Torquay United Fans Forum

The thing is, some items in the report can be done as a quick fixes.

Take, for example, the issue of parking at/near the ground. It must be assumed that this impacts negatively on gates. So picking up on a suggestion in the Change at TUFC thread, arranging a Park and Ride car park, add a bus service and/or minibus and problem solved.

TUFC should be acting on issues like this now, maximise gates, extract as much money from unsuspecting fans as possible whilst they are waiting for kick off, and generally have a big blitz on revenue streams.

It's not rocket science.

Chris

To be clear, we only have a stay of 6 months. Clarke Osborne's statement in the article says he looks forward to 'sharing our ideas with the Mayor and outlining plans later this year'.

We need to keep up the pressure.

Chris

Thanks Merse. Looks like it was 26th Sept 64 then based on Brighton being in the division. I'll let the site owner know.

Good period that in many respects as you indicated. Politics was however just as unstable as now with Labour winning the GE almost 3 weeks after this match with a majority of 4 seats.

Then I moved away to work having studied at Homelands Technical High School, now the Academy next door, having had sports days on Plainmoor pitch.

C'est la vie

Chris

So as this is the silly season, here's a photo from the BBC operators site, showing part of the Grandstand set in those heady days of the mid- sixties.

But is that Torquay I can see on the scoreboard, and if so, does anyone remember when the Lincoln match was?

http://tech-ops.co.uk/next/2016/10/young-dudley/

Chris

SenorDingDong wrote: ↑30 Apr 2017, 18:31 As an aside, interesting to note that yet again the Herald has disabled comments on the article where they state they're not reporting on GI because of ethics codes. Scared of a little debate?

Yes they are scared of debate. The reason is that any business interest can threaten a paper that it will act over any comment it doesn't like. Whether true or false. In practice this means legal costs even if the paper is found to be correct. So the smaller papers, even if owned by a national, will keep quiet rather than face significant cost.

I have seen this in action here in my home town between an educational establishment and the local daily. I know that the paper was warned of legal action and told that the lawyers were watching.

Whether GI engage in this practice is difficult to say, of course...

Chris

merse btpir wrote: ↑26 Apr 2017, 19:00
You should be under no illusion about that and neither should anyone be under any illusion it is a very profitable business for them.

Osborne is no fool and knows that well before the end of the leasehold at Poole the Borough there will be under pressure to cash in the 'family silver' as all local authorities are under this Tory Government........Poole of course is a Tory council.

Indeed, and they are already over halfway through the lease term. As you say the new development would be an ideal time to buy it out completely. The current site is slap bang in the town centre and adjacent to a big rejuvenation/development area. There is also a big demand for more town houses with a plot on the corner of Sterte Road/Holes Bay Road, 50 yards from the stadium, having a couple of houses squeezed in as we speak. Anyone with an interest in Poole Stadium is sitting on serious real estate.

Chris

As promised, I have collected some information on the history of Poole Stadium and Poole Town FC below:

The Borough of Poole own the site which was built for the football club in 1933. Poole Town FC built two stands to accommodate over a thousand people during their tenure there.

The BoP ‘forced’ Poole Town FC to leave the site in 1994 because of ‘low attendances’. But the wiki says that it was because of the widening of the dog track, which left too little space for grass in the centre.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poole_Town_F.C.#Stadium

So the Council was being duplicitous in kicking out PTFC so that they could expand the stadium for dog racing and therein raise more money.
A lease was given to Poole Stadium Development Corporation (the Block family) from 1991 – 1995 to run Dogs and Speedway. But they were unsuccessful and were taken over by Poole Stadium Limited, part of GI, in 1995. They have a 40 year lease.

