There are good people writing petty point-scoring bullshyte on here. You're all better than this. Or are you simply re-enacting Newport County board meetings through the ages as if to demonstrate why we as a club have always cocked things up?

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

pembsexile wrote:Yeh, come on Stan, why did you not attend this debriefing? Why did you tell me to go instead? We need answers.

Hi Mike,

I goad Bangedonthehead a couple of days back. The thought of old red ink writing abuse I that I didn't read cheered me no end. Presumably I missed a debrief?

A pointless comment, in a pointless vote, by a pointless troll

And there's one more. Have a medal.

JonD wrote:And there's one more. Have a medal.

Thank you very much, I am honoured.

However I would prefer that you took time to consider when you made up your mind that County owning a ground was a good thing and why?

Also, isn't it about time you revisited the reasons for that decision. There is a lot of nostalgia in sport, and likewise sporting stadia.

Newport rugby have realised that they need to move on, and that living off nostalgia is expensive and self destructive.

Basing the idea of building a new ground on a decision Stan/whoever made of buying his/their house 40 years ago (as he often quotes) is at best moronic.

When making such a decision you need to do research and list comparables.

40 years ago people rented their telly and bought their car. Today it's the other way around, why? Because a car can lose 50% of it's value over 3 years. Why not rent and hand it back and pick up a new one?

Anyway, just take some time to think about when you came to the decision that Newport County owning it's own ground was a good thing, and what has changed since you made that decision.

Bangitintrnet wrote:

JonD wrote:And there's one more. Have a medal.

Thank you very much, I am honoured.

However I would prefer that you took time to consider when you made up your mind that County owning a ground was a good thing and why?

Also, isn't it about time you revisited the reasons for that decision. There is a lot of nostalgia in sport, and likewise sporting stadia.

Newport rugby have realised that they need to move on, and that living off nostalgia is expensive and self destructive.

Basing the idea of building a new ground on a decision Stan/whoever made of buying his/their house 40 years ago (as he often quotes) is at best moronic.

When making such a decision you need to do research and list comparables.

40 years ago people rented their telly and bought their car. Today it's the other way around, why? Because a car can lose 50% of it's value over 3 years. Why not rent and hand it back and pick up a new one?

Anyway, just take some time to think about when you came to the decision that Newport County owning it's own ground was a good thing, and what has changed since you made that decision.

I'm with you in that I do not understand that owning our own ground is the answer. Comes with its own set of challenges. Sharing the costs of running a fit for purpose stadium in central Newport works for me. Hopefully we have an agreement to lease or something similar in place for a longer term than the original 10 years. To a degree this decision is out of our hands but I cannot foresee a future for rugby in Wales with no first class / professional team in Gwent.

Bangitintrnet wrote:

JonD wrote:And there's one more. Have a medal.

Thank you very much, I am honoured.

However I would prefer that you took time to consider when you made up your mind that County owning a ground was a good thing and why?

Also, isn't it about time you revisited the reasons for that decision. There is a lot of nostalgia in sport, and likewise sporting stadia.

Newport rugby have realised that they need to move on, and that living off nostalgia is expensive and self destructive.

Basing the idea of building a new ground on a decision Stan/whoever made of buying his/their house 40 years ago (as he often quotes) is at best moronic.

When making such a decision you need to do research and list comparables.

40 years ago people rented their telly and bought their car. Today it's the other way around, why? Because a car can lose 50% of it's value over 3 years. Why not rent and hand it back and pick up a new one?

Anyway, just take some time to think about when you came to the decision that Newport County owning it's own ground was a good thing, and what has changed since you made that decision.

First, can I say turn off the bold. It should be used for emphasis. All-bold usage is equivalent to all-caps usage and is equivalent to shouting in Internet parlance.

There are positives and negatives about owning your own ground. And people will have different views about whether we should. Those differing views are neither right nor wrong. If you wish to push one view over another and drive it to success, then the path is clear: you stand to become a club director on that platform.

The main negative of building and owning your own ground is owners over-mortgaging and frittering the money on players' wages in the mistaken belief that this will always bring success. Another negative is the annual cost of running a stadium that will generally only be utilised about 60 times every 365 days. And yet another negative is it can drain income from the playing side, especially as building projects "always" go over budget and the money has to be found pdq. The main positive is you have an asset that is generally of increasing worth over the order of a decade or two against which you could borrow to invest (but I refer you back to the start of this paragraph). And another positive is you are not beholden to a landlord, who when it is time to renegotiate lease terms has you over some sort of barrel.

