Quote: The Lucky Black Cat "Maybe you and your luddite friends are too stupid or thick to read and understand what many of us Fax fans post. I have never said TA should just take over the Shay. I have said certain conditions need to be met and that ensures the rugby club will never be forced to leave the shay against their will. I have said the Council is financially in a mess and needs to save money. '"
Stupid or thick? Don't they amount to the same thing? Oh the irony.
Certain conditions? Such as covenants that can be circumnavigated if necessary? Do you really think that if Tony's plans go pear shaped, or he loses interest, or he passes away, or his company has a change of leadership with a different vision, or he sells to any old random in future etc etc there would be no risk at all because of some convenants or conditions in the original purchase? Convenants such as that which was on Thrum Hall?
Conditions, restrictions, covenants etc mean nothing. By hook or by crook, Abbott or his successors or future owners would find a way if they so desired.
Were you at the public meeting with Abbott? If so you'll recall Abbott being asked to give a guarantee that if his plans go wrong, the staduim and the clubs will not be affected i.e. The Shay will always be a sports stadium and the club's will always be able to play there.
His reply (after a certain amount of spin and 10000000000% promises of his best endeavours) was "I can't give you a guarantee".
Surely if such restrictions were possible then, as the concerned tax payer you make out to be, you would rather The Shay be sold with the same restrictions but for the highest price legally possible (taking into account EU State Aid rules, for example)?
Why in 2005 when the Council wanted to sell The Shay were you marching with us against private ownership and demanding tax payer investment instead? All talk of any 'restrictions' you talk of were brushed aside as not worth the paper they're written on.
Hypocrisy. Pure and Simple. It is so obvious that the reason Fax fans are behind the bid is because it's Abbott. There is no other explanation.
Quote: The Lucky Black Cat "I requested under the Freedom of Info act the same rent question issue several weeks ago too. In the hope that I'd catch those Town numpties out.... Anyway it took a few weeks to get the necessary response but had it confirmed that we are in arrears on the rent and the amount was for period Sept 2012 - Oct 2013. Now it may be that we pay 12 months at a time but this needs putting to bed once and for all as its in the domain that we haven't paid our rent which is slightly worrying.....!'"
You are right to be worried. For a start, it wouldn't be called 'arrears' if you paid 12 months at a time and you were up to date.
Secondly, Abbott confirmed at the public meeting that the rent arrears were to be effectively 'tagged on' to the purchase of The Shay. Which is funny, because why would Halifax RLFC's rent be included in the negotiations for Reactiv to buy The Shay? After all, it's not Halifax RLFC who are buying The Shay is it?????? It's a separate issue isn't it?????
