tonights meeting

[DEANO]

Well that was an eye opener! We were treated to quite a large and passionate crowd , and listened to a professional and eloquent panel .onthe face of it, what is there not to like. We will be paying the same rent as huntington stadium with our own changing rooms and board room together with our own offices. This rent will be frozen for 7 years! We will also have free training facilities and free resrerve game facilities. We will also recieve a bigger percentage of bar takings than york city. So in a nut shell, why won't we sign on the dotted line. Over to you Mr Guildford

[Simon Hall]

Some people still couldn't see what was in front of them though, despite the council telling us everything except the pounds and pence of the deal (which they were even happy to tell us had the director who was there agreed!), we have been offered a fantastic deal, far better than the football club, on a fantastic facility that benefits the whole community.

The council made it perfectly clear what has caused this issue yet still people don't seem to get it, blaming them for this debacle is nothing short of retarded.

[KISS]

I tried to stay neutral, but it was so difficult when I was so passionate about the club that I have supported for 53 years.

What the council have offered is fantastic any other club would be falling over themselves to sign.

 

8000 seater stadium

Club shop

Club offices

Dedicated Board room which can be rented out

% Bars/food Turnover on matchdays

stand naming rights

ground advertising

rights to sell parking on matchdays.

seven years rent freeze,

All at the same price we currently pay to rent Huntington Stadium

and the club also rents offices at the moment.

[White Knight]

So, we're there any club reps on the panel, and did they give a view as to w here they currently stand.

We need Mr Delmonte to say yes, and get the bloody thing built!

[shades2]

''I tried to stay neutral, but it was so difficult when I was so passionate about the club that I have supported for 53 years''.

 

Now't wrong with that Gary, sure everybody there last night wants what's best for the club, that for me includes JG who is trying to get the best deal for the club, but pretty obvious his motives are been questioned by lots of people

 

Last nights stats etc were very high level (no detail of £ behind them)

One point made by the council was JG asking for ''50% more'' than originally agreed on one issue/item.

So you have to ask the question, JG has been in business for 35 years and will have agreed loads of contracts etc, he must surely have given his reasons to the council for this request? Why is he asking for more? Have the goalposts been moved on the detail (which we don't know!!) behind an agreement?

Or is he just doing it for fun...

 

Read the posts above - almost sounds too good to be true - so why would someone with detailed knowledge of all the facts behind that very high level presentation not sign??

 

Personally - just to be clear - I support the club not individuals - whoever runs the club now and in the future will get my support (and money)

[Simon Hall]

''I tried to stay neutral, but it was so difficult when I was so passionate about the club that I have supported for 53 years''.

 

Now't wrong with that Gary, sure everybody there last night wants what's best for the club, that for me includes JG who is trying to get the best deal for the club, but pretty obvious his motives are been questioned by lots of people

 

Last nights stats etc were very high level (no detail of £ behind them)

One point made by the council was JG asking for ''50% more'' than originally agreed on one issue/item.

So you have to ask the question, JG has been in business for 35 years and will have agreed loads of contracts etc, he must surely have given his reasons to the council for this request? Why is he asking for more? Have the goalposts been moved on the detail (which we don't know!!) behind an agreement?

Or is he just doing it for fun...

 

Read the posts above - almost sounds too good to be true - so why would someone with detailed knowledge of all the facts behind that very high level presentation not sign??

 

Personally - just to be clear - I support the club not individuals - whoever runs the club now and in the future will get my support (and money)

 

Why would someone with detailed knowledge of the facts not sign? The 9 or so other partners in the scheme have, without any of this outcry. JG is just trying to do whats best for his club, that he owns 100% and has all the say in where the money goes. You're left supporting an individual sadly.

[shades2]

Why would someone with detailed knowledge of the facts not sign? The 9 or so other partners in the scheme have, without any of this outcry. JG is just trying to do whats best for his club, that he owns 100% and has all the say in where the money goes. You're left supporting an individual sadly.

 

So what's the alternative then Simon??

 

Forgot this before - (and don't quote me) - but understand there is some sort of 'protocol agreement' with the council which means JG cannot talk to or be in contact with council people at the current time - so that may explain why he was not there last night

 

Of course somebody could have actually told us that last night...........

[Mrs Shades]

Sorry I didn’t hear anything new in the debate last night.

Was an invitation given to the club to have a representative on the panel last night, I’m guessing not..

As only the Council and the club directors know whats been said behind closed doors, it was unfair to put club directors ( attending as members of the public not in an official capcity) on the spot to divulge facts and figures and the council representatives knew that and used that to deflect flac from themselves.

