Bangitintrnet wrote: August 13th, 2022, 5:35 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: August 13th, 2022, 5:18 pm Again.
If Rodney Parade were to become unavailable what would be your solution?

We played 2 league games at Cardiff in 2021, you have your answer. Coventry played at Burton Albion earlier this week.

Taking an interest in a ground where as a football club we have no idea what facilities will be necessary next season, is simply a waste of time.
The football league no longer require a ten year lease.

If the WRU decided to sell RP to Barrett Homes for £5m or some other profitable amount, what precisely do you see as our legal position on continuing to play games at RP beyond this season? As I see it without a lease it is precisely none!

Bangitintrnet wrote: August 13th, 2022, 5:35 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: August 13th, 2022, 5:18 pm Again.
If Rodney Parade were to become unavailable what would be your solution?

We played 2 league games at Cardiff in 2021, you have your answer. Coventry played at Burton Albion earlier this week.

Taking an interest in a ground where as a football club we have no idea what facilities will be necessary next season, is simply a waste of time.
The football league no longer require a ten year lease.

My understanding is that the EFL require security of tenure of 10 years for clubs wishing to enter the League. I confess the idea of playing in Cardiff is not one I relish. If we were to get relegated..... frankly a scenario I find appalling.

You are entitled to your view that we don't need security. I just think you are utterly misguided.

Why is playing in Cardiff such a huge problem to someone who lives in Eire?

If in the unlikely event, it's a means to an end, the club survives - not the ground - is the basis. I. E. Football with a future, not football repeating the mistakes of the past.

The less we can tie ourselves down simply to satisfy those who have based their lives on solving ridiculous outcomes, the better.

Remember the year 2000 software bug?
Billions spent on hiring those who forecast devistation, and who benefits, oh yes those in software that made the forecasts.......

Bangitintrnet wrote: August 13th, 2022, 7:22 pm Why is playing in Cardiff such a huge problem to someone who lives in Eire?

If in the unlikely event, it's a means to an end, the club survives - not the ground - is the basis. I. E. Football with a future, not football repeating the mistakes of the past.

The less we can tie ourselves down simply to satisfy those who have based their lives on solving ridiculous outcomes, the better.

Remember the year 2000 software bug?
Billions spent on hiring those who forecast devistation, and who benefits, oh yes those in software that made the forecasts.......

The Titanic didn't need lifeboats for all the passengers because it was unsinkable. In 1964 the headmistress of the Pant Glas primary school in Aberfan presented a petition to the National Coal Board warning of an unstable tip above the school. Tonight I am driving into Carrick on Shannon, a round trip of about 15 miles. Over the last 35 years I have driven many hundreds of thousands of miles. I have never crashed my car. Nonetheless I shall wear a seatbelt.

There are two reasons why I shall be wearing a seatbelt. One because the law obliges me to. Secondly and more importantly I shall wear a seatbelt because I am not a total f@cking imbecile.

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: August 13th, 2022, 5:50 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: August 13th, 2022, 5:35 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: August 13th, 2022, 5:18 pm Again.
If Rodney Parade were to become unavailable what would be your solution?

We played 2 league games at Cardiff in 2021, you have your answer. Coventry played at Burton Albion earlier this week.

Taking an interest in a ground where as a football club we have no idea what facilities will be necessary next season, is simply a waste of time.
The football league no longer require a ten year lease.

If the WRU decided to sell RP to Barrett Homes for £5m or some other profitable amount, what precisely do you see as our legal position on continuing to play games at RP beyond this season? As I see it without a lease it is precisely none!

We have done the homes thing many times before.
The land is not valuable, and to get consent would require the planning committee to overturn their agreed building plan. To do so requires consent from the Welsh Government, and it requires satisfying a need. There is still plenty of brownfield land designated for housing in Newport. Finally if a company wishes to demolish a required facility it has to provide something suitable near. The costs of providing something similar is astronomical.

The cabbage patch hasn't sold for the same reasons. Its been up for sale for decade's........

Stan A. Einstein wrote: August 13th, 2022, 7:34 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: August 13th, 2022, 7:22 pm Why is playing in Cardiff such a huge problem to someone who lives in Eire?

If in the unlikely event, it's a means to an end, the club survives - not the ground - is the basis. I. E. Football with a future, not football repeating the mistakes of the past.

