Metal halide discharge lamps are still being manufactured and sold to help maintain existing installations, nearly all new floodlighting is LED so as the control gear fails the fittings would be getting replaced by LED, plus there is now a generation of LED lamps that are retrofit in discharge lighting.

The cabinets may be new, I'd expect them to be part of the new lights but the electrical plumbing that feeds them and the foundations they sit on is the same as far as I'm aware unless other issues were found.

Don’t believe me? Does it really matter? Fine, as you’re clearly training to create another nonissue then email the club and ask, I also believe MC stated the same on zoom but I may be wrong on that.

Bet you’re the kind of person who hunts through 10-year-old tweets to find young cricketers who make the sort of silly comments 16-year-olds make. Oh, what a joy.

Bu heck, vasty, I'd have hated to have been sat next to you at school. I can't make my mind up whether you were the school swot, the school know-it-all, the class comedian or the school bully or all of them !!!

The only part you are correct with is that the foundations are solid, pylons, lamps, cabling, connectors, and the shiny green cabinets all new.

Who would hook up a brand new floodlighting system to power equipment over 30 years old I do believe that there are legal standards to be met with electrical installations and gaffa taping new to old is probably a no-no at best, and breaching the regulations illegal at worst.

Nope don't do Twitter and never will

I do have a good memory and I did think at the time your post seemed a bit odd, spending 10's of thousands on new pylons and then corner-cutting by keeping ancient electrical fittings that are likely to fail and having had a chat with a volunteer at the Club I thought it only fair to share the news with you I know you like the facts right, don't you?

Not really, I’m oft on wrong, this is a forum not the high court.

You’re just being a pedant because you can’t argue any other way.

So as far as I recall and it’s a few month ago, the cost of the floodlights was kept low because the concrete foundations were in good order as I believe was the electrical supply to them. It doesn’t take much imagination to see the savings, so why does this offend you. I thought most fans would be happy at suchnews but not you,

I believe that LED lighting uses far less power so puts less strain on the system, I suspect if anything the old electrics were over spec.

So yes if they have changed the control boxed then great, I imagine the old ones were somewhat antiquated being 30 years old.

Have a nice day and try to enjoy the ground improvements, they are for your benefit.

Indeed, If you rewire your house you don't get the electricity company to run a new cable from the substation. The supply cables can easily be tested and being potted, unlikely to be subject to weathering, Also, as you say the power drawn by the new lights will be much lower than the old ones.

Not sure facts come under the description of pedantic but only you could say two different things in two consecutive sentences.

As for the house rewire, the power coming in remains the same and I doubt that a supplier would renew the kit when a rewire takes place but everything your side of the box really should be new and meet modern specifications.

Thanks for your input, I'm all done a reply to this post is not necessary but I'm sure you as you seem to like to have the last word but give it your best and try not there a good fellow.

So basically what seems to offend you is my descriptive powers regarding the state of the wiring. Jeez you need help, who cuffing cares, the new lights are better than the old ones and some cost savings were made using some of the existing infrastructure.

I can’t be alone in wondering what your problem is.

I'm surprised you didn't pick up on pylons where it's actual just a post

You get very tetchy when your views are challenged

You get very tetchy when your views are challenged

Not really, what views are you challenging?

That the floodlights were cheaper due to the use of the existing structure? That’s not a view it’s the truth.

You’re just flapping now because you’ve lost a non existent argument, one that exists mainly in your head.

Views well let's see the electrical gear, housing boxes which were your main theme of the 'we have saved thousands' claim, not facts a claim. The foundations were found to be sound when the original survey was carried out so was never included in the price for replacing the floodlights.

I still believe you get tetchy

So I take it the planning has been delayed with no date set after cancelled date?

To be honest I don’t think the planning is an issue. I’m far more concerned that the developer won’t contribute any funds to cover the development. There was a rumour that the developer was trying to wriggle away from their financial contribution then Mynards said we would walk away dependent on discussions.

It’s all guesswork really but if there’s no agreement after all this time with the developer on providing funds I personally expect us to get nothing.

