Newest article: Re: SLPC by Lord of the ManorYesterday 19:26Yesterday at 19:26:48view thread
Oldest article: Cam McWilliams by MJNB8/1 21:11Mon Jan 8 21:11:02 2024view thread
Next thread: What next then? by StockingfordBrew18/1 16:27Thu Jan 18 16:27:49 2024view thread
Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 1419
Sad times.
I have to say I didn't realise Arden Tigress was set up by Neil Robinson from the rugby club, in order to buy the ground in 2019.
So with the rugby club effectively owning the ground it was never going to end well for the football club. The Nuns/Neil Robinson/Arden Tigress (same thing) played the long game and have 'won'.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 998
If you dig a bit deeper, you will find that Neil Robinson is also a Director of MSCM Ltd., a company specialising in designing & supplying mining equipment to off-shore deep sea energy companies.
They operate world-wide.
Mark Dixon Lowther, Neil's business partner in Arden Tigress, is the Managing Director of MSCM Ltd.
I suspect Mark is a very wealthy individual?
Edited by VoR at 09:52:11 on 19th January 2024
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 1011
I have only heard, but AT and the Nuns are not (or ever have been) joined. Robinson was involved years ago.
There has apparently been lots of internal conflicts at the Nuns, so who is pally with who isn't is not clear.
Also (from coop minutes) AT made an offer to build a stadium for Nuns and Boro away from the new and then use main stadium land for other reasons....... The Nuns did not welcome this.
(conspiracy theory alert). In writing this. I wonder if the reason the Nuns did not welcome this is that they did not want a ground share with the football club (perhaps with the Boro being senior/main tenants) due to past events and wanting control of their own destiny.
The path for Nuns ground is now clear.
It must be remembered. There was only 3 years left on the lease; JG gave them an opportunity to bring this forward. The club (coop minutes) made a shocking presentation to the council last year. It seems to me that Boro would be in same situation in 3 years as now, but dont seem to have prepared for. At least they would have been able to budget (no sniggering) for it.
>>>> Former Nuneaton Boro fan <<<<
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 1053
To set the record straight on your 'conspiracy theory' VS, before you try to embroil the forum in your wild theories, I can confirm that AT's proposal to build a new Stadium at LW to be groundshared by both the Boro & the Nuns is correct.
The Boro employed Consultants, who produced a costing for the new Stadium.
I know this for a fact. It was discussed at the meeting I attended at the Club with Jason & Santi.
The obvious sticking point is the affordability of the Stadium new build & agreement between AT, the Nuns & the Boro, as to what ultimately is acceptable.
IMO, all of what has now happened could have been avoided, if proper negotiations on specification & cost could have been held & a compromise reached, even now I believe those negotiations could still take place, if the grown-ups are allowed to re-enter the room.
A demotion of two or three leagues for the Boro would help that cost/affordability situation but the Boro would need to consider finding a short-term minimum 5-year groundshare (maybe at the Oval?) to make the new Stadium build possible, without hindrance to the overall project construction programme.
The hot-heads need to go away now & let calm, sensible people try to re-open negotiations between the three parties concerned & see if we can make some real progress.
Just my thoughts!
Edit:
All three parties need people involved now who know what they are talking about!
Edited by VoR at 09:33:12 on 19th January 2024
Edited by VoR at 09:34:22 on 19th January 2024
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 590
Nice to read a post on here from someone who obviously knows what he’s talking about.
reply to this article | return to the front page
"wild theories" Lol
Views: 669
"wild theories" lol. This from VoR. ( Irony of ironies). Genuinely amused by that. And feeling less than embroiled.
Pot. kettle. etc.
Good to see that, rather than uniting in grief, some Forum posters still continue to bite lumps out of each other, whilst trying to impress us with their bountiful background knowledge, theories, proposed stratagems etc.
Whereas in reality, they cannot even spell the word Phoenix correctly, and if they were all as smart as they would have us believe, they would have advocated unity and taken steps to end this nonsense decades ago. The club would now be ours. Fan owned and safe.
