Wealdstone FC's take on PEPF

[DavidLH]

I’m a Barnet fan who lives close to Wealdstone’s current base in Ruislip. I also have a relative who plays for Wealdstone so I'm not unsympathetic to their situation.

However, Wealdstone currently play at Grosvenor Vale, a ground that previously, for a large number of years, accommodated Ruislip Manor FC. The ground was owned by Ruislip Manor Sports and Social Club who leased the stadium to the football club. The Sports and Social Club went bust & the football club were in trouble. Wealdstone came upon the situation and (perfectly understandably) decided that this wasn’t their problem and took advantage of the situation to secure themselves a home.

I’m not blaming Wealdstone for doing so but it is utterly hypocritical of their fans to blame Barnet for pursuing their own interests at The Hive. Harrow Council may have let Wealdstone down but Barnet haven’t acted any more selfishly over PEPF than Wealdstone did over Grosvenor Vale.

I’d have thought a groundshare at the Hive would make a huge amount of sense for Barnet (It would reduce overheads and/or increase revenue). In all honesty I’m less convinced it now makes as much sense for Wealdstone even if the two clubs could agree terms. Wealdstone have done a lot of excellent work to put down roots in Ruislip. About half the current fan base must be local now. I doubt there are many lost fans in central Harrow who will suddenly reappear again if the club is about a mile closer.

What is it exactly that Wealdstone's supporters want ?

[GRH]

Integrity is a matter of opinion of course, I don't really expect Barnet fans to agree there has been any lack of integrity on your part. Others however see it very differently.

I agree, it's all about perspective.

I'm sure there are Rusilip fans that feel harshly done by that they no longer play at their home, and enjoy the revenues that come from it. Perhaps some of them question the integrity of Wealdstone and the part they played.

It's all a matter of opinion of course.

[BoiledBurgers]

I’m a Barnet fan who lives close to Wealdstone’s current base in Ruislip. I also have a relative who plays for Wealdstone so I'm not unsympathetic to their situation.

However, Wealdstone currently play at Grosvenor Vale, a ground that previously, for a large number of years, accommodated Ruislip Manor FC. The ground was owned by Ruislip Manor Sports and Social Club who leased the stadium to the football club. The Sports and Social Club went bust & the football club were in trouble. Wealdstone came upon the situation and (perfectly understandably) decided that this wasn’t their problem and took advantage of the situation to secure themselves a home.

I’m not blaming Wealdstone for doing so but it is utterly hypocritical of their fans to blame Barnet for pursuing their own interests at The Hive. Harrow Council may have let Wealdstone down but Barnet haven’t acted any more selfishly over PEPF than Wealdstone did over Grosvenor Vale.

I’d have thought a groundshare at the Hive would make a huge amount of sense for Barnet (It would reduce overheads and/or increase revenue). In all honesty I’m less convinced it now makes as much sense for Wealdstone even if the two clubs could agree terms. Wealdstone have done a lot of excellent work to put down roots in Ruislip. About half the current fan base must be local now. I doubt there are many lost fans in central Harrow who will suddenly reappear again if the club is about a mile closer.

What is it exactly that Wealdstone's supporters want ?

Was or wasn't Barnet's proposal for PEPF predicated on completing the main stadium as a home for Wealdstone FC?

I doubt anyone could hold issue Barnet if the proposal to take over PEPF clearly stated this was to be a home for Barnet FC and not for Wealdstone FC. That however wasn't the case.

Wealdstone's takeover at Grosvenor Vale was very clear; take on the running costs and rent of the entire site and hundreds of thousands of pounds of debt that the club house had incurred. There was no commitment to provide a home for anyone. One however was offered but Ruislip Manor decided to go elsewhere.

If Barnet never intended for Wealdstone to play at PEPF then that should have been transparent. Perhaps an alternative proposal would therefore have been more attractive to LBH.

[DavidLH]

So RM FC were offered terms to stay at Grosvenor Vale - presumably pay rent, take the gate money, get nothing from the clubhouse ? They obviously decided they couldn't afford that and moved to Viking Sports or wherever. Isn't that pretty much the same deal Wealdstone are being offered at The Hive ?

I'll ask again, what is it that you want ?

[Tuesds]

"If Barnet never intended for Wealdstone to play at PEPF then that should have been transparent. Perhaps an alternative proposal would therefore have been more attractive to LBH."

Wealdstone can play at PEPF. The Barnet Chairman has said that very clearly. Naturally an agreement would have to be reached that is right for both clubs.

