[Heisenberg]

Westbars Spireite, on 08 February 2012 - 11:48 PM, said:

This guy clearly has issues.

I thank him for his well written essays on Rotherham United FC but I ask what it matters to me?

Exactly. A bloke loves his football club, that's lovely. But why keep coming on a rival board to tell us about it?

[born in 1866]

An easy question for you Pac

1) Why did Tony Stewart see it fit to set up RU Estates Ltd as the stadium owners.

Answer could be one of the following.

A) When the final bill for the build comes and RU Estates goes into admin it is RU Estates that fold with no points deduction to RUFC
B) He was unwilling to pump more money into RUFC and so he made sure it was commercially viable for him to get a good return on his money by investing through a third party company.
C) RUFC, with their track record, could not get the investment required for the stadium so it had to be done through a seperate entity. then and only then were other investors willing to chip in.
D) He has no intention of staying at RUFC and when he sells the club he becomes a rich landlord.

Oh and for what it's worth, Tony Stewart did not draw on the loan from the council because the loan was for RUFC and NOT RU Estates Ltd so it was RUFC who would have had the loan (probably at more favourable rates than the private investors are wanting) That would then mean that RUFC owned approx 30% of the ground.
And that would have messed up your messiah's whole plans.

Chairmen from Rotherham.... Had them, got the Tee shirt...... And don't trust them one bit

Oh, and RUFC do not own RU Estates Ltd, It is owned by shareholders who may/may not be associated with RUFC but I repeat the ground is owned by RU Estates who's only affiliation to RUFC is by being their landlord.

[Mr Mercury]

born in 1866, on 09 February 2012 - 08:06 AM, said:

An easy question for you Pac

1) Why did Tony Stewart see it fit to set up RU Estates Ltd as the stadium owners.

Answer could be one of the following.

A) When the final bill for the build comes and RU Estates goes into admin it is RU Estates that fold with no points deduction to RUFC
B) He was unwilling to pump more money into RUFC and so he made sure it was commercially viable for him to get a good return on his money by investing through a third party company.
C) RUFC, with their track record, could not get the investment required for the stadium so it had to be done through a seperate entity. then and only then were other investors willing to chip in.
D) He has no intention of staying at RUFC and when he sells the club he becomes a rich landlord.

Oh and for what it's worth, Tony Stewart did not draw on the loan from the council because the loan was for RUFC and NOT RU Estates Ltd so it was RUFC who would have had the loan (probably at more favourable rates than the private investors are wanting) That would then mean that RUFC owned approx 30% of the ground.
And that would have messed up your messiah's whole plans.

Chairmen from Rotherham.... Had them, got the Tee shirt...... And don't trust them one bit

Oh, and RUFC do not own RU Estates Ltd, It is owned by shareholders who may/may not be associated with RUFC but I repeat the ground is owned by RU Estates who's only affiliation to RUFC is by being their landlord.

Pac's reply to that will be interesting. He'll probably need a lie down before he replies!

[JonB]

born in 1866, on 09 February 2012 - 08:06 AM, said:

A) When the final bill for the build comes and RU Estates goes into admin it is RU Estates that fold with no points deduction to RUFC

Not 100% sure but i believe the rules were changed recently so that if holding companies of clubs, and possibly grounds, go pop then the club still receives a 10 point deduction. Its definitely the case for holding companies of actual clubs...not sure about holding companies for grounds though.

[Search & Destroy]

Skywalker, on 08 February 2012 - 11:42 PM, said:

Can you prove un-equivocally that Rotherham United has a larger ‘Fanbase’ than Chesterfield FC? Bearing in mind that Chesterfield FC has the greater Highest Home attendance between the 2 clubs.

I suppose you’ll trot out the latest census figures from the Rotherham Metropolitan area as proof, yet ignore the vast communities around the Chesterfield area whereby Chesterfield is the closest Town. I think you’ll find that the potential fanbase of both clubs is pretty similar.

May be wrong, but didn't we average more in our last season in league 2 than Rotherham did in their last season in what is now the championship?

[Spireite-Karl]

In fairness I like the artists impression, even if a tad optimistic as it looks to me like they've just scored..

[pac17]

born in 1866, on 09 February 2012 - 08:06 AM, said:

An easy question for you Pac

1) Why did Tony Stewart see it fit to set up RU Estates Ltd as the stadium owners.

Answer could be one of the following.

A) When the final bill for the build comes and RU Estates goes into admin it is RU Estates that fold with no points deduction to RUFC
B) He was unwilling to pump more money into RUFC and so he made sure it was commercially viable for him to get a good return on his money by investing through a third party company.
C) RUFC, with their track record, could not get the investment required for the stadium so it had to be done through a seperate entity. then and only then were other investors willing to chip in.
D) He has no intention of staying at RUFC and when he sells the club he becomes a rich landlord.

Oh and for what it's worth, Tony Stewart did not draw on the loan from the council because the loan was for RUFC and NOT RU Estates Ltd so it was RUFC who would have had the loan (probably at more favourable rates than the private investors are wanting) That would then mean that RUFC owned approx 30% of the ground.
And that would have messed up your messiah's whole plans.

