Wealdstone FC's take on PEPF

[kingoffootball]

Finally, what would be the current state of PEPF had BFC not moved in? From what I understand, Wealdstone would still be elsewhere and The HIve wouldn't exist, Harrow wouldn't have World Class Facilities for the community, instead there would be a pile of rotting metal. Have I missed something where Wealdstone would have picked up the baton and finished the project themselves, only for Barnet to come along and 'nick' PEPF from them? Or perhaps someone else would have moved in and Wealdstone fans would just be getting angry at another group / club (again for their own inability to finish the project).

I think it's been stated that there were bidders other than us who had indicated they would work with Wealdstone to develop the site in a way which suited them.

Not sure there's any more details stated than that though and it isn't easy to see what a company would have to gain by investing that money and then offering better terms than we have, but I guess it's possible if working with Wealdstone was the only way they could develop the site the way they wanted.

Unless there are detailed plans though, it's a lot easier to say that would have worked out better for them, than if they got to see the gritty reality of it.

[Bananas]

Hi guys, thanks for your feedback so far. Some very good points and questions raised here, many of which I can address at length and in more detail, but sadly I'm just absolutely flat out at the moment and just too stretched for time.
I assure you in the next couple of days I'll try to tie up the lose ends and any other arising questions.

Please understand, despite my obvious Wealdstone centric titfer, I am quite pragmatic about this and fully accept that some of the blame for us being shoehorned out of PEPF by procrastinating and "hoping for the best" falls firmly at our own feet, however I do have some major issues with TK and the way he most certainly went about this in at best an underhand way. As for BFC and their fans, I don't have any axe to grind with them at all.

Virtually all the information is out the on the web or at the LBH planning site, but believe me its painful slogging through it looking for those important snippets. I've done it...it's not fun...

If you want to narrow down the important bits, it tends to be centred around the S106 agreements, and the post planning ammendments/changes where "certain clauses" have been slealthily reworded, removed etc.

As I said above, its a great cure for insomnia and you'll learn a lot about flood plains and floolight design!

[BeesKnees]

Thanks for the links, I can see that Barnet FC offered Wealdstone the use of the stadium once completed and as far as I can tell they are still offering use of the stadium, all be it as a groundshare. I can also see that LBH approved the plan using Wealdstone attendance figures which were what was anticipated at the time and that thursdays decision may change the non-league only rule. I think we have to accept that Barnet FC's motives were never going to be to build a stadium and offer it for free so it was always the case that negotiation would be required.

What is Wealdstone FC's current plans? I've heard that they still have Ruislips ground for a few years yet. It would be nice to think BFC could find a new home in barnet by the time your lease ends and therefore we could all get what we want, but if not then it would be better to get on and not rubbish each others chairman.

[Phil The Force]

It looks like Wealdstone have been offered the chance to play at The Hive, but aren't happy with the terms.
Perhaps one of the Wealdstone fans who have been posting on here can outline those terms, then we can make our own minds up about whether they are reasonable or not.

[Bananas]

Hello again,
Right, still busy so not had the chance to properly address your questions yet, so in the meantime I'll just whet your appitite and show you a few bits which to my mind "prove" that it was always TK's plan to move BFC to PEPF from the outset, and kinda puts a large hole in his credibility.

Right...lets have a look at the original planning that WFC submitted regarding just the stadium part of the project.

The first submission was for a 3000 capacity stadium - in other words a ground capable of holding BSP football. This was the asperation of WFC at the time, not overstretching itself in building a ground that was way over spec for the level of football they were looking at.

During the planning process, the grading requirements for BSP football changed, and minimum ground capacity went up from 3K to 4K (which is still the case today). Therefore the planning was changed by WFC and the overall capacity of the stadium was increased to 4000 - and was approved - transport and infrastructure approvals based upon this capacity and taking in the average home crowds that Wealdstone were getting and anticipating were forthcoming.

