How desperate and incorrect is that even for the methley nimbys

So for definate, the £2mill is still in the development. That's what you are saying? Hope so.

The £2miilion is subject to a council meeting later this month. The bit regarding Yorkcourt appears to be correct.

Thought York court were selling bits of the development off to langtree? Either way it's gone too far not to happen and too Many quality experienced people working on it for it not to happen

A little perturbed by this as I thought all the money had been signed off and we were just waiting on planning issues. I'd like IA's take on this.

Think they've sold some off which was probably always the plan. It would be nice if someone could actually explain how it all works because it doesn't half seem a conveluted way of doing things.

Posted on Thursday.

I don't know what's happened to that wording, but the plans are on the portal so it's not really a prolem - just a bit frustrating that it's not being shouted about.

Technically the councils deadline for the £2mill expired last year, so yes, it is awaiting being verified again - but it's still there for us.

As for sharing, that could still happen. I don't like it, but if it has to happen then so be it - it's a lot easier to swallow for us than Cas and I would prefer them to stay in Cas if at possible - which of course they would like also.

As for us refusing to share with Cas - that was based on sharing on a site in GH with no funding - what a ridiculous thing to suggest. If Cas have a hope of a new stadium it is the one at NM - GH is dead barring a miracle - a state that has existed for years.

We should also take note of YC's committment to the scheme. The majority of land at NM is no-longer green-belt - it was removed from GB under the LDF. As such they could have ditched the original application and put a new one in minus the stadium - they haven't and are now committed to our scheme.

Financing a new stadium such as this is a moveable feast. You can plan on X and Y happening and Z providing funding, but no one knows the exact make-up until the plans are passed. As is the case now some of these plans will work out and other possibilities open up. In this environment none of us can tell you the exact make up of the partners / finance that will eventually make this reality.

I am not about to enter into pages of exchanges about the semantics of what I am saying - nor will IA (he is a busy boy these days), but safe to say that we remain confident in the ability of the people involved to deliver the stadium we so desire. I can't control what others do or say but we do keep in constant contact with them and we do request that they consider the supporters, albeit we still feel that this needs improving.

We have worked hard for 9 years now on this campaign and we believe we are 80% of the way through the processes required. We are more excited than anyone too see this brought to a conclusion but, as has always been the case, we cannot rush the process or the people involved - certainly not more than we are doing. I'm sorry, but you're just going to have to keep the faith at this time.

Thanks for the update TRB the new stadium is so important in returning our great club back to its former glory and stabilising Wakefield Trinity for generations to come that's why everyone involved in trinity are desperate for any news. Looking forward to the final 20% then seeing it get built and making it our new home.
Love this club Love this City

Document: DISS40 - Notice of striking-off action discontinued

Nothing to see. Nice try Mr Fender, but I think you're clutching at straws- even for you.

What does that mean?

Quote I performed a search on Companies House. This particular company has this description attached to its recent filing history. Form - DISS40 . Description - Strike-Off action discontinued. What does this mean and what is the relevance? PS Simple carnmores | Wed, 14/09/2005 - 14:36 | Permalink companies, without laibilities, can be struck off by its members or by CH ; however the striking off has to be discontinued if there is an objection. CH then issues a DISS40 to record that fact. And an objection can be made durdledoor | Wed, 06/03/2013 - 12:25 | Permalink And an objection can be made if there are court proceedings for example, against that company. The objection can be upheld (discontinued Strike Off) to prevent the company from manipulating it's assets in order to keep monies for debtors. So I was told.'" www.accountingweb.co.uk/anyanswe ... nies-house I won't pretend I know what any of that means.

Quote I performed a search on Companies House. This particular company has this description attached to its recent filing history. Form - DISS40 . Description - Strike-Off action discontinued. What does this mean and what is the relevance? PS Simple carnmores | Wed, 14/09/2005 - 14:36 | Permalink companies, without laibilities, can be struck off by its members or by CH ; however the striking off has to be discontinued if there is an objection. CH then issues a DISS40 to record that fact. And an objection can be made durdledoor | Wed, 06/03/2013 - 12:25 | Permalink And an objection can be made if there are court proceedings for example, against that company. The objection can be upheld (discontinued Strike Off) to prevent the company from manipulating it's assets in order to keep monies for debtors. So I was told.'" www.accountingweb.co.uk/anyanswe ... nies-house I won't pretend I know what any of that means.

Presume it is something to do with the methley residents newsletter mentioning the possibility of York court being struck off by companies house for late submission of their accounts.

I suspect that the potential for this to happen is no longer there, hence the strike off being discontinued

Spot on.