Investment Proposal - Trust ballot

Avening Posse

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Messages
9,435
Location
Sydney
Looks great to me. It does say it is subject to a suitable long term lease. I guess this means this has not been negotiated yet as presumably the term would be stated if it had. Would be interested in knowing how long as it's a fair chunk of cash being spent
 

AndrewP

Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
606
Location
Leamington Spa
Looks great to me. It does say it is subject to a suitable long term lease. I guess this means this has not been negotiated yet as presumably the term would be stated if it had. Would be interested in knowing how long as it's a fair chunk of cash being spent
I thought we'd agreed a new long term lease on the Cliff Hill relatively recently, I think it was shortly before the St James Park extension?. I maybe wrong mind you.
No brainer as far as I'm concerned, we knew it was coming - glad to see some traction on it now and frankly, I am all in favour of the trust supporting long term infrastructure investment in the club vs day to day running costs. Thumbs up all round.
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
41,245
Location
Hunkered down
Looks great to me. It does say it is subject to a suitable long term lease. I guess this means this has not been negotiated yet as presumably the term would be stated if it had. Would be interested in knowing how long as it's a fair chunk of cash being spent
One of the devil in the detail issues. You need a very secure long lease with terms agreed for compensation for improvements done at the end of the lease. I am sure this will be covered properly.
 

Boyo

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
3,012
Looks great to me.

Playing devil's advocate, if we didn't spend the money on the training ground, what would we spend it on? Engaging Trust members in a ballot is welcomed, but is there any real choice here?

Also, if the constitution requires a vote every time we enter a contract north of £60k, why weren't we asked to vote on the big screen, or the work on the pitch at SJP, or even the signing of Sam Nombe(!)?

For the record, I'm fully behind the proposals, but my queries above remain.
 

ExmouthMart

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
831
Location
Bristol
Who owns the freehold on the training ground?! There is already a preferred supplier after a tender process. Have I missed the beginning of this process?! I would personally like to see ‘us’ purchase the freehold of St. James Park and maybe then we will actually own our football club.
 

Antony Moxey

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
41,090
Location
Exmuff
Who owns the freehold on the training ground?! There is already a preferred supplier after a tender process. Have I missed the beginning of this process?! I would personally like to see ‘us’ purchase the freehold of St. James Park and maybe then we will actually own our football club.
There is a genuine disadvantage to owning the freehold of the ground: it makes us ripe for speculators who'll be more interested in a sizable town centre plot ripe for mass housing than they will a football club at the arse end of the league.
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
41,245
Location
Hunkered down
The balance sheet of what I think is the company earmarked to do the development is very weak being worth only £125,000. A £2.2 million project in that context imposes a huge risk for the Club and the Trust if things go wrong.
 

budegrecian

Active member
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
2,568
Looks great to me.

Playing devil's advocate, if we didn't spend the money on the training ground, what would we spend it on? Engaging Trust members in a ballot is welcomed, but is there any real choice here?

Also, if the constitution requires a vote every time we enter a contract north of £60k, why weren't we asked to vote on the big screen, or the work on the pitch at SJP, or even the signing of Sam Nombe(!)?

For the record, I'm fully behind the proposals, but my queries above remain.
If I've got this correct, I think the constitution requires the Club to seek approval from the Trust Board when a contract exceeds £60k, not a bollot of members. The Trust Board have decided, in this case, to ballot the membership & good on them for doing so.
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
41,245
Location
Hunkered down
There is a genuine disadvantage to owning the freehold of the ground: it makes us ripe for speculators who'll be more interested in a sizable town centre plot ripe for mass housing than they will a football club at the arse end of the league.
Which is why the Trust should buy the freehold if the opportunity at the right price arises.

Nothing wrong in selling out SJP to a speculator at full open market value with appropriate overage clauses if it releases enough funds to relocate to a better facility. I do not however detect much if any enthusiasm from the fans to move away from SJP.
 
Top