 yards) when the space was available to build an Olympic sized pool (50m). That surely would have brought additional revenue in for not much more cost. Same with the new pool near GY leisure centre - why only 25m.