Holiday Inn for sale

[TIL 1010 4,722]

[quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

a) The Hotel JV (Joint Venture) in which City has a 30% stake has leased out for 35 years the use of the hotel to an operator which has paid in recent years approx. £1m. a year to the Hotel JV. assuming they were prepared to sell.So anybody with a masterplan for this corner would have to buy out the lease from the operator

b) If I remember correctly the Hotel JV owed the bank at the 31st May 2012 approx. £10m. So the other Hotel JV shareholder would have to be bought out (assuming they were willing to sell) and the bank loan would have to be repaid.

[/quote]

Obviously I have edited Tangible''s post for you LDC and i trust you have answers to these issues or do you just think we will be permitted to alter the hotel without authority to do so ?

[Bws Cat 0]

Now thats some fire coming from morty.

[Dave 0]

The club need to take a leaf out of MK dons book and see if some adaptions can be made to the hotel.The double tree in Stadium:mk has some rooms that are pitch facing double up as executive boxes on match day and regular hotel rooms the rest of the time. Other rooms have little or no view that sideIf they could do some redevelopment like this then the hotel could stay and seats may be able to be added.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

How many seats could realistically be put in that corner?

 

 

[morty 0]

Frankly BW''s, the answer is that the hotel is there, and we have to live with it, throwing around all sorts of silly ideas, rather than just admit what I said above, is just daft.

[tom cavendish 0]

I think LDC mean changing from this:http://q-ec.bstatic.com/images/hotel/max1024x768/504/5043861.jpgTo this:http://doubletree3.hilton.com/resources/media/dt/LTNDTDI/en_US/img/shared/full_page_image_gallery/main/di_pitchfacingroom01_3_677x380_FitToBoxSmallDimension_Center.jpgIt would at least be logical for the hotel to change some of the windows to be full height and full width and then they could charge more per room (of which NCFC earn a percentage).

[Pyschic James 0]

I feel that the ground shall meet a grisly end, there will be fure and blood to usher the new age.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

How many seats could realistically be put in that corner?

[/quote]

Not many, especially given the gap that would be necessary between City and away fans........just unconomic to consider.

IMHO. we build up our squad and then we save up the £30m for a new GW. stand

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

Oops  - think uneconomic not unconomic!

 

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="tom cavendish"]I think LDC mean changing from this:

http://q-ec.bstatic.com/images/hotel/max1024x768/504/5043861.jpg

To this:

http://doubletree3.hilton.com/resources/media/dt/LTNDTDI/en_US/img/shared/full_page_image_gallery/main/di_pitchfacingroom01_3_677x380_FitToBoxSmallDimension_Center.jpg

It would at least be logical for the hotel to change some of the windows to be full height and full width and then they could charge more per room (of which NCFC earn a percentage).
[/quote]

 

Why would the club spend £10m+ to add say 500 seats?

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="morty"]Frankly BW''s, the answer is that the hotel is there, and we have to live with it, throwing around all sorts of silly ideas, rather than just admit what I said above, is just daft.[/quote]Three things.   The hotel is there, of course - it is a business.    We do not have to live with it if we can find better ways of utilising it now that the club is in the premiership, on a financial better footing, attracting full attendances nearly  every week - and not languishing near the bottom of the championship, deep in debt and desperate to find extra income.   As for silly ideas, you go and tell that to David McNally who has been actively trying to get temporary stands put in this season and come up against obstacles.  Does that mean he will give up?    I suspect not.   In his position he would undoubtedly be investigating other avenues of developing the hotel corner situation.  

I''m not Tom Cavendish and have no wish to build a stadium elsewhere.   My interest is in seeing Carrow Road as it should be - a complete stadium with seats all round.  As the aforementioned TC says in a post above there are solutions around similar to what I am suggesting. We are not going to get a new stand in the near future, so the hotel corner is the obvious place for development.   Its not rocket science and its not silly.    So why the negativity?  

