Questions to send to Roy and co

[Pedagogue]

I also have a question for Roy.

Its has been stated many times by the Board & Chairman that Walsall Football Club is up for sale, and has been for many years.
Based on this, can they explain why they have never once seen fit to announce, in public or press, what the asking price is ?
One would suggest that to sell anything you need a value / selling price. If the Board is serious then it's an extremely odd sales strategy.

A good question, Larry, but more to the point, is the freehold included in the sale price, or is it just the football club? The club itself is worthless - indeed, you would have to pay some-one to take it off your hands. Its "assets" comprise such things as the second-hand values of the fixtures and fittings, office equipment, gym equipment, playing/training kit, etc., the as yet unused portions of the leases of Bescot Stadium and the training ground and players' contracts (virtually worthless as they are all short-term). Off-set against these are the debts of £2.9 million (as at the last A.G.M. - but, of course, these may have been reduced by the recent inflow of money to the club). The face value of Jeff's shares is about £33,000.

No-one but a complete idiot is going to buy WFC without the freehold. Now, who do we know who has more money than sense? :mrgreen: Cheesebag, Asps, perhaps? - nah, not even them! :D :D

[tinned]

OCD's continual bleatings about not asking questions until we know the full facts make me loff. What total nonsense.

Durr, the reason people are asking questions is because we don't have, but wish to obtain, the facts. If they were all known then we wouldn't need to ask, would we?

Let me know if we're going a little bit fast for you.

[Sudoku Saddler]

He is a copper. It will always be too fast for him.

[Fray Bentos is God!]

He is a copper. It will always be too fast for him.

Explains a lot then.

[wccc sadler]

Roy Whalley spotted at Edgbaston today to watch the cricket.

[kevin]

Now, who do we know who has more money than sense?

David Beckham......................he had more money than sense when he had a paper round.

[Nortoncanesred]

In respect of the information volunteered to Wayne swift by RW, and by means of clarification of certain points.

1) Can RW please clarify in general terms a point made in response to question 5 about the purchase of the freehold of the Bescot site in 1994, namely "mortgage payments would have been much higher than the rent". Given that it is a matter of public record that the freehold was purchased by the current landlord for £200k (source UK Land registry), and also that UK base interest rates at the time of said purchase were 5.25%, (source http://www.houseweb.co.uk/house/market/irfig.html), and the rent payments were at the time £75k per annum (now £349k per annum). Upon what basis can the assertion that mortage payments would have been higher than rent payments be made?

2) Can Mr. Whalley clarify a point made in response to question 4 regarding the build cost of Bescot vesrus that of Glanford Park. Mr. Whalley asserts that the clean up costs of the site partly explained the higher cost of Bescot. However, a publication made by the club on January 12th 1991 details seperate cost for building the stadium (£4.1m) and cleaning up the site (£1.297M). Just to be clear on the difference in cost between the two stadia, Scunthorpe United's official website states Glanford park was built for £2.5m. If the club doccument of January 1991 is acurate, can Mr Whalley revisit the issue of the £1.6m difference in build costs and point to other reasons as to how this arose?

Whilst I appreciate that certain financial information may be of a sensitive nature, answers in general terms would be greatly appreciated, and I'm sure thay will be forthcoming given the commitment to give "straight and factual answers".

Yours Sincerely,

David Foulkes.

These are the questions I would like answering, also I would like to know how many firms quoted for the move and prices and what other land was considered and at what prices.

[Kneecap]

No they won't. A brownfield site and a greenfield site are identical in terms of foundation, unless you're building on an infill site or a rubbish tip (refer Stoke).

Not necessarily so Exile.
The variable factor will be the sub-strata. That is what always dictates the design and therefore the cost of the foundations.

Not making any point because I have no personal knowledge of the particular situation. Just looking for accuracy.
Building costs is my job.

[Exile]

No they won't. A brownfield site and a greenfield site are identical in terms of foundation, unless you're building on an infill site or a rubbish tip (refer Stoke).

