From Twitter

bobr666
Posts: 213
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 9:59 am
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 3 times

From Twitter

Post by bobr666 » Fri Jan 08, 2021 5:39 pm

Chairman of @wokingfc, Rosemary Johnson, has said the club will oppose new plans by #GolDev to build housing next to the stadium unless the #Developer helps to provide a new west stand at a cost of around £6 million. See link here

Baldman
Posts: 920
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:59 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 39 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by Baldman » Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:04 pm

GolDev paid the club £300k? I'm not sure I'd heard that

Edit to add: If this goes ahead, we are screwed, right?

KT15 Card
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 4:52 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 64 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by KT15 Card » Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:26 pm

Where's the 300k?

bobr666
Posts: 213
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 9:59 am
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by bobr666 » Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:29 pm

Nor me, but it's not unknown to secure exclusive rights to a development deal. I had a friend who had a big share of a chunk of land near Gatwick (his dad had been a farmer). One of the big supermarkets paid him and his siblings several hundred thousand for exclusivity in potentially developing it as a hypermarket and he thought he would be rich beyond his wildest dreams. Then 2008 happened. Then supermarkets decided to stop building new big supermarkets and didn't renew their option. :-(

bobr666
Posts: 213
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 9:59 am
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by bobr666 » Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:31 pm

> Where's the 300k? The club's operation has lost a lot of money each year for many. That's not a secret. That's why the interest from Katz is interesting. He has good and proven experience in developing matchday income way higher than WFC. OK, that was in the US, but he's a professional at that.

Nonsense Potter
Posts: 3225
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 9:22 am
Has thanked: 111 times
Been thanked: 339 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by Nonsense Potter » Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:33 pm

KT15 Card wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:26 pm
Where's the 300k?
The club’s latest accounts, released this week, show a very healthy cash position!

Considering the losses we’ve made, I think it was sensible not to spend it all in one go.
Scorer of possibly the greatest goal in the history of the Woking FC Supporters' team

bobr666
Posts: 213
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 9:59 am
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by bobr666 » Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:39 pm

> show a very healthy cash position! That's good news! Must sign up as a shareholder.....

rosemaryj
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 10:28 am
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by rosemaryj » Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:42 pm

Just for clarification, the full information is in a front page article in the News and Mail.
Wayne Gold put out a press release which he did not share with the board with regard to his application for the appeal on the failed planning application and also talking about a new development plan that he has been discussing with members of SWAG that the club had not been involved in at all.
In the press release he talked about the £300,000 that he paid to the club over a year period so that we could not negotiate with another developer, this information was known at the time and appears in the accounts spread over two accounting years. He also stated that "part of that proposal (his new development) will be a financial contribution to for Woking Football Club to allow them to improve their existing facilities....".
My response was to re-state that the club do not support the appeal and currently as the appeal has been put in the name of Goldev Woking Limited and Woking Football Club without the club board's support I have contacted the Planning Inspectorate to inform them of that fact and to remove the club's name from the appeal.
With the smaller scheme that he is proposing that is not within our control and part of the scheme is on the "compound" land. My comment to the press was that "Woking FC will oppose plans to build housing next to the stadium unless the developer helps to provide a new west stand at a cost of around £6million."
In other words I am not prepared to a likely desultory financial offer but an EFL compliant stand to replace the oldest part of the ground.
Whether he pursues this scheme is not up to me but I have pursued what I believe is the best that I can for the club.

Rosemary

Cardinal96
Posts: 910
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:01 pm
Has thanked: 104 times
Been thanked: 34 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by Cardinal96 » Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:50 pm

rosemaryj wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:42 pm
Just for clarification, the full information is in a front page article in the News and Mail.
Wayne Gold put out a press release which he did not share with the board with regard to his application for the appeal on the failed planning application and also talking about a new development plan that he has been discussing with members of SWAG that the club had not been involved in at all.
In the press release he talked about the £300,000 that he paid to the club over a year period so that we could not negotiate with another developer, this information was known at the time and appears in the accounts spread over two accounting years. He also stated that "part of that proposal (his new development) will be a financial contribution to for Woking Football Club to allow them to improve their existing facilities....".
My response was to re-state that the club do not support the appeal and currently as the appeal has been put in the name of Goldev Woking Limited and Woking Football Club without the club board's support I have contacted the Planning Inspectorate to inform them of that fact and to remove the club's name from the appeal.
With the smaller scheme that he is proposing that is not within our control and part of the scheme is on the "compound" land. My comment to the press was that "Woking FC will oppose plans to build housing next to the stadium unless the developer helps to provide a new west stand at a cost of around £6million."
In other words I am not prepared to a likely desultory financial offer but an EFL compliant stand to replace the oldest part of the ground.
Whether he pursues this scheme is not up to me but I have pursued what I believe is the best that I can for the club.

