Confused about club statement

[Guest]

The front page of the official site says that a one-year share has been requested.

 

The long article details three options. Am I right in understanding that the front page item corresponds to option 2, i.e. the club is accepting demotion?

 

[Guest]

The way i read it is the club are hoping for conference football at dover:

"It was the general view that our application for the extended Ground-Share would fail, and the team were mainly concentrating on discussing the options that would be left and available to the Club in that event."

So the three options are for use when the decision for groundshare is turned down by the conference.

Confused...you bet <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

 

[P.W.]

[color:"blue"]Yes, basically the Club weren't confident that the Conference would stretch the rules even further & felt the application for a one year extension was likely to be rejected.

 

The further options

1) for a 10 year share with a 3 year break-out would cost £400k a year and would mean that a return to Hartsdown would be impossible before the three years are up.

2)Accept demotion to the Nationwide Conference South, & Ground-Share with either Dover or Ashford .

3) Accept demotion to the Nationwide Conference South, and return to a partly completed Hartsdown Park. It was suggested by the Developer that this option would cost about the same as option 1) with the added bonus that the Club would also benefit from ground sponsorship / gate receipts / higher attendances etc.etc.

 

Another factor to option 3 is that, under terms of the lease, the club has to make good the structures that that had been demolished and that they have planning permission for the building of a replacement stand.

 

Supporters have generally agreed that the third option (though disappointing as it means relegation) would be preferable to another three seasons at Dover. [/color]

[Guest]

<img src="/images/graemlins/ooo.gif" alt="" />What does part stadium mean aqnd will further work be going on on non match days to get it finished. cant stand a section like halifax cos it looks so bad.

[Cookie]

No return to hartsdown for three years? The council would love that.Thats all they need to make a reason not to have it sitting there doing nothing. My guess is that they will build on it should that be the case.

[Guest]

A personal opinion. There is no way that Folkestone Invicta should accept further ground sharing at Dover. For two seasons Invicta have had either Dover or Margate as competition nearly every single week for home matches.

Dover and Margate are not the only clubs in need of money although Invicta do pay their debts.

You should give Invicta a break and at least consult them reference a ground share.

Yes , the pitch needs work on it but Margate paying towards this would be far cheaper than being fleeced at crabble.

Folkestone have far more cover than Ashford ( no disrespect to them)and apart from the pitch work should easily be able to satify requirements.

Their boardroom/hospitality suites are miles better than Dover as is the Stripes Club compared with the miserable Centre Spot.

The covered seating more than meets conference standards and travel to Folkestone for away teams by motorway is far easier than Dover.

You would save money compared with crabble and at the same time give Invicta help. I do not know if the Invicta board would be interested or not but Dover have had enough extra funding, and blown it.

On top of this I'm sure margate fans would be more appreciated at cheriton road. Let's see how Dover appreciate competition for a change. They need the money???, who doasn't.

[P.W.]

[color:"red"]quote(Geoff Pay):What does part stadium mean and will further work be going on on non match days to get it finished? [/color]

[color:"blue"] From what I understand, restoration of the football stadium /pitch to Conf.2 standards (ie: like Homelands Ashford.

Remembering the Club has permission to build a stadium & an obligation to 'make good' the upheaval of the demolition.

Then the 'Commercial Build' as & when permission is granted.

[color:"red"]quote(GP): ...cant stand a section like halifax cos it looks so bad.

[color:"blue"]Agreed but wouldn't want to stay away from Hartsdown just because it looked ugly. [/color]

[color:"green"]quote(Cookie): No return to Hartsdown for three years?

[color:"blue"]Yes, by taking up the 10-year share (with 3 year break-out) we couldn't return to Hartsdown even if it were finished in late August 2004. [/color]