Not necessarily so Exile.
The variable factor will be the sub-strata. That is what always dictates the design and therefore the cost of the foundations.

Not making any point because I have no personal knowledge of the particular situation. Just looking for accuracy.
Building costs is my job.

Substrate isn't affected by greenfield/brownfield though, unless (as I pointed out) it's infill or made ground. Besides, both Scunthorpe and Walsall grounds are built on floodplain.

Not making any point either, other than to say it ain't as simple as green/brownfield. Interested in accuracy too as I have modules in geotechnics and engineering geology from my degree.

[Kneecap]

Looks like we probably agree Exile. Just different words for the same point.
I agree about Greenfield/Brownfield but I have not the faintest about Scunthorpe. Never been there.
Nice to get involved in an intelligent conversation.
You in construction?

[Exile]

You in construction?

:D Marine insurance, me! Don't ask.

Know nothing about Scunthorpe apart from what I googled - maps satellite view shows the floodplain clear as day, and the underlying is a lightly folded permian/trassic mudstone, so not too far removed from Bescot, really.

[tinned]

What does Mr Whalley intend to do by way of compensation for the vociferous, vitriolic, condescending, and very defensive responses to my e-mail which has resulted in me being extremely upset, to the point where i have had to visit my doctor 3 times since reciept of the e-mail.

I am now house bound, and addicted to paracetemol, night and day nurse, and tickly cough medicine.

I do not expect anything will be offered by way of compensation, but i expect nothing short of a free season ticket for the coming season, some sailing lessons from Uncle Jeff, and a few goes on your sun bed Roy, thankyou very much :wink:

Another mindless post from Mr Self Important!

KNOB

Go and buy a personality

I would much rather have my personality thanks, well thought out, articulate and intelligent. Beats being a self interested, egotistic bully!

Mmmm, no idea who you are :roll:

[SWS1]

Also when replying to Mr Swift can he use the terminology about Fith Columnists correctly, as the term would imply that the fans of WFC would have somebody 'on the inside' to bring down the club down, which we clearly don't.

We used to have a club employee as a regular poster. Can't quite recall what happened to him.... :?

What DID happen to him??
:?: :?: :?: :?:

[OmmerEmCradley]

Rather than do this impersonally by letter as Bangor has suggested....

A question for Mr W.
Does he and Mr B realise that if they spent a couple of hours over maybe a curry and a few beers with a small group which includes Pedagogue and Geordiesaddler (and a couple of others) then they may be able to clear up a number of issues which on communicating to fans via this board may result in a friendly relationship with the fans to everyones mutual benefit?
Then maybe there would be closure and we could all get on with life.

Good idea Whitters.

The facts need to be sourced first to ensure that any questions posed are correct and therefore deserving of an answer.

Whitters - I agree with you wholeheartedly. For right or wrong, for over 20 years now, there's been suspicion, disbelief, cynicism and misunderstanding from fans towards the people who run the club resulting from the circumstances of the move from Fellows Park to Bescot, the club's subsequent financial difficulties following the Denglen/Devonmanor era and the circumstances of JWB's takeover.

I fail to understand why an open and honest disclosure and discussion of the facts would not be in the interest of all parties who have the interests of our football club at heart and I despair at the failure to address this issue.
The corrosive atmosphere that exists between the club and a significant body of fans is amply demonstrated, and indeed reflected, by the vituperative and increasingly intolerant discussions that occur on this website on the subject. I'm afraid the subject isn't going to go away.

OEC - with regard to sourceing facts, isn't it the lack of objective facts which causes much of the dispute? As for your point that only questions based on "Correct" facts are "Deserving of an answer", I disagree. What we need is enlightenment. If the "Correct" facts were known surely there would be no dispute or need for discussion? As paying customers - and loyal supporters - we all deserve answers.

that is what I am saying. Don't ask a question that isn't based on any evidence as it will be laughed at and not answered by the club.

