Cas Stadium Revelopment - could it be this time?

[dboy]

5 hours ago, Taffy Tiger said:

£12.2M from Axiom (In form of 106 I think) and £2M already given by WMDC. Absolutely no need to make any changes to stadium pitch . One of best playing surfaces in Super League . Always in immaculate condition , whereas training pitch is very bumpy and in very poor condition. 

Apart from it being 14 metres too short.

It's an under-10s field.

[The Future is League]

I hope this is not another false dawn from Cas too hang on too their Super League status.

Actions speak louder than Cas, so hurry up and get building to prove you are serious, and not playing more games when it comes to a rebuild

[The Ghost of 99]

15 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

I hope this is not another false dawn from Cas too hang on too their Super League status.

Actions speak louder than Cas, so hurry up and get building to prove you are serious, and not playing more games when it comes to a rebuild

You know how long the planning and financing processes take, right? Just saying, "get building" implies not.

[Adelaide Tiger]

13 hours ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

Think you're wrong there. The 12 million includes the Council money. The remaining 10 million is pure speculation. Axiom has promised nothing, and where the figure of 10 million comes from I don't know. It may be what Cas want and need but I seriously doubt they will get close to that much.

Unless...

....Axiom suddenly have a need to release that land ASAP, something that seems unlikely in the current economic climate. They could in truth sit on the land for years and just wait for Cas to go bust. That was Yorkcourts plan with BV untill Amazon came along and then suddenly they couldn't do enough.

Funny old game is property development.

Taffy Tiger may have seen the Yorkshire Post article that states ‘Funds raised by the proposed new Axiom employment development would add £12.2m to £2m already granted to Tigers from Wakefield Council’s rugby league resilience fund.

No idea how the Yorkshire Post has come up with £12.2m though.

[sentoffagain2]

1 hour ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

Taffy Tiger may have seen the Yorkshire Post article that states ‘Funds raised by the proposed new Axiom employment development would add £12.2m to £2m already granted to Tigers from Wakefield Council’s rugby league resilience fund.

No idea how the Yorkshire Post has come up with £12.2m though.

  I would be surprised if they have not used some of the £2m by now.

[Davo5]

47 minutes ago, sentoffagain2 said:

  I would be surprised if they have not used some of the £2m by now.

Those annual artists impressions don’t come cheap.

[The Future is League]

3 hours ago, The Ghost of 99 said:

You know how long the planning and financing processes take, right? Just saying, "get building" implies not.

Remind how long they have been promising a new or revamped stadium?

[The Ghost of 99]

2 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

Remind how long they have been promising a new or revamped stadium?

Pretty much every club in SL who has had a stadium redeveloped has done it with the support of the local authority, a soccer club or an enabling development. Without any of those, until now, Cas and Wakey have been in an impossible position. Fans of clubs who have been lucky engaging in a **** waving contest against those who haven't is really not very useful or insightful.

[The Future is League]

1 minute ago, The Ghost of 99 said:

Pretty much every club in SL who has had a stadium redeveloped has done it with the support of the local authority, a soccer club or an enabling development. Without any of those, until now, Cas and Wakey have been in an impossible position. Fans of clubs who have been lucky engaging in a **** waving contest against those who haven't is really not very useful or insightful.

Wakey have pulled their finger out on the matter and its happening for them now.

Cas are in real danger of losing their Super League status because of their dump of a ground

[The Ghost of 99]

23 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

Wakey have pulled their finger out on the matter and its happening for them now.

Cas are in real danger of losing their Super League status because of their dump of a ground

Cas are not in danger of losing their status when you look at the clubs around them. They are financially solid, have a decent academy, do ok on the field and own their own ground with plans to upgrade.

The grading system is not just a "new (but empty) ground" assessment in the same flawed way licencing was.

As for clubs "pulling their fingers out" if you think Wakey and Cas haven't spent years and years and quite a lot of money on their stadium projects then you clearly haven't done much research on the topic.

[whatmichaelsays]

32 minutes ago, The Ghost of 99 said:

Pretty much every club in SL who has had a stadium redeveloped has done it with the support of the local authority, a soccer club or an enabling development. Without any of those, until now, Cas and Wakey have been in an impossible position. Fans of clubs who have been lucky engaging in a **** waving contest against those who haven't is really not very useful or insightful.

I've said this before and whilst it's not a universally popular view, I stand by it. 

