Stadium Update

[Cricko]

The key word there being potential. I don't doubt that the retail park could make a lot of money, but realistically in the current climate most of the units will remain empty and the flats will be a more reliable source of income.

Which he can't build according to the plans until the rest of the development is done...... so that is never going to happen.

 

[Neil 15GB]

RM will be long gone by then.

 

[mrsblue]

If the flats fail to sell then imagine the huge rental income !, Lets aqssume monthly rent per flat was £700 or £8400 per year then multiply this by number of flats built.

Ron collects massive rent per annum and leaves a nice legacy for his family,OR Ron sells the flats and makes a killing;

Personally I dont care if RM earns billions so long he does the right thing for the club,That is the key question.

 

[Jam_Man]

If the flats fail to sell then imagine the huge rental income !, Lets aqssume monthly rent per flat was £700 or £8400 per year then multiply this by number of flats built.

Ron collects massive rent per annum and leaves a nice legacy for his family,OR Ron sells the flats and makes a killing;

Personally I dont care if RM earns billions so long he does the right thing for the club,That is the key question.

Problem is that there will be a debt accrued to build them. Having rents may not work if the debt isnt structured to be long term.

The flats will attract buy to let buyers anyway, not sure about the houses.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

I'm familar with how share options work but not sure of the relevance there. I've not had sight of the agreement between the club and the Council but would assume that if Ron has recently asked for the Council to accept a figure lower than previously offered then within the original agreement it was a fixed amount for the period of the planning permission given and be definition, non negotiable.

In terms of your final point I hope you are right - but there is no harm in us preparing ourselves for the worst.

The relevance of share options is that like planning permissions you don't have to go ahead.

A planning permission is just a permission. They can't force you to build it, just like they can't force you to exercise an option.

I agree we should be prepared in case things don't work out.

 

[onceknownasrab]

The figures do not support the fears. Agreed more shops closed last year than were opened but this was part because of online shopping but largely due to retailers closing inefficient small outlets and opting for larger more profitable units on out of town retail parks. Retail parks are seen in the industry as the immediate future.

Furthermore, there are many residential developments in Essex and there seems no delay in selling them.

I think the FF project is far more lucrative and viable than many give it credit for. It is the way forward for the club and falls in line with national trends for demand.

 

[Cricko]

The figures do not support the fears. Agreed more shops closed last year than were opened but this was part because of online shopping but largely due to retailers closing inefficient small outlets and opting for larger more profitable units on out of town retail parks. Retail parks are seen in the industry as the immediate future.

Furthermore, there are many residential developments in Essex and there seems no delay in selling them.

I think the FF project is far more lucrative and viable than many give it credit for. It is the way forward for the club and falls in line with national trends for demand.

http://www.retail-week.com/in-busin...cline-warns-former-focus-boss/5041275.article

 

[onceknownasrab]

http://www.retail-week.com/in-busin...cline-warns-former-focus-boss/5041275.article

As I said, retail parks are seen as the immediate future. The article which you have posted, highlighting comments from Bill Grimsey, predicts the demise of secondary retail parks. It does not say in the near future and is only a prophetic analysis reflecting the constant change in the retail sector.

Grimsey also puts the demise down to the desire to shop at malls such as Trafford and Westfield, neither of which are a threat to FF unless you can see beyond the horizon.

The future of FF long term will depend on how it evolves and changes within a fluid sector. That said, Grimsey will be able to one day turn round and told you so if after the decades he is still around to gloat.

 

[jimmyshrimp]

Bored with with stadium talk and politics. I support Football!

 

[mrsblue]

As I said, retail parks are seen as the immediate future. The article which you have posted, highlighting comments from Bill Grimsey, predicts the demise of secondary retail parks. It does not say in the near future and is only a prophetic analysis reflecting the constant change in the retail sector.

Grimsey also puts the demise down to the desire to shop at malls such as Trafford and Westfield, neither of which are a threat to FF unless you can see beyond the horizon.

