GIBSON'S STATEMENT - THE MISSING FACTS

[Guest]

Aaaah ... more words of wisdom. Let’s have a look at wot he’s got to say. William Verry are not a Development Company, OK. But who will own those bright and shiney new hotels and conferencing centres on your 15 acre site? The Football Club? Who will build them?

 

The problems with Clarence Park. My understanding is that there is likely to be a relaxation of ground grading requirements in the future, not a tightening up. What is acceptable now will be fine in the future. The lease is fine through to 2015, I should know as I was involved in setting it up! If a club has no insurance it shouldn’t be playing football or staging events. Employer liability and all that. The local residents were always the same. They cannot moan about us being here because we were here long before them all!

 

Car parking - why will nobody consider doing a deal with the station, the parking there is more than sufficient for all our needs. As for the stand, even Harding had a plan for its removal and replacement. Those seats in there come from Rochdale and Reading: we’ve got more than enough to see us off in this league and the Conference. As to the Council taking back Clarence Park, we’ve been here since 1908 and surely the 1954 Landlord & Tenant Act would prevent them from leaving us homeless.

 

The Board of directors may not have discusses relocation, but I bet someone has.

 

Oh and when is he going to justify sacking Robbo?

[mdetaylor]

No William Verry are not a developer. There is a holding company , a construction company, a facilities management company and no doubt other corporate entities that bear the William Verry name, there is not a development company though (this has to be expressed in the objects of the company).

 

Who will own anything is build, my guess would be fairly large property company through a development subsidiary (look at the listed property companies for a sample). It is possible that the funding could be provided by a bank who on completion would sell the development to property company. So William Verry would not be the owner (construction companies do not have the funding or capital to own large developments and Verry are not even one of the largest construction companies).

 

Who would build? Whoever wins the job through the tender process, the process being decided by how the dveloper wants to manage the project (Design and Build, contract management, phased development). So if Verry Construction table a competative bid and the developer thinks they can work with them then they may get the job. Still it is not massive profit as most construction co's work on 1-2% profit.

 

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 will only apply if it has not been contracted out. You intimate knowledge of the drafting of the lease of Clarence Park should allow you to inform us if this is the case.

[AFF]

Having earlier defended the right of freedom of speech on another thread, JN, and objected to those who make sweeping criticism of those who come on here, I've just read your contribution.

 

So you were involved in setting the lease up were you? Not very close to the centre of those who set it up, clearly. You know something of the Landlord & Tenant Act, 1954, do you? Not much, I'm afraid.

 

Jolly helpful to have your considered views on the future grading requirements of The Conference. Not that I doubt your knowlege in this respect, despite your clear lack of knowledge of the lease, and the League's requirements, but would you mind letting me know the source of your information? Just so that I can check the detail, you understand.

 

Insurance. Were you involved in setting that up, too? There is Building Insurance arranged by the Council, as Landlord. However, it would seem that no claim is met in the event of theft, notwithstanding damage to the building, as was the case in the recent break-in. Cost to The Club: £4000 I gather. Building Insurance should not be confused with Public Liability Insurance, as I'm sure you are aware, having been 'involved' in the past.

 

So the local residents 'can't moan'. They may not have grounds to moan but they certainly do moan. Perhaps the attitude in the past 'they can't moan, we were here first' has contributed to the current difficulties, not that you would have been involved in that, no doubt.

 

The Station Car Park. Have you ever tried to 'do a deal' with Railtrack? What would you have in mind, then? A 25 year lease? Why do a deal, anyway? It costs £1 to park in the Station multi-storey on Saturdays. There. Deal done. Thanks for the idea.

 

The Stand. Harding had a plan, did he? Oh. Well. That's all right then. Harding had a plan. As good as built that new stand. Don't be ridiculous.

 

Seats. We have enough seats, do we? Not enough bottoms, I'm afraid. Not enough income either, and not just from matchdays.