If you were moving to new business premises I don’t think you would buy in from seeing a pretty picture painted by the builder I think you would want to know a few more facts on running costs etc

At the end of the day I still have reservation that the council have the ability to bring this scheme in on time & budget, past schemes like the Barbican spring to mind. Therefore the immediate problem of where the club are going to play now far outweighs any argument over the stadium.

I hope and pray the meeting on Wednesday brings this a step closer to a conclusion for all concerned

[Simon Hall]

Sorry I didn’t hear anything new in the debate last night.

Was an invitation given to the club to have a representative on the panel last night, I’m guessing not..

As only the Council and the club directors know whats been said behind closed doors, it was unfair to put club directors ( attending as members of the public not in an official capcity) on the spot to divulge facts and figures and the council representatives knew that and used that to deflect flac from themselves.

If you were moving to new business premises I don’t think you would buy in from seeing a pretty picture painted by the builder I think you would want to know a few more facts on running costs etc

At the end of the day I still have reservation that the council have the ability to bring this scheme in on time & budget, past schemes like the Barbican spring to mind. Therefore the immediate problem of where the club are going to play now far outweighs any argument over the stadium.

I hope and pray the meeting on Wednesday brings this a step closer to a conclusion for all concerned

 

 

I know for a fact a director was asked if they'd like to attend in an official capacity. 

[GaryHall]

Sorry I didn’t hear anything new in the debate last night.

Was an invitation given to the club to have a representative on the panel last night, I’m guessing not..

As only the Council and the club directors know whats been said behind closed doors, it was unfair to put club directors ( attending as members of the public not in an official capcity) on the spot to divulge facts and figures and the council representatives knew that and used that to deflect flac from themselves.

If you were moving to new business premises I don’t think you would buy in from seeing a pretty picture painted by the builder I think you would want to know a few more facts on running costs etc

At the end of the day I still have reservation that the council have the ability to bring this scheme in on time & budget, past schemes like the Barbican spring to mind. Therefore the immediate problem of where the club are going to play now far outweighs any argument over the stadium.

I hope and pray the meeting on Wednesday brings this a step closer to a conclusion for all concerned

As it was a public meeting in a public place no one was excluded, before the meeting started I asked the only director present who is one of only two directors registered at companies house if they wished to participate in the meeting and sit at the front. The invitation was declined.

[Mrs Shades]

I'm glad a director was asked to attend and its a shame we couldn't hear the clubs point of view, but I do understand there are confidentiality clauses which have been signed, I know for a fact John Guildford could not attend as he is not allowed to talk to or be in contact with council officials.

 

This makes thinks difficult for all sides, some of the answers given last night were very vailed as I would expect as the council to did not want to be in breach of agreement clauses in place. Hence my comment I didn't hear anything new last night

 

But what all fans want is for things to move on, and hopefully they will

[shades2]

Game on tonight & sure JG will be there - so plenty of opportunity to have a quiet discussion

[Shadow45]

 

and the club also rents offices at the moment.

 

From whom do the club rent offices from?

[BIG IAN]

Guess!! It's not rocket science.

[Shadow45]

Guess!! It's not rocket science.

Sorry, it was a rhetorical question ;-)

[shades2]

Been away all weekend & don't do or understand facebook/twitter stuff, but already heard on the grapevine that a lot of people were unhappy about the way the meeting was run (I made my point on the night) - reckon people thought they were been bullied, the meeting almost sounded too well planned & too pre-prepared for me...... 

[Simon Hall]

Been away all weekend & don't do or understand facebook/twitter stuff, but already heard on the grapevine that a lot of people were unhappy about the way the meeting was run (I made my point on the night) - reckon people thought they were been bullied, the meeting almost sounded too well planned & too pre-prepared for me...... 

 

 

I've heard the same Col and somewhat agree so I've made my feelings known, it's up to people to make their own mind up about the meeting but we've all got different opinions and everyone wants what's best for the Knights. 

 

Some people put in hell of a lot of unpaid work and just blindly hand the money they raise over (well over a 6 figure sum in the last 13 years), only to be told it's not enough or get accused of impropriety, so I can fully understand someone getting a little cheesed off when people are blinded to the current owners version of things, especially when it's pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain cell what's been going on. Several neutrals I spoke to at the meeting were amazed that some Knights fans can't seem to fathom it out.

 

I've also hear a lot of people are more than happy with what the council have offered and several very important parties are happy with how the meeting went so we'll see what pans out.

[shades2]

I've heard the same Col and somewhat agree so I've made my feelings known, it's up to people to make their own mind up about the meeting but we've all got different opinions and everyone wants what's best for the Knights. 