The development partner in the site then goes bust - work stops - blah blah blah.

Barnet eventually secure the site...in a press release this was said...

"The London Borough of Harrow has announced Barnet FC Holdings are their preferred tender partner to complete the planned development of the Prince Edward Playing Field Site with their 'Football First' scheme.

The site will house Wealdstone FC in the main stadium, a secondary 'green' stadium, a supporter's bar as well as health and leisure, sports injury and banqueting and hospitality facilities. There will also be two FIFA approved third generation all-weather pitches, a youth and junior training area incorporating six pitches and separate men's first team training area.

Barnet Chairman Tony Kleanthous, together with Wealdstone directors Howard Krais and Roger Slater, announced the news on Monday 10 July at press briefings for newspapers in Harrow and Barnet. Wealdstone FC will be informing their members, shareholders and supporters at a specially convened meeting on Wednesday 12 July.

At the press briefings Tony Kleanthous stressed that Barnet's involvement at the Prince Edward site has no connection with any possible relocation of Barnet FC."

continuing...

"The London Borough of Harrow has steadfastly remained committed to housing Wealdstone FC in a permanent home of their own at Prince Edward. Barnet FC Holding's plans means that the stadium will be finished to a high quality spec along with the other facilities. The stadium will be developed to a high standard. It will be a four sided 5,000 capacity ground including 2,400 seats and a second tier being built on the main East stand. It is important to stress this stadium will be Wealdstone FC's home, not Barnet's and it is hoped to be ready in good time for the 2007/8 season."

There is more in that release, but I think you get the point.

Now the really interesting part is the stadium capacity part...

It had increased to 5000 in the planning application submitted by BFC...

Questions need asking here, mainly why in the first instance. Why would WFC need a 5000 capacity ground when 4000 was more than sufficient for a then Step 3 non-league club with average crowds at the time of around 300, who were at best looking at BSP Step 1 football? Why would TK spend extra money on the stadium that was neither needed, nor asked for? We all know how tight he holds the purse strings as it is, so to blow money increasing the capacity of the stadium by 25% seems very out of character for him...

Ok, so look at the plans submitted for the "new" stadium. The main alterations to the original plans to get that increase in capacity were a change to the side of the ground that back onto the Jubilee Line.

As has been said elsewhere on this forum in another thread, the construction that is to appear here is actually the South Stand at Underhill, relocated and slightly augmented.
Therefore, for the stadium to be completed, it would require the removal of the entire South Side of Underhill and shipping it a few miles down the road to PEPF.

So answer me this, if that was always the intention to complete the stadium by the beginning of the 2008 season, by using the stand from Underhill, how were Barnet going to be able to continue playing league football there with basically a 3 sided ground and nowhere near the capacity to meet FL grading requirements? Where were Barnet going to go?

His plans basically would have forced the closure of Underhill, to complete PEPF, therefore putting his own club out of the Football League just to finish a stadium for a Step 3 non-league club.

You don't need to read between the lines here to see what his intentions were. These aren't plans that came about during the building phase, late on into the project, but were there from day 1 several years previously. Solid evidence that from that point onwards he always intended to move BFC to PEPF regardless of what he had said publically.

Regardless of where WFC fitted into the stadium equation is kind of a moot point when TK has so blatently been underhand in his scheming here, and has in the public domain repeatedly said he has never intended to move BFC to Canons Park. This single planning point proves that was always the case. When somebody so blatently lies to his own supporters on such a fundamental fact regarding his own club makes you doubt his integrity on anything that follows.

Maybe you lot should ask some questions about that to him and see how he intended to make this whole scenario work. I would love to be proved wrong and eat humble pie to be honest.

Have a read of the interview he gave to Barnet Supporters association a few years ago...

http://www.bfcsa.co.uk/0910/articles/tk_interview_2.htm

All the information regarding the planning process and drawings etc are out in the public domain so if you don't believe me have a look.
Right...nose back to the grindstone...will be back later and hopefully will get around to addressing your queries!