 

Gary Roberts. Justify. Justify? It's been done. Gibbo is the executive and he has exercised executive power. Ask him on Saturday. I bet that he will answer you. I suspect that you wont like the answer but that's just too bad. Don't waste too much of his time.

 

So you don't believe a word of Gibbo's statement concerning 'relocation'. On second thoughts, I wouldn't bother asking him anything on Saturday. You will be wasting the time of both of you.

 

 

[Chubbhead EFM]

Talking about parking, what about the car parks in Oaklands College? It's not exactly a million miles away from the grounds. I believe they make the students car-park open to the public on market days (I think!). Is it just the student car parks that are open? I know there's a barrier into the staff car park, so I was just wondering if this one is open to the public too.

[EFM The Firm, The Voice]

yeah it is, people park there on match days for the game!

[Ted Maul]

Hey AFF - when you're not correcting spelling/grammar <img src="/forums/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> , you tend to talk some sense. Most of the time.

 

Are JimmyN and t. henry related to the duchess by any chance?

[Woody]

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ted Maul:</font><hr />

Are JimmyN and t. henry related to the duchess by any chance?

 

<hr></blockquote>

 

By all accounts, JimmyN is very pally with the duchess, Ted. Both enjoy a drink or two.

 

<img src="/forums/images/graemlins/beerchug.gif" alt="" />

[AFF]

I sometimes wonder why I bother.

 

Car parking. The lack of car parking at Clarence Park is frustrating on match-days. As has been highlighted, car parking is available within a few hundred yards of the ground, so that's all right then. No, actually. The lack of on-site car parking is one of the inhibiting factors with regard to social/commercial functions that could take place other than on match days and generate much needed income. Look at Chesham and Woood.

 

I think that Clarence Park is a great Ryman League ground, but the facilities limit the opportunity to bring in additional income and, one day, I suspect, will prevent promotion. As The Chairman says in his Statement, relocation is not a priority, but it is an issue for the future.

 

This Board. I recognise most of the regulars. [Thank goodness no-one knows who I am.] John Gibson should understand that, of the contributors to this board, there are a number of fans who have an opinion on most things, if not everything, concerning The Club. That's good. Many of those fans are un-used to the sight of an honest Chairman. John Gibson, nor anybody else who wasn't involved at The Club at the time, can have absolutely no conception of the things that were done, and the way they were done, under Harding. Harding was a 'saviour' when he took over from Tominey. Within 4 years he took The Club to suspension from the League and the brink of extinction. Don't make me laugh about 13 minutes from Wembley and all that garbage. Save it for the F.A. Investigation. No-one wants a repetition, hence the comment from Laz on another thread about 'honesty'.

 

Another thing that neither John Gibson, nor any other rational human being, can have any conception of, is the ludicrous lengths to which Harding would go on this message board and elsewhere to cause mischief, sometimes for his own benefit, often just for the hell of it, apparently. Ask Ian Rogers, Mark White, Barry Hilliard, Steve Trulock, Leigh Page, Steve Eames, Ray McCord, Bill Nicholson, every current Associate Director, many, many others.

 

Now look again at the contributions from 'JimmyN' on this and a couple of other threads. Not many people know that GHA was owed £100 by Harding by the end of the 1999 season. [A small sum in the context of the debts that he was racking up, of course.] Not many people know the detail of the lease on Clarence Park. Steve Trulock does. But Steve Trulock knows details that 'JimmyN' clearly doesn't know. So do I.

 

So. A new name appears on the message board. Clearly, John Gibson scans this thing. I bet he hasn't registered that 'JimmyN' has posted only a handful of messages. Nor will he link the few messages in the way that a 'regular' reader can. In The Chairman's shoes, I would have been deeply hurt by the opening message on this thread in response to an open and honest Statement to the fans to correct a misunderstanding concerning an article in the local paper.

 

'JimmyN' hasn't been to Clarence Park since he stole the red tractor, the tea-urn, the P.A thing and that carved pumpkin. He should be certified or locked up. Perhaps he will be.