Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support Fans Focus by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content


Recommended Posts

Imagine this hypothetical scenario any number of years from now.

Land properties (or whoever owns our ground at the time) decide to redevelop the site into a shopping mall and multi-story car park servicing Ebbsfleet station (not a bad idea from a financial point of view).

A discussion then ensues between us and them something like :

Us "You have to build us a new ground"

Them "No, we don't"

Us "Oh, yes you do"

Them "oh no we don't"


There then follows an embarrassing argument about the validity of a small clause in a contract signed many years ago.

Whether we win or not would probably be argued in court, the only winners would be the Lawyers.


Many Kent grounds have disappeared over the years without a replacement (even though new grounds were probably promised).


Similar examples to this could be considered at Sheppey Utd, Maidstone, Dartford , Now Margit.


I trust Brian, Glenn and the board implicitly with the club funds and legal affairs, I just hope they have got the new ground replacement contract absolutely BOMBTIGHT aND LOOPHOLE FREE.


Ps good luck tonite You REDS, looks like it could be a toughie.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

My only concern is this:


Every year we negotiate an extension to the lease.


Suppose one year the landlord says 'no thanks'.


If the lease expires one would assume the 'building us a new ground' clause would be gone? We rightly assume then that when the lease expires we will be homeless?


Maybe I have misinterpreted the limited information that I have on this - but does the landlord have to extend the lease each year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was my worry and point in asking who owned the ground. If Land Securities refuse to renew the lease, where does that leave the club? Promises aren't worth much in Business. I worked for a local firm that stated the work force was its greatest asset, then layed off 3/4 of the workers. Profit for the Shareholders is all that counts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...