[Wings of a Sparrow 1,410]

It all seems an awful lot of trouble to go to for someone who only goes to CR half a dozen times a year.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="lake district canary"]You are really such a twit, BW.     The whole point of this thread - and there have been some really interesting inputs from several posters - was to highlight a point in time where maybe, just maybe there may be the finances available to instigate some change.  I am not the only one who doesn''t like it and it is not going to go away on its own.    You accept that it is here to stay, unaltered and we will have to put up with it.   I on the other hand take a different view, that there may be a window of opportunity to change things, even if it is just to negotiate some seats in front of it.   You simply have closed your mind to it, would rather make disparaging remarks to me, rather than offer anything constructive, so therefore my previous comment to you remains.  I don''t have to say it again, do I?   [/quote]You sound more and more like wiz every day - and worringly you are also agreeing with him (something his aliases regularly did, and visa versa).So what is this argument you are so certain about -"was to highlight a point in time where maybe just maybe there may be the finances available to instigate some change."  or   " never have we been in a better financial position to do something"

"but no-one has come up with a decent argument as to why this should not be a sensible solution" or they have, as you state " I accept that it probably isn''t going to happen for various reasons"

"Its not as big a project as some are making it out" or  " It may just be too big a project with too many obstacles.

The simple fact is that you don''t really have a reasoned argument beyond a snide backhanded attack on the club, as in. "If the powers that be really care about the club they will make something like this happen" Are you really suggesting that the ''powers to be'' don''t care about the club ? If so, what do they care about ? Do tell us (or maybe you could ask your mate wiz to tell us).But there it matters little what is said, you will continue is this absurd martyr for the cause mode irrespective of whatever anyone else has said - "I''m sure you''re right on all points.  However, it won''t stop me"

ps I wouldn''t complain about  "disparaging remarks" made to you when you tell others to "f**k off."

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="morty"]Frankly BW''s, the answer is that the hotel is there, and we have to live with it, throwing around all sorts of silly ideas, rather than just admit what I said above, is just daft.[/quote]Three things.   The hotel is there, of course - it is a business.    We do not have to live with it if we can find better ways of utilising it now that the club is in the premiership, on a financial better footing, attracting full attendances nearly  every week - and not languishing near the bottom of the championship, deep in debt and desperate to find extra income.   As for silly ideas, you go and tell that to David McNally who has been actively trying to get temporary stands put in this season and come up against obstacles.  Does that mean he will give up?    I suspect not.   In his position he would undoubtedly be investigating other avenues of developing the hotel corner situation.  

I''m not Tom Cavendish and have no wish to build a stadium elsewhere.   My interest is in seeing Carrow Road as it should be - a complete stadium with seats all round.  As the aforementioned TC says in a post above there are solutions around similar to what I am suggesting. We are not going to get a new stand in the near future, so the hotel corner is the obvious place for development.   Its not rocket science and its not silly.    So why the negativity?  

[/quote]

 

ldc, I don''t want to add to the kicking you''re getting, but do you actually read what other posters have said? The hotel is not ours to do with as we wish. It is a joint venture between us and others. According to tangible we have only a 30 per cent stake. For anything to happen on the lines you have suggested would need the agreement of whoever holds the other 70 per cent. And from what Old Shuck has posted Holiday Inn - who presumbly own at least some of that 70 per cent - are pretty happy with the status quo.Even if they agreed we alone would then have to foot the bill for a very small number of seats. From (possibly fallible) memory a proper corner infill there, with seats going all the way back, would only have added around 1,500 seats. How many seats - or rather how few seats - will be fitted in under your plan?

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

And from what Old Shuck has posted Holiday Inn - who presumbly own at least some of that 70 per cent - are pretty happy with the status quo.

Even if they agreed we alone would then have to foot the bill for a very small number of seats. From (possibly fallible) memory a proper corner infill there, with seats going all the way back, would only have added around 1,500 seats. How many seats - or rather how few seats - will be fitted in under your plan?

[/quote]

The party that owns the other 70% of the Hotel JV.  is not Holiday Inn.

Holiday Inn have franchised out their name to the operator (the company with the 35 year lease from the Hotel JV).

Even if NCFC Plc could buy out the various parties, people are forgetting the £10m (approx) bank loan.

 

For others:

McNally has tried to get a temporary stand between the hotel and the pitch. He''s not suggested as far as I know the idea of replacing the hotel with a corner stand (that''s uneconomic).

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]

And from what Old Shuck has posted Holiday Inn - who presumbly own at least some of that 70 per cent - are pretty happy with the status quo.Even if they agreed we alone would then have to foot the bill for a very small number of seats. From (possibly fallible) memory a proper corner infill there, with seats going all the way back, would only have added around 1,500 seats. How many seats - or rather how few seats - will be fitted in under your plan?

