Brighton lose bank funding for Falmer, or something similar

[Pretty pink fairy]

:gossip:

Last night I went to a fancy function and learnt from a member of the Bloom Falmer that the Albion have lost FALMER as the funding from the Banks has not materialised.

However, the Bloom family have put a debenture of £40 million with the FA of their own money into their account. This allows the club to proceed with the stadium.

The Bloom family are actively seeking finance for the ground, otherwise they will own it with their own funds!

 

[Stoo82]

AND TO SHOUT BACK- FROM THE ARGUS 21st JANUARY:

"Brighton and Hove Albion FC will be handed the lease it needs to build a new stadium, a council has decided.

Brighton and Hove City Council has voted to give the football team the necessary plots at Falmer.

The agreement is CONDITIONAL ON THE FOOTBALL CLUB SECURING FUNDING and planning permission."

IF FUNDING WAS IN PLACE DO YOU THINK THEY WOULD HAVE PUT SUCH A CONDITION IN. WAKE UP! WE DONT YET HAVE FULL FUNDING IN PLACE NO MATTER HOW SOME TRY TO SPIN IT!!

LOUD ENOUGH?!!!

Sorry i dont get your point. We got the permission. So funding is in place.

 

[Knotty]

The only reason she gets Shit is because people don't actually read what she says - she has in the past told you the truth but has always said she can't tell the source - if she was able to the whole thing WOULD fall into place and you all wouldn't slag her off the way you do

Not exactly true.

She is entitled to post her opinions as we are entitled to believe or disbelieve them, or to remain open-minded.

I don't personally agree with all the abuse she gets but fully understand why she gets it. She has strong views on the Wilkins saga because she says she knows what happened. She, and you, have very strong anti-DK views and even when you post on non-Wilkins threads, you only do so with an anti-DK angle.

My views on that are:

1. Has she heard just one side of the story from her source and chosen to accept that as the 'truth'?

2. Has she heard both sides of the story and formed her opinion on what she has heard?

3. In the case of either 1 or 2, she is fully entitled to believe that she knows the truth. That doesn't mean that she actually know it.

4. If I, or others, knew exactly what she and you know, we might have the opposite opinion.

5. Her biggest problem is that she cannot accept that without any knowledge of the facts, most of us can have no opinion.

6. She has to accept that without any facts, most are not going to want to believe her, especially when virtually all her posts appear to be cheap attempts to discredit someone who has done great things for BHA.

7. Even if I did know all the facts and thought that DK was wrong in sacking DW, it wouldn't change my support for the Albion one little bit. Neither of you, nor I, are shareholders of the club. Whatever DK and the board choose to do with it is their business, whether we like it or not.

8. Personally, I will support BHA regardless of who is the chairman, board, manager, players. I don't care, and don't need to know, who is funding Falmer, as long as it is funded. The same applies to where the money comes from to buy players. All the shareholders have put significant sums of money into the club at some stage and they all deserve praise for doing so. If it is the Blooms who are stumping up large sums right now, it has been Norman Cook, and it was DK and others in the past. Who put money into the pot, and when, is irrelevant - the club, not individuals, buys players . They have all contributed.

9. It would be nice to see just one post from her that is purely about the football and not a jibe at DK. After all, aren't we paying to simply watch football, good or bad - not to know all the inner workings of the club?

 

[Taybha]

Im going to the shops for my sunday times,theres a free dvd inside today



Well look at that the dvd is all about alzheimers

 

[dougdeep]

Last night I went to a fancy function and learnt from a member of the Bloom Falmer that the Albion have lost FALMER as the funding from the Banks has not materialised.

If that was meant to read a "member of the Bloom family", why didn't you ask their name?

 

[chimneys]

Sorry i dont get your point. We got the permission. So funding is in place.

Stoo- Re-read the Argus quote in my thread. We will get the all important lease from the Council when the funding is in place. Planning is a seperate issue.

Hence funding is NOT IN PLACE as if it were, the grant of lease from the Council wouldnt contain the funding condition.

 

[Stoo82]

chimneys - I dont know for sure if we have funding.

I THINK we do and dont think that the club would lie.
Building has started and I for one see that as proof enough that funding is in place or at least there is enough eveidence for the people that matter that funding will come in the future.

I just can not imagine that the council would allow scenes like this:

Brighton and Hove Albion | News | Gallery | Gallery | Latest Stadium Site Images

Falmer: Field of Dreams photos (Part 1) - North Stand Chat

Only for the club to say 'sorry, but we did not get the money, woops!'

 

[Steve Foster]

What with the statement "funding is in place" with whom - I can confirm to people who I bank with and who my mortgage is with - Why don't the club confirm who the funding is with - good publicity for the bank and the club wouldn't it be ??

Well said Deano. The club should come out with a statement as to who is funding Falmer. I suspect the club has not done this because the loans that the banks had promised have not now materialised........so the Bloom's have stepped in.

