Jump to content

Ground Improvements


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, ChinaOwl said:

 

The relationship as I now see it:

 

The club are only responsible for maintaining rental payments. HK entity responsible for ground maintenance. What happens if the club cannot maintain rental payments? Eviction or repossession?

 

"The club are understood to have to pay the Booths just under £200,000 a year [2004] and the expensive duty to keep Millmoor intact falls on the club, not the landlords. In addition the current directors say the Booths are entitled to what might seem an extraordinary package of privileges for a family no longer in control: about 30 free tickets to every home match, with entertainment; advertising in the ground; and first call on away tickets and even FA Cup final tickets.

In late 2006 the club fell behind with the rent and tried to argue in court that the original agreement undervalued the properties and that the lease was onerous. The case was struck out, the rent was paid, the agreement maintained. "  (Source: The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/football/2008/apr/23/rotherham.leaguetwofootball)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, ChinaOwl said:

 

What has the revenue coming into the club got to do with the business that owns the ground? They are by all intents and purposes, completely separate entities. If the club is paying rental for the ground, it could be argued that the landlord has a responsibility to maintain the ground in a satisfactory condition. 

or not depending on the terms of the contract, what actually did the contract between the 2 parties state in relation to 'satisfactory condition''?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, bigthinrob said:

Don't suppose there's any chance of some sanity on here is there??

 

Even if it's a teeny weeny miniscule bit of sanity.

 

Even a minimal amount of logical thought (bearing in mind the circumstances) would do.

 

 

I agree. And that has to start with the Chairman first. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, bladeshater said:

Be grateful he's keeping the club afloat because if doesn't keep paying the bills there may not be a club

 

Why would I be grateful for him doing  that?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bladeshater said:

You wouldn't if you're a blunt

 

Being grateful for the owner not running the club into the ground?

 

Weird outlook.

 

Thank you "Mr Chansiri" for not bankrupting the club - I won't question anything you do as a consequence.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ronnie Starling said:

As we don't "own" the ground does this mean the owner will throw a bob or too at improving the facilities?

We haven't owned the ground since MM bought the club. DC has owned the ground since he bought the club from MM. The fact that a different DC company from the club company now owns the ground makes no difference whatsoever. I don't think he will spend a penny, mainly because the basis of his wealth is actually with his family and not him personally. Having splashed something like £130m already on the club, the ground, players transfers and subsidising player wages and now buying the ground off himself, I doubt anything significant will be spent. In any case, with COVID-19 preventing any proper return to normal crowds for at least a season, why would he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ChinaOwl said:

 

The relationship as I now see it:

 

The club are only responsible for maintaining rental payments. HK entity responsible for ground maintenance. What happens if the club cannot maintain rental payments? Eviction or repossession?

Neither because Chansiri owns both entites 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ChinaOwl said:

 

What has the revenue coming into the club got to do with the business that owns the ground? They are by all intents and purposes, completely separate entities. If the club is paying rental for the ground, it could be argued that the landlord has a responsibility to maintain the ground in a satisfactory condition. 

The Landlord would use rental monies to borrow capital 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ka58 said:

 

Being grateful for the owner not running the club into the ground?

 

Weird outlook.

 

Thank you "Mr Chansiri" for not bankrupting the club - I won't question anything you do as a consequence.

 

No point “questioning” if you’ve already made your mind up.

 

No answer would suffice regardless.

 

You’re not looking for ‘answers’ you’re looking for retribution.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bigthinrob said:

No point “questioning” if you’ve already made your mind up.

 

No answer would suffice regardless.

 

You’re not looking for ‘answers’ you’re looking for retribution.


No - I’m saying you can’t absolve him from any criticism on the basis that he hasn’t bankrupted the club.

 

I don’t know what you’re on about regarding “retribution” that doesn’t make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...