 

Some people put in hell of a lot of unpaid work and just blindly hand the money they raise over (well over a 6 figure sum in the last 13 years), only to be told it's not enough or get accused of impropriety, so I can fully understand someone getting a little cheesed off when people are blinded to the current owners version of things, especially when it's pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain cell what's been going on. Several neutrals I spoke to at the meeting were amazed that some Knights fans can't seem to fathom it out.

 

I've also hear a lot of people are more than happy with what the council have offered and several very important parties are happy with how the meeting went so we'll see what pans out.

 

Think its time to move forward now Simon, one very good thing about actually having last weeks meeting is that the commitments made by the council are now public, so there's no going back now & those commitments must now be included in any legally binding contracts

 

So bring on Wednesday & let's hope everybody gets their ar*ses in gear - about time we had some good news

[Simon Hall]

Think its time to move forward now Simon, one very good thing about actually having last weeks meeting is that the commitments made by the council are now public, so there's no going back now & those commitments must now be included in any legally binding contracts

 

So bring on Wednesday & let's hope everybody gets their ar*ses in gear - about time we had some good news

 

Those commitments were in the contracts, that's the thing.

 

I agree, let's hope there's some good news this week. I've a feeling there will be too, although some will never be happy...

[BIG IAN]

I think the majority of knights fans will be happy, very happy

[GaryHall]

Just to clarify the room hire for the meeting was paid for by me personally, not by KISS.

[Peter G.]

Just for the record, I for one was happy with the meeting. In fact, wasn't it nice TO HAVE A BLOODY MEETING!

 

I've listened to Vice Presidents and others over the months putting forward their points of view on forums such as this, some who appear to wholeheartedly support JG in his approach and others who like me do not approve of how our club is being run.

Guess what they have in common, apart from being loyal Knights fans? They haven't a clue as to why an agreement for the Knights future has not been signed. This became very clear at " the meeting" when the chair asked if there was anybody in the room who knew the answer to this question. There followed a deathly silence. The chair took his microphone down to the group consisting of JGs family and friends plus a director of the club and asked the same question again. They either didn't know or were not prepared to comment in the absence of our leader, TITTER.

 

Do these fans who have put so much time and money into the club not wonder why JG himself didn't call a meeting months ago with fans, especially Vice Presidents and sponsors, to discuss the position he had taken on their behalf? And it would now appear that because the chairman of KISS had the audacity to agree with council officials that a public meeting with Knights fans and any other interested parties might help clear the air that he himself is now being attacked by JG for doing so?

 

Back to the meeting itself. After what I believed to be a slick presentation by the council reps which clearly showed the list of potential gains to the Knights at the new stadium there followed what could be termed a game/meeting of two halves.

The first half consisted of many attacking the council for withdrawing the Knights access to B.C pus training facilities. Many fans spoke well and passionately on this subject, including ex players and parents whose sons are desperate for somewhere to train and play.

IMO the council reps handled themselves in a professional manner during these understandable attacks and reiterated the council position that all facilities were part of the same package which was agreed verbally last September and needed to be signed by JG. When asked why they had only attacked JG in The Press and nobody else they replied that over the last few years they had received hundreds of emails etc from JG which made it appear that HE was the club.

It was made clear at this point that the agreement for the Knights to play at B.C was for a MINIMUM of two years. I clearly remember thinking to myself that surely Tim Atkins would not lie about this crucial point at a public meeting?

 

In the second half of the meeting it became apparent that more and more people in the audience were asking the same question, with the information that had been received why had the agreement not been signed in September? As stated earlier, when the chairman repeatedly asked this question NOBODY seemed to know the answer.

 

The above is taken from a few notes I jotted down during the meeting and afterwards. Obviously people have their own take on the proceedings and it is unlikely that there was anyone present who did not share some particular bias regarding the embarrassing goings on at our club. As others have already stated above it is to be hoped for that Wednesdays meeting can finally make some progress for all concerned.

[Simon Hall]

But JG is the club Peter, he's already said in The Press "but as soon as I step down, the club will have no office and they will have nothing"

 

http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/sport/yorkcityknights/11715271.Knights_stadium_row__Club_future_under_threat_if_I_leave__says_Guildford/

 

 

Personally, I'd class the lack of playing & training facilities as a far bigger problem for a Rugby League club, but maybe I'm just being negative?

[AndyHall]

G is for the backbone of the club (sans spine)

[Clarence St]

Excellent post again Peter as usual. Couldn't have put it better myself! Let's hope we get some positive news after Wednesday's meeting.

 One thing I had forgotten until I used the link Simon has put on here to the Press piece from January 9th where J.G. said he hadn't had a meeting with the project board and had been asking for one for weeks but couldn't get one. I would like to have asked Tim Atkins about that point if I had remembered as I find it very puzzling.