Rather than led meekly into the eternal flames of hell by experts and businessmen.
"Calm sensible people " was also pretty entertaining also. "Hotheads" made me chuckle too. Rather be a hothead than a Walter Mitty figure with a Trumpesque sense of inflated over importance.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: "wild theories" Lol
Views: 637
Unfortunately, your fan-owned initiative failed.
We move on with the benefit of hindsight.
It's a fierce craic!...stay strong.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: "wild theories" Lol
Views: 502
It wasn't "my" initiative, you foolish, silly man! That kind of statement illustrates just how far you are distanced from the actual club history you purport to be so knowledgeable about.
"We" haven't moved anywhere, except out of existence .
If millions of words solved anything, NBFC would be playing in the Premiership by now, probably at your beloved HLR/ half finished stadium.
I'll cope with the craic ta, and my strength is clearly greater than yours, as I do not feel the need to inflict dozens and dozens of repetitive and mostly patronising posts a day on other people. That will do for me for now. I'll be taking another rest whilst VoR sorts the current crisis out.
Whilst dolloping out homely advice (and boy! do you have a surfeit of it!) have you considered some kind of counselling?
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 734
As i understand it VOR AT have said that they wont deal with anybody connected to the soon to be defunct club, so presumably for what you suggest any new club would have to be run by people who have not previously been involved ?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 717
That makes sense, start with a clean slate.
Building a new Stadium at LW to suit the Nuns & the Boro (playing at Level 9 or 10/Step 5 or 6), IMO would be affordable & would considerably reduce a major exceptional cost item for AT...big smile!
The Stadium could then be further developed in partnership with the Nuns over time, to suit both clubs requirements & future ambitions.
I hear a big sigh of relief within the Town Hall.
Edit:
As a rider to that, I think 'the people previously involved' situation would have to be discussed sensibly between the parties & judged on merit.
Eg. I would still want Grimesy to be our Secretary & Sophie to manage events.
Edited by VoR at 11:47:11 on 19th January 2024
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 544
We don’t want a partnership with the Nuns. It doesn’t work
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 627
Why would the Nuns want to go into another groundshare with us, didn't work out that well for them previously
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 597
It appears to me that both Clubs are now at the lowest ebb in their history & cannot realistically go any lower & so a radical re-think may be required?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 677
If AT want to re develop the current Stadium surely the stands could be re sighted saving a lot of money in the building of a new ground
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 681
It depends on how AT assess the options.
If the Stadium site is to be re-developed, all of the stands would either have to demolished & cleared away, or carefully dismantled & sold to a third party (another club).
Either way, it can be costed.
It is an exceptional cost that adds no value in AT's eyes to the Development but that said they will want cost certainty, because they will want to establish their Development Profit, before they push the button on the new Development proceeding.
That can all be discussed & will be cost/value driven.
It may not be financially viable to retain all 5 structures (including the side terracing) & it may be better to sell the existing floodlights & install a new modern floodlighting system, that reduces light pollution/spread of light & is directional...that will help with the Planners.
That can all be individually costed, there would be various scenarios/options that could be considered, once the costs are known?
Edited by VoR at 11:56:43 on 19th January 2024
Edited by VoR at 11:58:57 on 19th January 2024
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 656
They may be deemed Boro Leisure assets, and auctioned by the liquidator. FCUM acquired a stand from Northwich Victoria's liquidator of the similar design to the LW terraces, that had already been relocated once before.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 613
That was Northwich Victoria's side terrace that is now FCUM's Home End terrace.
The lasting memory of my last visit to Northwich, was Delton Francis hitting a 'Glenn Hoddle like' 50-yard defence splitting pass back to our goalkeeper, to put their striker through on goal to score their third & the scenes at the end of the game with the Boro fans doing the Conga when news came through that the Sky Blues had been relegated!
Not one of Delton's greatest moments!
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 643
Unless there is a prior agreement the stands as fixtures are owned by the land owner. In land law there are fixtures and Chattles (fittings).
