Lots of other good stuff mentioned at the meeting btw for anyone who didn't get along, very positive messages financially and re: future development plans. I did note some stuff down but I don't know how appropriate it is to share or interesting it might be.
I'm inclined to think that the training ground owners should be prepared to sell back (to FALL or trust so it's protected, if not the Couhigs directly) at whatever they paid plus interest but that might be old fashioned.
I tend to agree although I would substitute adjusted for inflation rather than interest (they have effectively had that by rent). I don't remember the numbers but in principle are the club morally obliged to repurchase the land for say £500k (if that was the inflation adjusted purchase price) if they could purchase a similar field in the vicinity to do their training for £250k (including costs of preparing it)?
I'm inclined to think that the training ground owners should be prepared to sell back (to FALL or trust so it's protected, if not the Couhigs directly) at whatever they paid plus interest but that might be old fashioned.
I tend to agree although I would substitute adjusted for inflation rather than interest (they have effectively had that by rent). I don't remember the numbers but in principle are the club morally obliged to repurchase the land for say £500k (if that was the inflation adjusted purchase price) if they could purchase a similar field in the vicinity to do their training for £250k (including costs of preparing it)?
Interesting question, If it was really bought as a favour and the people needed their money back then possibly. Although securing the clubs future should be paramount if that was the original reason. The way the clause was removed suggests otherwise.
@DevC said:
I don't remember the numbers but in principle are the club morally obliged to repurchase the land for say £500k (if that was the inflation adjusted purchase price) if they could purchase a similar field in the vicinity to do their training for £250k (including costs of preparing it)?
No. Do you really think the Couhigs would entertain a moral obligation? I don’t mean that as a slight on them at all, they’re business people. As for the Trust/FALL - presumably they can’t afford it anyway.
Remember when AP was built, "the team benches were clear perspex shelters as used on the continent, and one of the earliest usages in this country." Although some claim this is an urban myth similar to Lionel Ritchie once performing there.
Is the land really going to be built on? Isn't it Green belt? If the current owners do have that in mind it was a very dubious way to purchase it from the club!
@WildWestFC said:
Is the land really going to be built on? Isn't it Green belt? If the current owners do have that in mind it was a very dubious way to purchase it from the club!
Due to the junction opposite and being in the middle of pretty much no where getting planning for housing on the training ground site would be problematic at best
More likely near impossible
@WildWestFC said:
Is the land really going to be built on? Isn't it Green belt? If the current owners do have that in mind it was a very dubious way to purchase it from the club!
I wonder if Beeks Homes have ever built on once-greenbelt land before. I wonder ?
@WildWestFC said:
Is the land really going to be built on? Isn't it Green belt? If the current owners do have that in mind it was a very dubious way to purchase it from the club!
I wonder if Beeks Homes have ever built on once-greenbelt land before. I wonder ?
Steady now, someone will be along to tell you it couldn't possibly happen.
I wonder when the airport development plans are finally passed ? And I wonder if that would assist in helping the training ground be moved out of greenbelt land and developed ?
@ChasHarps said:
I wonder when the airport development plans are finally passed ? And I wonder if that would assist in helping the training ground be moved out of greenbelt land and developed ?
Mr Couhig said (if I've written this down correctly) that this has been a "source of some frustration" talks have been going on for over a year and "I don't think we'll come to an agreement." Mr. Couhig has made an offer, they have identified some place else and it will be resolved one way or another in 60 days. He went on to say that the offer was certainly more than they paid but I didn't manage to write down the exact wording perhaps a Trust board member/director can advise on the exact wording.
Mr. Beeks is the Life President (appointed without election in 2017) is, or was, the Head of the Governance committee and Mr. Keizner serves on the WWSET board.
I am sure they wouldn't want their legacy to be tarnished by accusations of being carpetbaggers.
It would help their image perhaps from a moral/reputational point of view if they were to accept a sensible offer from a party or parties who clearly and manifestly have the longer term interests of the football club genuinely at heart.
Actually a serious follow-up. I did lock horns with Marlowchair a few times but always found him civil in our frequent disagreements and was sorry he left. Does anyone on here actually know him and if he’s okay?
