Brockhall STC - planning permission application ?

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

Just now, JoeH said:

A newer building? More pragmatic use of the space? Financially beneficial? Cuts down costs and potentially some staffing costs too?

Yay for job losses🙄

Edited February 21, 2021 by Hoochie Bloochie Mama

[Wovers]

5 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Not suggesting a financial gain in the slightest.

However, you have a professional relationship with the club and are the only person on the whole board with anything positive to say.

So I think your judgment is clouded and I discount it on that basis, sorry.

Fully agree.

[Guest]

Just now, arbitro said:

Jack Walkers legacy being respected?

Do you really believe this is progressive?

How will it benefit the club?

I don't really buy into all this legacy stuff, times change and move on. The building is 30 years old and we're moving a minute up the road, not to another town.

I don't know, good question. I don't even think it'll go ahead, as other posters have alluded to. Would have to wait and see what the building itself looks like. It will be a much newer facility than the one we have, but couldn't possibly say for sure that its progressive or not yet.

I think if it helps us financially, then thats a benefit. We're not going up to the Premier League and I'd rather merge the training centres to raise funds than sell all our best players or drop the Cat One status, for example.

 

[Guest]

Instead of just having a civilised conversation about my feelings on the plans, you are choosing to attack my personal self, my business and claim that I simply cannot have an opinion on the subject that can be in any way listened to.

Suggestions that I am being paid by the football club are ludicrous and I take a massive amount of offence to that. It's an absolute joke the way I'm being lambasted by some on this board for daring to sponsor the clubs website.

 

[Mattyblue]

If it wasn’t for Jack we wouldn’t have Brockhall, at all. Or the fantastic facilities at Ewood Park, or a Cat 1 Academy.

’Don’t buy this legacy stuff’. I mean, honestly.

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

Just now, JoeH said:

I don't really buy into all this legacy stuff,

You and Venky's both. 

[RevidgeBlue]

25 minutes ago, Oldgregg86 said:

How anyone can’t see that especially with all the Coventry stuff and the same three involved happen to be here is beyond me

It's unbelievable isn't it.

I know many people are keen to castigate the owners at every opportunity but I really wonder if this sickening scheme is actually their idea, or they've been fed the line about "a state of the art" training facility by the Coventry 3 only to find out when it is too late that the reality is anything but.

With losses running at £20m p.a. it's unlikely that this short sighted idea would cover more than a couple of years debts at best. And that's if the Club is receiving the monies in full.

It needs to be revealed how much the site would potentially be sold for, would it be placed on the open market or sold to a Company in which current Club employees have an interest, would the proceeds go to the Club in full and if so for what purpose would they be used, to pay down debt or to be reinvested in the playing side of things.

Even if everything was relatively above board and the owners were the driving force behind the idea they were receiving the full proceeds and Waggott/Mowbray/Venus weren't making a penny out of it it's impossible to see how a much smaller facility on one site could be anything other than a significant downgrade on the existing ones.

If you're genuinely serious about upgrading the training facilities, leave the existing sites intact and make the necessary improvements to make them state of the art as necessary. If there's no desire to do that it can only be concluded that this is a scam, we just don't know for sure yet who's behind it but bearing in mind what happened at Coventry it seems fairly clear who will be the architects of this scheme.

[Guest]

I think you can respect the past and still move forward, but sure, instead of actually talking about that, lets just attack! 

 

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

Just now, JoeH said:

Instead of just having a civilised conversation about my feelings on the plans, you are choosing to attack my personal self, my business and claim that I simply cannot have an opinion on the subject that can be in any way listened to.

Suggestions that I am being paid by the football club are ludicrous and I take a massive amount of offence to that. It's an absolute joke the way I'm being lambasted by some on this board for daring to sponsor the clubs website.

 

Calm down. Why are you offended? You're a club sponsor. You aren't impartial. The end. 

Anyway, who sent you the plans?

[Ewood Ace]

9 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Financially beneficial? Cuts down costs and potentially some staffing costs too?

Financially beneficial for who though? 

I think with cut down costs you have hit the nail on the head. That's what we will see the rebuild done on the cheap like everything else and no doubt there will be a benefit in it but that benefit won't be for Blackburn Rovers Football Club who will end up worse of than before.

Also are you inferring that staff of the club losing their jobs is a positive thing?

Edited February 21, 2021 by Ewood Ace

[den9112]

Extracts from Andy Cole’s  autobiography ,I see Swag gets a mention but not in a good light .

[Guest]

Just now, Ewood Ace said:

Also are you inferring that staff of the club losing their jobs is a positive thing?