The portable temporary buildings are probably chattles unless they are fixed to the ground and their removal may cause damage to the land. There are various areas of case law related to this type of thing and it can be complex.
Even the disabled stand which I designed is fixed and unless the coop had an agreement with the land owner, that will remain a fixture and belong to AT.
So AT own the fixed stands and structures and could sell them on- that is what would be reusable.
Edited by Armchair vulture at 12:03:39 on 19th January 2024
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 608
They are all exceptional costs to be borne by the Development & what happens to them is likely to be cost/value driven.
All those cost options will need to be carefully considered.
If AT let a Stadium Demolition/Enabling Works Contract, everything will become the property of the Demolition Contractor, to do with as they see fit?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 841
Correction VOR. I was also in that meeting and Boro did not employ Consultants - AT did.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 810
My mistake Pitman, it was my interpretation at the time, from what was being discussed.
You have just confirmed that Consultants have been employed, which adds more substance to the discussion.
Edit:
Just to clear this up, in my meeting with Jason & Santi, we were talking about the cost of a like-for-like Stadium replacement, to National League standards.
Is that your understanding?
Edited by VoR at 14:11:48 on 19th January 2024
Edited by VoR at 14:12:01 on 19th January 2024
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 704
Well this is all news to us hot heads, suppose you've kept this secret as to not upset the football club and now it does not matter.
Note to self, 'be careful what you wish for'
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 682
The discussion I had with Jason & Santi at the time was confidential.
Edit:
I still believe there could be future prospects for a re-formed Boro at LW, as long as there is a proper discussion held between all parties.
The Boro dropping 2 or 3 leagues would help the affordability of the project & 2 clubs groundsharing would bring in much needed extra revenue to keep the facilities maintained & in good order.
I'm sure NBBC would be mightily relieved if that was to happen, once the kids stop sqabbling!
Just my thoughts!
Edited by VoR at 11:29:14 on 19th January 2024
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 915
Thanks VS.
Im pretty sure from some digging they are one and the same though...
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/12248222/officers
Neil Robinson is still a director, set the company up just before the ground purchase, and it is the guy from Nuns according to this article from the time:
https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/liberty-way-nuneaton-borough-sale-17127246
For me this changes things - it isn't just some faceless moneyman taking profit. Its a local man seeming to ruin our local club.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 861
Interesting - some interesting comments also at the end :)
I will leave this here (from coop) and the only tangible evidence of what AT intend. Hence my conspiracy theory.
Let's also not forget that IN kicked the Nuns out, potentially risking their future. Only because they owned other land (and requirements low) could they continue. Imagine the hassle they went through, and loss of income (bar not being near pitch). Imagine more if they had to find another venue.
There is 1 underlying issues to this current mess (using JG method of counting!!!!!)
1) Who negotiated such a lease; Was it IN/Smurf or Smurf/AT (or AT). Dates become important.
2) The club did not pay the rent and did not offer an acceptable solution prior to gates being locked
3) What would happen with the lease did expire.
I find AT motives impossible to understand, but point 2) was the catalyst.
[quote[Feed back from owner of ground. The Rugby Club are not happy with his proposals for the present ground, which is to build them a new ground on part of the land at Liberty Way, which the football club would then share with them. He would then apply for planning permission for the rest of the site. This leaves the football club in limbo at present with less then 3 years on the current lease.[/quote]
>>>> Former Nuneaton Boro fan <<<<
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 828
VS, please realise that it is about 'Development Profit' & reaching a cost/affordability solution that is acceptable to all three parties.
If all three parties are properly represented by professional people, who can come to a fair compromise in a tough negotiation, then the outcome could be favourable for all three parties but those negotiations have to take place in a civilised environment.
Edit:
Regarding the lease, I believe that the term of the lease was a carry-over/continuation from the lease granted by Ian Neale/Lee Thorn.
Edited by VoR at 10:04:23 on 19th January 2024
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 829
Thanks for the replies all.