People forget how much of a role fortune plays in these sorts of projects and to be frank, I have doubts over whether St Helens and Warrington would be playing where they are now had they jumped into bed with Tesco just a couple of years later than they did. That's not to say that they'd still be playing at Knowsley or Wilderspool, but that their respective projects may have looked very different. 

If St Helens or Warrington had launched their projects slightly later and closer to the 2008 recession, where the housing market collapsed and when the grocery retail landscape changed, prompting supermarkets like Tesco to shift away from the "hypermarket" model to compete with the likes of Aldi and Lidl, would those projects have worked the way they did? We'll never know the answer, but I don't think it's completely unfair to suggest that both clubs could have found themselves in a similar position to Wakefield or Castleford. 

For all of the fair criticsm you could throw at clubs like Castleford and Wakefield, they have tried to do what many posters on here suggest they should do and mirror what clubs like Warrington and St Helens did, working with major developments and using S106 planning to support their projects. In the case of Wakefield, that failed because the developer took advantage of a loophole in the planning consent that the council subsequently wouldn't/couldn't enforce. In the case of Castleford, they've been impacted by the collapse of the retail sector (especially "big box" retail) and the rise of online shopping. 

Both clubs now appear to have found a way forward, but it's unfair not to acknowledge the role that fortune (or lack of it) - alongside some undoubted hard work - plays in this process. 

Edited December 21, 2022 by whatmichaelsays

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

36 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

Remind how long they have been promising a new or revamped stadium?

They first announced that they'd moving to a new stadium in Glasshoughton in the mid 1970s.....

[Saint Toppy]

21 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

I've said this before and whilst it's not a universally popular view, I stand by it. 

People forget how much of a role fortune plays in these sorts of projects and to be frank, I have doubts over whether St Helens and Warrington would be playing where they are now had they jumped into bed with Tesco just a couple of years later than they did. That's not to say that they'd still be playing at Knowsley or Wilderspool, but that their respective projects may have looked very different. 

If St Helens or Warrington had launched their projects slightly later and closer to the 2008 recession, where the housing market collapsed and when the grocery retail landscape changed, prompting supermarkets like Tesco to shift away from the "hypermarket" model to compete with the likes of Aldi and Lidl, would those projects have worked the way they did? We'll never know the answer, but I don't think it's completely unfair to suggest that both clubs could have found themselves in a similar position to Wakefield or Castleford. 

For all of the fair criticsm you could throw at clubs like Castleford and Wakefield, they have tried to do what many posters on here suggest they should do and mirror what clubs like Warrington and St Helens did, working with major developments and using S106 planning to support their projects. In the case of Wakefield, that failed because the developer took advantage of a loophole in the planning consent that the council subsequently wouldn't/couldn't enforce. In the case of Castleford, they've been impacted by the collapse of the retail sector (especially "big box" retail) and the rise of online shopping. 

Both clubs now appear to have found a way forward, but it's unfair not to acknowledge the role that fortune (or lack of it) - alongside some undoubted hard work - plays in this process. 

Just to clarify Saints new stadium wasn't necessarily contingent on Tesco. The land had already been bought by Langtree and Saints had already taken the decision to build a new stadium somewhere in the town rather than redevelop KR after they had an economic assessment done. They would have built a new stadium somewhere even if the current site wasn't available.

Saints had already reached an agreement with the housing developer for the KR site but actually never received the amount they initially agreed because of delays to the current site availability, which pushed it into the 2008 recession and the subsequent lowering of land values for housing. Its reported they got around £2M less than they originally agreed, so the directors just funded the extra. They funded the construction of the whole stadium anyway, they just saved some money by having the Council & Langtree do the ground remediation in advance of the stadium build on the current site. Even if they hadn't had this the directors were still prepared to pay for a new stadium somewhere. 

So yes Tesco building their new store on the Linkway site then made that site available for a stadium development when Saints wanted one, but it wouldn't have stopped a new stadium being built anyway, just probably somewhere else in the town.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Saint Toppy

[The Ghost of 99]

The council still had to be very actively involved in approving planning at Knowsley Road and shepherding the whole thing through the planning approval process.

Meanwhile the club was reliant on its very wealthy backers to ensure there were no funding gaps.

So lots of good fortune for St Helens there, and good luck to them (although I for one preferred the old ground which was a "mustn't miss" away game!)

[Toby Chopra]

1 hour ago, The Future is League said:

Wakey have pulled their finger out on the matter and its happening for them now.