Chairmen from Rotherham.... Had them, got the Tee shirt...... And don't trust them one bit

Oh, and RUFC do not own RU Estates Ltd, It is owned by shareholders who may/may not be associated with RUFC but I repeat the ground is owned by RU Estates who's only affiliation to RUFC is by being their landlord.

not unusually in football for owners to set up an holding company and your wrong that if the holding company goes into admin it does effect the club with deductions look at the Portsmouth situation


Oh and for what it's worth, Tony Stewart did not draw on the loan from the council because the loan was for RUFC and NOT RU Estates Ltd so it was RUFC who would have had the loan (probably at more favourable rates than the private investors are wanting) That would then mean that RUFC owned approx 30% of the ground

the £5 million loan had nothing o do with it being in RUFC name or RU Estate ltd it was simply not required and RUFC own 100% of the stadium



Chairmen from Rotherham.... Had them, got the Tee shirt...... And don't trust them one bit

LMAO at this! chairmen from Rotherham? when was the last time a chairman of Rotherham was sent to Jail, when was the last time Rotherham was done for financial irregularities and i know the man was from Rotherham but he was owner of Chesterfield..



Oh, and RUFC do not own RU Estates Ltd, It is owned by shareholders who may/may not be associated with RUFC but I repeat the ground is owned by RU Estates who's only affiliation to RUFC is by being their landlord.

RU estate is a holding company for RUFC and not Landlords and we do not pay rent to them....

[pac17]

Spireite-Karl, on 09 February 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

In fairness I like the artists impression, even if a tad optimistic as it looks to me like they've just scored..

great picture spitting image of B2Net (legoland stadium)

[born in 1866]

JonB, on 09 February 2012 - 08:39 AM, said:

Not 100% sure but i believe the rules were changed recently so that if holding companies of clubs, and possibly grounds, go pop then the club still receives a 10 point deduction. Its definitely the case for holding companies of actual clubs...not sure about holding companies for grounds though.

RU Estates Ltd is not a holding company. It was set up by Tony Stewart and was used to raise the required capital to build New York Stadium (giggle).
When RUFC pay rent it will go to RU Estates to give the investors a return on their investment, as such RU Estates is a completely seperate company owned by the people who put in the capital for the NYS.

If RU Estates go into admin RUFC would not be punished much in the same way as if the Sheffield City Trust (Owners of DVS) went bust.

[Heisenberg]

Dema Reborn, on 09 February 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:

New York Stadium lol i can't stop laughing lol.....

Roll up, roll up for the naming rights to our cringeworthily-named new stadium.

[Spireite-Karl]

I'm impressed Pac at the way you've got around the problem of the high water table...

[pac17]

Spireite-Karl, on 09 February 2012 - 01:48 PM, said:

I'm impressed Pac at the way you've got around the problem of the high water table...

I'm inpressed how you've got all your little toys out just so you can brag and show people what you've got..

[Sheik Yerbooty]

Spireite-Karl, on 09 February 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

In fairness I like the artists impression, even if a tad optimistic as it looks to me like they've just scored..

looks a typical league 2 goalmouth scramble

[Wooden Spoon]

Millers>Spireites, on 07 February 2012 - 11:22 PM, said:

Why would we be worried? Because previous boards have messed up? These are entirely new, professional, competent people. So far, they've delivered exactly what they said they would and they keep on delivering. Asking if I'm worried, is as daft as me suggesting you still cheat tax and pay players in brown paper bags... allegedly.

Remind me which board exited administration without a CVA, breaking FL rules and leaving many businesses to go without ten of thousands of pounds in monies owed?

[pac17]

Spinach chin, on 09 February 2012 - 06:24 PM, said:

Remind me which board exited administration without a CVA, breaking FL rules and leaving many businesses to go without ten of thousands of pounds in monies owed?

remind me again which club was done for financial irregularities breaking FL rules?...

[Mr Mercury]

pac17, on 09 February 2012 - 07:25 PM, said:

remind me again which club was done for financial irregularities breaking FL rules?...

we only had 9 points docked, youve had 20 or is it 30?...so there!!!!!!

[Wooden Spoon]

pac17, on 09 February 2012 - 07:25 PM, said:

remind me again which club was done for financial irregularities breaking FL rules?...

CFC - No reason to deny it. But since then, we have moved on, and so has the FL with the introduction of the fit and proper persons test-such as it is.

Your trying to put all of your issues on previous regimes, yet your current board broke the rules with almost the fisrt act.

[shaun1866]

Oh dear me the red boarding has gone onto the side of the stadium, how tacky is that ? I suppose a Rotherham business based wood yard gave you that to get it out of their yard

[pac17]

Mr Mercury, on 10 February 2012 - 08:12 AM, said:

we only had 9 points docked, youve had 20 or is it 30?...so there!!!!!!

if i remember right did the FA want to increase the point deduction, you got away very light...

we went into admin twice that's why the point's deduction but i rather that happen then commit an illegal act of fraud..