Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Amberexile wrote:8th June 2013
I can't read either signature

Neither could I. However it has been stated that it was Howard Greenhaf who negotiated the agreement.

In your opinion is there any ambiguities in that agreement that could lead to the club saving/earning extra money?

Alan G Bryant wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Amberexile wrote:8th June 2013
I can't read either signature

Neither could I. However it has been stated that it was Howard Greenhaf who negotiated the agreement.

In your opinion is there any ambiguities in that agreement that could lead to the club saving/earning extra money?

Of course I don't the details of what money changes hands in relation to which clauses currently but in my opinion yes there are opportunities for the club to improve their position and they should conduct a full review.

Amberexile wrote:

Alan G Bryant wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:
In your opinion is there any ambiguities in that agreement that could lead to the club saving/earning extra money?

Of course I don't the details of what money changes hands in relation to which clauses currently but in my opinion yes there are opportunities for the club to improve their position and they should conduct a full review.

That was the point made by Mr Redwood a few months back. Having seen the license I agree. However only the present directors have the full picture.

Surely conducting a full review of an agreement that is already signed is futile?

If the WRU or RP are not playing ball then it is also up to the supporters to initiate the change. A complete boycott of the watering holes at RP might make them reconsider their stance.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Alan G Bryant wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:
In your opinion is there any ambiguities in that agreement that could lead to the club saving/earning extra money?

Of course I don't the details of what money changes hands in relation to which clauses currently but in my opinion yes there are opportunities for the club to improve their position and they should conduct a full review.

That was the point made by Mr Redwood a few months back. Having seen the license I agree. However only the present directors have the full picture.

Of course there is a timing issue here. In my view, before the WRU took over we were in a much better financial position to leave sleeping dogs lie and that to force the issue of reviewing the licence with Newport Rugby would have been a costly mistake. Now that it seems that the WRU have reviewed the document where clauses are in their favour to the extent that it jeopardises the viability of the club, we should now respond with our own review.
While the net position will still be a detrimental situation for the club compared to the pre-WRU period we now have little to lose and at least by not having pressed the issue earlier, we will have saved ourselves a few years of additional costs.