All I am trying to point out is that it seems to me there are 2 parties, not 3. Arden Tigress is connected to the Nuns.
I am not speculating on what happened or what will happen, but to get to this stage AT/Nuns and the football club have made a big mess for both teams.
What I'd love to see, and I think we are all entitled to, is these people in a room, like the Post Office enquiry, explaining exactly how it got to this stage, and what the plans are for the future.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 786
There is common ground with Neil Robinson between Arden Tigress & the Nuns but I believe in any negotiations there will be 3 parties, with Neil representing AT.
He could not have a foot in both camps, that would mean a conflict of interest would arise.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 787
But there lies the problem.
Say that Jimmy Ginelly is Arden Tigress and we have a '3 way negotiation' - I'm sure it would work out great for the Boro.
Say that Neil Robinson is Arden Tigress and we have a '3 way negotiation' - I'm sure that would end up, and has ended up, with the Boro being where is is now. Screwed.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 736
To avoid that scenario, both Jimmy & Neil would have to behave like grown-ups.
If they are incapable of that, they should not be involved in the negotiation.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 711
I may of missed it, but what has JG got to do with the boro going forward?
>>>> Former Nuneaton Boro fan <<<<
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 700
I used JG as an example to get across what looks like an unlevel playing field.
If the discussion ever happens it will be 'Boro Football Persons' vs Nuns/Arden Tigress.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 682
I was replying to London Boro's post.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 686
In essence I hope, and I'm sure we all do, as VoR says that we can get some sensible people in the room that have the best interests of both clubs and the town at heart.
Ideally we would move on from all of the past involved parties, and indeed the current ones who have contributed to this situation.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 681
Agree.
I would not want anyone (even goodies) who have been involved in the last 12 months involved in anything going forward.
Too much baggage and hidden agendas.
To me.....LW is a dead parrot when it comes to Boro;
>>>> Former Nuneaton Boro fan <<<<
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 669
I wouldn't agree with any of those sentiments VS.
LW is the only venue available in the town at present, unless NBBC are prepared to open discussions on Avenue Road?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 638
They are more than prepared, as it potential solves two problems for them.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 668
Problem is that the CIC the COOP have a share in is majority owned by JG.
As you say if any new club is run by that CIC I'm out!
Note to self, 'be careful what you wish for'
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 668
JG has & will always have the talent to raise money for any club he is involved with, IMO that should not be dismissed.
As long as he doesn't have any say in the management of the Club.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 472
Except we seem to have lost money
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 620
Guy Hadland posted on X yesterday he was up for being involved if a new club was formed
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 637
Too close to Ginnelly.
Any involvement of JG is a no no from me personally.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 612
I'm not interest in praise for that loser, if he is involved I'm not.
The only talent he has is getting money out of/looking after his mates and upsetting those that really matter.
Note to self, 'be careful what you wish for'
reply to this article | return to the front page
3 people
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 706
Seeing what has happened to the Boro, since AT arrived on the scene, I would now be seriously concerned for the future of the Nuns.
I can see a very realistic prospect now, where we could lose both of our premier sporting clubs within the town, with the net gain of building some Industrial Units, all rubber-stamped by NBBC.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 464
I can't see Arden Tigress destroying the Nuns, given he used to be their Vice Chair. Unless Mr Robinson is a worse bloke than he seems to be already.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 1023
I wonder if it was pay back from when the football club fucked them over ?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 867
Could well be.
This just makes it all the more frustrating/bemusing it couldn't be sorted out for the good of the town.
I think they should stream a Post Office Horizon type enquiry over YouTube, because it does (on the face of it) seem a scandalous waste.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 880
Not sure why so many Boro fans are simply rolling over and accepting that AT will raze the stadium to the ground and build industrial units at Liberty Way. (JG told a group of volunteers that this was the plan a couple of years ago so hardly a shock to the club).
What if AT is denied planning permission? The ground would stay as sporting use and the market price would probably drop. Despite what may have happened behind the scenes AT just thinks they can steamroll ahead with their plans.
