Mortgage
Moderators: Admin, Ralph, asl, Robin
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29852
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
This raises one interesting question:
Is it cheaper and quicker to build a tidy new ground at Seasons than it is to make the current Whaddon site and facilities fit for purpose?
Is it cheaper and quicker to build a tidy new ground at Seasons than it is to make the current Whaddon site and facilities fit for purpose?
This is good news.
I'm happy to admit to being totally wrong when I said that the freehold would be astronomically costly and beyond our means.
I thought that with housing development potential at some stage in the future the cost would be prohibitive, so to manage to purchase it with "a modest loan" is a great achievement by the club. This must have been the exciting thing that our chairman was alluding to many months ago.
No idea if this will make us more of a target to asset stripping consortia.
As for stadium potential who knows but I bet they'll be an emergency meeting in the Village Hall pretty soon.
I'm happy to admit to being totally wrong when I said that the freehold would be astronomically costly and beyond our means.
I thought that with housing development potential at some stage in the future the cost would be prohibitive, so to manage to purchase it with "a modest loan" is a great achievement by the club. This must have been the exciting thing that our chairman was alluding to many months ago.
No idea if this will make us more of a target to asset stripping consortia.
As for stadium potential who knows but I bet they'll be an emergency meeting in the Village Hall pretty soon.
-
Sprout Picker
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 11:20
There will no doubt be a development uplift clause in the sale so Zurich would share in any uplift in value of the ground if sold for housing.paperboy wrote:This is good news.
I'm happy to admit to being totally wrong when I said that the freehold would be astronomically costly and beyond our means.
I thought that with housing development potential at some stage in the future the cost would be prohibitive, so to manage to purchase it with "a modest loan" is a great achievement by the club. This must have been the exciting thing that our chairman was alluding to many months ago.
No idea if this will make us more of a target to asset stripping consortia.
As for stadium potential who knows but I bet they'll be an emergency meeting in the Village Hall pretty soon.
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29852
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Also potential that the site has been designated in the local plan as not being allowed to have built houses on.ctfc-fan wrote: ↑20 Jul 2022, 12:27There will no doubt be a development uplift clause in the sale so Zurich would share in any uplift in value of the ground if sold for housing.paperboy wrote:This is good news.
I'm happy to admit to being totally wrong when I said that the freehold would be astronomically costly and beyond our means.
I thought that with housing development potential at some stage in the future the cost would be prohibitive, so to manage to purchase it with "a modest loan" is a great achievement by the club. This must have been the exciting thing that our chairman was alluding to many months ago.
No idea if this will make us more of a target to asset stripping consortia.
As for stadium potential who knows but I bet they'll be an emergency meeting in the Village Hall pretty soon.
Club confirmation with David Bloxham and Paul Godfrey's thoughts:
https://www.ctfc.com/news/2022/july/che ... ng-ground/
https://www.ctfc.com/news/2022/july/che ... ng-ground/
It’s all in the ctfc articleRegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Also potential that the site has been designated in the local plan as not being allowed to have built houses on.ctfc-fan wrote: ↑20 Jul 2022, 12:27There will no doubt be a development uplift clause in the sale so Zurich would share in any uplift in value of the ground if sold for housing.paperboy wrote:This is good news.
I'm happy to admit to being totally wrong when I said that the freehold would be astronomically costly and beyond our means.
I thought that with housing development potential at some stage in the future the cost would be prohibitive, so to manage to purchase it with "a modest loan" is a great achievement by the club. This must have been the exciting thing that our chairman was alluding to many months ago.
No idea if this will make us more of a target to asset stripping consortia.
As for stadium potential who knows but I bet they'll be an emergency meeting in the Village Hall pretty soon.
Seasons is green zone land I believe so cannot build on most of it, also no transport infrastructure on in that part of town so location is not practical either. If we ever moved ground the race course or Golden valley are the more likely locations.RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote: ↑20 Jul 2022, 11:04 This raises one interesting question:
Is it cheaper and quicker to build a tidy new ground at Seasons than it is to make the current Whaddon site and facilities fit for purpose?
-
Jerry St Clair
- Posts: 1733
- Joined: 15 Aug 2011, 16:40
Great news.
Just one note of caution. Clubs with valuable assets are attractive targets for dodgy owners. So, let's be wary of potential suitors proclaiming wild ambition and spending promises.
Just one note of caution. Clubs with valuable assets are attractive targets for dodgy owners. So, let's be wary of potential suitors proclaiming wild ambition and spending promises.
-
Wellwisher
- Posts: 134
- Joined: 24 Jan 2022, 22:21
Surely that only applies if those assets can be stripped from the club and sold-off for the dodgy owner's benefit?Jerry St Clair wrote: ↑21 Jul 2022, 15:42 Just one note of caution. Clubs with valuable assets are attractive targets for dodgy owners.
If the training ground cannot be developed for housing or commercial etc, then while it is obviously a valuable asset for the club, it would actually be more of a liability for a dodgy owner, in the sense that it costs money to maintain etc.
* -