Yours in football!

[Bananas]

It looks like Wealdstone have been offered the chance to play at The Hive, but aren't happy with the terms.
Perhaps one of the Wealdstone fans who have been posting on here can outline those terms, then we can make our own minds up about whether they are reasonable or not.

Ok just saw this so will try to answer it...

Yes there were negotiations between TK and WFC regarding what he was going to charge us for playing there. I'm not privvy to the exact figures that were banded about at the time, however I have spoken to club officials about it and quote (as much as I can rememeber the exact wording):

"The figures he was asking for were totally unreasonable. Our only cash flow from the stadium would have understandably been gate money, and based upon our expected crowds our income could not even come close to covering the excessive rent he was demanding. To have agreed to them would have been to sign a slow death warrent for the club eventually bankrupting us. That was something we could never agree to. He (TK) knows this, and realises that he has us over a barrel in that respect, can go away now and publicly say he has offered us use of the stadium but we have turned him down, and come away from it still smelling of roses".

I should probably add here, about 2 years ago TK offered to "buy us out" of PEPF as long as we gave up any rights we may have to demand to play there. For somebody who thinks that WFC doesn't actually have any rights to demand to play at PEPF this is odd behaviour in itself.
Now considering the large sum of money that WFC have invested in the site, the fact that we have a still unfulfilled £200K Football Foundation loan on the stadium that won't be realised until it is actually built, and that they could in theory call in that loan at any time thus probably bankrupting the club (and they have done that several times in the past so not an unreasonable thing to occur) how much do you think he offered us to walk away from his multi million pound development? Half a million? £200K? £100K?



Nope...


Nowhere close....


Sum total of his offer...


£50K....


Paid in 50 £1000 monthly installments.


Yeah...Thanks Tony...

[becbee]

To be honest , Bananas, we want to be able to continue watching our club play football. We'd rather it was within the LB of Barnet but if that's not possible, then why shouldn't we play at a ground which is owned by our Chairman? Whatever the rights or wrongs of your arguments are they are nothing to do with us fans - even if we did agree with you we have no power to change things anyway so there's no point in your attempts to convince us of your perceived entitlements.

[ShankBee]

Banana's; speak to Barnet Trust about your plight. Some of them hate TK & Barnet at the Hive more than you do.

[Moonchild_Bee]

I should probably add here, about 2 years ago TK offered to "buy us out" of PEPF as long as we gave up any rights we may have to demand to play there.

Thanks B.

Blunt question - do Wealdstone have any legal rights to play at PEPF, or just the moral high ground? In which case you don't even have the rights to that £50,000?

I thought that when building work was stopped by Wealdstone on the ground, that it reverted back to Harrow Council under their terms to do as they saw fit, and at that point Wealdstone ceased having and rights whatsoever?

Also, I've seen from a blog or two that Howard is still involved in the club. Are you basically confirming (and check the links) that in fact at no point did Wealdstone FC actually at the time (2006) get a legal document in place assuring Wealdstone's future at PEPF? Surely they must have? What does it say?

A quick google shows the full document you quote from memory (good memory too!)

http://www.wealdstonefc.co.uk/print.php?sid=90
http://www.barnetfc.com/page/LatestNews ... 40,00.html
A bit more reading here: http://www.roge.slater.btinternet.co.uk ... jul06.html

I'm a bit confused about the points you make about the new South Stand. Like the floodlights we needed them for League grading, and with the intention to move to another ground, they were made portable. They weren't added to Underhill instead of PEPF.

