+- COYR NOTTINGHAM FOREST FORUM (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk)
+-- Forum: NOTTINGHAM FOREST - A REBEL CLUB IN A REBEL CITY (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Nottingham Forest Fan Talk - Forest All Over The World (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: The Infrastructure Projects (/showthread.php?tid=23)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - wassy04 - 25-01-2024
(25-01-2024, 04:48 PM)Joe Baker Legend Wrote: I was sent the following snippets, how correct it is I do not know.......
Attended the NFST AGM yesterday and Tom Cartiledge addressed a few points on the PSR situation and ground bits
He is a lot more approachable than Nicholas Randall and very forthright
We are not far away from being able to start work on the container stands. Tom realises we are restricted by City Ground location and would have wanted a big capacity with main stand redevelopment. Main blockers are City Council having limited staff due to cuts. However the club don't blame the City Council, they recognise they are a slight bottleneck for work to begin
With FFP thing. He can't say too much legally, but club feel let down by PL, and have a solid legal stand point. PL FSA also attended and acknowledged the lack of transparency on Man City punishment and also that an independent regulator is very highly a possibility for the PL and FFP etc.
No mention of Boat club, just City Council need to work with club to start with groundwork and surrounding infrastructure. They have to be ready as Club are ready to go in off season, but it won't be this Summer for the Council
Strong desire for it to be resolved ASAP, they are already sharing accounts and transfer plans with PL for next season. Full transparency and trying to provide full disclosure.
Confidence in independent commission to see sense but no guarantees
I think the club wish to operate as normal as possible with a view to perhaps being more cautious and sceptical about promises of what can and cannot be includes. Been likened by Finance and accountants as complicated as filing a tax return and claiming for relief and allowances that are perhaps bending the limits.
They will err on the side of caution no doubt but not do a Leicester and not spend. We are under no embargo or limitations of than those we assess as getting us in trouble this time next year.
Furthermore, they are recruiting a fair few Senior leadership roles. Starting with a permanent Legal Councel/officer at the club
With focus on Tom Cartledge being a more active Chairman, dealing with Operational matters where Dane previously acted. So no, immediate CEO but Tom filling part of those duties.
He is definitely more the business side,.off field structures, ground, academy options. Then the owners and sporting director on the Playing side of things as their.focus
Good snippets, thank you!
On the FFP stuff, it pretty much tracks with what Everton dealt with too in terms of being assured certain thing then the league reneging later. We did kind of dig of our grave there a bit by persuing Everton!
Aware this is the wrong thread but reading between the lines, presumably pre Everton points deduction, we were assured we could include the Brennan sale then they later changed their minds, hence the lack of effort to sell him (or someone else) in June to avoid a penalty. Or alternatively, there is some allowance we've been told previously we could claim that has since turned out not to be the case hence the surprise fail.
This is what I have always assumed to be the issue and makes me feel better about the way it was handled. We ran close to the line to stay up (Felipe and Danilo in Jan were critical signings for example, less said about some others), we thought we were ok still however there was no leeway when something was changed that we couldn't use as an allowance and so we failed. In this instance, I'm both happy to back the clubs choice of approach and also the fact that we potentially still deserve a punishment.
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - stirred - 03-02-2024
Re stadium redevelopment / some people suggesting relocation, interesting article in the athletic around Barcelona attendances. Playing in a 50,000 capacity stadium while they rebuild the Camp Nou, but fans are staying away. 80k Camp Nou season ticket holders but given the choice to not pay for this season and retain their ticket for when the Camp Nou reopens, only 17k season ticket holders took them up. Averaging 41k attendance in total even though they are giving tickets away and at discounts.
Fans not happy the stadium is further away, also that ticket prices were announced higher initially before being lowered, but still poor take-up.
Fans choosing to save money / watch their Champions League winning womens team / watch local semi-pro teams.
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - Paplane - 16-02-2024
Big story in the Athletic today. Forest looking to re-develop the Bridgford stand as well as the Main Stand. Daniel Taylor reckons he's seen a master plan and it's v impressive.
Also a shiny new training facility in a new location. Announcement not far away before a planning application etc.
The 250 year lease on the CG site that Randall announced was never completed for some reason. The problem now is that the city council are in administration and that's holding up the renewal. None of new stands can start until there's certainty on the lease.
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - Sausage Roll - 16-02-2024
A couple of interesting paragraphs which shed a bit more light on why Forest want to buy Hart's and also what happened to the 'Miracle Gates' idea:
"The stadium designs make it clear why it would be well worth the wait. The new-look City Ground really is a thing of beauty. And if you are wondering why Forest are buying the former Hart’s restaurant in central Nottingham, it is not just to recreate a “high quality” dining experience but also to turn three floors into club offices.
Why do Forest need more office space? Because their plans involve building a 19-storey apartment block on what is currently the club’s shop and main offices, opposite the stadium. The apartments will go up after the Peter Taylor Stand and the layout of a pedestrianised plaza means Forest have had to sacrifice plans to create what would have been known as the Miracle Gates, commemorating their European Cup-winning teams from 1979 and 1980."
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - Salvatore Matrecano - 16-02-2024
A good and interesting article. Nice to see the club feeding Mr Taylor and him responding with an extremely positive piece, shows he is capable. The ambition and vision of our owner comes over and I very much like the sound of our new chairman so far.