The less we can tie ourselves down simply to satisfy those who have based their lives on solving ridiculous outcomes, the better.

Remember the year 2000 software bug?
Billions spent on hiring those who forecast devistation, and who benefits, oh yes those in software that made the forecasts.......

The Titanic didn't need lifeboats for all the passengers because it was unsinkable. In 1964 the headmistress of the Pant Glas primary school in Aberfan presented a petition to the National Coal Board warning of an unstable tip above the school. Tonight I am driving into Carrick on Shannon, a round trip of about 15 miles. Over the last 35 years I have driven many hundreds of thousands of miles. I have never crashed my car. Nonetheless I shall wear a seatbelt.

There are two reasons why I shall be wearing a seatbelt. One because the law obliges me to. Secondly and more importantly I shall wear a seatbelt because I am not a total f@cking imbecile.

I am afraid you are a total imbecile, who is completely and totally unable to provide sensible reasons why we should want a long lease.

Bangitintrnet wrote: August 13th, 2022, 7:44 pm

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: August 13th, 2022, 5:50 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: August 13th, 2022, 5:35 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: August 13th, 2022, 5:18 pm Again.
If Rodney Parade were to become unavailable what would be your solution?

We played 2 league games at Cardiff in 2021, you have your answer. Coventry played at Burton Albion earlier this week.

Taking an interest in a ground where as a football club we have no idea what facilities will be necessary next season, is simply a waste of time.
The football league no longer require a ten year lease.

If the WRU decided to sell RP to Barrett Homes for £5m or some other profitable amount, what precisely do you see as our legal position on continuing to play games at RP beyond this season? As I see it without a lease it is precisely none!

We have done the homes thing many times before.
The land is not valuable, and to get consent would require the planning committee to overturn their agreed building plan. To do so requires consent from the Welsh Government, and it requires satisfying a need. There is still plenty of brownfield land designated for housing in Newport. Finally if a company wishes to demolish a required facility it has to provide something suitable near. The costs of providing something similar is astronomical.

The cabbage patch hasn't sold for the same reasons. Its been up for sale for decade's........

You say the land is not valuable, if that is the case then why do you think that Mr Buttress is so keen to acquire it?
However back to my question, what legal protection do we have that would prevent us being removed from RP at the end of this season, and any subsequent season if the owner simply wanted County out?

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: August 13th, 2022, 9:22 pm

You say the land is not valuable, if that is the case then why do you think that Mr Buttress is so keen to acquire it?
However back to my question, what legal protection do we have that would prevent us being removed from RP at the end of this season, and any subsequent season if the owner simply wanted County out?

Banginternet won't answer because although he can spout BS with the best of them his actual knowledge of these matters is minimal. However there may be, I stress may be, one course of action.

There is a legal principle found in contract law known as promissory estoppel. If and only if, the WRU have promised Newport County that we can remain at Rodney Parade then even though there is no consideration from Newport County, (A requirement for a contract to exist) the WRU could be prevented from removing County, at least in the short term.

It's unlikely. Firstly such a promise would need to have been made. Secondly on a balance of probability County would need to prove that the promise had been made and finally the relief would only be in the short term.

Your concerns though, in my view, are well justified.

Stan A. Einstein wrote: August 13th, 2022, 10:42 pm

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: August 13th, 2022, 9:22 pm

You say the land is not valuable, if that is the case then why do you think that Mr Buttress is so keen to acquire it?
However back to my question, what legal protection do we have that would prevent us being removed from RP at the end of this season, and any subsequent season if the owner simply wanted County out?

Banginternet won't answer because although he can spout BS with the best of them his actual knowledge of these matters is minimal. However there may be, I stress may be, one course of action.

There is a legal principle found in contract law known as promissory estoppel. If and only if, the WRU have promised Newport County that we can remain at Rodney Parade then even though there is no consideration from Newport County, (A requirement for a contract to exist) the WRU could be prevented from removing County, at least in the short term.

It's unlikely. Firstly such a promise would need to have been made. Secondly on a balance of probability County would need to prove that the promise had been made and finally the relief would only be in the short term.

Your concerns though, in my view, are well justified.

Using the courts is what happens when two parties have come to the end. You simply don't understand that companies can be mutually benificial to each other in a working relationship.

