RL loan? as someone says it would be cheaper re-paying that than rent!

If we could afford this, I would be happy for us to buy the ground back, and totally re vamp the stadium, even if it meant moving away for a season to do this properly.

Does the ground also include, the Superbowl and Oasis gum site. If so, then the area is quite substantial.

One main concern of this though, is the showroom, and house, that is currently in front of the east stand.

You could actually build a stand which is similar to The Well, at Hull KR. On that side, you have terracing, and behind that, offices and suites, with a stand above these. Also, I was looking at the Carnegie Stand at Headingley last time, and although it is very high, it doesnt seem to go back too far deep (thinking of land area)

It doesn't include the Superbowl. There is a white line which demarks the extent of the site, however, that is for sale too at a guess about £150k-£200k. Any purchaser of either parcels of land really ought to buy both.

I think some people on here need to look in the mirror talking about abandoning Newmarket for BV. I get buying the ground by the club (they would be a tenant at Newmarket) its an option but the Newmarket development and more precisely the 15000 petition was about sporting facilities etc. I signed that petition and signed it to support better facilities in Wakefield. BV is an option but I think the Trust, York Court and the Council need to take a real look at themselves about this whole episode and make sure the aims and objectives of what the development is about and what was promised is fulfilled if not then people should be held accountable. I am not party to any of the terms and conditions etc but certainly the council and York Court will be the Trust as a charity I suspect are representing the best interests of the public of Wakefield, if the Club decides to buy BV back this could impact on the trust ability to improve facilities for the District as per the original specification. I maybe off the mark in some areas but as an outsider this is how I see it, could be tricky in parts.

I don't think it is better than rent. Someone mentioned on here that the rent was now £75,000. To make it easy, let's say the cost of being a landlord is £15,000 (with legal fees, etc), that is a guaranteed 10% return on capital year on year at a time of low interest rates. If the club stayed at Belle Vue, you'd get your money back in ten years, and all the time sitting on some fat real estate. I'd say for an investor, Belle Vue is one hell of an investment.

The only difficulty, I suppose, is that you can never release the capital properly unless we move, although you could sell on your investment.

Sorry if this has already been covered, but have the hopes of York Court coughing up for Newmarket pretty much faded away or are we still fighting?

I was looking at it from the point of view of the current owner, the Bank of Ireland who I suspect simply want some money back as soon as possible rather than a return over 5 years.

For a long term investor it may be a good deal particularly if you feel you can get the planning condition removed.

I get you.

The Bank of Ireland might have got their money back anyway, if the rent was as high as was stated. I don't think they're losing out, but the rent reduction might have made them think that it wasn't worth hanging onto anymore.

The organisation(s) that could get the absolute best value out of holding the land is either the stadium trust or Wakefield Trinity.
Due to the restricted covenant on the land any other potential landlord cannot realise the value of the land without either removing the covenant or being reliant upon Wakefield moving to a new stadium, how long would it take Wakefield to make that move well how long is a piece of string. Investors like to make their investments based on calculated, well known and predictable circumstances which allowed them to maximise their returns and in this case that's not possible because of the imponderables. I suspect in the current financial climate any potential investor would rather put their money into a property that meets their normal criteria and expectations rather than one which could see their investment tied up for years.

If MC could raise the cash, it could be a canny investment; buy BV back, play there until we don't need to any more, then get planning permission for houses and flog the land for significantly more than you paid for it - due to said PP and the removal of any covenant.

It's a lot of money to tie up though, for an indeterminate period of time.

No way BV is worth that much , one it's a dump , two it's in Agbrigg and three it's a dump , four its pointless buying BV without Super Bowl and five its a dump .

Isn't that exactly what Ted did that led us into all the messes that followed (albeit he did it through a company based in the Isle of Man and presumably charging the club rent)?

I think you've answered your own question...

Do it the way I said - but avoid the temptation to try to be cleverer than your business acumen, or bank balance, allows - a la Ted.

It's the ground we want not the whole of Bellevue and it's worth what somebody wants to pay for it, simple question to a simpleton why is the area of Bellevue including the ground not named Agbrigg if according to you it's in Agbrigg.

If we had guaranteed SL status, it would be a no brainer but, is the figure mentioned a starting point for the bidding or, the actual price that the BOI ? want