An example of a question based on no fact: "Why are we playing home games in blue this season not white like last year?"

Answer "We're not playing in blue"

A better researched and worded question could have been "Why have we changed back into a home strip of red shirts after two seasons playing in white shirts, has the club received complaints about changing from red to white or from white to red"

A very simplified Q&A but if people want answers then make sure the question has no room for a get out by the club. Therefore a little bit of research from the outset may (as it is not guaranteed) get an answer from the club. Questions fired from the hip after a few scoops will be ignored.

It has been stated ad infinitum on here that the facts are out there, but i havn't seen them all to make a judgement. Other have also remarked the same. There may be simple explanations to a lot (I personally doubt all) of the hype and frustration spouted on this site. ultimately it comes down to what happens next after the questions have been answered. Various posters have stated that things have been done by various parties over the last 20 years that were illegal. Without a formal complaint the authorities won't do anything. Do you think that the local press and media didnt resaerch the issues in 1988, 1991 and 1994? I personally doubt that any media will get involved now as the law of defamation is now common place (A Sunday paper had to pay undisclosed damages today for defamation)

Ask questions but make sure they are well researched and well though through.

I still havn't heard what peoples end states are yet; I would be very interested to hear them.

[OmmerEmCradley]

The ground bearing capacity and the types of foundation used at each ground are very probably quite different.

I like your qualifying statement - "probably". The geology and soil of the Midlands are well-known, and any competent construction company would have factored this into their (erm) bid. Remember the Bescot site was a sewage works and water treatment facility, not a repository for the burial of asbestos.

Any Civil Engineer will tell you that foundations required on a brown field site are far in excess of those required on a green field site

No they won't. A brownfield site and a greenfield site are identical in terms of foundation, unless you're building on an infill site or a rubbish tip (refer Stoke).

Also labour charges differ significantly from region to region

Yes, it's well-known (source: anecdotal evidence, Harry Enfield's "loadsamoney") that people up North are cheaper to hire than further South. Considerably. :roll:

The contract for Bescot Stadium was awarded after an open competetive tendering process, and was done for the best interests of Walsall FC

Says who? Any souce for this extravagant statement? See kevin's response above.

We did not have the luxury of a viable greenfield site with robust transportation links so close to the town centre.

True, perhaps, but never really researched, and definitely irrelevant and diversionary speculation when contrasted with what really happened.

The Banks's Stadium has served both Walsall FC and the people of the borough for 20 years.

I agree.

We must all invest in the next 20 years to see us go from strength to strength.

I agree. I assume ALL means the owner too. If bonser really wants to walk away, pension intact, and let go, I'd buy the club at his cost price plus compound interest (logic: we've stood still for his tenure, at best), and I assure you I'd make a much better job of the future than Bonser has of the past.

we do not have, nor do we wish to know, the detailed construction costs of another football ground in the North of the country. we are only interested in one football ground, and that is Walsall FC.

We're also only interested in one ground, but the comparison is inevitable and no concrete figures or facts have ever been provided that can dissipate the idle speculation that perhaps something may have been amiss during the construction of Bescot. Of course, if either owning company (club and ground) at the time had ever filed accounts, we might not be having this discussion.

I cannot answer your question regarding how the rent was preferable to a mortgage, as you are asking me to comment on one fact that happened in august 1998 and another that happened in 1994. If you would like to reassess your facts as you believe you have them and then repose this question then we will do our best to answer it.

Ah, dissembling and leaping on the slightest discrepancy as an avoidance tactic. the last refuge of the desperate. The question is easily rephrased and the answer is exactly the same in terms of relevance.

As an aside, I note that the RAC nerve centre, an award-winning, architecturally-designed and significantly more complex building than a bit of concrete and steel with pillars, cost £7million 20 years ago. That was also a brownfield site.

Nice of you to not take the original post in context, but I can't apologise if you don't read through posts correctly.