My personal belief is that using the Hive is a temporary measure (yes I genuinely believe that) and we will return to the Borough of Barnet with a new 10,000 stadium. However we cannot survive groundsharing and using PEPF as our own revenue stream in the meantime means we avoid the problems many clubs (including Wealdstone) have faced. It's sensible (or the Plan B,C,D etc that is being talked about on your board). In fact the events with Barnet council in the past couple of years have been the final straw (culminating here: http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/barn ... Underhill/). It wasn't the aim in 2006 to reach this point. Also see http://www.barnetfc.com/page/LatestNews ... 70,00.html for potential 'final straw'!

And further more, I believe this will be backed up by further disclosures about Barnet Councils underhand practises in the months to come.

[John_c]

Your assumption regarding the moving of the south stand being used to deliberately close Underhill is a ridiculous one. And is just that, an assumption.

I'm guessing that BFC Holdings and TK have invested significantly more than WFC ever did in this project, and will continue to do so.

As a Barnet fan it seems clear to me that The Hive would always provide an opportunity once it was realised that our chances of a new ground in Barnet where 2nd to none. It's currently just that - an opportunity. If it leads to be an eventual permanent home for BFC, then so be it.

TK has broken no laws here, and cannot be blamed for the collapse of the original project.

This all comes from desperation. Despration to prove that we have all been misled in order to somehow scupper a move to the Hive with no alternative being suggested other than stay and rot at Underhill. No thanks.

[GRH]

If the chairman's intention all along was to move into the Hive and make it a permanent home for Barnet FC, why is he still spending money on legal fees to try and get a resolution on a future for Barnet in the Borough of Barnet?

It seems to me that all he is doing is making sure we have a contingency in place and aren't left homeless. I might be being harsh here, but if the original contractors had a decent contingency, then perhaps Wealdstone wouldn't find themselves in the position that they are in.

[kingpinfid]

TK has probably played the system. Said the right things in public, all the while preparing back up plans and strategies behind the scenes. Unfair on Wealdstone FC, probably. But any business would do a similar thing in the circumstances.

TK's role is to secure the best future he can for Barnet FC, within legal means. Not to help Wealdstone FC.

The Saracens owners acted in a similar manner to get hold of Copthall for a nominal fee (was it £1?), thus killing any lingering hopes we had of one day building a stadium there. To make matters worse, I see that Saracens are now planning to play their homes games at various venues, including Wembley, Vicarage Road and elsewhere in the midlands. So they're keeping Copthall as a back-up (and thus preventing our involvement), but may never use it. Now that's what I call tactical blight!

[jerroll]

The Saracens owners acted in a similar manner to get hold of Copthall for a nominal fee (was it £1?), thus killing any lingering hopes we had of one day building a stadium there. To make matters worse, I see that Saracens are now planning to play their homes games at various venues, including Wembley, Vicarage Road and elsewhere in the midlands. So they're keeping Copthall as a back-up (and thus preventing our involvement), but may never use it. Now that's what I call tactical blight![/quote]

That's while the stadium is being prepared for them, they are due to move into Copthall in early february.

[beeamazed]

Please get your facts right Kingpin.
Copthall's history ,move on.

[becbee]

The Saracens owners acted in a similar manner to get hold of Copthall for a nominal fee (was it £1?), thus killing any lingering hopes we had of one day building a stadium there. To make matters worse, I see that Saracens are now planning to play their homes games at various venues, including Wembley, Vicarage Road and elsewhere in the midlands. So they're keeping Copthall as a back-up (and thus preventing our involvement), but may never use it. Now that's what I call tactical blight!

That's while the stadium is being prepared for them, they are due to move into Copthall in early february.[/quote]

Saracens are not keeping Copthall as a back up. They are moving in permanently in February when the stadium is ready for them.

Before then they are continuing to play at Vicarage Rd but because they won't be able to play all their pre-Feb matches there, they are playing one match at Twickenham, one at Wembley, one in Central London and one at Stadium MK.

http://www.onlybarnet.com/forum/posting ... =3&p=45530

Saracens have spent about £20 million on Copthall, it's ridiculous to suggest they'd do that just to spite Barnet.