Guest Dipped Flake Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I doubt very much this whole scheme will go ahead in the current climate, a handy get-out for Romanov I suppose. The main concern then becomes the safety certificate for the old stand. I understood this was the last season it was covered but doubt it would take too much money to patch it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 What I hear is that the council are waiting on movement from the club. It's the club that are holding things up. And if that is the case, hopefully someone will respond now that Lopez has disappeared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I think you're missing the point. The only way we will get a stand is if it is believe that the associated developments will fund it and make a profit as well. We were never building a ?51m stand. Anyway, the credit crunch has put paid to any chance there ever was. Exactly, sick of hearing about a ?51m stand, people should read past the headlines. Its like hobos.net on here sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 More absolute rubbish from our resident financial "expert". I honestly am staggered by this post. I'm staggered by the vast majority of your posts. Coco clearly has a clue what he's talking about. You clearly don't. IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 What I hear is that the council are waiting on movement from the club. It's the club that are holding things up. It's very unlikely that the planning application process is being held up by communications between the council and the club. There are separate plans ongoing between the club and the council with regards to the distillery/nursery/additional land etc. and that's probably what these rumours are referring to...at a guess, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ford donald Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 If we do,it will be more lies i would expect! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 It's very unlikely that the planning application process is being held up by communications between the council and the club. Sorry, but that is just not true at all. What is your basis for saying this? I'll give you a scenario. council says it needs more info on something, and writes to club for this. Club fails to reply. Result? process held up by clubs lack of communication. As I understand it, from folks who've been pretty on the ball re the stand the whole way through the process, this has been the hold up for quite a number of months now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 As far as I have heard and seen written on here a few times is that the council are looking for hearts to provide assurances about funding, and also timescales and progress on the nursery side of it before they will allow it. Apparently they have concerns that the funding is not in place. As far as I can tell this isnt unusual for a development of this size and it will only become worrying if the funding/assurances cant be found at which time we will have to seriously question the lon term future and viability of tynecastle as our home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Sorry, but that is just not true at all. What is your basis for saying this? I'll give you a scenario. council says it needs more info on something, and writes to club for this. Club fails to reply. Result? process held up by clubs lack of communication. As I understand it, from folks who've been pretty on the ball re the stand the whole way through the process, this has been the hold up for quite a number of months now. Did you read the rest of my post? Why is it 'not true at all'? I said it probably had more to do with the ongoing arrangements between the council and the club with regards to the peripheral issues. It is known that there have been some hold ups with the various things that were meant to have been cleared up with the distillery, which in turn has halted progress with the nursery and the other land deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I'm not a planner, nor an expert on planning applications But the financing of a project is totally distinct from planning being granted is it not. Given that you can have what is essentially a shell company own land and apply for planning solely with the intent of increasing its value in order to sell it on to a (at the time of the application) unknown buyer (and therefore project funder). Or am i wrong? Buy the way can Warren Buffet please explain that if just about every commercial enterprise in the UK is looking to cut costs and staff, with nothing other than negative growth in the economy projected for at least a couple of years why additional com prop will be needed within 2 years? Am genuinely interested to learn of the basis behind the claim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I'm not a planner, nor an expert on planning applications But the financing of a project is totally distinct from planning being granted is it not. Given that you can have what is essentially a shell company own land and apply for planning solely with the intent of increasing its value in order to sell it on to a (at the time of the application) unknown buyer (and therefore project funder). Or am i wrong? Buy the way can Warren Buffet please explain that if just about every commercial enterprise in the UK is looking to cut costs and staff, with nothing other than negative growth in the economy projected for at least a couple of years why additional com prop will be needed within 2 years? Am genuinely interested to learn of the basis behind the claim Part of the planning is the nursery move and construction, the council arent willing to give permission without assurances because in short they are worried vlad will uproot the nursery then do a runner from the project due to lack of cash leaving them with a "temporary" nursery only Seems fair