The comment you make about Wealdstone needing income over and above matchday gate receipts is well understood by Barnet supporters. However, I'm not sure why you think Barnet would be in a position to make an ongoing donation to Wealdstone of a share of the income of the football centre it has developed and is managing and maintaining? If such a promise was made only to be withdrawn, that would be dishonourable, but I cannot believe Barnet has ever been in a position to promise a share of this income to anyone else. If I am mistaken, please point us to evidence of any commitment made that Barnet FC would provide Wealdstone with a share of the income from a football centre for which Wealdstone has no share in the lease and for which it is not responsible for management, maintenance, investment etc?

[BoiledBurgers]

So RM FC were offered terms to stay at Grosvenor Vale - presumably pay rent, take the gate money, get nothing from the clubhouse ? They obviously decided they couldn't afford that and moved to Viking Sports or wherever. Isn't that pretty much the same deal Wealdstone are being offered at The Hive ?

I'll ask again, what is it that you want ?

Different scenarios. Barnet were given PEPF on the basis that Wealdstone were provided a home in a completed stadium. Is that stadium completed? Have Barnet tried to find a reasonable solution to meet their commitment to Wealdstone? Again, opinions will differ.

Wealdstone were not given Grosvenor Vale on the basis Ruislip Manor were provided a home. One was offered, Ruislip Manor declined. Wealdstone have not withdrawn their right to play at PEPF. A suitable agreement has yet to be forthcoming and the stadium isn't yet completed.

[BoiledBurgers]

"If Barnet never intended for Wealdstone to play at PEPF then that should have been transparent. Perhaps an alternative proposal would therefore have been more attractive to LBH."

Wealdstone can play at PEPF. The Barnet Chairman has said that very clearly. Naturally an agreement would have to be reached that is right for both clubs.

The comment you make about Wealdstone needing income over and above matchday gate receipts is well understood by Barnet supporters. However, I'm not sure why you think Barnet would be in a position to make an ongoing donation to Wealdstone of a share of the income of the football centre it has developed and is managing and maintaining? If such a promise was made only to be withdrawn, that would be dishonourable, but I cannot believe Barnet has ever been in a position to promise a share of this income to anyone else. If I am mistaken, please point us to evidence of any commitment made that Barnet FC would provide Wealdstone with a share of the income from a football centre for which Wealdstone has no share in the lease and for which it is not responsible for management, maintenance, investment etc?

Is the football centre actually Barnet FC's? You may use it, but I don't believe Barnet FC are the leaseholder.

[John_c]

Could you clarify the 70/80% finished bit? I think you're stretching those figures somewhat.

I come back to my point earlier. Wealdstone are basically takling the moral high ground. Fair enough. But that doesn't mean that Barnet FC and it's fans should in some way knock The Hive on the head in support does it?

You also claim to have "massive latent support" around The Hive? A bit of a spurious claim, surely?

My take on this is that you had your chance, it didn't work out. BFC has taken up the reigns and completed a not even half finished project. It's a shame it has taken you so long to venture on to these parts and express your views. Although I'm sure our learned Trust Directors have been in touch.

[DavidLH]

So RM FC were offered terms to stay at Grosvenor Vale - presumably pay rent, take the gate money, get nothing from the clubhouse ? They obviously decided they couldn't afford that and moved to Viking Sports or wherever. Isn't that pretty much the same deal Wealdstone are being offered at The Hive ?

I'll ask again, what is it that you want ?

Different scenarios. Barnet were given PEPF on the basis that Wealdstone were provided a home in a completed stadium. Is that stadium completed? Have Barnet tried to find a reasonable solution to meet their commitment to Wealdstone? Again, opinions will differ.

Wealdstone were not given Grosvenor Vale on the basis Ruislip Manor were provided a home. One was offered, Ruislip Manor declined. Wealdstone have not withdrawn their right to play at PEPF. A suitable agreement has yet to be forthcoming and the stadium isn't yet completed.

Wealdstone have been offered the chance to play at The Hive. They have said the terms aren't acceptable to them. Exactly the same as Ruislip Manor did. The reason Barnet have stopped talking about Wealdstone using the stadium is that Wealdstone have said they can't accept the terms.

The reality is of course, that this should have been nailed down at the time that Barnet won the right to complete the development. It clearly wasn't and now you seem to be expecting Barnet to make some sort of goodwill concession towards Wealdstone over and above their contractural commitment. The problem is you still haven't said what.

So for the third and final time. What is it you want ???? It's a simple question.