Rosemary
Spot on Rosemary.

Card Sharp
Posts: 1103
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:50 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by Card Sharp » Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:56 pm

It's a sorry state of affairs this. I agree with the club's stance now but it is a far cry from the praise and optimism at the outset! Mind you, we had just sacked Oh Anthony and were staring at relegation!

neverlostatwembley3
Posts: 184
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 6:05 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: From Twitter

Post by neverlostatwembley3 » Fri Jan 08, 2021 7:10 pm

“ In the press release he talked about the £300,000 that he paid to the club over a year period so that we could not negotiate with another developer, this information was known at the time...”

Known to who? The payment certainly wasn’t disclosed to fans at the fans forum at the time and I don’t know anyone who has heard about it until now.

Baldman
Posts: 920
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:59 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 39 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by Baldman » Fri Jan 08, 2021 7:19 pm

rosemaryj wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 6:42 pm
Just for clarification, the full information is in a front page article in the News and Mail.
Wayne Gold put out a press release which he did not share with the board with regard to his application for the appeal on the failed planning application and also talking about a new development plan that he has been discussing with members of SWAG that the club had not been involved in at all.
In the press release he talked about the £300,000 that he paid to the club over a year period so that we could not negotiate with another developer, this information was known at the time and appears in the accounts spread over two accounting years. He also stated that "part of that proposal (his new development) will be a financial contribution to for Woking Football Club to allow them to improve their existing facilities....".
My response was to re-state that the club do not support the appeal and currently as the appeal has been put in the name of Goldev Woking Limited and Woking Football Club without the club board's support I have contacted the Planning Inspectorate to inform them of that fact and to remove the club's name from the appeal.
With the smaller scheme that he is proposing that is not within our control and part of the scheme is on the "compound" land. My comment to the press was that "Woking FC will oppose plans to build housing next to the stadium unless the developer helps to provide a new west stand at a cost of around £6million."
In other words I am not prepared to a likely desultory financial offer but an EFL compliant stand to replace the oldest part of the ground.
Whether he pursues this scheme is not up to me but I have pursued what I believe is the best that I can for the club.

Rosemary
Thanks Rosemary. Can I ask a couple of follow ups?

- who owns the land on which the revised smaller proposal would be built?
- is a smaller development such as the one mentioned in the paper contemplated in the agreements that were previously signed by the club/council/developer?
- if this new development is built as proposed and no new stand is possible, where does that leave us as a club?

rosemaryj
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 10:28 am
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by rosemaryj » Fri Jan 08, 2021 7:34 pm

Yes, ask questions by all means. Always happy to answer if I know the answer.

The compound land is owned by the council, the land to the right of the Kingfield Road entrance is made up of houses of which I believe two are rented but they are privately owned.
Whilst the compound land was part of the original planning application which would have provided the club with a brand new stadium, the new proposed application has no agreements signed that I am aware of with either the council or the club, hence my stating what I would want out of the developer, bearing in mind that no official approach or discussion has been held with the club re. this smaller scheme although I am aware SWAG have been involved in the discussions.
The council has made it clear that they wish to help the club and the compound land is council owned, I would suggest although again, I have not been involved with any discussions with either the developer, the councillors or the council about this I am stating what the club would require or I could see no reason for the club to support the application. As the leader of the council and her deputy appear to have a meeting booked with the developer - according to the press release - I would suggest questions relating to any council input are directed to those councillors. Their details can be found on the Woking Borough Council website.
On a final point the money to the club was made known at a meeting with fans by the Goldev Woking Limited accountant and has been reported to the AGM of the club to the shareholders through the club accounts.

Rosemary

Baldman
Posts: 920
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:59 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 39 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by Baldman » Fri Jan 08, 2021 7:46 pm

Thanks for responding and for the extra detail Rosemary.

Just a suggestion for all, perhaps we as supporters could support the club in buying one of the properties that is in the proposed smaller development. They may already be covered by option agreements of course.

alas Tom Jones
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:35 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: From Twitter

Post by alas Tom Jones » Fri Jan 08, 2021 9:36 pm

If the LGS is to remain in place, possibly complemented by a new west stand, I would urge the club to consider how to make the steps accessing the seating less hazardous. Descending them with nothing to hold onto isn't a pleasant experience.