We are already of significant factors why planning permission should be denied, The Town Plan and the fact that the land is on a floodplain. However, more important is the impact on the Community. We have already read the impact on fans now that their Club has been killed off. We need to do everything possible to stop any PP in the hope that the ground can be purchased back in the future for generations to come. The issue of the Memorial Garden on Consecrated ground has already been discussed, in addition there is a Community Allotment on the site, not forgetting the potential destruction of the disabled stand which was recently erected and paid for by the Supporters' Co-operative-this was always full of folks enjoying enhanced viewing of games.
I am sure there are many more reasons why the PP should be rejected but surely we now need to pull together with a common focus so that when the time comes we can do everything possible to put up a fight for what is right. An online petition may have some impact, together with lobbying the Council which has recently renewed the ACV and acknowledged at present the land can't be used for industrial use.
Finally, we have no idea where the Rugby Club stands on this issue, their Clubhouse would have to be demolished for AT's plans to go ahead. I know one of the forum's regular contributors is well connected at the RC and might feel the time is right to declare if they are friends or foes.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 771
The Council Leader Kris Wilson has confirmed publicly that the LW site currently has no specified use.
The ACV will enable the Club's supporters, in whatever guise, to declare their intention to put in a bid to buy the LW football ground (land & buildings) from AT.
They will have 6 months to prepare their offer.
AT do not have to accept their offer.
As far as re-developing LW is concerned, AT have cleared their first hurdle & got rid of their sitting tenant, that is a major plus.
To progress a successful re-development of LW, AT will need to enter into a joint development agreement with the Nuns, if NBBC are going to give their proposals any credibility.
All that considered, the hard work will then begin, it will be very challenging, with many exceptional costs, delays & consultations to overcome in seeking a satisfactory Planning Permission.
If AT/Nuns intend to re-develop LW themselves, that IMO, would be accepting considerable financial risk & would involve gaining a full Planning Permission.
The other option for AT/Nuns to consider, would be to gain an outline Planning Permission & sell the site on to another developer, retaining some land to build the Nuns a new Clubhouse & pitch.
The Memorial Garden, if consecrated will be subject to a Church of England jurisdiction & will involve Eclesiastical Law. There will be delays & charges. The premise of consecrating ground, is to prevent it from being used in an unbefitting way.
Then there will be a Public Consultation/Enquiry.
If everything progresses well & the Nuns release their Covenant on LW & the Chief Planning Officer recommends acceptance of the proposals to the Planning Committee, the final hurdle to clear will be the vote in the Council Chamber, where they will enter a political environment.
This entire process will take a very long time!
I hope this is helpful?
Just my thoughts!
Edited by VoR at 10:35:07 on 19th January 2024
Edited by VoR at 10:36:29 on 19th January 2024
Edited by VoR at 10:38:03 on 19th January 2024
Edited by VoR at 10:55:04 on 19th January 2024
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 861
What if the Nuns use the existing ground and gave A T their pitch or ground beyond that for industrial units they would probably get planning permission and the Nuns can use the pitch ? It will be interesting to see who purchased the stands etc which I believe are some of the football club assets which will be sold to pay creditors ?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 602
Unless I have missed it and that could be very possible given the amount of content on here, everyone seems to under the assumption that AT are in this purely for profit. Given the owners and their existing relationship with the rugby club, is it not possible that AT want the ground just for use by the RC and as a sponsor or similar arrangement and not to sell on? The relationship between clubs has been fraught to say the least and this could now give them a ready built stadium with a club house right next to it. Just a thought
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Nuns/Arden Tigress
Views: 504
Do you think Rugby club would be able to pay the rent the Boro were supposed to be, answer no, i also doubt AT bought LW for charitable reasons ie to allow Nuns to play there
reply to this article | return to the front page
Previous thread: Amended stats. by Vernon Slain19/1 12:32Fri Jan 19 12:32:50 2024view thread