• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Irate Ian

Members
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
2,070
FAO: Shrimperzone Forum Members



I am "poking around" as you put it is for various reasons, but principally that RM has declined to disclose following my prior requests across the club official site circa 3 weeks ago, information which I feel should be in the public domain and is of concern to me as a life supporter of the club.

My poking around is well intended, but I would stress that I have concern only for SUFC & SUFC only - as opposed to any Property Development Company. I nail my colours to the mast, in avoidance as to any doubt as to my interests.

On the working assumption and earnest hope that permission may be forthcoming, If Ron can provide answers, I and like minded supporters would appreciate his disclosure, of the following:-


1. Who [names of all consortia members] or what corporation [and names of their shareholders] are the beneficial owners of the land on which the Fossetts development is proposed.

2. In consideration for the release of restrictive covenant of use of land at Roots Hall now or previously, what if any long term security of tenure are SUFC to be granted at the proposed new stadia and by what vehicle or deed.

3. What terms of lease and anticipated rent is to be payable [and to whom] by SUFC at Fossetts. Also what termly rent reviews are proposed.

3a Does Ron feel that because of his possible need to maximise profits from the development, that he has any possible conflict of interest with the needs of SUFC to remain solvent during its use and occupation of the stadium.

3b If the immediate landlord sells the freehold, will any provision for SUFC being protrected against eviction be envisaged.

3c In the event of SUFC Ltd entering any form of Insolvency, will the football team trading under the name of Southend United be given first refusal to continue use and occupation under identical terms as SUFC Ltd under the proposed Lease or Trust Deed so that perpetual occupation by any re-incarnation of Southend United only be first assured ?

4. Who will be [a] the immediate and the residual landlord.

5. Will there be a right of forfeiture of lease for faliure to pay rent on a timely basis or other covenants.

6. Will SUFC have sole use of the stadium and capability to derive benefit of income from other permitted uses.

7. What other uses are envisaged.

8. Does RM envisage SUFC being capable of meeting payment of rent based upon the projected operating costs of SUFC at the new stadium.

9. What are the projected financials viz can the club sustain to trade with the overheads that are anticipated.

9a Do the financials assume higher level of average gate, if so what average number?

9b How was this number estimated and what if any market research may have been undertaken and will this be published, if so, when.

9c Has Ron considered raising capital by SUFC from its supporters by other than purchase of shares; for the advance purchase of season cards for [a] more than one year life [c] perpetual [in form of some type of foundation debenture purchase as with the Royal Albert Hall]

10 What liabilites are presently subsisting to the owners of Roots Hall by SUFC in respect of [a] rent service charges or other liability.

11 What is to be done concerning these liabilities if the development proceeds.

12 What if any pre-conditions are anticipated for advance purchase of season cards for above 1 year.

13 Will any purchase include all/or any events taking place at the stadium.

14 If not, will season card holders be afforded first refusal on other than football events in "their" seats.

15 What other information can Ron disclose to supporters that will serve to enable a greater understanding of the proposed legacy he anticipates bestowing upon SUFC in return for the club being the vehicle by which his or other development companies can ultimately re-develop the site of Roots Hall.


If any Shrimperzone members have any additional questions, would they contact John and please publish.

Await with interest Rons thoughts and comments.


Southend Utd 1st and last.
 
What if it doesn't get approved?

I'm confident it will go ahead, but if it doesn't then we have little option but to look for another site imho. Contrary to what has been suggested in previous threads, I don't see the redeveolpment of the Hall as a viable option here, certainly not for the longer term.
 
Have been reading thses threads and thinking for ages, and as persistently annoying as irate_Ian is, he makes some fair points. I think RM has done an outstanding job here and there's no reason not to trust him, but the cynic in me thinks that anyone involved in proprty development is not to be trusted. I do worry that some stupidly tiny smallprint might be added into any contracts that might screw the club over for property development space or money.