Meanwhile Poole Town FC found themselves in a bad place literally and football wise. They never really found a good home, moving between several sites over the next few years and sank low in the leagues. They halted the decline and with their new home – in the grounds of a local school – pulled back up. Currently they are 5th in the Southern League with one game to go and well managed. But the question of a ground haunts them. They have a hearing today (26th April) with the Football League which will decide whether they can participate in the play-offs because of the grading of their ground at the school.

http://www.pooletownfc.co.uk/playoff-appeal-update/

The BoP have for the last few years tried to help them find a suitable home. The last occasion was aborted by the council after a fractious public meeting in Branksome where some members of the public made clear in no uncertain terms that PTFC were unwelcome. I recall this meeting as I met a local councillor at a school governing body meeting two days afterwards, and she was still very stressed over it.

There is currently a site ‘on offer’ on the outskirts of Poole at Canford Magna, Bearwood. Information on this can be found on the PTFC website here:

http://www.pooletownfc.co.uk/bearwood-proposal/

This site is somewhat slow in progressing, possibly because Stadia UK – the GI successor to Poole Stadium Limited – have expressed interest to the Council in developing Poole Stadium and coaxing PTFC back. These plans have not been made public even though they went to the Council Pre-planning last year. The pre-planning stage is to find out the Council's reaction to the plans so that amendments can be made before they are submitted - which they have not so far. Although a meeting has been held between Stadia UK and PTFC, the latter have declared they will not take the offer up to return ‘home’ because of the lack of guarantees, which they didn’t specify. Who can blame them? Once bitten, etc?
My information is that the Council have ‘another site’ in mind for the Stadium. Maybe that is the cause of the delay on Bearwood?

So can we trust our Councils?

This sorry episode just serves to warn us, in my opinion, of the dangers we face. There are parallels between us and Poole. Notice also that Stadia UK were happy to take a 40 year lease and not freehold. Might that happen at Plainmoor, and would they introduce Dogs there? If this is so, will the Council arrange a public meeting for residents about the development, like the one at Branksome ?

Chris

Will do.

Glostergull wrote: I would also urge the fan in Poole to do some digging as well. we need all the evidence we can find. I suspect we will find a lot of evidence of proposals put forward. studies done and plans drawn up and some even submitted. but that is all i would expect to find. i doubt even a shovel has been stuck in anger.

I am on the case. The father of one of my son's friends is big in Speedway and has coached riders at Poole stadium for years. I'll see if he knows anything.

Re: local newspapers. I think that they do not want to get lawyers breathing down their necks over something they have printed, and so keep quiet. I have noticed my local paper has kept away from issues that parents had with an Academy and comments have been deleted. I do know that the Academy's lawyers let the paper know they were watching.

Chris

Soupdragon wrote: ↑17 Apr 2017, 11:09 As well as drawing attention to the immediate plight of our club, this ‘media storm’ has now ensured that any decision by the mayor, any report by Kevin Mowatt/Liam Montgomery, and any general mucking about by the council over the terms of the ACV taken out by the Trust on the Plainmoor ground will receive national scrutiny.

Not just ‘scrutiny’ by a few disinterested Tory councillors. Their continued silence on where they stand on this issue is becoming deafening.

That's a very good point, Soup. Hopefully the Mayor and councillors will have read the Guardian article and the Club's reply and act accordingly.

Signed - now 169.


Chris

standupsitdown wrote:£250,000 - £300,000 doesn't seem an impossible sum for TUST to raise in the 6 months available if the council decide to sell.
£100 per match going supporter. Some may put in more, some less. There could be crowd funding and I'm sure many people in the Bay would put in a bit to help keep the football club, even if they don't actually turn up and support.
It would seem a far better proposition to put money into buying the ground than just the club, which could easily be a black hole.
Hopefully GI would be pleased to sell at a reasonable price if they don't get the ground.

Yes, I thought that - it's around the sort of mortgage many people take out on their homes these days as a comparison. But presumably there would be debts to settle, not forgetting the GI loan? So a full business plan would probably be needed?

Chris

Love the comment by 'StillPav' at the foot of the article :

"StillPav 5:54pm Wed 3 Aug 16

Presumably Torbay Council were impressed by the new stadiums that Gaming International have built in Reading, Milton Keynes and Swindon.

Hold on..."