Jump to content

Sh*te Years Ahead


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Marpals said:

 

Those Banners have been there ages at least over a Year.

 

15 months by the sounds of things. Like I mentioned before, I don't go in to Sheffield that much, let alone near that place.

 

The conversation with the source was around the American investor and what was holding him back. The McCabe development was mentioned, but I didn't realise it was common knowledge. When it got mentioned I thought it was much more recent and well off the radar, but it seems that's not the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

15 months by the sounds of things. Like I mentioned before, I don't go in to Sheffield that much, let alone near that place.

 

The conversation with the source was around the American investor and what was holding him back. The McCabe development was mentioned, but I didn't realise it was common knowledge. When it got mentioned I thought it was much more recent and well off the radar, but it seems that's not the case.

Well, depending on what McCabe owns, this could get messy for them in regards to any future improvements and the appeal of buying them.

 

Wouldn't surprise me if McCabe has the planning permission but no interest in doing anything with it. Just to spite them. He'll also no be wanting to sell that lend for cheap or near market value. It'll be his way of recouping what he "lost".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skyline said:

Well, depending on what McCabe owns, this could get messy for them in regards to any future improvements and the appeal of buying them.

 

Wouldn't surprise me if McCabe has the planning permission but no interest in doing anything with it. Just to spite them. He'll also no be wanting to sell that lend for cheap or near market value. It'll be his way of recouping what he "lost".

 

Spite was exactly how it all came across to me. It's almost an insurance policy for him. I think you are right, it won't go cheap and he won't sell easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything blacked out is earmarked for development.

McCabe may have been done over, but he still has the last laugh if he wants.

He can stop matches happening at the Lane if Scarborough Holdings go ahead and develop.

They can't play games if they only have access on two sides of the ground for fans to gain entry to the stadium.

image.png.058daa411ba3b4b719f1b6c1c2001e8d.pngimage.png.2d898eb083d8d8ed7dda8745464f18a0.png

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaveClark said:

Everything blacked out is earmarked for development.

McCabe may have been done over, but he still has the last laugh if he wants.

He can stop matches happening at the Lane if Scarborough Holdings go ahead and develop.

They can't play games if they only have access on two sides of the ground for fans to gain entry to the stadium.

image.png.058daa411ba3b4b719f1b6c1c2001e8d.pngimage.png.2d898eb083d8d8ed7dda8745464f18a0.png

How the hell did he manage to carve the land up like that with nobody from United noticing??

 

Presumably he will sell them a few slips of land for access for mega £s, maybe Poundland didn't get the bargain he thought?

 

Maybe McSue is planning to go back to having a cricket pitch 🤣🤣🤣

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, nbupperthongowl said:

How the hell did he manage to carve the land up like that with nobody from United noticing??

 

Presumably he will sell them a few slips of land for access for mega £s, maybe Poundland didn't get the bargain he thought?

 

Maybe McSue is planning to go back to having a cricket pitch 🤣🤣🤣

Presumably McSue can ask an extortionate amount of money for those pieces of prime land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DaveClark said:

Everything blacked out is earmarked for development.

McCabe may have been done over, but he still has the last laugh if he wants.

He can stop matches happening at the Lane if Scarborough Holdings go ahead and develop.

They can't play games if they only have access on two sides of the ground for fans to gain entry to the stadium.

image.png.058daa411ba3b4b719f1b6c1c2001e8d.pngimage.png.2d898eb083d8d8ed7dda8745464f18a0.png


The land behind the kop is what I thought was meant in ChapSmurf’s original post.

 

I might be misremembering it, but I’m sure going back a few years McCabe had plans to develop that land. Going back before the prince turned up or they announced that fairytale expansion in 2018. Sure it was going to be flats or student accommodation or something.
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DaveClark said:

Everything blacked out is earmarked for development.

McCabe may have been done over, but he still has the last laugh if he wants.

He can stop matches happening at the Lane if Scarborough Holdings go ahead and develop.

They can't play games if they only have access on two sides of the ground for fans to gain entry to the stadium.

image.png.058daa411ba3b4b719f1b6c1c2001e8d.pngimage.png.2d898eb083d8d8ed7dda8745464f18a0.png

Pretty sure it's not all that area that is marked, I know he was due to build some flats on the corner of John St and Shoreham St but it wouldn't have effected any entrances to the ground or any development of the kop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The key to this is when the land was split up just before the ground became solely a football club.

It used to be split up hugely when it was a cricket ground, and not a lot change after that fact - even to this day.

