38 replies to this topic

[Derwent]

Not content with ruining the chances of ever getting a new stadium in Workington, I see it looks like the Reds are now preventing the construction of the new Northside bridge despite being offered 10 times the value of the land they hold according to Cumbria County Council....

http://www.timesands...ws-feed-1.17079

Edited by Derwent, 20 May 2011 - 07:23 PM.

[dkw]

I love the way Dobie says its not him, then completely incriminates himself seconds later. what a buffoon.

[Keith T]

Can anyone tell me how you can sign an agreement when you are still waiting to negotiate a price for the land? You have to be careful making allegatione so all I will say is that if it is the Reds, Mr Dobie, then he is trying put a few more pounds into the Reds coffers at the expense of daily inconvenience to thousands of people. And who gained most from the siting of the temporary bridge with money from the county council and new floodlights from the borough council?

[wonky]

Nothing surprises me when it comes to the clowns at borough park. I'm sure rocker lad will be on shortly spouting his usual bs and trying to make out that the reds are well within reason and doing what's best for the community

[rockerlad]

where in that article does it say it is the reds?????? if it is us then thats a poor showing, but it does not say it is the reds who are causing the delay. As it says the council have not named the party involved. There for you should watch with your accusation, as many of you soon bit down the next of haven fans when they post something about town

[dkw]

where in that article does it say it is the reds?????? if it is us then thats a poor showing, but it does not say it is the reds who are causing the delay. As it says the council have not named the party involved. There for you should watch with your accusation, as many of you soon bit down the next of haven fans when they post something about town

I think the fact the article says 8 out of 9 have agreed terms, then Dobie says they are still negotiating is a bit of a giveaway, dont you.

[rockerlad]

I think the fact the article says 8 out of 9 have agreed terms, then Dobie says they are still negotiating is a bit of a giveaway, dont you.

Again toh is does not name the reds as the party involved, but as said above if it is us then this is a poor showing by the club.

[wonky]

Take the blinkers off mate, the truth is staring you in the face. 8 out of 9 have agreed but reds admit there still negotiating, it dosent take a genius to work out who our mystery guest is does it

[rockerlad]

Take the blinkers off mate, the truth is staring you in the face. 8 out of 9 have agreed but reds admit there still negotiating, it dosent take a genius to work out who our mystery guest is does it

I am not trying to defend the club, as i have said if this is true then thats a poor showing, but until the reds are named i will assume it is not us.
can i just add reds dont own any of the land we lease it from ABC, so it would be the council selling the land and then buying us out of our lease.

Edited by rockerlad, 20 May 2011 - 07:05 PM.

[dkw]

Again toh is does not name the reds as the party involved, but as said above if it is us then this is a poor showing by the club.

Seriously? Are you that blinkered as to defend your club beyond reason? Right, read this and tell me how it sounds to you?

There are nine parties – landowners and leaseholders – involved in the transfer of land around the bridge site.

Eight, including Allerdale council and Tesco, have agreed terms.

“We believe that these eight landowners have entered into negotiations in the spirit of recognising how important this new bridge will be for the town of Workington,” added Coun Markley.

Humphrey Dobie, chairman of Workington Reds football club, which leases some land, said: “It’s not us. We’re still talking to them because they want some of our land. We have not caused any problems that I know of. We’re still trying to negotiate a price.”

8 put of 9 have agreed terms, so thats one that hasnt. We then get Dobie telling us he is still negotiating, doesnt take Miss Marple to figure out who hasnt agreed terms does it.

[rockerlad]

Seriously? Are you that blinkered as to defend your club beyond reason? Right, read this and tell me how it sounds to you?



8 put of 9 have agreed terms, so thats one that hasnt. We then get Dobie telling us he is still negotiating, doesnt take Miss Marple to figure out who hasnt agreed terms does it.

Dobie could be talking about negotiation with ABC as they own the land. They can sell it to who ever they want, then the reds have to be compensated. Workington AFC can't stop ABC selling the land. Have a think about that.

[dkw]

Dobie could be talking about negotiation with ABC as they own the land. They can sell it to who ever they want, then the reds have to be compensated. Workington AFC can't stop ABC selling the land. Have a think about that.

So your just going to ignore this bit then "We’re still talking to them because they want some of our land"

[rockerlad]

So your just going to ignore this bit then "We’re still talking to them because they want some of our land"

Dobie cant say "our land" we dont own any land at all. Words lost in translation maybe. Every bit of land the BP sits on is owned by ABC. Cumbria CC are purchasing the land and will not be buying direct from WAFC as we dont own anything. Maybe the council should come out and name the guilty party and have things over and done with.
If you take a look here there is a fe supporting my argument.

http://www.timesandstar.co.uk/news/politics/land-wrangle-may-cause-two-year-delay-for-new-workington-bridge-1.839135?firstComment=0&commentview=1#forum

And if it turns out to be WAFC who are being greedy then I will be ashamed of my club.

[dkw]

Dobie cant say "our land" we dont own any land at all. Words lost in translation maybe.

That sounds like clutching at straws to me. And as for supporting your argument, all I see is a forum with no official word at all.

[rockerlad]

That sounds like clutching at straws to me. And as for supporting your argument, all I see is a forum with no official word at all.

i didnt say any of the word was official

[dkw]

i didnt say any of the word was official

So how does some random saying something on a forum support your argument then?

[Keith T]

Rockerlad, the council own the land but the Reds have a leasehold on the land from the council. Until the Reds agree to give up the lease on that part of the land covered by the lease, for an agreed sum of money, then the council cannot sell it until the lease expires.

Now if it is the Reds that are holding up the bridge, and from all the quotes, etc, in the newspaper it would certainly point towards them, then the council have already offered 10 times whatever the lease is worth to get moving with the bridge. If say, for arguments sake, the Reds only had 3 years left on their lease, if the council were to be as bloody minded they could put off the bridge until the end of the lease and take the land back for nothing. They could also decide because of what is happening that they did not want to renew the lease and where would that leave the Reds?

[rockerlad]

Rockerlad, the council own the land but the Reds have a leasehold on the land from the council. Until the Reds agree to give up the lease on that part of the land covered by the lease, for an agreed sum of money, then the council cannot sell it until the lease expires.

Now if it is the Reds that are holding up the bridge, and from all the quotes, etc, in the newspaper it would certainly point towards them, then the council have already offered 10 times whatever the lease is worth to get moving with the bridge. If say, for arguments sake, the Reds only had 3 years left on their lease, if the council were to be as bloody minded they could put off the bridge until the end of the lease and take the land back for nothing. They could also decide because of what is happening that they did not want to renew the lease and where would that leave the Reds?

DP ha ha, only joking Keith, belive me Keith this will all be sorted very soon, also why would the council want to get shot of BP they have in recent seasons spent a fair bit of cash on it helping the upgrades.

Keith can i point you to this please :

"The county council has been working flat out to get all the necessary pieces of the jigsaw together, but one local landowner is proving to be the sticking point"

Reds are not a land owner.

Edited by rockerlad, 21 May 2011 - 02:45 PM.

[wonky]

Keith reds will no doubt let the lease run out and end up with nothing, these are the same clowns that would rather stay in that ###### hole than get a state of the art ground to share with town. I personally hope they get nowt.

[rockerlad]

Keith reds will no doubt let the lease run out and end up with nothing, these are the same clowns that would rather stay in that ###### hole than get a state of the art ground to share with town. I personally hope they get nowt.

Well with that attitude I will be praying Haven get selected for the Championship and town get left to rot in this division.