Your analogies (like most in truth), break down when you analyse them more deeply.

It is hard to escape the fact that property/land tends to increase in value over the long term. But a car, unless it is a very special one that will become an investable proposition (and there are very few of those given total auto output) will almost always be a depreciating asset.

As to renting a TV 40 years ago (and you probably meant nearer 50 to 60 years ago), some people still do rent their TVs. It's a good way of updating to a new model every few years or so without the capital expense. Truth be told, I think most people rented their TVs decades ago because TVs were expensive, less people were affluent enough to go out and buy one, HP was more difficult to get, and credit cards for the 'unwashed masses' were still a distant dream. TVs then got relatively cheap, credit became easier to get (but not necessarily afford) and the renting model declined in popularity; but it is still there.

What we should seek is something like a 99-year lease to use our present home. But as with other avenues, there are pitfalls with this. A decline in club fortunes (and things tend to the cyclical in football) could make the terms difficult/impossible to meet. And we've been there.

IMHO, there are only two ways we can conceivably get our own stadium again: (1) NR moves out of RP for good and the Dragons fold, and we somehow end up with an option to buy RP. (2) A multi-millionaire/billionaire thinks we are a good plaything/long-term investment bet to get to the Premiership promised land.

Oh, I suppose the council could gift us a parcel of land with planning permission and we then run a buy-a-brick campaign to build the Field of Dreams.

I think I favour the long-term lease on RP. If we end up on the wrong end of a football cycle and have to move out of RP, we could always seek to ground share with NR.


EDIT:

I should add that building your own ground from scratch is a project bordering on the multi-decadal time scale. So, in our ownership model, you would need a succession of like-minded people wishing to drive the project forward over many club director election cycles.

The first concern of the board in our ownership model is to ensure we run the club sustainably, and then hope for a modicum of success on the field to ensue from that (which I think we have achieved on both counts, even if possibly fortuitously).

Absent crowds and trust members in the tens of thousands generating a lot more income than we do now, I think that this is the best we can hope for from that ownership model. Of course, on-field success, organically, in the long term, may well lead us to that outcome in terms of attendances and income generation. But club history suggests that is unlikely. But against that, we have never been financially stable as a club over a prolonged period before. So maybe the time is coming where the history will be rosier. Who knows?

But I'd be happy for that multi-millionaire with money to burn to pop by and ask us if we'd like to change that model, too, and build a new ground.

NearlyDead wrote:

Bangitintrnet wrote:

JonD wrote:And there's one more. Have a medal.

Thank you very much, I am honoured.

However I would prefer that you took time to consider when you made up your mind that County owning a ground was a good thing and why?

Also, isn't it about time you revisited the reasons for that decision. There is a lot of nostalgia in sport, and likewise sporting stadia.

Newport rugby have realised that they need to move on, and that living off nostalgia is expensive and self destructive.

Basing the idea of building a new ground on a decision Stan/whoever made of buying his/their house 40 years ago (as he often quotes) is at best moronic.

When making such a decision you need to do research and list comparables.

40 years ago people rented their telly and bought their car. Today it's the other way around, why? Because a car can lose 50% of it's value over 3 years. Why not rent and hand it back and pick up a new one?

Anyway, just take some time to think about when you came to the decision that Newport County owning it's own ground was a good thing, and what has changed since you made that decision.

First, can I say turn off the bold. It should be used for emphasis. All-bold usage is equivalent to all-caps usage and is equivalent to shouting in Internet parlance.

There are positives and negatives about owning your own ground. And people will have different views about whether we should. Those differing views are neither right nor wrong. If you wish to push one view over another and drive it to success, then the path is clear: you stand to become a club director on that platform.

The main negative of building and owning your own ground is owners over-mortgaging and frittering the money on players' wages in the mistaken belief that this will always bring success. Another negative is the annual cost of running a stadium that will generally only be utilised about 60 times every 365 days. And yet another negative is it can drain income from the playing side, especially as building projects "always" go over budget and the money has to be found pdq. The main positive is you have an asset that is generally of increasing worth over the order of a decade or two against which you could borrow to invest (but I refer you back to the start of this paragraph). And another positive is you are not beholden to a landlord, who when it is time to renegotiate lease terms has you over some sort of barrel.

Your analogies (like most in truth), break down when you analyse them more deeply.

It is hard to escape the fact that property/land tends to increase in value over the long term. But a car, unless it is a very special one that will become an investable proposition (and there are very few of those given total auto output) will almost always be a depreciating asset.