The future of FF long term will depend on how it evolves and changes within a fluid sector. That said, Grimsey will be able to one day turn round and told you so if after the decades he is still around to gloat.

The moral fibre of towns has been destroyed by retail parks and malls,Indeed the last few years we have seen large firms go belly up.Recent info states the internet continues to grow and grow putting even more pressure on high streets and retail parks.

Ron imo has sold the council the idea he will bring jobs and housing to the masses and give the council a cool 6 million,Yet slowly but surely Ron makes the carrot smaller and smaller.

 

[onceknownasrab]

The moral fibre of towns has been destroyed by retail parks and malls,Indeed the last few years we have seen large firms go belly up.Recent info states the internet continues to grow and grow putting even more pressure on high streets and retail parks.

Ron imo has sold the council the idea he will bring jobs and housing to the masses and give the council a cool 6 million,Yet slowly but surely Ron makes the carrot smaller and smaller.

There is and never was a moral fibre of towns. High streets have evolved and devolved as a matter of course to reflect the changing times and ever increasing and subsequently decreasing footfall. There has always been precious little in consumer loyalty and the term 'shop around' has never been more significant than in times of recession.

It is not the developers nor the retailers that dictate shopping but personal choice. If everyone shopped in the high streets they would flourish but because of the obvious limitations in terms of size the consumer would have to pay more for their purchases.

If you look at all the out of town supermarkets alone, they are there because of demand and the inner towns could never allocate sufficient space for them.

One of the many attractive qualities about retail parks is the free parking and that is something an awful lot of people appreciate and councils have never cottoned on to in their self serving money grabbing agendas.

You also mention large stores going bust. Yes and by and large it is the ones that did not move with the times. Comet did not counter the online offensive and dont get me started on the darling Woolworths, a store steeped in tradition and locked in the past.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Tell southend council to cut their benefit payments to the immigrants who frequent southend highstreet and take Rons reduced offer and we can move on.

I'm assuming that this is some sort of joke? :unsure:

 

[Brett Angle]

The relevance of share options is that like planning permissions you don't have to go ahead.

A planning permission is just a permission. They can't force you to build it, just like they can't force you to exercise an option.

I agree we should be prepared in case things don't work out.

Oh I see. - but that would be somewhat self defeating on Ron's part wouldn't it ? - i.e. if planning permission expires/ is withdrawn. Bearing in mind how long it took to get in the first place?

I guess all interested parties are waiting to see who blinks first. I have to admit that I'd be furious if the Council acquiesce to any of Ron's demands without a strict timetable and definitive milestones (made public). Ironically that would ensure that the town and the club's interests (vs Ron's) are deemed paramount.

 

[united we stand]

Well if they had a chance of selling them maybe....the housing market is on its knees.hence why so few developments....not only because people are scared of commitment even if they could get a mortgage but new buyers (which drive the market) are as rare as rocking horse **** these days...unless of course you wish to believe the bollocks The Halifax came out with about Southend being 15% up in values which I can assure you is a crock of shyte.

I even doubt RM's think tank of making the rest of RH housing at this stage but he needs out of RH first.

I have posted beofre that my local boys football team has been trying to move for 15 years and that we have fanced many of the same issue that SUFC has . The development is not of the same size, but it is still a multi million pound project with over 40 houses being built on our own ground. In November the builder finally agreed terms as they belif believe the time is right now to start building, So not all builders agree with your assesment

 

[united we stand]

To begin with lets be absoultely clear I am neither 'arrogant' or consider myself 'more intelligent' than anyone else on this message board.

Secondly I am always interested in reading other people's opinions - that is primarily what a forum is all about isn't it? .