McCabe owns portions that will cause major issues.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Marpals said:

Pretty sure it's not all that area that is marked, I know he was due to build some flats on the corner of John St and Shoreham St but it wouldn't have effected any entrances to the ground or any development of the kop.

 

@DaveClark could be right. I've looked in to this further since I commented in this thread, and it seems there is planning permission to update the south stand, so it could well be that Scarborough Holdings are part of that.

 

What I now understand is that the corner of Cherry St/Shoreham St is the area in question, that SH owns and has planning permission for. That would stop a stadium expansion, should they ever have the finances and fan base for it. I doubt they will ever get either.

 

All I know is it's a right laugh for us that won't end well for the grunters lol

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

@DaveClark could be right. I've looked in to this further since I commented in this thread, and it seems there is planning permission to update the south stand, so it could well be that Scarborough Holdings are part of that.

 

What I now understand is that the corner of Cherry St/Shoreham St is the area in question, that SH owns and has planning permission for. That would stop a stadium expansion, should they ever have the finances and fan base for it. I doubt they will ever get either.

 

All I know is it's a right laugh for us that won't end well for the grunters lol

 

I don't think any of the car park land behind the South Stand is SH, its the corners it could be Cherry St/Shoreham St, I seem to remember McCabe was going to build some flats on the corner of John St/Shoreham St, but it could have been the other corner.

If SH did own the car park behind the South Stand do you think they would let them use it ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Marpals said:

I don't think any of the car park land behind the South Stand is SH, its the corners it could be Cherry St/Shoreham St, I seem to remember McCabe was going to build some flats on the corner of John St/Shoreham St, but it could have been the other corner.

If SH did own the car park behind the South Stand do you think they would let them use it ?

 

You might be right about the other corner, but other people have shown me news reports of the Cherry St/Shoreham St banner, so I know that exists.

 

I don't know about the car park situation. I guess it depends what is in the Title Deeds, or what has been previously, legally, agreed. Maybe McCabe is playing it cute. "Yes, of course you can use the car park. Not a problem. Free of charge" and then whoomp. Up goes the Development on the corner.

 

He supports the club so he's on a sticky wicket emotionally. But I'm sure he can easily overlook that when it comes to business and making a return on his investment, especially at the expense of HRH Prince of Izal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

You might be right about the other corner, but other people have shown me news reports of the Cherry St/Shoreham St banner, so I know that exists.

 

I don't know about the car park situation. I guess it depends what is in the Title Deeds, or what has been previously, legally, agreed. Maybe McCabe is playing it cute. "Yes, of course you can use the car park. Not a problem. Free of charge" and then whoomp. Up goes the Development on the corner.

 

He supports the club so he's on a sticky wicket emotionally. But I'm sure he can easily overlook that when it comes to business and making a return on his investment, especially at the expense of HRH Prince of Izal

The signs are there and have been for over a year I definitely know that.

But I would really be surprised if SH own the car park behind the South Stand, I sure that would have been in the press, also SH would have put signs up on the car park wall, if only to play mind games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Marpals said:

The signs are there and have been for over a year I definitely know that.

But I would really be surprised if SH own the car park behind the South Stand, I sure that would have been in the press, also SH would have put signs up on the car park wall, if only to play mind games.

 

Signs on Cherry St/S St. or John St/S St.?

 

Yeah good point about the press. I doubt McCabe would have let that kind of news slip through his fingers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Marpals said:

The signs are there and have been for over a year I definitely know that.

But I would really be surprised if SH own the car park behind the South Stand, I sure that would have been in the press, also SH would have put signs up on the car park wall, if only to play mind games.

 

That said, we are here taking the pizz and we don't even own our own ground. I'm sure who is in the worst place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, nbupperthongowl said:

Wouldn't go as far as to call it 'prime' land at bumhole lane 🤣🤣🤣

If mcsue claims it and they play in chapeltown park  then he's done his job...dirty scrubbers and want football world to feel sorry for them.....fk them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

@DaveClark could be right. I've looked in to this further since I commented in this thread, and it seems there is planning permission to update the south stand, so it could well be that Scarborough Holdings are part of that.

 

What I now understand is that the corner of Cherry St/Shoreham St is the area in question, that SH owns and has planning permission for. That would stop a stadium expansion, should they ever have the finances and fan base for it. I doubt they will ever get either.

 

All I know is it's a right laugh for us that won't end well for the grunters lol

 


Nothing going on the next few months guys.

 

Next project for SH us continue with Thorpe Park and then something in Scarborough itself.

  • Thanks 1
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...