[/quote]

The party that owns the other 70% of the Hotel JV.  is not Holiday Inn.

Holiday Inn have franchised out their name to the operator (the company with the 35 year lease from the Hotel JV).

Even if NCFC Plc could buy out the various parties, people are forgetting the £10m (approx) bank loan.

 

For others:

McNally has tried to get a temporary stand between the hotel and the pitch. He''s not suggested as far as I know the idea of replacing the hotel with a corner stand (that''s uneconomic).

[/quote]

 

Thanks for that clarification, Tangible, but it comes to the same thing as far as my point is concerned. The other 70 per cent is held by a company that is presumably happy with the profitable status quo.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

ldc, I don''t want to add to the kicking you''re getting, but do you actually read what other posters have said? The hotel is not ours to do with as we wish. It is a joint venture between us and others. According to tangible we have only a 30 per cent stake. For anything to happen on the lines you have suggested would need the agreement of whoever holds the other 70 per cent. And from what Old Shuck has posted Holiday Inn - who presumbly own at least some of that 70 per cent - are pretty happy with the status quo.Even if they agreed we alone would then have to foot the bill for a very small number of seats. From (possibly fallible) memory a proper corner infill there, with seats going all the way back, would only have added around 1,500 seats. How many seats - or rather how few seats - will be fitted in under your plan?

[/quote]

I''m not getting a kicking.   There have been some really good posts on this thread, especially those who have real knowledge about the subject. Those that just want me to shut up, want me to shut up most of the time anyway. 

I''m not stupid, I know there would have to be serious negotiations.      Who is to say that in business negotiations cannot take place that could further the interests of all parties?  The hotel as it stands offers very few the chance to view from its cell like windows.  Even as it stands, simple reconstruction of the facade would make for better viewing and allow more people in to watch - which makes more money for the hotel and the club.  I don''t really understand why people are so hot under the collar about someone suggesting solutions about something that was set up in a different world - a club that was deep in debt, worried about its future, and on a downward spiral.   Things have changed.  You would think people would recognise that and realise the potential that exists and support ideas that would improve viewing facilities - subject to negotiation, of course.

[YankeeCanary 0]

LDC, your raison d''etre on this forum appears to be "bang the drum slowly and repetitively", without offering either anything new to support your argument or, indeed, attempting to do a little more digging as to whether your thoughts may be impractical or not. For example, why don''t you check Holiday Inn policy as it relates to balconies, particularly when facing a sports facility? With respect to one of your thoughts, if I were the CEO of such a company I would be extremely reluctant to house a number of football supporters on each of a number of balconies for safety reasons, never mind liability should an accident occur ( just once ). Do you have any knowledge of insurance premiums for such circumstances. Have you given any thought as to why it was designed the way that it is in the first place? You could pretend to be a researcher conducting a study of such facilities across the UK. It might be more productive for you to engage in such investigative work and inform the forum at large as to what you discover. It certainly would be more productive than "banging the drum slowly and repetitively" and expecting others to conduct activity simply because you think they should.    

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="YankeeCanary"]LDC, your raison d''etre on this forum appears to be "bang the drum slowly and repetitively", without offering either anything new to support your argument or, indeed, attempting to do a little more digging as to whether your thoughts may be impractical or not. For example, why don''t you check Holiday Inn policy as it relates to balconies, particularly when facing a sports facility? With respect to one of your thoughts, if I were the CEO of such a company I would be extremely reluctant to house a number of football supporters on each of a number of balconies for safety reasons, never mind liability should an accident occur ( just once ). Do you have any knowledge of insurance premiums for such circumstances. Have you given any thought as to why it was designed the way that it is in the first place? You could pretend to be a researcher conducting a study of such facilities across the UK. It might be more productive for you to engage in such investigative work and inform the forum at large as to what you discover. It certainly would be more productive than "banging the drum slowly and repetitively" and expecting others to conduct activity simply because you think they should.    [/quote]

I don''t necessarily have the answers and it is up to others to decide if my ideas have any merit.    There has been some interesting and new information come out from certain posters on this thread who have knowledge I don''t - and that is of value to me and anyone else who is interested in the situation of the hotel.   That is all that matters.   The thread is about the hotel, not me.