Jpo2508
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: From Twitter

Post by Jpo2508 » Sat Jan 09, 2021 7:18 am

So it appears Gold has got what he wanted, first refusal on the land, and as feared by fans at the beginning, he has zero interest in the football club.

Wafflebutt
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 11:54 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by Wafflebutt » Sat Jan 09, 2021 8:20 am

Jpo2508 wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 7:18 am
So it appears Gold has got what he wanted, first refusal on the land, and as feared by fans at the beginning, he has zero interest in the football club.
I thought it was quite apparent that he had no interest in the club, I dont think anyone feared it.

Nonsense Potter
Posts: 3225
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 9:22 am
Has thanked: 111 times
Been thanked: 339 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by Nonsense Potter » Sat Jan 09, 2021 8:51 am

Jpo2508 wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 7:18 am
So it appears Gold has got what he wanted, first refusal on the land, and as feared by fans at the beginning, he has zero interest in the football club.
Is that right? He had exclusivity on the development for a certain period of time, which included the provision of facilities for the club. If he’s not providing them, surely the agreement is broken and the club/council aren’t obliged to use him.

As I see it, we just need to wait for his appeal to be turned down and he’ll eventually disappear.
Scorer of possibly the greatest goal in the history of the Woking FC Supporters' team

neverlostatwembley3
Posts: 184
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 6:05 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: From Twitter

Post by neverlostatwembley3 » Sat Jan 09, 2021 10:09 am

Depends on what the terms of agreement were with him and how well drafted the agreement was I suppose. It worries me that the club isn’t sufficiently protected and we could be in constant limbo while he decides what to do.

Why would John Katz and co invest in us when Wayne Gold could potentially acquire 75% of the shares if he gets planning?!

KT15 Card
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 4:52 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 64 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by KT15 Card » Sat Jan 09, 2021 10:38 am

I'm not particularly clued up on all this, but if the council own the land, what's stopping them from rejecting it and finding someone cheaper and someone who doesn't piss the neighbours and the football club off?

What's so good about Wayne Gold?

neverlostatwembley3
Posts: 184
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 6:05 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: From Twitter

Post by neverlostatwembley3 » Sat Jan 09, 2021 11:33 am

I don’t think the appeal can be rejected by the Council. The appeal is decided by the Government Planning Inspectorate.

Re Wayne Gold there were 300,000 reasons why the club thought he was great. I believe he was introduced by Alexander Jarvis.

KT15 Card
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 4:52 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 64 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by KT15 Card » Sat Jan 09, 2021 11:39 am

neverlostatwembley3 wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 11:33 am
I don’t think the appeal can be rejected by the Council. The appeal is decided by the Government Planning Inspectorate.

Re Wayne Gold there were 300,000 reasons why the club thought he was great. I believe he was introduced by Alexander Jarvis.
Thanks. Weird it's still classed as an appeal when the plans are totally different though!

Nonsense Potter
Posts: 3225
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 9:22 am
Has thanked: 111 times
Been thanked: 339 times

Re: From Twitter

Post by Nonsense Potter » Sat Jan 09, 2021 11:56 am

KT15 Card wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 11:39 am
neverlostatwembley3 wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 11:33 am
I don’t think the appeal can be rejected by the Council. The appeal is decided by the Government Planning Inspectorate.

Re Wayne Gold there were 300,000 reasons why the club thought he was great. I believe he was introduced by Alexander Jarvis.
Thanks. Weird it's still classed as an appeal when the plans are totally different though!
The appeal would only apply to the original plans
Scorer of possibly the greatest goal in the history of the Woking FC Supporters' team


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests

Cardboard

Cardsboard.co.uk is not an official message board of Woking Football Club or The Cards Trust, the opinions expressed are those of the individual authors. If you see an offensive post then click "Report" on the relevant post. Posts will be deleted at the discretion of the moderators whose decision is final. Please be warned that some posts will contain swear words.

Vanarama National League Club Forums: Aldershot Town | Altrincham | Barnet | Bromley | Chesterfield | Dagenham & Redbridge | Dover Athletic | Eastleigh | FC Halifax Town | Hartlepool United | King's Lynn Town | Maidenhead United | Notts County | Solihull Moors | Stockport County | Sutton United | Torquay United | Wealdstone | Weymouth | Wrexham

Unofficial League Forums: The Conference Forum

Other Links: Cards Trust - Boost the Budget | wokingfc.co.uk | Surrey Advertiser | Woking News and Mail | Woking FC Official Photo Gallery | BBC Sport - Woking | BBC Football Commentaries