Re: Boston stand no more : Mon Oct 18, 2021 9:51 am  

Jukesays wrote:

I await the reply to this with interest

I spoke to some Latics fans at work the other day and they hate IL as they think he tried to kill them off with wanting the stadium and not the team, I had to put them straight after our phone conversation

Re: Boston stand no more : Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:17 am  

Cruncher wrote:

Just out of interest, do you include Ian Lenagan in that?

Only, he's been in charge at Wigan for nearly 15 years, and I don't remember him saying a single thing that could have driven any kind of fan-on-fan-hatred.

He's even pointed out quite recently that Latics can do what they want at the stadium as they own it.

I'm prepared to be proved wrong. But I've always believed that he was a big fan of having a peaceful stadium-share.

His son has never covered himself in glory on Twitter. I’ve not particularly got a gripe with IL in that sense. There’s no doubt trying to buy the stadium and not the football club was always going to alienate a big chunk of the town, just like changing seats and raising rent will alienate rugby fans. I’ve never got the sense it was an easy relationship behind the scenes whoever has been in charge though. On one hand you’ve got IL saying they are taking sponsors to court for non-payment and the other you’ve got the new football ownership discussing the rent as basically being peppercorn and non-viable. I’d love nothing more than peace in the town for both my teams.

Re: Boston stand no more : Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:21 am  

DannyT wrote:

His son has never covered himself in glory on Twitter. I’ve not particularly got a gripe with IL in that sense. There’s no doubt trying to buy the stadium and not the football club was always going to alienate a big chunk of the town, just like changing seats and raising rent will alienate rugby fans. I’ve never got the sense it was an easy relationship behind the scenes whoever has been in charge though. On one hand you’ve got IL saying they are taking sponsors to court for non-payment and the other you’ve got the new football ownership discussing the rent as basically being peppercorn and non-viable. I’d love nothing more than peace in the town for both my teams.

No disrespect, but what you've 'got a sense of' is not proof of anything.

But at least you've provided clarity that you don't include the current Wigan chairman in that blanket condemnation you just threw out.

Re: Boston stand no more : Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:35 am  

I keep praying that somehow, sometime, we get our own stadium again. Leave the Latics to their delusions, they will go pop again in the non to distant future, they re unstainable as a club. Even Whelan couldn't make them sustainable. Some foreign entity who will have been sold a pup like the Chinese were, probably promised premier League football with a few million invested. Let em eat cake, we will see just how profitable they make the stadium then.

Re: Boston stand no more : Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:41 am  

DannyT wrote:

His son has never covered himself in glory on Twitter. I’ve not particularly got a gripe with IL in that sense. There’s no doubt trying to buy the stadium and not the football club was always going to alienate a big chunk of the town, just like changing seats and raising rent will alienate rugby fans. I’ve never got the sense it was an easy relationship behind the scenes whoever has been in charge though. On one hand you’ve got IL saying they are taking sponsors to court for non-payment and the other you’ve got the new football ownership discussing the rent as basically being peppercorn and non-viable. I’d love nothing more than peace in the town for both my teams.

I believe that we pay circa £520k pa rent.
Not I suggest a peppercorn rate but quite possibly lower than market rate if that can be calculated.
For about a dozen matches per season not a bad income stream.

Re: Boston stand no more : Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:43 am  

Cruncher wrote:

No disrespect, but what you've 'got a sense of' is not proof of anything.

But at least you've provided clarity that you don't include the current Wigan chairman in that blanket condemnation you just threw out.

I suppose trying to flip the ownership of stadium and training ground without owning the football club was IL’s first public foray into the battle.

