Jump to content

Brockhall STC - planning permission application ?


Recommended Posts

Just now, J*B said:

150M? They’re selling the land, not developing the houses themselves. They’ll be lucky to get 20M from knocking down the STC and selling the land. I could accept it if it was 150M. 

And that is the popular misconception amongst many who are in favour. Swag actually said that it could be that they may even have to ask the owners for more money to complete his project. That is the main reason why I'm struggling with this. Just what is the point of effectively downsizing when it might actually end up costing more money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's reassuring to know we still have fans who care and put some pressure on Waggott and Co in various ways. Even a post on this message board will have helped so nobody should underestimate their inv

Joe, I mean this will all due respect, but Jack’s legacy isn’t Rovers winning the league. I would assume you’re too young to really remember what Jack did? Jacks legacy is putting Blackburn on th

With respect, you are talking absolute rubbish on this point and imo being extremely disrespectful to Jack Walker. I hope my post doesn't send you scurrying off to the moderators to complain as I woul

Posted Images

10 hours ago, Sparks Rover said:

I don't believe that.  The business has taken a hit worldwide , about 500m down from what I can see.  Time to consolidate from their point of view.  They could realise 150m from the land potentially and would it really make any difference to the 1st team that we dont have teams below U10.....nope.

150 mill ?

So you don't think that if someone tipped them the nod that certain individuals might specialize in these projects then employing them might seem a tab more attractive ?

It was a surprise to everyone when after employing no real directors they suddenly install a real CEO with experience on 300k p.a.  Of course Mowbray got the credit for advising on that but maybe it goes a lot deeper.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, arbitro said:

Swag actually said that it could be that they may even have to ask the owners for more money to complete his project. 

Must be true then. Make no mistake this is a way of raising money, not spending🙄.

Plus, with the enhanced value of real estate in that area, why wouldn't they look to make money off the builds ?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, arbitro said:

And that is the popular misconception amongst many who are in favour. Swag actually said that it could be that they may even have to ask the owners for more money to complete his project. That is the main reason why I'm struggling with this. Just what is the point of effectively downsizing when it might actually end up costing more money.

I’m not bothered about us losing money on building it, although as you say it makes no sense. I’m concerned what happens when we’re (hopefully) back in the Premier League and nobody says “the training centre isn’t big enough - we need to move the academy elsewhere” and all the local land is worth hundreds of millions of pounds and we don’t want to pay that. Before you know it we’ve swapped two sites half a mile between each other for two sites 4 miles away from each other. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

Must be true then. Make no mistake this is a way of raising money, not spending🙄.

Plus, with the enhanced value of real estate in that area, why wouldn't they look to make money off the builds ?

 

Pretty much everyone would have thought the club would make lots of money on this and that was the motivation and in their eyes the justification. Now whether or not Swag is telling the truth is immaterial to me, the fact he said it should be a stick to beat him with when he is questioned about it by various fan groups and the press. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, funny-old-game said:

I've looked mainly from a distance on here of late about anything Rovers, as I'm running on empty with regards to the passion and love I've had over more than 50yrs being a fan.

 

What irks me most is this total mismanagement will continue until the Venkys leave or we go out of existence. Nobody really knows if the debt £190+ is something they can claw back, either way the club is being diluted, stript back or asset stript (take your pick).

 

The Venkys are in to deep in my opinion so this downward spiral will continue till either of the above happens and we have no club left.

 

Another thing that gets to me is some members that are very vocal on this topic are the one's that looked down their noses at members advocating Venkys out and voiced it on here as their was clearly only one way this was going. Myself, arbitro, Clayton's left boot to name a few where outside Ewood wanting Venkys out and the apathy and distain towards us was soul-destroying, now some are on here with what seems like the pennies has finally dropped, but sadly maybe to later IMO.

I wasn't a supporter of the original Venky's out campaign because I didn't see the point in ousting multi billionaire owners in favour of people who can't afford to fund us.

Still don't.

If a genuine alternative with sufficient financial clout comes along then it's a discussion worth having but not until then for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J*B said:

150M? They’re selling the land, not developing the houses themselves. They’ll be lucky to get 20M from knocking down the STC and selling the land. I could accept it if it was 150M. 

Ozz said £15m from the sale of the land as a ball park figure.

Maybe that was a figure Waggott gave to the Supporters Trust?

Less than a year's running losses. Then you have the new training centre to build (supposedly).

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tomphil said:

Article in LT about our academy and it being rated as one of if not the best in the country in terms of productivity.