[John_c]

Is the football centre actually Barnet FC's? You may use it, but I don't believe Barnet FC are the leaseholder.

I would imagine it's owned by the BFC Holdings? They own BFC as well.

Next you'll be telling us that the company is registered in Cyprus which undoubtedly means it's dodgy in some way? Are you sure you're not a director of the "Supporters" Trust?

[BeesKnees]

Barnet were given PEPF on the basis that Wealdstone were provided a home in a completed stadium

I've been trying to follow this but can't find it in LBH planning permission or BFC planning submissions. Are you able to point me to the documentation that confirms this.

As many have already said, I'm sure BFC are prepared to share the cost of running the site if you want to ground share.

[Bananas]

Barnet were given PEPF on the basis that Wealdstone were provided a home in a completed stadium

I've been trying to follow this but can't find it in LBH planning permission or BFC planning submissions. Are you able to point me to the documentation that confirms this.

As many have already said, I'm sure BFC are prepared to share the cost of running the site if you want to ground share.

There's no easy way to copy and paste a link to the documents you're asking about due to the clunky nature of the LBH's planning site, so follow this process...

http://www.harrow.gov.uk/planningsearch ... Type=quick

in the street name search type "prince edward*"

Page 2 of 3 there is planning application P/0002/07 - click on details...

Next page - click on documents

Near the bottom of the substancial list dated Tuesday Jan 9th 2007 is a document called Planning statement. Click on that...

Page 7 - item 2.4
Page 16 - second bullet point down
Page 29 - item 7.24
Page 33 - item 8.5

That's a good enough place to start reading...
As you can see there are a lot of documents regarding that planning application, many of which make interesting reading - or a good cure for insomnia...

[Bananas]

I really should engage in this debate further, but really don't have time at this exact moment, but will address the PEPF/Hive/BFC/WFC scenario later in the week when I have a few minutes breathing space.

However, before I dash out the door I will try to clear up what happened with WFC and RMFC at the Vale a few years ago, because there is some confucion over our involvement with them and their ultimate sad demise.

The Chairman of RMFC invited the Board of WFC to buy out the shares in Ruislip Manor Sports and Social Club. At the time RMSSC was massively in debt with the tax man and brewery (and there were several people there in positions of power that were skimming off money into their own pockets), and he could see that it was only a matter of time before the club went into liquidation and the lease to KCIS (our landlords) became null, hence the site, football ground and RMFC being lost forever.

At the time WFC's reserves and Youth teams were playing there, WFC was groundsharing at Northwood.

RMFC were in disarray, no money coming in from the gate, no funding from the social club, manager walking out taking the majority of the side with him. They were in such disarray that members of our board were having to pay RMFC's match officials their match fees as they had no money at all. WFC loaned them out under 18 side and manager to get them through to the end of the season. It wasn't a good time for the club, the ground was bordering on derelict and the pitch was in such a bad state that for 3 months over the winter their league had banned them from playing home games because it was considered dangerous.

WFC bought out the shares of RMSSC, took on six figure tax and brewery loan debts (the size of which we were never aware of at the time) with the intention of moving WFC to the stadium and groundsharing it with RMFC.

At a EGM of RMFC (that I attended), the then current chairman explained to the scant number of people who attended the situation that their club was in. Religated, no income stream and basically on its knees.
WFC spoke to a "famous middsexian" with an interest in non-league football (you can guess the name), who agreed to sponsor RMFC for the next season to the sum of £50K - the only proviso being that they take a vollentary drop down another division to the Middx County League - a level of football where they could financially survive and rebuild the club.
As a neutral at the meeting I thought this was the only way forwards, the club had a future and a bit of financial stability, and they could continue to play at GV.
WFC having spent 20 odd years ground sharing knew how much it cost to do it, and made an offer to RMFC considerably less than they would have to play at any other ground in the area, basically a charge that reflected running costs of the stadium and maintenence.

A vote was proposed to the RMFC club members to agree to this course of action. It was roughly 80/20 to NOT take up the offer, basically those there said in a nutshell that RMFC had never played at such a low level and they wouldn't want to see the club go there. In essence they signed their own clubs death warrent...

I was stunned by that decision - they'd rather see the club finish than continue at a lower level - madness...but probably summed up how much they actually cared about the club considering all that had gone on behind the scenes over the previous couple of years. It certainly saddened me...

The then current Chairman said that if that was the case he was going to stand down from his position immediately - kinda understandable I guess, having put many years and pounds into the club to keep it afloat for so long only to see the lack of support from his own people.

Anyhoo...

