New Grandstand - 2 day public consultation

Argyle sy · Jul 27, 2017

foreigner":hmnhkgyp said:
If a diddy place like Chelmsford could support an ice hockey team i'm pretty sure a city the size of Plymouth and the surrounding area could.
Mind you I don't know how costly these ventures are and you do hear of teams going bust.

Hull Stingrays being One of the prime examples of the the going bust because their wage bill far exceded their incomings, to be honest it was a surprise they didn't go bust sooner. The same goes for Edinburgh and Dundee who get by on crowds of less than 1000, and their average attendence figures are inflated because of the support that both Flyers and Braehead clan take when they play there.

jerryatricjanner · Jul 27, 2017

Argyle-sy":1oe8kvz5 said:
Pogleswoody":1oe8kvz5 said:

Can you have a hotbed for ice hockey?? :think:

Click to expand...

You can actually. Scotland has 4 teams, 4 within a short journey in Coventry, Sheffield, Nottingham and Manchester, You would be surprised at some the attendances at these games as well. My team average over 2000, but its not unusual to see sell outs of 3100+(both of these figures are higher than what the local football team, Raith Rovers attract by the way) so yes their certainly are hotbeds for ice hockey in the UK.

I think that went right over your head Argyle-sy

The Grumpy Loyal · Jul 27, 2017

jimsing":27erxgls said:
The Grumpy Loyal":27erxgls said:

Argyle-sy":27erxgls said:

The Grumpy Loyal":27erxgls said:

dennis the menace":27erxgls said:

For ice hockey it needs to be of international size. The Link Centre in Swindon, where I used to live, has elevated seating on one side with standing room around the rink perimeter. The capacity is 2500. This is what we need but plans don't indicate the ground floor rink side capacity.

Click to expand...

From the plans, 1,050 seats is the capacity. As others have said, it's a half-arsed plan. Pointless for recreational skating, yet not big enough to facilitate what would be a superb option in a National League Ice Hockey team.

Click to expand...

See my above post. I do not think 1,050 would be a hindrance to a Plymouth based EIHL team, the main issue would be travel as it would cost the Scottish clubs a fortune to travel down at least twice in a sesason discounting play off matches.

Click to expand...

It's not just that though. The opportunity exists to build something that could facilitate Ice Hockey as well as give Raiders a purpose built home.

Build something that gives genuine potential for PAFC to benefit from with regard to the 50% profit share.

Click to expand...

You like spending other people's money, Grumpy, don't you, and where did you get the 50 per cent figure from?

Under the terms of the original sale of HHP land to Brent, there was to be either provision of a Grandstand, or, an agreement for PAFC to profit share 50% from any development that ensues on that plot of HHP land.

Graham Clark pulled up the original document earlier in this thread.

Argyle Nutter · Jul 27, 2017

Looking at Graham's post & yours again grumps it states that either the provision of a Grandstand OR 50% from the HHP development, Not looking to poor scorne on anyone or the plans in general as I think the plans are very good, but the plans involve the refurbishment with enhanced facilities of the old girl, so does this remove the 50% profit liability, as in effect they have provided a "Grandstand" albeit refurbished.

PL2 3DQ · Jul 27, 2017

Argyle Nutter":tock4ezm said:
Looking at Graham's post & yours again grumps it states that either the provision of a Grandstand OR 50% from the HHP development, Not looking to poor scorne on anyone or the plans in general as I think the plans are very good, but the plans involve the refurbishment with enhanced facilities of the old girl, so does this remove the 50% profit liability, as in effect they have provided a "Grandstand" albeit refurbished.

This was explained earlier in the thread - JB confirmed at the Fans Forum the club will still receive 50% of profit from the HHP development. Which is good news.

Argyle Nutter · Jul 27, 2017

PL2 3DQ":3j3k6owa said:
Argyle Nutter":3j3k6owa said:

Looking at Graham's post & yours again grumps it states that either the provision of a Grandstand OR 50% from the HHP development, Not looking to poor scorne on anyone or the plans in general as I think the plans are very good, but the plans involve the refurbishment with enhanced facilities of the old girl, so does this remove the 50% profit liability, as in effect they have provided a "Grandstand" albeit refurbished.

Click to expand...

This was explained earlier in the thread - JB confirmed at the Fans Forum the club will still receive 50% of profit from the HHP development. Which is good news.

Thanks Ian missed the confirmation bit.

davie nine · Jul 27, 2017

Looking at the ice hockey discussions, we should probably steer well clear.

Guiri Green · Jul 27, 2017

50% of the profit from the sale or lease of the development I would think. Not 50% of the profit the Ice Rink as a business might make.

The Grumpy Loyal · Jul 27, 2017

Argyle Nutter":hz1eperw said:
Looking at Graham's post & yours again grumps it states that either the provision of a Grandstand OR 50% from the HHP development, Not looking to poor scorne on anyone or the plans in general as I think the plans are very good, but the plans involve the refurbishment with enhanced facilities of the old girl, so does this remove the 50% profit liability, as in effect they have provided a "Grandstand" albeit refurbished.