If that doesn't tell the world it should be left well alone then nothing does. It is working it is doing what it was set up to do. Apart from integrating some into the first team squad it has fook all to do with Mowbray or Waggot.  THat line had already started long ago and would've been & will be a requirement for any BRFC manager in this era.

Any CEO should be actively encouraging the owners to back this to the hilt whatever it costs. With nearly half its yearly cost being met by a grant anyway it's a bargain running as it is.

Keep this slippery weasel and his grubby pound sign eyes well away from it all would be my forceful advice.  Leave it well alone there's no need for any crackpot ideas when it is now reaching its peak as it is.

It isn't broken it doesn't need fixing by some welps who failed at Coventry. It's the future of Blackburn Rovers not Steve Waggot or Tony Mowbray !

Exactly. Top post.

You can't expect a Damien Duff or a Phil Jones out of the Academy every season, they only come along once every ten years or so at best but we do seem to be producing a string of decent youngsters who could do a job for us and who probably would under a different manager.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

I wasn't a supporter of the original Venky's out campaign because I didn't see the point in ousting multi billionaire owners in favour of people who can't afford to fund us.

Still don't.

If a genuine alternative with sufficient financial clout comes along then it's a discussion worth having but not until then for me.

I agree with that in principle but the structure hasn't changed re quantity Chairman since 2012, Venkys on the ground involvement is next to nothing.

You only have to look at the dross Chairman's we've had under the Venkys from Agnew to Waggott all chancers with no passion or commitment, compare this with Fox through to Williams.

Nothing will change and the "alternative with financial clout" will not happen just more years of dilution as with the attempted training ground sale even though it's in the top15 in the country,upkeep of the Ewood, fans expectations etc because we have no real structure and those in charge are just feathering their own nest and have no love or affinity with it.

I'm a glass half full sort but it's only going one way sadly.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sparks Rover said:

Eh? You just pummelled me for saying 150m 

Yeah - it’s worth different things to different people. To a housing developer the land is worth 150M in revenue. If you want to buy it to build a football academy there will be a different value on the land.
 

Essentially, the option to rebuy the land will never be there again because it’s worth hundreds of millions of pounds more to a developer than it is to a football club. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, J*B said:

Yeah - it’s worth different things to different people. To a housing developer the land is worth 150M in revenue.

Hmm. Why don't venkys just do it.?  Small project on the scale of it.  I would if I was them.  I think that's the plan.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Exactly. Top post.

You can't expect a Damien Duff or a Phil Jones out of the Academy every season, they only come along once every ten years or so at best but we do seem to be producing a string of decent youngsters who could do a job for us and who probably would under a different manager.

Yes in my eyes it is doing what it was set up to do, produce players for us. Anything else is a bonus but there'll be a few who'll be worth decent money. 

We are at a level now that it works for us, they wouldn't be good enough for the Prem. If they mess around with it, cut costs and downgrade it then might not produce players good enough to fill a championship squad.  So it's best all round to make the most of it as it is. 

Why ask owners to have to top up rebuilding costs of a smaller site ?  Surely better they just continue to top it up and improve what we already have. The next big sale from the first team put some of the profit back towards upgrading the existing sites.

Do they want to spew another 12 million on investments that are more likely to depreciate than double ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

Hmm. Why don't venkys just do it.?  Small project on the scale of it.  I would if I was them.  I think that's the plan.  

Venky Homes, can you imagine the state of them?

Mind you, it's plausible and makes financial sense for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, LDRover said:

Venky Homes, can you imagine the state of them?

Mind you, it's plausible and makes financial sense for them.

Its obvious....thats what I thought would happen.  These are big time even though you wouldn't know it...

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Exactly. Top post.

You can't expect a Damien Duff or a Phil Jones out of the Academy every season, they only come along once every ten years or so at best but we do seem to be producing a string of decent youngsters who could do a job for us and who probably would under a different manager.

We’re in agreement about all of this Rev.

I would just add this. The lower down the leagues we fall, the more the academy will produce for the first team. It’s not just down to improvements - or otherwise - in the academies performance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, den said:

We’re in agreement about all of this Rev.

I would just add this. The lower down the leagues we fall, the more the academy will produce for the first team. It’s not just down to improvements - or otherwise - in the academies performance.

Yes, and we will be truly buggered when the Academy is scraped and we are doing a Brentford within Brexit restrictions and in competition with teams who know how to do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • J*B unpinned this topic
  • J*B pinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.