People sign onto contracts everyday of their lives, do they read the small print? Why not if they could end up in Court? Because people except that for a business to do well they have to look after the interests of their customers, otherwise they will ultimately fail. In the rare exceptions that proceedings do get as far Court, 90% are settled out of Court, as neither party are actually willing to put it to the test. They are settled in a way that could have happened many months before.

So the vast majority of contracts are never ever put to the test of the court as to their validity.

Stan mentions accepting payment, as legally binding the terms of a contract signed by others.
That much is true, but the actually of enforcement is a slow process that makes it useless for us.

The owner's of Coventry City Stadium took Northampton Town to Court for providing an alternative venue, thus allowing Coventry football club to avoid paying rent on the then Rioch Stadium. Typical Billy Big Bollocks legal stuff that never got tested in court, with good reason.

The fact of the matter is quite simple. The British Court System needs Acts of Law to provide the sequence of events that need to be satisfied, before enforcement can take place. This make Court appearances a simple procedure which has either been followed to the letter - and granted - or not.

In our case neither party can utilise the relevant law - Landlord and tenant Act - and therefore enforcement is a long and protracted process. As such it becomes useless in practice, and both sides will be aware of that fact.

So our landlord arranging long term finance for the pitch, and stadium upgrades, is factual commitment to the long term viability of the Stadium, with us in partnership. No Billy Big Bollocks legal crap drawn up by complete wankers that never gets tested in court needed.

And to answer Taunton Iron Cider, why would David Buttress try to aquire RP? He is the representative of the owners.

AFAIK he is doing what the WRU have asked him to do, which is sell the Dragon's and RP as an entity.

Bang it replies:-

And to answer Taunton Iron Cider, why would David Buttress try to aquire RP? He is the representative of the owners.

AFAIK he is doing what the WRU have asked him to do, which is sell the Dragon's and RP as an entity.

So your inside knowledge suggests that Mr Buttress is instructed to sell both the Dragon’s franchise along with RP, and that doesn’t concern you?
If your relaxed position is reflective of the Board, then in my view they are potentially being negligent, and I really don’t understand why the Club is not pushing hard for a lease. If as it has been suggested the Club has been rebuffed, then shouldn’t the owner/supporters be informed?

Call me old fashioned but I would like everything to be in writing, it provides security of tenure as well as certainty over rental payments and other features of operating out of RP. As things stand, and taking Stan’s helpful note into account, the best we have currently is to rely on verbal exchanges as the only potential way of staying at RP in the event of our space being preferable to our presence.

Why should it be a concern? Why does everything have to be doomsday scenarios?
Am I concerned that the predicted global warming flooding will put RP under 10ft of water no. Should you be - probably - after all it is far more likely, than most doomsday scenarios.
Why is it that you think anyone that isn't bothered by apocalyptic fantasy has to be a member of the board - or part of the club - the evil ones, who obviously take pleasure in ignoring your protestations?

I have outlined why putting everything in writing doesn't provide security of tenure above. You are falling into the trap that Stan sets, I. E. it has to be legally enforceable.

In actually it has to be enforceable in the real world, and in the time frame available. Nothing that anyone can write on a piece of expensive paper, is of any use, as we can't use the Act that provides enforcement in a timely manner.

Therefore it is simply bollocks to say that the club has to enter into an agreement, rather than work together in a mutually benificial way.

Coventry City signed up, it didn't suit, they had to walk away, played elsewhere, and are stronger for it. Did their agreement give them, or the landlord security of tenure? No of course not. They walked, got stronger and the landlord is on a slippery slope.

Bangitintrnet wrote: August 14th, 2022, 10:04 am Why should it be a concern? Why does everything have to be doomsday scenarios?
Am I concerned that the predicted global warming flooding will put RP under 10ft of water no. Should you be - probably - after all it is far more likely, than most doomsday scenarios.
Why is it that you think anyone that isn't bothered by apocalyptic fantasy has to be a member of the board - or part of the club - the evil ones, who obviously take pleasure in ignoring your protestations?

I have outlined why putting everything in writing doesn't provide security of tenure above. You are falling into the trap that Stan sets, I. E. it has to be legally enforceable.

In actually it has to be enforceable in the real world, and in the time frame available. Nothing that anyone can write on a piece of expensive paper, is of any use, as we can't use the Act that provides enforcement in a timely manner.