Comments
Lots of other good stuff mentioned at the meeting btw for anyone who didn't get along, very positive messages financially and re: future development plans. I did note some stuff down but I don't know how appropriate it is to share or interesting it might be.
I tend to agree although I would substitute adjusted for inflation rather than interest (they have effectively had that by rent). I don't remember the numbers but in principle are the club morally obliged to repurchase the land for say £500k (if that was the inflation adjusted purchase price) if they could purchase a similar field in the vicinity to do their training for £250k (including costs of preparing it)?
Is there a recording or a re run of the session last night?
Interesting question, If it was really bought as a favour and the people needed their money back then possibly. Although securing the clubs future should be paramount if that was the original reason. The way the clause was removed suggests otherwise.
No. Do you really think the Couhigs would entertain a moral obligation? I don’t mean that as a slight on them at all, they’re business people. As for the Trust/FALL - presumably they can’t afford it anyway.
One thing is certain. Whoever does eventually own that piece of land will ultimately benefit enormously.
Remember when AP was built, "the team benches were clear perspex shelters as used on the continent, and one of the earliest usages in this country." Although some claim this is an urban myth similar to Lionel Ritchie once performing there.
Don't you mean the current owners!!
Is the land really going to be built on? Isn't it Green belt? If the current owners do have that in mind it was a very dubious way to purchase it from the club!
Due to the junction opposite and being in the middle of pretty much no where getting planning for housing on the training ground site would be problematic at best
More likely near impossible
I wonder if Beeks Homes have ever built on once-greenbelt land before. I wonder ?
Steady now, someone will be along to tell you it couldn't possibly happen.
I wonder when the airport development plans are finally passed ? And I wonder if that would assist in helping the training ground be moved out of greenbelt land and developed ?
I'm sure Dev can enlighten you!
Beetlejuice!
Dont know where you all live, but can pretty much guarantee that at some point in the past where your house now stands used to be a field
Mr Couhig said (if I've written this down correctly) that this has been a "source of some frustration" talks have been going on for over a year and "I don't think we'll come to an agreement." Mr. Couhig has made an offer, they have identified some place else and it will be resolved one way or another in 60 days. He went on to say that the offer was certainly more than they paid but I didn't manage to write down the exact wording perhaps a Trust board member/director can advise on the exact wording.
Mr. Beeks is the Life President (appointed without election in 2017) is, or was, the Head of the Governance committee and Mr. Keizner serves on the WWSET board.
I am sure they wouldn't want their legacy to be tarnished by accusations of being carpetbaggers.
It would help their image perhaps from a moral/reputational point of view if they were to accept a sensible offer from a party or parties who clearly and manifestly have the longer term interests of the football club genuinely at heart.
Think you are confusing morals/reputations with property developers @micra An easy mistake to make.
Where have all the cOnsPiraCY tHeoRY people gone?
Where is Marlowchair when you need him?
Actually a serious follow-up. I did lock horns with Marlowchair a few times but always found him civil in our frequent disagreements and was sorry he left. Does anyone on here actually know him and if he’s okay?
I never did discover who @marlowchair was. Is he no longer a Gasroomer ?
I'll just nip in to say he disappeared after being adamant Gareth had managed his last game as Wycombe manager. Absolutely adamant he was.
(But i'm off now,as mentioning this gets a few people flapping, so i'm off sharpish)
Hello @Malone. HELLO. Oh, he’s gone.
Is it possible that at the time Marlow Chair posted the information cited above that it was accurate at the time of writing?
Disclaimer: I don't know who Marlow Chair is/was either but I found his postings to be accurate and well-informed.
Marlowchair and nicecarrots, now there’s a front two that would strike fear into the opposition.
But completely inaccurate @NiceCarrots when it came to predictions.
Never let the facts get in the way of conspiracy theories.
I am delighted as always to agree with the excellent Mr. Glass Halffull, where is Marlow Chair when you need him?
If Marlow Chair was playing, I wouldn't even make the squad.
Is it time we launched a Bring Back The Chair campaign?