Telling people to 'wake up and smell the coffee' seems to against the above . Opinions are fine , statements like that scream 'I'm right your an idiot'' --- hence my reply to your post

 

[Andyhsufc]

FWIW, I'm in the "can't see it happening" camp. I do not profess to understand the arrangements that Ron has with the council and Sainsburys but, as far as I can see, he has neither the financial means or the diplomacy skills needed to make such an ambitious scheme happen. He has managed to alienate numerous stakeholders in the project and is now using the council as a smokescreen to buy himself some time. Our only saving grace is that Sainsburys will not want to be seen putting a football club out of business...the end result may be Southend playing at an alternative ground.

 

[Jam_Man]

FWIW, I'm in the "can't see it happening" camp. I do not profess to understand the arrangements that Ron has with the council and Sainsburys but, as far as I can see, he has neither the financial means or the diplomacy skills needed to make such an ambitious scheme happen. He has managed to alienate numerous stakeholders in the project and is now using the council as a smokescreen to buy himself some time. Our only saving grace is that Sainsburys will not want to be seen putting a football club out of business...the end result may be Southend playing at an alternative ground.

Bear in mind that Sainsburys are financing the 3 stands, so he does have the financial ability to build that, whether he can complete it is another thing.

 

[mrsblue]

The club has been raped from top to bottom and is RMs tool for his final goal which simply is to make pots of cash and leave the club and its fans high and dry.

Sainsbury will I have no doubt keep their side of the deal and build the 3 sided joke .

 

[Shrimpergonzo]

Time to chip in with my opinion - I'm not particularly pro- or anti- Ron and would just like to focus on the facts, not the personalties involved. I am a qualified property professional and have been involved in many complicated capital development schemes in my career over the last 20+ years, so hopefully look at this with a reasonably knowledgable eye.

Firstly it needs to be restated that this is a highly complicated development scheme, the big picture involves building a large stadium, a major food store, a retail park and some residential units on two different sites, one of which has an ancient monument on it. Therefore to say "Club X started around the same time and theres is built now.." is completely irrelevant as they may not have been under the same constraints as us. Added to this the fact that the developers do not yet have control over the whole site (i.e. Victoria Ave shops) means that we have also a complicated land assembly exercise, and also the fact that the club needs to keep playing throughout the development, meaning that the phasing is also critical (which will impact on cash flow).

Secondly the s.106 monies that we have to pay to the Council were determined in a slightly more favourable economic climate. It is not surprising therefore that when the numbers have been re-crunched recently that the development does not stack up anymore. There are a whole load of variables here - the shops on Victoria Ave want more for the land, retailers are being squeezed and so want to pay less rent - therefore something has got to give, unfortunately for SBC it is the amount of planning gain cash that they will receive.

I am not at all surprised that Ron is trying to negotiate this down, my guess is that he's gone in low (which I would do too) knowing that he'll have to give up something in the subsequent negotiations and they'll agree somewhere between the two figures at some point in the next couple of months.

My predictions are as follows:

• A revised s.106 planning gain sum will be agreed in Feb/Mar
• We will start on site in the summer
• the 3-sided ground will be completed at some point early in the 2014/15 season (not in time to start it)
• The 4th side will not be as big as originally planned or completed as early as planned
• Ron will walk away on completion leaving the club either with a big debt to him (which he will sell on) or with a rent to pay (his pension fund) - either of which could leave us with serious financial problems

I hope this is a balanced opinion, like most of you I can see trouble ahead but I can't see any way out of it and sticking with Ron seems to be the best plan in the short term as whilst he is still chasing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, he'll keep the club alive so we've got something to do on a Saturday afternoon instead of going shopping with the other half!

 

[Mick]

Secondly the s.106 monies that we have to pay to the Council were determined in a slightly more favourable economic climate.

If the economic climate had improved rather than deteriorated, we'd be seeking to pay more? The council would be looking to demand more more ? No, neither of those things would be happening.

Overall a balanced view, Garry but I think comparisons with other clubs are possibly valid. I'm sure most new grounds/complexes had issues (Brighton's certainly did); they just had people better able to deal with them.

Not sure I liked your not-so-happy ending either !!