As to renting a TV 40 years ago (and you probably meant nearer 50 to 60 years ago), some people still do rent their TVs. It's a good way of updating to a new model every few years or so without the capital expense. Truth be told, I think most people rented their TVs decades ago because TVs were expensive, less people were affluent enough to go out and buy one, HP was more difficult to get, and credit cards for the 'unwashed masses' were still a distant dream. TVs then got relatively cheap, credit became easier to get (but not necessarily afford) and the renting model declined in popularity; but it is still there.

What we should seek is something like a 99-year lease to use our present home. But as with other avenues, there are pitfalls with this. A decline in club fortunes (and things tend to the cyclical in football) could make the terms difficult/impossible to meet. And we've been there.

IMHO, there are only two ways we can conceivably get our own stadium again: (1) NR moves out of RP for good and the Dragons fold, and we somehow end up with an option to buy RP. (2) A multi-millionaire/billionaire thinks we are a good plaything/long-term investment bet to get to the Premiership promised land.

Oh, I suppose the council could gift us a parcel of land with planning permission and we then run a buy-a-brick campaign to build the Field of Dreams.

I think I favour the long-term lease on RP. If we end up on the wrong end of a football cycle and have to move out of RP, we could always seek to ground share with NR.

Indeed, I used Car/TV as a way of getting people to actually think about how things change over time, rather than as a comparable.

I agree that leases have there problems, but are useful in providing security.
Even if you own the freehold, continuing your lease can still have benefits.

I think trust is another issue that drives people's decision making. And most would say can NCAFC trust the WRU?

Well to answer that question I suppose you have to look at alternative landlords.

Newport Council kicked us out of Somerton Park, sold the land for housing, and refused to build a fit for purpose league football ground to replace it. Do they now have a good track record with investment at Newport Stadium?

FAW, kicked us out of Wales, however have since invested in Dragon Park, from which we benefit, but not much investment in Stadia.

WRU, abandoned local rugby in favour of the regions. However were renting out the original Cardiff Arms Park for concerts, long before the millennium stadium was thought of. They do have a good track record in not only varied use of stadia, but also investment in Stadia.

If we ignore the sugar daddy, and Dragons buying RP options. Out of the three possible options left, it seems to me (purely on track record) that we have ended up with the best choice.

Personally I would prefer a short lease with option's to renew at regular (say 7 year) intervals, with a framework for how to review and revise lease payments.

Overall however, it is interesting how stadium ownership has changed over the years. Stadia have been separated from the club's assets, and become separate management companies, who tend to share the facilities to make them viable.

Bangitintrnet wrote:

NearlyDead wrote:

Bangitintrnet wrote:

JonD wrote:And there's one more. Have a medal.

Thank you very much, I am honoured.

However I would prefer that you took time to consider when you made up your mind that County owning a ground was a good thing and why?

Also, isn't it about time you revisited the reasons for that decision. There is a lot of nostalgia in sport, and likewise sporting stadia.

Newport rugby have realised that they need to move on, and that living off nostalgia is expensive and self destructive.

Basing the idea of building a new ground on a decision Stan/whoever made of buying his/their house 40 years ago (as he often quotes) is at best moronic.

When making such a decision you need to do research and list comparables.

40 years ago people rented their telly and bought their car. Today it's the other way around, why? Because a car can lose 50% of it's value over 3 years. Why not rent and hand it back and pick up a new one?

Anyway, just take some time to think about when you came to the decision that Newport County owning it's own ground was a good thing, and what has changed since you made that decision.

First, can I say turn off the bold. It should be used for emphasis. All-bold usage is equivalent to all-caps usage and is equivalent to shouting in Internet parlance.

There are positives and negatives about owning your own ground. And people will have different views about whether we should. Those differing views are neither right nor wrong. If you wish to push one view over another and drive it to success, then the path is clear: you stand to become a club director on that platform.

The main negative of building and owning your own ground is owners over-mortgaging and frittering the money on players' wages in the mistaken belief that this will always bring success. Another negative is the annual cost of running a stadium that will generally only be utilised about 60 times every 365 days. And yet another negative is it can drain income from the playing side, especially as building projects "always" go over budget and the money has to be found pdq. The main positive is you have an asset that is generally of increasing worth over the order of a decade or two against which you could borrow to invest (but I refer you back to the start of this paragraph). And another positive is you are not beholden to a landlord, who when it is time to renegotiate lease terms has you over some sort of barrel.

Your analogies (like most in truth), break down when you analyse them more deeply.

It is hard to escape the fact that property/land tends to increase in value over the long term. But a car, unless it is a very special one that will become an investable proposition (and there are very few of those given total auto output) will almost always be a depreciating asset.