Waiting in the wings was a character who was on the perifery of discussions - like me an outsider taking notes. He was a representative of Tokington church and community centre in Wembley (err...Tony something...surname escapes me here...sorry).
He suddenly became the knight in shining armour for RMFC, promising a future and funding as long as he became Chairman...

Long story short, he got voted in...upped sticks for the club...renamed it Tokington Manor...moved it lock stock to Viking Sports club in Greenford (paying more than twice the figure that WFC were going to charge for them to remain at GV)...brought in his own people.
He was basically looking for a club at a certain level of the non league pyramid to hijack, as a vehicle to funding avenues for his own purposes. He had no interest in RMFC, it's past history or it's future. He was a charlitan and effectively was the man who drove the last nail into the coffin of RMFC.

That's a real basic outline of what happened between RMFC and WFC - I could go on for hours about the finer details...

In a nutshell, WFC did everything in their power to help RMFC continue at Grosvenor Vale. In fact we went beyond the call of duty to try to continue a famous club even though it was on it's knees. The death of RMFC was as of a result of previous mismanagement (and dodgy dealings done by various incumbants at the time), and due to the involvement of this "gentleman" from Tokington. WFC can hardly be held responsible for any part of it.

So, as you can see (even in basic form) there aren't exactly many similarities between RMFC-WFC-GV and BFC-WFC-PEPF, so please don't draw comparisons between 2 utterly different scenarios!

Any questions! haha!

Will give you my (totally unbiased obviously) apprasal of PEPF in a couple of days time. Feel free to ask questions in the meantime.

[Moonchild_Bee]

Page 7 - item 2.4
Page 16 - second bullet point down
Page 29 - item 7.24
Page 33 - item 8.5
That's a good enough place to start reading...
As you can see there are a lot of documents regarding that planning application, many of which make interesting reading - or a good cure for insomnia...

That's an interesting document, thank you. Shame individual aspects cannot be linked to directly.

It was submitted 22 December 2006, and obviously there have been many changes to the application since, the most important one is going through soon.

It includes comments that Barnet will continue to play first team matches at Underhill for example, which isn't the case.

With regards to Wealdstone FC there is a clear statement that

"Barnet Football Club will lease the site to Wealdstone on match days".

I was under the impression this has been offered - from TK directly. Is this not the case? Surely this has been discussed directly with Wealdstone - and with regards to above statement, I would presume initially discussed back in 2006, otherwise why would it state this?

So - why have Wealdstone not accepted this? Is it purely about the additional revenue? If so, where does the document (or others) state that there would be additional revenue shared?

What is WFC's structure in terms of chairman / ownership? What is there take apart from I note someone who blogs occasionally. I'm just not sure who is standing up for WFC, or who would previously have discussed PEPF with BFC?

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).

There seems (to me) to be an element of trying to shut the stable door, unfortunately a decade after the horse has bolted. A vague attempt to cry injustice to try and get some compensation, when this effort would have been better spent a long, long time ago. An attempt to try and create a panto villain in BFC and TK as it helps your cause.

To quote your own fans:

I dont see Barnet have done much wrong, they have a club to run and a future to sort out and to be fair to them that site has been up and running for a few years now, something we couldn't do. So lets get away from the we are just poor hopeless victims in all of this and start pointing fingers at our own club as to my mind that is where the fault lies.

[/quote]

[Moonchild_Bee]

Could you clarify the 70/80% finished bit? I think you're stretching those figures somewhat.

Also with regards to this - if a project is finished 70 or 80% - let's say 80% - is doesn't make any difference if it then left to rot for a few years. The 80% 'finished' it may have been, but tat absolutely not at stage, contrary to the implication did Barnet simply have to come in and simply finish the 20% and voila - get a brand new stadium with training facilities.

Many aspects of what Wealdstone were building were completely irrelevant. If anyone saw The Hive as it was the day construction stopped (as I did - albeit twice a day from the Jubilee Line) and how it is now will realise there is no comparison. Some buildings remain, but there are vast changes. The most important things to Barnet were a) the land b) the approval for conversion into football facilities and c) a supportive council.

I think the majority of building work that existed when we took over the land probably hindered rather than helped Barnet Football Club.

Harrow Council will be happy as they have better community facilities that initially expected. They have premier league and national football teams training in Harrow, and such a good facility, the the Olympic Committee are sending their Footballing Officials to train at The Hive over the Olympics. That's what has been delivered to Harrow Borough so far. Just a shame Barnet Council didn't want it.

I'll add that's just my own comments and i'll be happily corrected.