Takeover

Quoted from Fishy_fishtails

He started it?? Grow up!

Yep.
Answer the takeover rumour if he really felt it necessary to, it was a daft rumour that could have been ignored and would have died on its own but ok , he chose to publicly respond. No issue with that.

Just think the rest of it wasnt necessary .


However.....at least it sounded like the council are actively pushing for something

Quoted from chipsandgravy

The takeover rumour got way out of hand as usual. A simple press release stating there had been interest but the party concerned couldn't demonstrate they had the funds.
Even the local media started asking the question. Yes, that well known journalist Phil Space.
Major shareholder comes and puts the record straight. See item 1
He also takes the opoortunity to thank the team for there heroic efforts at Palace. He could do that face-to-face, they don't need to watch it on video.

You forgot to mention the bit where he maintains that that failed project of Peaks Parkway is the best option

Was that largely uneccsssary?

Yes!

Quoted from tarka

Unnecessary? Making a statement about a rumoured takeover isn't unnecessary, neither is an update on the stadium.

He said a lot more than that though. A simple PR would have been sufficient.

Update on the stadium? He gave his opinion that PP was the best option and made some nonsensical statement about it being funded by enabling development (in the same interview as saying that there isn't the demand in the area for housing and retail.)  That's not really an update is it? It's an admission his 'vision' was flawed.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

He said a lot more than that though. A simple PR would have been sufficient.

Update on the stadium? He gave his opinion that PP was the best option and made some nonsensical statement about it being funded by enabling development (in the same interview as saying that there isn't the demand in the area for housing and retail.)  That's not really an update is it? It's an admission his 'vision' was flawed.

It's unbelievable isn't it.

Didn't watch the interview myself, but perhaps he meant that there are not the enabling projects to be had anywhere other than PP, which is a big plot of land, and lends itself to a housing development?

Well, as usual, the Fenty statement as taken over the feel-good factor and brought us back down to earth.

Is this reality? Probably yes whilst he is here.

Peaks Parkway has been shelved (dead in the water) but he seems in denial.

Talking to a "FREEMAN OF GRIMSBY" He says the football stadium is NOT part of their plans for Freemo.

So where does that leave us back to square one it seems.

Political differences should not come into it but you can't help thinking a Conservative councillor/ the major gtfc investor/club director V a Labour council in charge are at play here as well.

Both stubborn and with massive egos to boot.

Even Jolley would find it hard to mend that rift.

Quoted from TownSNAFU5

Bigdog, you have identified a number of realistic  potential risks and costs to GTFC operating as a viable business and football club sometime in the future.

The caveat being that no additional funding is received or made available to fund them.

Taking the above potential costs from the playing budget is a worry.

The Board should be looking at these risks and how to manage and fund them.  This is prudent and part of their responsibilities. Also identifying contingencies (if the Main Stand was closed).

If the Board are unable or unwilling to cover these potential risks and costs, then they should look harder at attracting and engaging with other parties than can supply new investment, ideas and energy.  Change is good.

Morning Fishes, and not wanting to prolong, this already too long post, but it might be worth noting.

The Main Stand is not at 'risk' in the medium term or even the long-term as long as it is, up kept 'and it is' and that risk assessments are mitigated against 'which they are'

The cost of improvements have largely been met by external funding and certainly have not hit and will not hit the playing budget.  

It might help to know that the playing budget can only be 50% of turnover plus permanent investment under salary cap rules. We have committed that sum and any improvements will come from elsewhere. Grants and the likes included.

I maintain that the stadium and it's upkeep, together with the training ground, plus the youth academy are light years ahead of 18 years ago having had considerable investment in them.

Could we have done better 'maybe' do we need new facilities 'yes' but are they well cared for? Nick Dale who is largely responsible these days for the facilities, does a really good job of maintaining the stadium to conform and provide the best match-day experience at BP give a Victorian stadium.  

Kind regards  John Fenty
UTM and fingers xx today

Thanks for the insight John! Always refreshing to hear the facts on here.

Quoted from Getyourfactsright

Morning Fishes, and not wanting to prolong, this already too long post, but it might be worth noting.

The Main Stand is not at 'risk' in the medium term or even the long-term as long as it is, up kept 'and it is' and that risk assessments are mitigated against 'which they are'

The cost of improvements have largely been met by external funding and certainly have not hit and will not hit the playing budget.  

It might help to know that the playing budget can only be 50% of turnover plus permanent investment under salary cap rules. We have committed that sum and any improvements will come from elsewhere. Grants and the likes included.

I maintain that the stadium and it's upkeep, together with the training ground, plus the youth academy are light years ahead of 18 years ago having had considerable investment in them.

Could we have done better 'maybe' do we need new facilities 'yes' but are they well cared for? Nick Dale who is largely responsible these days for the facilities, does a really good job of maintaining the stadium to conform and provide the best match-day experience at BP give a Victorian stadium.  

Kind regards  John Fenty
UTM and fingers xx today

John, honest question - is there anyone in the building who advises you on PR & external comms? I believe offers have been made, and declined, in the past that might’ve helped in this area.

Quoted from Getyourfactsright

Morning Fishes, and not wanting to prolong, this already too long post, but it might be worth noting.

The Main Stand is not at 'risk' in the medium term or even the long-term as long as it is, up kept 'and it is' and that risk assessments are mitigated against 'which they are'

The cost of improvements have largely been met by external funding and certainly have not hit and will not hit the playing budget.  

It might help to know that the playing budget can only be 50% of turnover plus permanent investment under salary cap rules. We have committed that sum and any improvements will come from elsewhere. Grants and the likes included.

I maintain that the stadium and it's upkeep, together with the training ground, plus the youth academy are light years ahead of 18 years ago having had considerable investment in them.

Could we have done better 'maybe' do we need new facilities 'yes' but are they well cared for? Nick Dale who is largely responsible these days for the facilities, does a really good job of maintaining the stadium to conform and provide the best match-day experience at BP give a Victorian stadium.  

Kind regards  John Fenty
UTM and fingers xx today

Another honest question John, is there a "fans forum" in the pipeline ?