Therefore it is simply bollocks to say that the club has to enter into an agreement, rather than work together in a mutually benificial way.

Coventry City signed up, it didn't suit, they had to walk away, played elsewhere, and are stronger for it. Did their agreement give them, or the landlord security of tenure? No of course not. They walked, got stronger and the landlord is on a slippery slope.

You repeatedly make it clear that you think a formal lease is unnecessary, a view that I personally don’t subscribe to. But what does interest me is why are you being so dismissive of having a formal legal agreement, is it because you and the rest of the Board have been told by the WRU/ Mr Buttress that one will not be offered?

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: August 14th, 2022, 12:10 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: August 14th, 2022, 10:04 am Why should it be a concern? Why does everything have to be doomsday scenarios?
Am I concerned that the predicted global warming flooding will put RP under 10ft of water no. Should you be - probably - after all it is far more likely, than most doomsday scenarios.
Why is it that you think anyone that isn't bothered by apocalyptic fantasy has to be a member of the board - or part of the club - the evil ones, who obviously take pleasure in ignoring your protestations?

I have outlined why putting everything in writing doesn't provide security of tenure above. You are falling into the trap that Stan sets, I. E. it has to be legally enforceable.

In actually it has to be enforceable in the real world, and in the time frame available. Nothing that anyone can write on a piece of expensive paper, is of any use, as we can't use the Act that provides enforcement in a timely manner.

Therefore it is simply bollocks to say that the club has to enter into an agreement, rather than work together in a mutually benificial way.

Coventry City signed up, it didn't suit, they had to walk away, played elsewhere, and are stronger for it. Did their agreement give them, or the landlord security of tenure? No of course not. They walked, got stronger and the landlord is on a slippery slope.

You repeatedly make it clear that you think a formal lease is unnecessary, a view that I personally don’t subscribe to. But what does interest me is why are you being so dismissive of having a formal legal agreement, is it because you and the rest of the Board have been told by the WRU/ Mr Buttress that one will not be offered?

You and the rest of the board ha ha ha ha ha

As you have been repeatedly told, I am not, nor never have been, anything to do with Newport County other than a supporter.

I have no knowledge of any discussions other than the podcast that David Buttress had a year or so back, with subsequent words in the Argus.

I have explained why working together with a common aim - to make RP as cheap as possible by increasing revenue available to all parties - is what has been shown to work well elsewhere. The key is flexibility as we can use as much or as little of the facilities as we require.
In my working role I personally have been involved in construction contracts which are complex. The contractor needs flexibility to be able to provide the project on time and within budget. What doesn't work is inflexible contacts that just lead to delays caused by desputes over who is responsible for doing what when. If the contract is flexible enough to allow contractors to sort out any issues themselves to avoid penalty clauses, then it is a win/win.
Everything in life has to be a win/win, its pointless going through life pretending that we are losing 25k revenue from beer sales because we don't own the ground, we don't have the funds to own the ground.

Likewise why tie ourselves down to costs that we don't need? Why?

In order to pretend that we now have security? It simply doesn't, but what it does do is make it extremely unlikely that club has flexibility to withstand several demotions.

It doesn't help, its very much a millstone that we don't need.

Bangitintrnet wrote: August 14th, 2022, 10:04 am

In order to pretend that we now have security? It simply doesn't, but what it does do is make it extremely unlikely that club has flexibility to withstand several demotions.

We don't have a ground. But we do have the flexibility to withstand several demotions. So long as Albion Rovers agree Kimberley Park, Malpas Rd, Crindau, here we come.

Banginternet ogs again.

Stan A. Einstein wrote: August 14th, 2022, 2:53 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: August 14th, 2022, 10:04 am

In order to pretend that we now have security? It simply doesn't, but what it does do is make it extremely unlikely that club has flexibility to withstand several demotions.

We don't have a ground. But we do have the flexibility to withstand several demotions. So long as Albion Rovers agree Kimberley Park, Malpas Rd, Crindau, here we come.

Banginternet ogs again.

Just because you can't stand Cardiff, the Rugby, or anyone who points out that you are a complete failure who has scrounged off every tax payer all your life?

Why don't you tell us again how the gravey train run out, so you had to you get married and live in Eire, forgot to mention love didn't you, I think we all know why don't we.

Or you could try explaining why you can't wait to spend Newport Councils money for them.

It all amounts to the same thing.