Khaled, when will the West Stand re-open?

I've seen plenty of threads recently that discuss a variety of issues around the club, but I'm not sure if the questions have been posed in such a way that link those issues together. I'm not sure what is the best way to put these questions to the club, but I know that people from the club read these posts, as do members of the Supporters Trust who collate such questions. So maybe this is a sensible place to start?

Will the Supporters Trust commit to continue asking the CEO when the West Stand will re-open, until there is an answer?

If we take the club at face value and trust their explanation of why it closed, then there are known remedial actions to be taken before it can open. The club knows what they are, but we also know that they are not pertinent to the safety certificate which the Council has issued. What are those actions, and what is the cost? Who has advised that they are necessary?

Has the club discussed those actions with the landlord? Regardless of the liability in the tenancy agreement, are constructive discussions ongoing to try to resolve them? If not, why not?

In the continued absence of any clear explanation of these facts, I will continue to draw the inference that there are in fact no real issues with the West Stand which are significant enough to warrant its closure, and in fact that the owners of the club are attempting to use this as leverage over the owners of the stadium to extract funding. Funding which I do not expect to be invested in either the maintenance of the ground or anything else in the interest of the club, but instead to further offset the purchase of the club.

Because that, I believe, is the sole objective of the group which purchased 80% shares - to burden the club as far as possible with the costs of the purchase so as to maximise their own profits when they sell it. It may be that I'm conflating two issues, but the extraction of £750k from the club to pay the Cryne family for the cost of purchasing the club supports the impression that that is the aim of the 80% group.

There appears to be an implicit threat to the owners of the ground, that if they do not release funding to the club for the upkeep, maintenance, or indeed development of the ground, that they will seek to take the club elsewhere. We've seen media reports to this effect, which seems entirely in keeping with the manner in which the owners like to communicate.

If that's correct, I think the ownership group have badly misjudged two things:

1. They really should have sought to sell at the end of last season, while the stock of the club was high. That would have maximised their chance of fulfilling their objectives. Have they sought out interested parties?
2. They mistakenly believe that the supporter base will continue to provide that support unconditionally, in the event that they take the club away from Oakwell - and that this provides them the leverage they believe they have.

If the Supporters Trust has any kind of ongoing dialogue or relationship with the ownership group - rather than through the puppet CEO - then a focus on this second point should be a priority. Their strategy will not work, because they do not have deep enough pockets to continue funding a club which the supporters do not support financially. Indeed, there is little evidence at all that they have any kind of financial backing at all.

Do they realise that what they think is leverage, is in fact worthless because their asset will be so severely diminished that all parties will lose out? Do they think the owners of the ground (Council and Crynes) will buckle over a threat of loss of revenue which is so miniscule in relation to their other interests (I believe £180k p/a from the last accounts?)

I feel that the recent focus on performance on the pitch - and the admittedly shocking performance of Marcus Schopp as manager - has distracted us from these issues which in the long term are probably more pertinent to our interests as supporters. How can we mobilise our efforts around these subjects? Do we really want to? Is there a consensus among the fanbase?

 

I don't think it will ever open again. They've written it off and won't spend their paper money on it.

 

Completely agree. Expecting it to reopen is pointless. It won't.

 

It'll be open next season......at Rotherhams ground

 

From what I can recall from what @Gally told us, this month they have a meeting with the council, the wall is being looked at by a specialist and the holes in the stand are being peered through by a specialist company who can let them know if it is all concrete down there? So there should definitely be updates at the end of the month?

 

I sit next to a very well known former employee of the club and he assures me that underneath the wooden floorboards is a many inch (16 or 18) thick raft, or whatever it's called, of concrete.
He says that there is no way that the old stand is unsafe and that the wooden boards can be replaced without endangering the integrity of the building.
I may be slightly off with the detail but make the most of what I imply.

 

I don't either which is unfortunate as there's no way I'll be renewing my season ticket next year as a result .

 

I would be surprised if in the aftermath of the Hillsborough and Bradford tragedies, plus us playing that season in the Prem and planning the North stand to allow room to extend the pitch if we ever got into Europe, that the flooring of the West stand and what lay underneath it wasn't investigated and dealt with at the time. The two problems that Khaled has identified certainly don't seem insurmountable to me, old walls get knocked down and rebuilt all the time .

 

For what I can remember. At the fan engagement (Hopefully stand corrected.) There wasn't a given deadline. But discussed (behind closed doors) opening in sections or waiting till complete repairs to open fully.

 

I think the same, and I'm not particularly asking the question with the expectation of an answer.

However, repeatedly asking it is one way we can let the owners know that we won't just sit back and let them ruin our club.

I'm sure there are plenty of other ways too, but I'm not much of an anarchist, so I've gone with writing on the BBS!

 

They're using this as a threat, but would to hey really carry it out? It would be absolute suicide, they'd lose at least half of their income from supporters. You'd have to be very successful on the pitch to not care about that.

Plus I don't think they have the capital to sustain any losses.

Also, I'm not sure any of the other clubs in the region would want to be associated with such a move. The financial incentive for them to do so would have to be far greater than the pittance the club currently pay to rent Oakwell.

 

Someone got an answer from the council. Does this explain owt?

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/barnsley_council_inspection_of_o#incoming-1894414

 

Not a lot. It explains that the Council inspection (in the role of landlord) was a desktop review of documentation provided by BFC, followed by a walk around the ground. However the line "no issues or concerns were raised by BFC staff" certainly raises an eyebrow or two.

I guess it's only slightly revealing that there is an 'OCAL-BFC' project board in operation, but no indication of who represents each body on the board, how often it meets or what its purpose is. But perhaps it indicates a continuing dialogue between BFC and OCAL/the Council.

It reinforces the point that whatever the issues which need remediating are, it's for the club to tell us.

 

I think this is the only logical conclusion we can draw.

 

I think you are right and is a purely economic argument a few things to think about there:

The assessment of the savings of closing the stand probably didn’t factor in a large amount of refunds being requested.

Assumed significant away supporters

Didn’t factor in that if the club get relegated the away followings next year will be significantly smaller.

Put all this together and it looks like a very short term decision has been made.

But then again Khaled isn’t worried about relegation.

 

What's the chances of it re-opening if we draw a top Premier League team in the FA Cup?

 

Now that would be interesting

 

It would seem a strange economic decision to make. Would've thought that any gains from the Sheffield Utd game will have been significantly eaten into, if not completely offset after the Derby and Hull games. And will only get worse with every game now (who's likely to sell out now?)

 

It would make economic sense perhaps if as CEO you assumed everyone would be all nice about it and move without kicking up a fuss.