lowandhard wrote:

Goddard & woods wrote: I don't care how Butthead dresses it up to double the payments overnight to a cash strapped league 2 club is morally wrong IMO and whoever allowed that clause in any agreement should hang their head in shame it could financially cripple us.
I fear you are right though NGR we will be forced out at some point and then the only alterative at the moment is a return to SP with a probable drop in attendances and revenue and a lot of money to be spent just to bring it up to league requirements.
Then I fear it will be sooner rather than later that we will drop back out of the league and be back in the National league or National league south such a shame after all the hard work that went in to regaining our league status.
As for paying towards the new pitch why should we have to cough up we rent not own it should be up to the landlord to provide the facilities we pay for its like a landlord asking its tenant to pay for a new roof because the old one leaks, the rugby didn't mind using a pitch that we had a football league grant for the pitch was in a shocking state and needed replacing that should be the landlords responsibility not ours.

I think it’s unnecessary to bandy about personal insults like that. What in fact is the truth of this “ doubling of costs “ , I’d like to see the breakdown on that. Didn’t our landlords build the temporary stands for the Spurs game very quickly and efficiently? Did we pay them for that equally quickly and efficiently? Now I don’t know the answer to the latter question but this relationship is a two way thing. The WRU have provided a good playing surface ( which apparently we contribute to ) which is not really needed for rugby which can be played on a farmer’s field, is that a bad landlord? The EFL must have been scrutinising us very closely at one time and if the WRU had wanted us out , why not just neglect the pitch?
We really need to be good partners here and isn’t it true that the ticketing for next year will be first class at a common ticket office and that the shop facilities will be re-united at the stadium? That doesn’t sound like a landlord that’s trying to kick us out. As the bard had it “ ambition should be made of sterner stuff “.

frostyjohn wrote:Much of the foregoing comment is based on second hand reports, press articles and rumour. All so unnecessary if there was some transparency by the Board, having started the hare running by comments at the meeting. Simply answer what are the costs of using RP and how much have they been increased by the WRU and why increased. Don't need chapter and verse on contractual niceties just basic facts. Not too much to ask on such an important topic.

abf9 wrote:

frostyjohn wrote:Much of the foregoing comment is based on second hand reports, press articles and rumour. All so unnecessary if there was some transparency by the Board, having started the hare running by comments at the meeting. Simply answer what are the costs of using RP and how much have they been increased by the WRU and why increased. Don't need chapter and verse on contractual niceties just basic facts. Not too much to ask on such an important topic.

The rent was £90k a year but the WRU are now applying ancilliary match day costs which the previous owners didn't ,which basically doubles it.
The WRU are playing hard ball and we all have a reason why.

UPTHEPORT wrote:

abf9 wrote:

frostyjohn wrote:Much of the foregoing comment is based on second hand reports, press articles and rumour. All so unnecessary if there was some transparency by the Board, having started the hare running by comments at the meeting. Simply answer what are the costs of using RP and how much have they been increased by the WRU and why increased. Don't need chapter and verse on contractual niceties just basic facts. Not too much to ask on such an important topic.

The rent was £90k a year but the WRU are now applying ancilliary match day costs which the previous owners didn't ,which basically doubles it.
The WRU are playing hard ball and we all have a reason why.

Thing is we dont have any cards do we

We got nowhere else to go

Exile 1976 wrote:Jeez Brendan, the vast majority of us wanted a new stadium, not just you, but you did exactly what we did to help. Nothing.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Exile 1976 wrote:Jeez Brendan, the vast majority of us wanted a new stadium, not just you, but you did exactly what we did to help. Nothing.

15 years ago I was posting that we needed to develop a stadium. The constant objection was that we couldn't afford to.

Over and over I said that we could not afford not to. I said such a stadium might take 15 years to develop but that we had to begin. Time and again I was shouted down.

Well here's the thing. I was right.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:
Well here's the thing. I was right.

Exile 1976 wrote:Jeez Brendan, the vast majority of us wanted a new stadium, not just you, but you did exactly what we did to help. Nothing.

Jimmy Exile wrote:

Exile 1976 wrote:Jeez Brendan, the vast majority of us wanted a new stadium, not just you, but you did exactly what we did to help. Nothing.

To be fair the clown did offer to put a grand in a trust fund, as long as other people did the work of setting up the trust fund.

I think stan thinks in his strange world that offering to put in a grand meant offering to build a stadium

Exile 1976 wrote:

Jimmy Exile wrote:

Exile 1976 wrote:Jeez Brendan, the vast majority of us wanted a new stadium, not just you, but you did exactly what we did to help. Nothing.

To be fair the clown did offer to put a grand in a trust fund, as long as other people did the work of setting up the trust fund.

I think stan thinks in his strange world that offering to put in a grand meant offering to build a stadium

No need to call him a clown Jimmy. He does have County's interest at heart and I know he's wanted, like much of us, our own stadium for years. The only issue I have is the 'I told you so' type attitude when he did nothing more than anyone else to get this realised