Re: Boston stand no more : Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:46 am  

DannyT wrote:

His son has never covered himself in glory on Twitter. I’ve not particularly got a gripe with IL in that sense. There’s no doubt trying to buy the stadium and not the football club was always going to alienate a big chunk of the town, just like changing seats and raising rent will alienate rugby fans. I’ve never got the sense it was an easy relationship behind the scenes whoever has been in charge though. On one hand you’ve got IL saying they are taking sponsors to court for non-payment and the other you’ve got the new football ownership discussing the rent as basically being peppercorn and non-viable. I’d love nothing more than peace in the town for both my teams.

He himself didn't want to buy the football club as he himself did not have enough cash to run it (if I'm honest is suspect he didn't want the stadium either, but that was a necessary evil if either other buyers didn't want it or if it led to rent increases that were unachievable from out POV).

IL being made the scapegoat for Latics problems by a minority (and yes it is a minority) who like to exaggerate or tell lies about any perceived wrong doings by Wigan Rugby to perpetuate their own biased hatred to the rugby is exactly just that, exaggerated lies and Gas lighting.

IL brought numerous buyers to the table, 1 who would have wanted the club only and IL would have owned the stadium with a reciprocal arrangement to the one we have now. And another who wanted the whole lot, and had a good relationship with them were the tenancy would not have been a problem post purchase.
IL worked countless hours in trying to pave ways to a solution for all parties.

A snippet of a a complex issue that says "He didn't want to buy the football.club" is no more than 1% of the reality that happened.

But, those want to believe that what he meant was he didn't give a Toss about the football club and wanted to see them go out of existence will believe just that, because it will suit their narrative, as they want the disharmony

Re: Boston stand no more : Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:53 am  

Itchy Arsenal wrote:

I believe that we pay circa £520k pa rent.
Not I suggest a peppercorn rate but quite possibly lower than market rate if that can be calculated.
For about a dozen matches per season not a bad income stream.

The average over the last few years (obviously not including covid years) is about 325 to 350k per year Purley for the Rent.
However
The income brought in from corporate and other income streams directly linked to Wigan RL take that figure over 1.2million is my understanding (and I have seen figures showing this).

If the new owners want to ignore that income stream fine, if it wins them friends in the short term with the very vocal 10% then let em, a lot of money for on average 15/16/17 days a year or so. The question is can they afford to ignore that income stream.
If they have access to 100/200/300 million plus then good luck to em.

If they haven't then IMO they're going the wrong way about treating an important integral figure to their future plans.
Playing Bluff with us may not work out the best for them

Re: Boston stand no more : Mon Oct 18, 2021 11:12 am  

Itchy Arsenal wrote:

I believe that we pay circa £520k pa rent.
Not I suggest a peppercorn rate but quite possibly lower than market rate if that can be calculated.
For about a dozen matches per season not a bad income stream.

So the new Latics owners need to fill a gap of 500k then in between accounts, which they might find easier to do when there’s no rugby club there in a few years. The council accounts for the year seem to state they have given up/released or whatever the (technical term is) their 15% in the stadium.

Re: Boston stand no more : Mon Oct 18, 2021 11:12 am  

Jukesays wrote:

The average over the last few years (obviously not including covid years) is about 325 to 350k per year Purley for the Rent.
However
The income brought in from corporate and other income streams directly linked to Wigan RL take that figure over 1.2million is my understanding (and I have seen figures showing this).

If the new owners want to ignore that income stream fine, if it wins them friends in the short term with the very vocal 10% then let em, a lot of money for on average 15/16/17 days a year or so. The question is can they afford to ignore that income stream.
If they have access to 100/200/300 million plus then good luck to em.

If they haven't then IMO they're going the wrong way about treating an important integral figure to their future plans.
Playing Bluff with us may not work out the best for them

I hope that the new owners are just bluffing and ultimately they can’t ignore an income stream that even if below perceived market rates is still a significant positive cash flow

My biggest concern (even more so than the current squad) is that if they can forgo this income and can spend a £100k or so on legal fees to contest the current rental agreement then we are really in the shoite

I just hope (either way) than Danson takes over in 2023 or after the end of the 2022 season