Have to say the council doesn’t come out of it at all well. My opinion it is a typical small minded, short sighted view that the council see a Premier League club as a cash cow that they can extort higher rent charges and even sell the land for residential use as a way out of their own financial incompetence. Yet they can’t see the longer term advantages of having a global brand on their doorstep and the commercial opportunities that brings.
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - Sniffer Dog (Admin) - 16-02-2024
(16-02-2024, 05:04 PM)Salvatore Matrecano Wrote: A good and interesting article. Nice to see the club feeding Mr Taylor and him responding with an extremely positive piece, shows he is capable. The ambition and vision of our owner comes over and I very much like the sound of our new chairman so far.
Have to say the council doesn’t come out of it at all well. My opinion it is a typical small minded, short sighted view that the council see a Premier League club as a cash cow that they can extort higher rent charges and even sell the land for residential use as a way out of their own financial incompetence. Yet they can’t see the longer term advantages of having a global brand on their doorstep and the commercial opportunities that brings.
Amazing what a drop off in subscriptions can do.
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - Fumanchew - 16-02-2024
It will be interesting to see where the land for the new training ground might be. Selling the current land where we train to rushcliffe Borough council for housing would solve their problem of where to build houses to fill their quota. You’d hope Forest are redeveloping a brownfield/ex-industrial site somewhere.
It’s telling that buying the city ground land maybe be more expensive then building a new stadium, also wanting 1m a year is unsustainable if we can’t stay in the prem.
You could expect about 500+ apartments to go up if we moved and the city council sold the land for waterfront development
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - Salvatore Matrecano - 16-02-2024
Do weown the land for the training ground? That definitely is in prime West Bridgford building area, selling that could probably fund a new build somewhere a bit cheaper.
As for DT, this is irrelevant but I don’t think its a drop off in subscriptions as the Athletic have millions, but I do think its ego related. I like Taylor and thank him for shining a light on occasion but he is like most journos in that he can be bought off for an exclusive (see John Percy). But exclude any of them and they can quickly turn. Just they way they are wired and I think there are very few exceptions.
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - Madforit - 16-02-2024
I suppose this all depends on the council, so forgive me if I don`t get excited over this bit of goss, but until I see the main stand being pulled down I`ll take this with a pinch of salt.
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - ozzyten10 - 16-02-2024
If you got 500 apartments at 200000 that is 100m - land probably worth 30-40m but - and here is a bargaining chip- forest actually own the leasehold for some of the land external to the stands. A 100 year lease starting at £500,000 per year with increases in line with inflation would be a good deal all round- or one off 20m.
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - nffc93 - 16-02-2024
(16-02-2024, 05:59 PM)Salvatore Matrecano Wrote: Do weown the land for the training ground? That definitely is in prime West Bridgford building area, selling that could probably fund a new build somewhere a bit cheaper.
As for DT, this is irrelevant but I don’t think its a drop off in subscriptions as the Athletic have millions, but I do think its ego related. I like Taylor and thank him for shining a light on occasion but he is like most journos in that he can be bought off for an exclusive (see John Percy). But exclude any of them and they can quickly turn. Just they way they are wired and I think there are very few exceptions.
We own that land. ND brought that
RE: The Infrastructure Projects - Tricky - 16-02-2024
(16-02-2024, 05:04 PM)Salvatore Matrecano Wrote: A good and interesting article. Nice to see the club feeding Mr Taylor and him responding with an extremely positive piece, shows he is capable. The ambition and vision of our owner comes over and I very much like the sound of our new chairman so far.
Have to say the council doesn’t come out of it at all well. My opinion it is a typical small minded, short sighted view that the council see a Premier League club as a cash cow that they can extort higher rent charges and even sell the land for residential use as a way out of their own financial incompetence. Yet they can’t see the longer term advantages of having a global brand on their doorstep and the commercial opportunities that brings.
The City Council darent sell the land the club sits on and I dont think legally they can either.
The Labour controlled City Council currently have the support of the working classes, many of whom are Forest fans. They just darent risk rocking the votes of so many of the electorate to even contemplate doing so. Within the City Council boundaries, and let us not get confused with the Greater Nottingham area here, there are only 323,000 residents living within the boundaries of the unitary council. 66,000 of those are below voting age and there are also 50,000 students within that total.
Assuming an average turnout for local elections if about 33% (im being generous here!) that means around 69,000 people will go out to vote. Forest probably garners about as much support throughout the city, this doesnt mean people going through the turnstyles, just families that all support the reds. Let us say 15,000 of the turnout votes for opposition parties and that leaves 54,000 to vote them back into a majority party. If you then consider the swing a decision to sell the City Ground land from Labour to the opposition parties, Labour would lose control of the city.
I was on the City Council when Doughty went on his rent strike over payments for the Trent End overhang to the City Council. The then leader of the Council, Jon Collins knew it would be political suicide to take the matter to court and decided that we had to take the more diplomatic route and negotiate with Doughty over his concerns. Doughty gambled massively with the Council at that time, as he was legally bang out of order. Luckily for him, and us fans, his gamble paid off.
Legally, doesnt the ground have some sort of protection to it now as being a part of a community protection pledge (or summat?)