As to renting a TV 40 years ago (and you probably meant nearer 50 to 60 years ago), some people still do rent their TVs. It's a good way of updating to a new model every few years or so without the capital expense. Truth be told, I think most people rented their TVs decades ago because TVs were expensive, less people were affluent enough to go out and buy one, HP was more difficult to get, and credit cards for the 'unwashed masses' were still a distant dream. TVs then got relatively cheap, credit became easier to get (but not necessarily afford) and the renting model declined in popularity; but it is still there.

What we should seek is something like a 99-year lease to use our present home. But as with other avenues, there are pitfalls with this. A decline in club fortunes (and things tend to the cyclical in football) could make the terms difficult/impossible to meet. And we've been there.

IMHO, there are only two ways we can conceivably get our own stadium again: (1) NR moves out of RP for good and the Dragons fold, and we somehow end up with an option to buy RP. (2) A multi-millionaire/billionaire thinks we are a good plaything/long-term investment bet to get to the Premiership promised land.

Oh, I suppose the council could gift us a parcel of land with planning permission and we then run a buy-a-brick campaign to build the Field of Dreams.

I think I favour the long-term lease on RP. If we end up on the wrong end of a football cycle and have to move out of RP, we could always seek to ground share with NR.

Indeed, I used Car/TV as a way of getting people to actually think about how things change over time, rather than as a comparable.

I agree that leases have there problems, but are useful in providing security.
Even if you own the freehold, continuing your lease can still have benefits.

I think trust is another issue that drives people's decision making. And most would say can NCAFC trust the WRU?

Well to answer that question I suppose you have to look at alternative landlords.

Newport Council kicked us out of Somerton Park, sold the land for housing, and refused to build a fit for purpose league football ground to replace it. Do they now have a good track record with investment at Newport Stadium?

FAW, kicked us out of Wales, however have since invested in Dragon Park, from which we benefit, but not much investment in Stadia.

WRU, abandoned local rugby in favour of the regions. However were renting out the original Cardiff Arms Park for concerts, long before the millennium stadium was thought of. They do have a good track record in not only varied use of stadia, but also investment in Stadia.

If we ignore the sugar daddy, and Dragons buying RP options. Out of the three possible options left, it seems to me (purely on track record) that we have ended up with the best choice.

Personally I would prefer a short lease with option's to renew at regular (say 7 year) intervals, with a framework for how to review and revise lease payments.

Overall however, it is interesting how stadium ownership has changed over the years. Stadia have been separated from the club's assets, and become separate management companies, who tend to share the facilities to make them viable.

So here are a few questions for everyone:

1. A group of businesspeople. Comes in an offer to buy both Rodney Parade and The Newport Stadium? (if they are successful)

2. Part of buying both grounds is that they would need to play a small part in running Newport County, at first and then, later on, taking control of the club?

3. Allow the trust to have a place on the board with some say how the club is being run?

Putting a question mark at the end of a statement doesn't make it into a question.

excessbee wrote:Putting a question mark at the end of a statement doesn't make it into a question.

This thread has more votes and far more hits than the Bradford man of the match poll yet you call it a 'pathetic response'.

You really believe that to be true.

You really believe that to be true?

excessbee wrote:Putting a question mark at the end of a statement doesn't make it into a question.

Yes, I believe a question mark is appropriate.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

excessbee wrote:Putting a question mark at the end of a statement doesn't make it into a question.

This thread has more votes and far more hits than the Bradford man of the match poll yet you call it a 'pathetic response'.

You really believe that to be true.

You really believe that to be true?

OK, I should have said...... doesn't necessarily make it into a question.

JonD wrote:There are good people writing petty point-scoring bullshyte on here. You're all better than this. Or are you simply re-enacting Newport County board meetings through the ages as if to demonstrate why we as a club have always cocked things up?

''The answer is blowing the wind"

Know who are now. ****.

Newport County's problem has never ever been on the pitch. They have always been undone off of it.

A plan; I'd scrap the current board, who are as above.

When you have more directors than players you have a problem.

Start there.

I’m interested in your view how we have more directors than players.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

excessbee wrote:Putting a question mark at the end of a statement doesn't make it into a question.

This thread has more votes and far more hits than the Bradford man of the match poll yet you call it a 'pathetic response'.

You really believe that to be true.

You really believe that to be true?

A fixed 7 day vote, has more hits than a man of the match vote, in a evenly matched game.

A fixed 7 day vote, has more hits than a man of the match vote, in a evenly matched game?