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.

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