Those that want to make it personal are not worth responding to.   I don''t really know why I''m answering you as you are so condescending.   All your points you make could have been put in a matter of fact way instead of an interrogating way.  But you chose, as you always do to try to appear clever and superior.   Fine, if that is what you want,  but for me its not about personalities, or looking clever - its about the football club.  I''ve said this to you on several occasions but you don''t seem to get it.   My banging on irritates the heck out of some posters, but the more people reply with spurious or closed minded responses, the more I will tend to "bang on".  

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="YankeeCanary"]You could pretend to be a researcher conducting a study of such facilities across the UK.[/quote]He would need to go to Carrow Rd to do that Yankee. Are you asuming he has a Sat Nav? [;)]

[Bill 1,788]

"The hotel is there, of course - it is a business.    We do not have to live with it..............."we dothere is a 150 year lease on the land(that tends to determine who says what happens there)

[Zak Van Burger 0]

150 years wow are they going to be p!$$ed when we move to the new out of town stadium in Bristol or what?

[tom cavendish 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"]I''m not Tom Cavendish and have no wish to build a stadium elsewhere.   My interest is in seeing Carrow Road as it should be - a complete stadium with seats all round.  As the aforementioned TC says in a post above there are solutions around similar to what I am suggesting. We are not going to get a new stand in the near future, so the hotel corner is the obvious place for development.   Its not rocket science and its not silly.    So why the negativity?   [/quote]In an ideal world I wouldn''t want the club to move from Carrow Rd. However, I recognise that in order to achieve a bigger modern stadium without incurring costs that could have a detrimental impact upon the playing budget, a new stadium could be the answer. £30m is a lot of money to spend for just an extra 8,000 seats. Also consider that the car park directly behind the Jarrold Stand has been sold for housing. Imagine an extra 8,000 people at the stadium and virtually no car parking. The roofs at the far ends of the stadium have roof supports that block spectator views etc.

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="YankeeCanary"]LDC, your raison d''etre on this forum appears to be "bang the drum slowly and repetitively", without offering either anything new to support your argument or, indeed, attempting to do a little more digging as to whether your thoughts may be impractical or not. For example, why don''t you check Holiday Inn policy as it relates to balconies, particularly when facing a sports facility? With respect to one of your thoughts, if I were the CEO of such a company I would be extremely reluctant to house a number of football supporters on each of a number of balconies for safety reasons, never mind liability should an accident occur ( just once ). Do you have any knowledge of insurance premiums for such circumstances. Have you given any thought as to why it was designed the way that it is in the first place? You could pretend to be a researcher conducting a study of such facilities across the UK. It might be more productive for you to engage in such investigative work and inform the forum at large as to what you discover. It certainly would be more productive than "banging the drum slowly and repetitively" and expecting others to conduct activity simply because you think they should.    [/quote]



I don''t necessarily have the answers and it is up to others to decide if my ideas have any merit.    There has been some interesting and new information come out from certain posters on this thread who have knowledge I don''t - and that is of value to me and anyone else who is interested in the situation of the hotel.   That is all that matters.   The thread is about the hotel, not me.


Those that want to make it personal are not worth responding to.   I don''t really know why I''m answering you as you are so condescending.   All your points you make could have been put in a matter of fact way instead of an interrogating way.  But you chose, as you always do to try to appear clever and superior.   Fine, if that is what you want,  but for me its not about personalities, or looking clever - its about the football club.  I''ve said this to you on several occasions but you don''t seem to get it.   My banging on irritates the heck out of some posters, but the more people reply with spurious or closed minded responses, the more I will tend to "bang on".  



[/quote]

How exactly did you perceive my input to be "clever and superior" or, indeed, closed minded? I thought I asked some valid questions in an open way suggesting, as it was you that initiated the thread, that perhaps you could seek out the answers to those questions and inform this community of what you discovered, and help ascertain if your ideas are practical or not. That''s not closed minded....that''s open minded. I''ll repeat them:

"attempting to do a little more digging as to whether your thoughts may be impractical or not. For example, why don''t you check Holiday Inn policy as it relates to balconies, particularly when facing a sports facility? With respect to one of your thoughts, if I were the CEO of such a company I would be extremely reluctant to house a number of football supporters on each of a number of balconies for safety reasons, never mind liability should an accident occur ( just once ). Do you have any knowledge of insurance premiums for such circumstances. Have you given any thought as to why it was designed the way that it is in the first place? You could pretend to be a researcher conducting a study of such facilities across the UK. It might be more productive for you to engage in such investigative work and inform the forum at large as to what you discover.