Also nice of you to be pedantic at part of one of my posts. when i mentioned about different foundations for different ground bearing, then you could have helped the discussion for all by adding a post along the lines of:

"OEC I can see what you are trying to say about the actual foundations used at Glanford and Bescot. FYI I have studied elements of Geology as part of a degree. I think what you were trying to explain was that both grounds may have used different foundation systems based on the make up of the strata benaeth the two grounds. You may have a point that one ground may have been built with a simple pad or raft foundation whilst the other may have used extensive, and deep, pile foundations. This wouldn't necessarily be dependant upon whether it was built on a brownfield or greenfield site, as the underlying sub-base would be more important in the decision of what kind of foundation was used. I do take your point though that the type of foundation used at both grounds may account for some of the difference in cost. I hope this helps take the discussion forward"

But you didn't, shame that

[madaway]

hi this is just question in general when morrisons bought the fellowes park ground. dose any body know how much plus where did the money go just like to know thanks.

[OmmerEmCradley]

hi this is just question in general when morrisons bought the fellowes park ground. dose any body know how much plus where did the money go just like to know thanks.

Think OPS means Fellows where he has written sale of Bescot

A few FACTS for you all:

The expenditure on the Stadium and the utilisation of the funds from the sale of Fellows Park was as follows:

£4.100,000 Stadium build costs
£1,297,000 Land reclamation and refurb costs
£ 500,000 Walsall MBC ranson strip
£ 276,000 Purchase of houses on site require to develop Bescot
£ 800,000 Construction of the Saddlers Club
£ 398,000 Paid to Terry Ramsden to satisfy his debt
£ 688,000 Used to pay off overdraft and professional fees on deal

£8,059,000 Total expenditure

£5,750,000 Sale of Bescot
£ 660,000 Other income including catering subsidies and brewery loans

£6,410,000 Total income

£1,639,000 Total excess expenditure.

Mr Maurice Miller introduced the Club to Denglen Limited whose directors were Peter Gilman ( director Leeds at the time) and M Morris ( director of Charlton Athletic). They could not be directors of Walsall because they already had other footballing interests. Ramsdens Shares were sold to Davenmanor of which Maurice Miller was the major shareholder.

In August 1988 at an EGM of the company a resolution was approved to enter into a development agreement with Denglen Limited and to dispose of Fellows Park, build a new Stadium and pay off major existing debts. The meeting also agreed to enter into an annual rent of £75,000 with RPI adjustments in respect of Bescot Stadium.

The contract for the construction of Bescot Stadium was awarded to GMI Construction Limited on a negotiated tender basis.

The value of Bescot Stadium, including the land value at the time was valued at £10,000,000. To have rented an equivalent stadium would have led to a rent of £1m pa subject to RPI. In order to reduce this rental figure the proceeds from the sale of Fellows Park was invested into the development. The rent of £75,000 pa was below the commercial value of the outstanding expenditure. A commercial rent would have been £300,000pa and so it was a good deal for the Club!!!

All the above is taken from a Media document released by the Club at the time and reproduced in the match programme on 12th January 1991.

[madaway]

thanks for your reply but how much was the ground fellows park sold for. that was not in the figures?

[OmmerEmCradley]

thanks for your reply but how much was the ground fellows park sold for. that was not in the figures?

£5,750,000 Sale of [Fellows]

[Geordiesaddler]

thanks for your reply but how much was the ground fellows park sold for. that was not in the figures?

£5,750,000 Sale of [Fellows]

All thrown lovingly into the Denglen (GMI) pot, never to be seen again.

What a shame we couldn't have found a greenfield site and employed Peter Birse construction to build our ground. We could then have owned the land (saving £3m in rent) and had an initial £2-3m as a fighting fund to get us out of the fourth division and develop some commercial useage on the new site.

[Nortoncanesred]

In August 1988 at an EGM of the company a resolution was approved to enter into a development agreement with Denglen Limited and to dispose of Fellows Park, build a new Stadium and pay off major existing debts

£1,639,000 Total excess expenditure

That went well.

