Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Eyesore In The Corner

Whats the legalities?

  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#41 D11

D11
  • Coach
  • 1,116 posts

Posted 04 March 2014 - 09:43 AM

Could the bar be improved this way to increase the service and revenue without breaking any existing legal agreements?

 

Should we have bought the Kill One when it was on offer & have that as the club house, would this have saved the club 5K per season? 

 

We need to remember that the club requires £100k before it looks at any further expenditure on assets which would increase its overall debt. This is the only responsible way the club can go forward.  The £100k has been required since the AGM that was held in 2011 and until this money is found the club will struggle.


"we all make mistakes that's why they put rubbers on pencils"


#42 atp

atp
  • Players
  • 46 posts

Posted 04 March 2014 - 11:42 AM

The deal for selling alcohol from the outside bar was carried out by the present BOD. Extending the Raiders Bar requires Planning permission and a further deal/permission from the Covenant owner.

if at the time planning permission was sort for the extension of the raiders bar area instead of the now outside bar it would have cost no more at the time.
Also there is room for a second floor above the Raiders Bar in the future if needed.
To extend the Raiders bar room area dose not need permission from the covenant holder! The only reason the covenant holder would be involved is if the proposal was to move the actual bar area outside the perimeter of the now bar area. The deal for selling alcohol was done in order to keep the outside bar open due to its popularity. The first season (Championship one) it broke even. After promotion to Championship I believe a small profit was achieved, The £100k which was said to be required outside the normal fundraising in 2011 was to ensure a competitive side could be put on the field, this was not achieved due to various reasons at the time.
The BoD have since paid off a considerable amount of the inherited debt and still held a position in Championship which should be applauded. Fund raising is going forward so I am led to believe and big strides have been achieved since 2011, I do not believe the £100k is as urgent as some would believe, if would be wonderfully if the club had it in its coffers but it has not been possible. If you fail to raise the money one way you try another, it may take longer but it is progressing. All that we can do is get behind the BoD and the team and support the club the best we can .

#43 D11

D11
  • Coach
  • 1,116 posts

Posted 04 March 2014 - 02:50 PM

if at the time planning permission was sort for the extension of the raiders bar area instead of the now outside bar it would have cost no more at the time.
Also there is room for a second floor above the Raiders Bar in the future if needed.
To extend the Raiders bar room area dose not need permission from the covenant holder! The only reason the covenant holder would be involved is if the proposal was to move the actual bar area outside the perimeter of the now bar area. The deal for selling alcohol was done in order to keep the outside bar open due to its popularity. The first season (Championship one) it broke even. After promotion to Championship I believe a small profit was achieved, The £100k which was said to be required outside the normal fundraising in 2011 was to ensure a competitive side could be put on the field, this was not achieved due to various reasons at the time.
The BoD have since paid off a considerable amount of the inherited debt and still held a position in Championship which should be applauded. Fund raising is going forward so I am led to believe and big strides have been achieved since 2011, I do not believe the £100k is as urgent as some would believe, if would be wonderfully if the club had it in its coffers but it has not been possible. If you fail to raise the money one way you try another, it may take longer but it is progressing. All that we can do is get behind the BoD and the team and support the club the best we can .

Extending the bar outside its current area breaches the covenant therefore permission is required.

I am unaware how you calculated that the outside bar broke even in the first year as I had difficulty getting people to carry out stock takes and of course the starting point is the cost of the  deal made with the covenant holder (which was into thousands) before any profit could be looked at.

The £100k required in 2011 outside the normal funding was not needed to put a competitive side on the pitch it was to bring the club out of the debt it was in. If you believe that the £100k that was required is now not as urgent then you either haven't read the last 3 years accounts or simply do not understand them. I must remind you that each year since 2011 the club has had to borrow, loan and re mortgage to get through the seasons. I have warned many times of the requirement and already mentioned that the club is currently only £50k better off on the accounts than it was before the current BOD. To round it up if the club closed today and sold the ground there would hardly be enough to pay the debt.


"we all make mistakes that's why they put rubbers on pencils"


#44 atp

atp
  • Players
  • 46 posts

Posted 04 March 2014 - 03:38 PM

Extending the bar outside its current area breaches the covenant therefore permission is required.
I am unaware how you calculated that the outside bar broke even in the first year as I had difficulty getting people to carry out stock takes and of course the starting point is the cost of the  deal made with the covenant holder (which was into thousands) before any profit could be looked at.
The £100k required in 2011 outside the normal funding was not needed to put a competitive side on the pitch it was to bring the club out of the debt it was in. If you believe that the £100k that was required is now not as urgent then you either haven't read the last 3 years accounts or simply do not understand them. I must remind you that each year since 2011 the club has had to borrow, loan and re mortgage to get through the seasons. I have warned many times of the requirement and already mentioned that the club is currently only £50k better off on the accounts than it was before the current BOD. To round it up if the club closed today and sold the ground there would hardly be enough to pay the debt.

considering there has been no AGM, EGM, this year I am wondering how you know so much about the current financial situation?
I think you will find that it was stated that the £100k was to help keep a competitive team on the park, I do not disagree that the BoD have borrowed since they took position, but even the government still borrow money even though the deficit is reducing! In the clubs present position I should think it will be a lot cheaper for the club to borrow money now than the extortionate rates of interest that were being charged previously? As I said previously the £100k could not be raised as hoped in the way the club wished it could so you try another way, if it means borrowing monies to pay of existing debts at a MUCH cheaper rate of interest than is in place at the time then the club will pay the debt of faster and save money also through less interest

#45 Alias

Alias
  • Coach
  • 229 posts

Posted 04 March 2014 - 04:00 PM

Should you be divulging private matters relating to your time on the board on a public forum D11 and atp ?

#46 D11

D11
  • Coach
  • 1,116 posts

Posted 04 March 2014 - 04:09 PM

considering there has been no AGM, EGM, this year I am wondering how you know so much about the current financial situation?
I think you will find that it was stated that the £100k was to help keep a competitive team on the park, I do not disagree that the BoD have borrowed since they took position, but even the government still borrow money even though the deficit is reducing! In the clubs present position I should think it will be a lot cheaper for the club to borrow money now than the extortionate rates of interest that were being charged previously? As I said previously the £100k could not be raised as hoped in the way the club wished it could so you try another way, if it means borrowing monies to pay of existing debts at a MUCH cheaper rate of interest than is in place at the time then the club will pay the debt of faster and save money also through less interest

It was myself and Alan Stoker that raised the point of the £100k required during the 2011 AGM, have a check of the minutes of that meeting and I can categorically tell you I was more concerned at the time  about the future of the club with its outstanding debts rather than a competitive side.


"we all make mistakes that's why they put rubbers on pencils"


#47 D11

D11
  • Coach
  • 1,116 posts

Posted 04 March 2014 - 04:10 PM

Should you be divulging private matters relating to your time on the board on a public forum D11 and atp ?

 

 

You are correct.

 

Reading the various messages on here from ex BOD members with little understanding reminds me why I left.


"we all make mistakes that's why they put rubbers on pencils"





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users