Cas are in real danger of losing their Super League status because of their dump of a ground

I doubt they're in danger of losing SL status purely due to the ground, I see no signs we're going to toughen up the entry criteria. It's just they're nowhere near Cat A - and the benefits that brings - until they get it sorted.  

[Davo5]

1 hour ago, The Ghost of 99 said:

Pretty much every club in SL who has had a stadium redeveloped has done it with the support of the local authority, a soccer club or an enabling development. Without any of those, until now, Cas and Wakey have been in an impossible position. Fans of clubs who have been lucky engaging in a **** waving contest against those who haven't is really not very useful or insightful.

Didn’t a Championship club not too far away develop their ground without those things ?

[Forever Trinity]

5 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

Didn’t a Championship club not too far away develop their ground without those things ?

It did by selling a shed load of land to a house builder as part of the help

[GUBRATS]

Stadiums either should or should not be part of any grading process , you either have one or not , we've seen clubs be refused entry to SL due to stadium , and other clubs allowed entry to SL despite their stadium not being up to standard 

Set out the standard and stick to it 

But do not accept any ' proposed developments ' until they are physically real , until that point they don't exist 

Edited December 21, 2022 by GUBRATS

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

21 minutes ago, Forever Trinity said:

It did by selling a shed load of land to a house builder as part of the help

No it didn't, don't talk garbage. 

[The Ghost of 99]

38 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Stadiums either should or should not be part of any grading process , you either have one or not , we've seen clubs be refused entry to SL due to stadium , and other clubs allowed entry to SL despite their stadium not being up to standard 

Set out the standard and stick to it 

But do not accept any ' proposed developments ' until they are physically real , until that point they don't exist 

It will no doubt be a factor. But so will stadium ownership, indebtedness, being propped financially up by one individual, having a website and professional brand identity, spread and size of income streams and a load of other factors. Which would leave Cas in my mind as a mid-ranking B which would see them comfortably remain in SL in the near term.

[GUBRATS]

8 minutes ago, The Ghost of 99 said:

It will no doubt be a factor. But so will stadium ownership, indebtedness, being propped financially up by one individual, having a website and professional brand identity, spread and size of income streams and a load of other factors. Which would leave Cas in my mind as a mid-ranking B which would see them comfortably remain in SL in the near term.

What will be a factor ?

Proposed stadium developments ? 

 

[Toby Chopra]

55 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Stadiums either should or should not be part of any grading process , you either have one or not , we've seen clubs be refused entry to SL due to stadium , and other clubs allowed entry to SL despite their stadium not being up to standard 

Set out the standard and stick to it 

But do not accept any ' proposed developments ' until they are physically real , until that point they don't exist 

IMG's Matt Dwyer addressed that very point this week, when comparing the new grading system with licensing: 

“One of the challenges was that the clubs claimed to make plans for their future development, but they weren’t sticking to those plans.

“In contrast, we are looking at what clubs have actually done. So a club that claims to be planning to build a new stadium will only get credit for its plans when the stadium is actually built."

https://www.totalrl.com/img-deny-return-to-super-league-licensing-as-london-backed-for-big-future/

[The Ghost of 99]

2 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

IMG's Matt Dwyer addressed that very point this week, when comparing the new grading system with licensing: 

“One of the challenges was that the clubs claimed to make plans for their future development, but they weren’t sticking to those plans.

“In contrast, we are looking at what clubs have actually done. So a club that claims to be planning to build a new stadium will only get credit for its plans when the stadium is actually built."

https://www.totalrl.com/img-deny-return-to-super-league-licensing-as-london-backed-for-big-future/

Quite. I don't know why fans of clubs who are tenants are getting so hung up on this. Stadia will be a factor but built ones only. They should be more concerned about the financial viability assessments IMG are going to make which isn't likely to be particularly favourable for most of the lodger clubs.

[dboy]

1 hour ago, Davo5 said:

Didn’t a Championship club not too far away develop their ground without those things ?

If you mean Fev, let's cut through the smoke and mirrors - it's still a very poor ground, with barely any facilities. 

A couple of decent seated stands has improved the place, but it isn't anything special.

[Davo5]

2 minutes ago, dboy said:

If you mean Fev, let's cut through the smoke and mirrors - it's still a very poor ground, with barely any facilities. 

A couple of decent seated stands has improved the place, but it isn't anything special.

It was better than it’s 2 closest Superleague clubs grounds & done with no Superleague funding & £2 million council grant.