to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Herbertson Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Bollox mate. That stand has too many fans in it. No, your wrong. If you look closely neither is a hibby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Marsh Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 The main stand was built in 1912, its nearly a century old. We need to be careful as it may become a listed building shortly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Did you read the rest of my post? Yes. Why is it 'not true at all'? Because it's perfectly feasable that the planning application could be held up by poor communication between HMFC and the council. I said it probably had more to do with the ongoing arrangements between the council and the club with regards to the peripheral issues. It is known that there have been some hold ups with the various things that were meant to have been cleared up with the distillery, which in turn has halted progress with the nursery and the other land deal. Which is all well and good, but completely ignores the fact the HMFC have been failing to reply to questions asked of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Part of the planning is the nursery move and construction, the council arent willing to give permission without assurances because in short they are worried vlad will uproot the nursery then do a runner from the project due to lack of cash leaving them with a "temporary" nursery only Seems fair to me I see - is this defo or an educated guess?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john brownlee Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 There shouldn't be any problems in getting the planning permission given the apparent professionalism of the application and the Council's awareness of how many projects are being postponed across the City. Would be very strange if the Council were to reject the plans now after having seen them all the way through. The question of course remains on the finance side.[/quote] see after you have hit the side of your head with a hammer more than once does the pain go away. The holdup is because of the cooncil planning and the relocation of the kiddies play eara. Cast your mind back to the coonciller that made the biggest fuss about the new stand and now look where she is. I do believe that has a lot to do with politics. Jennybawes is the fly in the ointment make no mistake about it. she will walk over broken glass to bring an end to the development at Tynecastle. If she cant do that then the delaying tactics will suite her for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigolo-Aunt Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Cant see it. Many thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Pathetic. Now in the tradition of infantile responses it is "we were promised a new stand". Plans were announced and a lot of money spent on a planning application. Circumstances have changed and we'll see what happens but this "we were promised" stuff is ridiculous. We were "promised" an new 60,000 capacity stadium at Sighthill in 1939. Something happened that made it impossible to proceed. But hey, we were promised! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Maroonblood Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Pathetic. Now in the tradition of infantile responses it is "we were promised a new stand". Plans were announced and a lot of money spent on a planning application. Circumstances have changed and we'll see what happens but this "we were promised" stuff is ridiculous. We were "promised" an new 60,000 capacity stadium at Sighthill in 1939. Something happened that made it impossible to proceed. But hey, we were promised! How much did you pay then for your season ticket? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 How much did you pay then for your season ticket? I bought two. I can't remember the exact amount. ?370 or thereabouts (each) , in the main stand. And you? And why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.T.F.Robertson Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I bought two. I can't remember the exact amount. ?370 or thereabouts (each) , in the main stand. And you? And why? I think that might qualify as a "whooooosh". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 In answer to the OP: no, I don't think we'll hear anything. But the stand sure as heck ain't gonna happen - and even without the credit crunch, financing it has always been a massive question mark. Note the redevelopment of Ripo's stadium. Has it happened? Nope. I'm not even sure that UBIG did more than part fund Kaunas' stadium either - and that's about it as far as their record goes. A few posters on here actually became fully fledged Vlad Outers the moment the plans were unveiled: Lopez' explanation of how we proposed to pay the debt back over decades was incredibly unconvincing and clearly fraught with risk; and ?51m more debt all in aid of a hotel and development in hardly-ideal Gorgie is not something I want this club involved with. Some day, under someone, the new stand will hopefully happen. But I'll bare my bum in Burton's window if it does under Romanov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I think that might qualify as a "whooooosh". If I interpret "whoooosh" rightly, it might well. (Red faced smiley thing?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 Good thread this by the Stairboy, and deserves to be bumped now that we all agree the Hamilton game was flaps. Buffalo Bill . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stirlo Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 The priority should be on reducing the debt - not building the ?51m stand and going further into debt. If and when the club is in a healthier financial state they should look at the option of a cheaper new stand without hotel/flats etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.