In a less forward way (the tone that ii is using in his questions might make RM feel unfairly threatened and mistrusted after all the money he's put into the club), it might be a good idea to seek assurances from RM. Everything seems hunky-dory on the surface if FF gets the go-ahead, but with the positive influence that visions of our future have on the mind, some perspective might be being lost. No-one but those firmly involved will know what's REALLY going on behind the scenes and what the situation of this club will REALLY be once it moves into the new ground.

Considering that the club's ability to play at a decent level or, worse yet, survive probably rests on this ground, I think it's only fair that some of us are a bit wary or suspicious.
 
1) The bulk of the land is owned by SEL (its boots and laces)
2) the local plan has the B&L site set aside for sports use only (and has done for many years which is why the retail unit cannot go ahead with out the stadium)
3) RM said some years ago that the stadium would be handed over to the clubs at completion
3a) Because a retail site with an element of reliance on footfall from a football stadium stadium would not work if no one played there..........
4) Thats the same question as 1)
5)see 3)

Oh I am getting fed up of trying to recall things which have been mentioned by RM in the past 3 years...
I suggest you have a word with vrious members of the trust, they have all this information and more besides, most of this was done to death on the Mailing list a good few years ago, where the level of "investigation" was rather more than posting questions and was not driven by a hidden agenda.

Personally , had you had valid reasons for asking the questions (and don't just quote the supporter angle, you probably spend far more money per annum in your local supermarket, just try getting all the shareholder, rent information out of sainsbury's just by posting on thier online shopping site) and put them forward in the correct and businesslike manner RM may well have replied. Certainly if the questions had been asked in reference to maybe a reasonable investment potential .
 
It is true tho...

I want to support my team, not talk about the ins and outs of the finances and who owns what, and what might happen if this or that!!


Lets just be united in supporting the team eh!!

But without a knowledge of what is going on beghind the scenes, especially the finances, how can anyone expect to say, "we are not paying the wages" or "splash the cash" for example.
 
This is getting boring....

any more fourms you want to use?

Tawn ******g yawn!!!!

It is true tho...

I want to support my team, not talk about the ins and outs of the finances and who owns what, and what might happen if this or that!!


Lets just be united in supporting the team eh!!


So on the basis you think that this thread is boring etc... would it not just be better to ignore it - No-one forces you to click on the link.

After all the rummaging around for bits and bobs, we can finally see the questions which need answering.

After all lets look at it for a moment. Roots Hall as a piece of land is useless as it stands because it can only be used for football purposes unless we have somewhere else to play. This gives us a little bit of protection.

When we move to a new stadium, will we still have the same level of protection? It appears not.

Yes a new stadium will enable the company who own the club to generate more income etc, but we (as a football club) won't own the ground and ultimately will just be tennants like the retail shops that will be based there.

So whilst we can all get excited about the prospect of playing in front of 22,000 supporters in a shiny new stadium, lets not just assume that everything is OK. It's not being negative - just realistic.
 
So on the basis you think that this thread is boring etc... would it not just be better to ignore it - No-one forces you to click on the link.

After all the rummaging around for bits and bobs, we can finally see the questions which need answering.

After all lets look at it for a moment. Roots Hall as a piece of land is useless as it stands because it can only be used for football purposes unless we have somewhere else to play. This gives us a little bit of protection.

When we move to a new stadium, will we still have the same level of protection? It appears not.

Yes a new stadium will enable the company who own the club to generate more income etc, but we (as a football club) won't own the ground and ultimately will just be tennants like the retail shops that will be based there.

So whilst we can all get excited about the prospect of playing in front of 22,000 supporters in a shiny new stadium, lets not just assume that everything is OK. It's not being negative - just realistic.

It's taken me a long time to make any real comment on this. I think what's got people's goats is the way II has gone about his postings, blanketing all the different forums and just the manner he's used.

Offline he seems a nice enough chap, and where he's made comments on other threads, they've often been relevant and witty. It's just this "dog with a bone" mentality on here that's proved irritating. I don't think anyone's saying he maybe doesn't have a point.
 
Back
Top