Thank-you to the Blooms!

 

[Stoo82]

Well said Deano. The club should come out with a statement as to who is funding Falmer. I suspect the club has not done this because the loans that the banks had promised have not now materialised........so the Bloom's have stepped in.

Thank-you to the Blooms!

Why should a company tell you which bank they use? Do Tessco do Asda do the Blooms? The Blooms do use a bank right?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Stoo- Re-read the Argus quote in my thread. We will get the all important lease from the Council when the funding is in place. Planning is a seperate issue.

Hence funding is NOT IN PLACE as if it were, the grant of lease from the Council wouldnt contain the funding condition.

The grant of lease was made in January, subject to planning permission and the council being satisfied as to funding.

The planning permission was given by the council last week.

The funding condition is to be met in accordance with the Council's Cabinet decision on 15 January:-

"Site possession by the club can not take place until the Director of Finance & Resources / Section 151 Officer is satisfied that the club’s business case can be fully funded".

"Cabinet agrees that authority for discharging the Funding Condition in the Agreement for Lease be delegated to the Director of Finance and Resources and the Assistant Director of Finance (section 151 officer) in consultation with the Leader of the Council".


In other words, the obligation on the Club is to satisfy two officers of the council, who will consult the Leader of the Council. These matters are invariably dealt with confidentially. There is nothing that requires the Club to publish the details of the project's funding.

 

[Steve Foster]

Why should a company tell you which bank they use? Do Tessco do Asda do the Blooms? The Blooms do use a bank right?

Perhaps the club should of told the supporters that the funding from the Banks is NOT in place and that the Bloom's have now stepped in?

The club of course are not at liberty to do so, however, as part of openess to the supporters it is surely the right thing to do?

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Perhaps the club should of told the supporters that the funding from the Banks is NOT in place and that the Bloom's have now stepped in?

The club of course are not at liberty to do so, however, as part of openess to the supporters it is surely the right thing to do?

So this IS fact, is it?

 

[sir albion]

I hope it is the blooms who get to own it and well deserved

 

[Notters]

Imagine going to a fancy do and saying 'should of'

 

[seagullsslimjim]

Why should a company tell you which bank they use? Do Tessco do Asda do the Blooms? The Blooms do use a bank right?

Tesco use HSBC !

 

[sir albion]

Tesco use HSBC !

who do you bank with?whats your adresse?whats your age?whats your account number and sort code?

 

[Cantona's Flying Dropkick]

Tesco use HSBC !

That's why HSBC haven't asked for a government bailout!

 

[chimneys]

The grant of lease was made in January, subject to planning permission and the council being satisfied as to funding.

The planning permission was given by the council last week.

The funding condition is to be met in accordance with the Council's Cabinet decision on 15 January:-

"Site possession by the club can not take place until the Director of Finance & Resources / Section 151 Officer is satisfied that the club’s business case can be fully funded".

"Cabinet agrees that authority for discharging the Funding Condition in the Agreement for Lease be delegated to the Director of Finance and Resources and the Assistant Director of Finance (section 151 officer) in consultation with the Leader of the Council".


In other words, the obligation on the Club is to satisfy two officers of the council, who will consult the Leader of the Council. These matters are invariably dealt with confidentially. There is nothing that requires the Club to publish the details of the project's funding.

Here we go again Lord B. Why all the smoke and mirrors? You and I both know if funding were in place that would not have been made a condition as it would have already been satisfied.

And for the last time- many of us are not asking for details ,merely that funding is in place!! Why do you and others persist in sidestepping the point being made and instead turn it into a publication of the detail point every time. You've now become a proper politician Lord B!

 

[Billy the Fish]

nimbys still talking bollox in argus comments

What the f*** is wrong with these freaks. It's probably the same people on the argus site who come on here and spout their bullshit.
Chimneys must have a mental age of about 8. The council must be satisfied that the club has a business case otherwise they wouldn't have given the club posession of the site, what don't you understand about that?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Here we go again Lord B. Why all the smoke and mirrors? You and I both know if funding were in place that would not have been made a condition as it would have already been satisfied.

And for the last time- many of us are not asking for details ,merely that funding is in place!! Why do you and others persist in sidestepping the point being made and instead turn it into a publication of the detail point every time. You've now become a proper politician Lord B!

I don't get where you think he's avoided the question ? LBs post makes perfectly clear that the council will only grant the lease if they are satisfied that the club can fund the project - they granted the lease and so by assumption the club have satisfied the council they have the funds available ( in whatever form that might be ). I think I'll rather believe the Director of Finances' point of view than any from posters on here who have had diddly squat to do with the project. I'm sure the council officials have seen rather more of the paperwork than anyone on here !!!

People need to take SFs post for what it was - a shit stirring one designed to attract attention.