[OmmerEmCradley]

thanks for your reply but how much was the ground fellows park sold for. that was not in the figures?

£5,750,000 Sale of [Fellows]

All thrown lovingly into the Denglen (GMI) pot, never to be seen again.

What a shame we couldn't have found a greenfield site and employed Peter Birse construction to build our ground. We could then have owned the land (saving £3m in rent) and had an initial £2-3m as a fighting fund to get us out of the fourth division and develop some commercial useage on the new site.

Selective post again...............................

The club would have paid rent wherever it went, brownfield, greenfield, infill, backfill, flood plain, airplane and whatever else our resident geologist could tell us about flora and fauna in the Northern Hemisphere.

But since the club moved to Bescot it now has the additional income of conferencing, shows, sunday markets, weddings etc, that it never had before. That money has been re-invested for the benefit of the football.

[OmmerEmCradley]

In August 1988 at an EGM of the company a resolution was approved to enter into a development agreement with Denglen Limited and to dispose of Fellows Park, build a new Stadium and pay off major existing debts

£1,639,000 Total excess expenditure

That went well.

So what were the debts before that EGM then?

[Nortoncanesred]

The club would have paid rent wherever it went

Not if it purchased the freehold it wouldn't.

[Nortoncanesred]

In August 1988 at an EGM of the company a resolution was approved to enter into a development agreement with Denglen Limited and to dispose of Fellows Park, build a new Stadium and pay off major existing debts

£1,639,000 Total excess expenditure

That went well.

So what were the debts before that EGM then?

Whatever they were they were added to by £1,639,000 by this move, which was my point.

[OmmerEmCradley]

In August 1988 at an EGM of the company a resolution was approved to enter into a development agreement with Denglen Limited and to dispose of Fellows Park, build a new Stadium and pay off major existing debts

£1,639,000 Total excess expenditure

That went well.

So what were the debts before that EGM then?

Whatever they were they were added to by £1,639,000 by this move, which was my point.

But if the debts were £5 million when we were at fellows, but were £1.639 million at Bescot then the overall debt was REDUCED by £3.36 million.

So can you explain what you mean

[OmmerEmCradley]

The club would have paid rent wherever it went

Not if it purchased the freehold it wouldn't.

Did the club vote to buy the freehold or leasehold then, because I've never seen that written down anywhere in any debate or discussion. I have seen that the club voted to pay £75K rent on a ground that was valued at £300K RPI, so that seems like good business sense to me

[Nortoncanesred]

In August 1988 at an EGM of the company a resolution was approved to enter into a development agreement with Denglen Limited and to dispose of Fellows Park, build a new Stadium and pay off major existing debts

£1,639,000 Total excess expenditure

That went well.

So what were the debts before that EGM then?

Whatever they were they were added to by £1,639,000 by this move, which was my point.

But if the debts were £5 million when we were at fellows, but were £1.639 million at Bescot then the overall debt was REDUCED by £3.36 million.

So can you explain what you mean

You seem to have a problem with basic addition/subtraction, I'll help you.

The only debt that is mentioned in the expenditure is that to Mr Ramsden of £398,000 and the overdraft which is included but not the total of £688,000. This comes to around a million pounds if you deduct the "deal fees" which were not existing debts. So the deal created a loss larger than the debts that were paid off.

[Nortoncanesred]

The club would have paid rent wherever it went

Not if it purchased the freehold it wouldn't.

Did the club vote to buy the freehold or leasehold then, because I've never seen that written down anywhere in any debate or discussion. I have seen that the club voted to pay £75K rent on a ground that was valued at £300K RPI, so that seems like good business sense to me

The club owned Fellows Park.

The club doesn't own Bescot Stadium.

That isn't that hard to grasp.

[OmmerEmCradley]

Did the club own Fellows Park or was it owned by the main shareholder. there is a difference!