I wasn't trying to infer that. I'm merely saying that the 'benefit' the club refers to is a financial one, which I would assume comes with lower staffing and management costs by merging the two sites. 

[Leonard Venkhater]

21 minutes ago, Moptop1 said:

The times are certainly a’changing!!! 

The line it is drawn so the people must see

They got no respect for Jack's legacy

More managed decline is all it can be.

There's  a battle outside ragin'

And there is no believin' The Coventry Three

For the times they are a changin'

 

 

 

 

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

Just now, JoeH said:

I think you can respect the past and still move forward, but sure, instead of actually talking about that, lets just attack! 

 

I don't see any 'attacks'? Just a fella with a plan and a tetchy nature. 

[Guest]

Just now, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

I don't see any 'attacks'? Just a fella with a plan and a tetchy nature. 

You wouldn't. You've already gone back through one of your posts and deleted a comment I see 😉

[Ewood Ace]

7 minutes ago, JoeH said:

I don't really buy into all this legacy stuff, times change and move on.

Nor do enough of our fans that why the owners and various managers (including Mowbray) get away with their ineptitude for so long.

[arbitro]

1 minute ago, JoeH said:

I don't really buy into all this legacy stuff, times change and move on. The building is 30 years old and we're moving a minute up the road, not to another town.

I don't know, good question. I don't even think it'll go ahead, as other posters have alluded to. Would have to wait and see what the building itself looks like. It will be a much newer facility than the one we have, but couldn't possibly say for sure that its progressive or not yet.

I think if it helps us financially, then thats a benefit. We're not going up to the Premier League and I'd rather merge the training centres to raise funds than sell all our best players or drop the Cat One status, for example.

 

It isn't 30 years old, that's what the club put out yesterday and were wrong.

A legacy is there to be respected and the woman Venky said they would respect Jacks legacy when they bought the club. Now, by selling one of the jewels in the crown they (and the likes of Waggott) are disrespecting us.

Do you honestly think the money will be reinvested in the playing side? I'd wager it goes to offest losses. I think you're being incredibly naive.

Do your know the Cat one status will be guaranteed after this move?

[Ewood Ace]

1 minute ago, JoeH said:

I wasn't trying to infer that. I'm merely saying that the 'benefit' the club refers to is a financial one, which I would assume comes with lower staffing and management costs by merging the two sites. 

So people losing their jobs in the clubs latest cost cutting exercise is a 'benefit'. Nice.

[Guest]

 

Just now, Ewood Ace said:

Nor do enough of our fans that why the owners and various managers (including Mowbray) get away with their ineptitude for so long.

I respect what I assume is your position on legacy, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I can respect and understand your viewpoint, I just don't hold legacy in such an important light as yourself and others who do.

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

5 minutes ago, JoeH said:

You wouldn't. You've already gone back through one of your posts and deleted a comment I see 😉

Yes, the one you quoted. Nothing to hide there and it wasn't offensive. But you are a very defensive character who is prone to emotional outbursts when questioned about anything so I was actually saving you the distress. Thank me later 😉

 I'm just staggered you actually think you can claim objectivity. Baffling. 

Edited February 21, 2021 by Hoochie Bloochie Mama

[Herbie6590]

55 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Because most fans won’t have a clue about Coventry and our local media will be too craven to even investigate, never mind expose it, I’d wager...

Jaquob Crook said to me on Twitter last night that he will pose the questions about the Coventry situation so let’s give him the benefit until after the next press session.

[Guest]

Just now, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

Yes, the one you quoted. Nothing to hide there and it wasn't offensive. But you are a very defensive character who is prone to emotional outbursts when questioned about anything so I was actually saving you the distress. Thank me later 😉

 I'm just staggered you actually think you claim objectivity. Baffling. 

Nothing to hide but was still removed. I find that rather odd. I think you know full well that attacking my person and integrity rather than talking about my opinion or yours was a bad call, and you backtracked. Call it what you want.

[Mattyblue]

Just now, Herbie6590 said:

Jaquob Crook said to me on Twitter last night that he will pose the questions about the Coventry situation so let’s give him the benefit until after the next press session.

And they’ll flat bat it away, obviously. 

I’d prefer real journalism that publishes the investigated story and then gives those involved the right to reply.
 

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

2 minutes ago, Leonard Venkhater said:

The line it is drawn so the people must see

They got no respect for Jack's legacy

More managed decline is all it can be.

There's  a battle outside ragin'

And there is no believin' The Coventry Three

For the times they are a changin'

 

 

 

 

The Ballad of a Shit Plan

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

12 minutes ago, JoeH said:

We're not going up to the Premier League

Why not?