If you are not interested in becoming more knowledgeable on your own initiative but would rather leave it to others to decide if your ideas have merit then, may I ask, who are those others that you are referring to? If it''s individuals at the club then why are you spending time repeating yourself on this forum rather than communicating with those responsible at the club? If, on the other hand, your meaning of "others" refers to posters on this forum then why would you expect us others to take the time to work on your ideas if, indeed, by your own admission you are not prepared to do it yourself?  

 

[lake district canary 4,531]

Yankee, for the umpteenth time, I''m not interested in being taught how to do things better by you.    I have already said I appreciated the input from some knowledgeable posters on this thread, which you conveniently manage to ignore, so basically you are just trying to pick faults for the sake of it.    That is not discussion as I know it.  I don''t expect you to understand that as you are always intent on trying to show me up rather than respond to the debate.   Respond to the debate by all means, but if you try to do it in a way that doesn''t attempt to belittle me,  we would get along much better.    Its simple.  I had an idea.   I put across some opinions as to how I perceive things could be done.  Others respond.   Some are more knowledgeable than me and give their input and experience.   Shuck for one showed good insight.   Even Tom Cavendish gave some thought to it, someone who I don''t normally have time for.  That''s how it works - its a discussion board.  Others just try to be negative for the sake of it - there''s a lot of that on here, in case you hadn''t noticed.    

[TIL 1010 4,722]

LDC you accuse people of making it personal and yet near the start of this thread you told someone to feck off and now have an attack on Yankee by accusing him of trying to be clever and superior.There must be some irony in there somewhere. Now I am a straightforward simple man but can you tell me how you negotiate with the bank when they have you by the balls to the tune of £10 million and negotiate to buy 70% of a hotel as we are after a football club. Unless news has not reached you yet financial institutions do not like football clubs.

[TIL 1010 4,722]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]LDC you accuse people of making it personal and yet near the start of this thread you told someone to feck off and now have an attack on Yankee by accusing him of trying to be clever and superior.There must be some irony in there somewhere. Now I am a straightforward simple man but can you tell me how you negotiate with the bank when they have you by the balls to the tune of £10 million and negotiate to buy 70% of a hotel as we are after a* football club. Unless news has not reached you yet financial institutions do not like football clubs.[/quote]

* all.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Zak Van Burger"]150 years wow are they going to be p!$$ed when we move to the new out of town stadium in Bristol or what?[/quote]I doubt it, unless City leave the contents of the bars behindand I can''t see Delia doing that

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]LDC you accuse people of making it personal and yet near the start of this thread you told someone to feck off and now have an attack on Yankee by accusing him of trying to be clever and superior.There must be some irony in there somewhere. Now I am a straightforward simple man but can you tell me how you negotiate with the bank when they have you by the balls to the tune of £10 million and negotiate to buy 70% of a hotel as we are after a football club. Unless news has not reached you yet financial institutions do not like football clubs.[/quote]

Well, officer, I admit to getting riled by a couple of trolls who were intent on undermining me for the sake of it, but that was nowhere near the start of the thread.   Most of the worthwhile responses were well before that.  Yankee, persistently tries to instruct  me on how I should post -  I am quite happy to learn, but will not be dictated to.  

On the hotel point, businesses can  negotiate with other businesses quite easily if you have the mind to and are not put off by big numbers.   We already apparently have a stake in the hotel and that also suggests we have some influence in what happens.  The potential for the hotel is obvious, both as a hotel and as a potential spectator area.  If you approach the hotel from a business angle, rather than a football angle,  things look rather different.  It is a goldmine - but it is not being utilised to its utmost potential either for the football club or the hotel.  The facade is a joke  and could easily be altered to offer better viewing - even with just bigger windows.  I keep saying I don''t have all the answers,  but  the fact remains that we have something that looks like a block of flats in the corner of the ground with a big space in front with nothing in it.    That needs to change and could be done quite easily if there is a will to do it and the recognition of all parties that it could be in their interests to do so. 

[nutty nigel 7,509]

Always the victim....