Same here, Yorkcourt are the worry.

Read on the other forum that YC or Henry Boot have the contract to construct the new stand. The budget is capped at £8m or so regardless of the output. The fear from the poster was that they could over value what they do to max out the budget without doing much at all.

If this is true we need to spend some money on an independent QS who can ratify what the costs are and much sure they are market rates.

I agree with the others, they are where this whole thing will fall down if its going to. Whilever they are involved they I will never trust them

I can't believe we are still dancing with the devil

this will only end in tears

I’m afraid I’m as sceptical. I hope I’m wrong because if we do get this stand/pitch/north stand/car park done I think it will secure our long term future and lead to far greater income streams. It should have a snowball effect and bring in opportunity for further development.

Who else are we going to dance with?

There is no alternative.

With YC it might end in tears, without them it won’t even start.

If after multiple months of discussions before planning and after submission between Trinity and YC (maybe WMDC?) haven’t yielded any agreement for funding by now then it’s unlikely they will.

The developer meanwhile have got further planning on the land at Newmarket.

I really hope I’m wrong but if we haven’t yet secured funding it’s looking ominous. At one of the early Q and As didn’t they say that they were aiming to secure funding/discussing it before the planning was even submitted? I may be wrong there though. Planning has been submitted and I’m sure there will be reliable estimations on costings available so I’d like to think it’s all sorted and we aren’t still fighting a for said funding.

The trinity board must be pulling their hair out.

You don't know that, sorry but you don't.

I get your concern but that's not how this deal works. The monies simply cannot be transferred until planning permission is passed.

I detest YC but even I wouldn't expect them to hand over the funding without the above, would you?

I keep saying this but the NM planning is only a small part of this deal, it's a wee bit more complex than just that. Even if I was free to tell you how it works I'm not sure I could, I'll be honest it's a bit beyond me. I'm only reasonably happy with the deal because TRB seemed to get it!

As for the amount, yes that is fluid and dependent on the economy, timing will affect the amount by a small degree, that's just reality. Even if we only get say 5 million it's still a triumph, where else would Trinity pick up that amount of cash? It's far less than we deserve but it's gone beyond that now, now anything is a win.

As someone who's been involved since 2004, it seems to me to be the closest we have ever been to getting something but I couldn't in all conscience say I'm certain. Keep the faith is all I can say, MC and JM are nobody's fools, I think we all agree on that, they are not going to be hoodwinked and they do have some decent leverage at their disposal.

PS: There is nothing sinister about the delayed planning, it's purely Covid related, on this one I think it's fair to say Trinity is NOT the victim of a scam.

Thanks for the reply.

I don’t know that we haven’t secured funding your right. I have absolutely no knowledge of how the funding process or planning processes work or what stage discussions are at. It’s purely apprehension on my part.

The planning seems like it’s just a matter of time which is certainly positive news. One thing is for sure that I trust Carter and Mynards to have the best interest of the club at heart and they do appear to be shrewd businessmen who wouldn’t be taken for a ride.

We will just have to be patient until after the planning is sorted it seems.

It's very frustrating and nothing is certain but if MC and JM have proved one thing it's that they don't BS. I do believe that if anyone can pull this off they will.

It's also worth noting that neither of them is an expert in this field so they too are often having to learn very quickly. It is possible that they and we will get screwed again but until that happens actually happens we need to remain positive and patient IMHO.

I can't tell you how many times I've been here before as have most fans, I do get the cynicism and the concerns. I now just

I’ve been thinking a bit about this, there seems to be a feeling that Wakefield council are more supportive of Trinity these days. What IF, the developer has been informed that, should an agreed amount of money is not forthcoming for the redevelopment of BV, then the council will not allow planning permission for plot 8, and the land returned to Green belt status. The developers would then losing £120 million of land. I’m sure the shareholders of a company at risk of losing that sort of asset wouldn’t be very happy when all could be resolved for a few million £.
As I said, just thinking, who knows what might happen, I’m hoping No news is Good news.