Vasty could you please tell me where the covenant is ? I've searched high and low and been through the Title for Belle Vue and there is no covenent recorded and that is where covenants are normally recorded.

There is a Planning Condition on the current housing consent that states that BV cannot be developed until the stadium at Newmarket is built and fit in which to play Super League games. You are not thinking of this are you ?

If we've reduced our annual rent to 75k for example and we make a cheeky offer of 450k for the land that equates to just 6 years worth of rent, surely there's a way to put that together.

If/when Newmarket happens we then have a saleable asset that, because we're leaving, can be used for housing which in turn should bump up the value of the land.

https://audioboom.com/boos/4158528-wake ... p-for-sale

https://audioboom.com/boos/4158528-wake ... p-for-sale

For all the crap they have caused us Yorkcourt should be buying it for us with one of two options. They either...

A -Put it in our/the stadium trusts name and agree to a series of staged payments to enable the full upgrade of the old place or

B -Buy it themselves and let us play there rent rent free until such a time that Newmarket is built and we can move in there. The planning condition is voided at that point and they then have a site prime for housing with planning permission already in place.

I'll get hung drawn and quartered by some on here but maybe the option of coming to some sort of settlement fee with York court to drop Newmarket for a a nice sum that would cover the cost of buying Belle Vue and surrounding areas and buildings + a "little" extra to cover upgrade cost?
Saves them a fair few quid on building Newmarket and we get to own Belle Vue.

Would be nice to own it again, but York Court should not be allowed to get away with what they have done with the aid of a cardboard box.

I for one could quite happily go with that

According to Mick Carter in the radio earlier the covenant does

Very reasonable amount I would have thought - tempting -could it be raised ?

I maybe way off the mark and don't know what I'm talking about but the article says that we have just agreed a 5 year lease.
A few months after this agreed, the ground is put up for sale.
Why would they put it up for sale and miss out on 5 years rent, unless they know they can't do what they would like with it?
As has been mentioned a covenant on the ground.

The owner would get the purchase price now which is better to them than rent over 5 years particularly as they are unable to develop the site, or sell for development until the tenant (the Club) either quit or turn the lease in and the planning condition ( it's not a covenant as far as I'm aware unless someone can point out where it isn't) on redeveloping Belle Vue is removed.

The Stadium Trust were are of this and are acting upon it. Securing BV in the interests of the club would be a positive, be it short, medium or long term.

As for the Covenant, there are conditions, which I think people are referring to in general as a covenant. They are in our favour.

4000 or so Trinity supporters on Sunday, £150 each?

Ha ha, yeah ok Khlav, you've been involved with SWAG so know the problem we had getting people to sign a petition. Imagine asking 4,000 to give £150 each? I bet we wouldn't get a hundred people willing to stump up the money.

The last report I saw from Sir Rodney Walker was the option of purchasing of Belle Vue. Redevelop Belle Vue? Or buy and sell and put towards Newmarket? Would good to get something sorted soon so club can plan long turn but this is also the biggest decision for the future of our great club so it needs to be the right one.

I think it's down to the club to raise the money and secure a commercial mortgage. Once that is done you can start looking at shares/bonds etc to raise money through the support Base. Whilst I'd love to see some level of fan ownership/representation I don't think our supporters generally have deep enough pockets. The lack of pay monthly option on season tickets caused some enough problems.

True.

Carter is looking into the possibility of the club buying the ground back in the radio link. Hopefully the club has a bette reputation amongst the loca businesses to maybe get them onboard with this .

Yes they should – again, jeez some people still whine on about the first time they did it

.

I think Box should buy it, it’s not like he’s short of a few quid. Then he could get his cronies to debunk the covenant kick the club off & let it go to even greater rack & ruin. He could ride by every now & then & chuckle to himself.

But seriously, what would any developer do with the site, can you imagine the cost alone for levelling the damn thing. I think the best bet is for the siting of a huge mosque, it could be like Wakefield’s answer to the Dome of the Rock. They could leave the turnstile block on Donny Road & we could all go along with our old programmes reciting our best ever team Wilkinson, Marsden, Higgings, Exley...) that’s one for the old timers

.

I wait with the usual trepidation

.

RL loan? as someone says it would be cheaper re-paying that than rent!

If we could afford this, I would be happy for us to buy the ground back, and totally re vamp the stadium, even if it meant moving away for a season to do this properly.

Does the ground also include, the Superbowl and Oasis gum site. If so, then the area is quite substantial.

One main concern of this though, is the showroom, and house, that is currently in front of the east stand.

You could actually build a stand which is similar to The Well, at Hull KR. On that side, you have terracing, and behind that, offices and suites, with a stand above these. Also, I was looking at the Carnegie Stand at Headingley last time, and although it is very high, it doesnt seem to go back too far deep (thinking of land area)

It doesn't include the Superbowl. There is a white line which demarks the extent of the site, however, that is for sale too at a guess about £150k-£200k. Any purchaser of either parcels of land really ought to buy both.

I think some people on here need to look in the mirror talking about abandoning Newmarket for BV. I get buying the ground by the club (they would be a tenant at Newmarket) its an option but the Newmarket development and more precisely the 15000 petition was about sporting facilities etc. I signed that petition and signed it to support better facilities in Wakefield. BV is an option but I think the Trust, York Court and the Council need to take a real look at themselves about this whole episode and make sure the aims and objectives of what the development is about and what was promised is fulfilled if not then people should be held accountable. I am not party to any of the terms and conditions etc but certainly the council and York Court will be the Trust as a charity I suspect are representing the best interests of the public of Wakefield, if the Club decides to buy BV back this could impact on the trust ability to improve facilities for the District as per the original specification. I maybe off the mark in some areas but as an outsider this is how I see it, could be tricky in parts.

I don't think it is better than rent. Someone mentioned on here that the rent was now £75,000. To make it easy, let's say the cost of being a landlord is £15,000 (with legal fees, etc), that is a guaranteed 10% return on capital year on year at a time of low interest rates. If the club stayed at Belle Vue, you'd get your money back in ten years, and all the time sitting on some fat real estate. I'd say for an investor, Belle Vue is one hell of an investment.

The only difficulty, I suppose, is that you can never release the capital properly unless we move, although you could sell on your investment.

Sorry if this has already been covered, but have the hopes of York Court coughing up for Newmarket pretty much faded away or are we still fighting?

I was looking at it from the point of view of the current owner, the Bank of Ireland who I suspect simply want some money back as soon as possible rather than a return over 5 years.

For a long term investor it may be a good deal particularly if you feel you can get the planning condition removed.