No mate. The agreement was made originally back in 2012(?) when Brent bought the HHP land. If his original plan had been built, then that would have wiped out any future 50% profit share. Hallett lending the club the money to do the refurb is a totally different arrangement.

So to emphasise once more, any future profit from development of the HHP land benefits PAFC DIRECTLY to the tune of 50%.

This is why developing this land to it's absolute maximum potential is so important to our football club.

Argyle sy · Jul 27, 2017

jerryatricjanner":2zpafrrr said:
Argyle-sy":2zpafrrr said:

Pogleswoody":2zpafrrr said:

Can you have a hotbed for ice hockey?? :think:

Click to expand...

You can actually. Scotland has 4 teams, 4 within a short journey in Coventry, Sheffield, Nottingham and Manchester, You would be surprised at some the attendances at these games as well. My team average over 2000, but its not unusual to see sell outs of 3100+(both of these figures are higher than what the local football team, Raith Rovers attract by the way) so yes their certainly are hotbeds for ice hockey in the UK.

Click to expand...

I think that went right over your head Argyle-sy

It probably did jerryatricjanner mate lol.

davie nine · Jul 27, 2017

The Grumpy Loyal":3fpjl09w said:
Argyle Nutter":3fpjl09w said:

Looking at Graham's post & yours again grumps it states that either the provision of a Grandstand OR 50% from the HHP development, Not looking to poor scorne on anyone or the plans in general as I think the plans are very good, but the plans involve the refurbishment with enhanced facilities of the old girl, so does this remove the 50% profit liability, as in effect they have provided a "Grandstand" albeit refurbished.

Click to expand...

No mate. The agreement was made originally back in 2012(?) when Brent bought the HHP land. If his original plan had been built, then that would have wiped out any future 50% profit share. Hallett lending the club the money to do the refurb is a totally different arrangement.

So to emphasise once more, any future profit from development of the HHP land benefits PAFC DIRECTLY to the tune of 50%.

This is why developing this land to it's absolute maximum potential is so important to our football club.

Considering the opinions expressed on here, I assume that 50% of losses would also apply if we had an ice hockey team.

PL2 3DQ · Jul 27, 2017

University ice hockey appears to be popular, I don't think the two Plymouth Universities have an ice hockey team yet but perhaps they might now start up teams and join the national league and use the Mayflower rink?

The Grumpy Loyal · Jul 27, 2017

davie nine":27xnnlg0 said:
The Grumpy Loyal":27xnnlg0 said:

Argyle Nutter":27xnnlg0 said:

Looking at Graham's post & yours again grumps it states that either the provision of a Grandstand OR 50% from the HHP development, Not looking to poor scorne on anyone or the plans in general as I think the plans are very good, but the plans involve the refurbishment with enhanced facilities of the old girl, so does this remove the 50% profit liability, as in effect they have provided a "Grandstand" albeit refurbished.

Click to expand...

No mate. The agreement was made originally back in 2012(?) when Brent bought the HHP land. If his original plan had been built, then that would have wiped out any future 50% profit share. Hallett lending the club the money to do the refurb is a totally different arrangement.

So to emphasise once more, any future profit from development of the HHP land benefits PAFC DIRECTLY to the tune of 50%.

This is why developing this land to it's absolute maximum potential is so important to our football club.

Click to expand...

Considering the opinions expressed on here, I assume that 50% of losses would also apply if we had an ice hockey team.

Give me strength.

No Davie. Argyle are not liable to incur any losses made from any HHP Development.

They are however due to gain under the profit-sharing agreement made six years ago.

There is no risk attached to PAFC - the football club.

I'm not sure I could make it any clearer.

What is abundantly clear is that people are muddying the waters by expressing opinions when they have absolutely no clue whatsoever about the 50% HHP profit share agreement.

gaspargomez · Jul 27, 2017

The real consultation period will be when the Council consider the application.

I'm fine with the grandstand redevelopment (even though I wish it was better) so I'd like to see that happen ASAP.

The hotel and ice rink are not suitable for Central Park. Why does there need to be hotel on an area of designated open space ? If Brent wants to build a hotel then the deal should be that some of the development profits go towards Phase 2 of the grandstand development and making that happen.

Stuart House · Jul 27, 2017

Slightly off topic, but when reviewing the current application via the planning portal you can view all previous applications linked to home park.

Before my Argyle supporting time, but I never realised that we were granted conditional planning permission in 1994 to build a new Devonport End and add a roof to the Barn Park.

Any one remember why this development never happened?

New Grandstand - 2 day public consultation

Argyle sy

jerryatricjanner

The Grumpy Loyal

Guest

Argyle Nutter

Golf Liaison Officer ⛳️

PL2 3DQ

Site Owner

Argyle Nutter

Golf Liaison Officer ⛳️

davie nine

Guiri Green

The Grumpy Loyal

Guest

Argyle sy

davie nine

PL2 3DQ

Site Owner

The Grumpy Loyal

Guest

gaspargomez

Stuart House