If was music you'd be an orchestra.

The reasoning is simple.



Others have suggested that the reason for not playing is linked to not paying, hence the quote Quote. "Fax are skint".



Others seem to take some satisfaction from anything that can be negatively said about Fax and really hope the are skint and do go bust.



Put the two together and the "Fax are skint" proves true, they go bust and that's the end.



Those who are happy about this are then left with just one club playing out of the Shay with the bigger shortfall I mentioned with the same problems as before and possibly a weaker position themselves.



Just one point would be for CMBC to consider is can they justify losing £250,000 and rising on a sports stadium that hosts one club with a following of say 1500 people when they are having to make cut backs in other important areas.



This Fax "Hate" number comes down to a couple of dozen people at best who claim the Shay is a community asset and that they speak for the rest of the population of Calderdale.



They don't want the truth they just want to see Fax fail in anyway possible.



The fact is no one on here or away from HLRLFC and CMBC actually knows the truth.



Another fact is HRLFC will have to pay the rent or they won't be playing there and with no ground they will be out of business.

How hard is that to reason out.



The question / concerns about this have been going on for months.



Once a question / concern has been raised, that must eventually be resolved, in this case (paying any rent due) what is the point of keep going over and over the same subject.



Again, sooner or later it will be resolved one way or the other, it will be paid or Fax will be out of business.

That doesn't explain why you think allowing Fax to continue not paying rent is preferable to the alternative (which is to kick us out). Where does the figure of £250k/year come from? I haven't seen this anywhere other than a claim TA made on Twitter. One of the FOI requests confirmed a 5-figure annual short-fall, which is not surprising given Fax are behind with their rent. Besides, we all know the stadium is under-utilised, a whole tier of the east stand remains unoccupied for example, and the council have admitted in another FOI that they've made no attempt to remedy this.



It isn't written in stone that The Shay has to make a loss under council ownership. The soccer club managed to pay £30k/year rent and I believe pay for their own staff to look after the pitch, but as with everything it costs more when there's a council involved. I wonder how many staff are employed in relation to the Shay today as opposed to 20 years ago, and whether or not those positions are actually justified in the cold light of day.

Fine the FOI may be correct but you know naff all about the rest.

TA said he wasn't involved in any pay-day loan companies. FACT: He's a director of several.



MS said he knew someone had bid to buy the Shay but didn't know who. FACT: MS and TA talk.



One of the FOI requests said the rugby club agreed to pay in full by 31/12/13. FACT: They didn't.



Several people who claim to know the catering company's owner have separately claimed that Fax owe them 5-figures. RUMOUR.



The denial around here is extreme.

Faxcar, I won't repeat all your post to saves space, but, basically well put.

As I have been saying for a while it's a topic going nowhere, it has been done to death off thread on three other topics, let's wait and see. We don't have the answers and I agree it's very emotive, but I'm confident it is being dealt with.

Peace.

I'm happy to wait and see also, it's not like we have much choice I suppose. But it's fair to say I'm worried, if not the Shay then where? Odsal? Do me a favour. I hope this is sorted soon.

Can anyone offer an opinion as to what sort of dispute

with the council could justify the action of not paying £63k

rent over a 16 month period ?

Anything said has likely been said before and mostly guess work based on all the spin that has being going on with a few smatterings of so called factual information mixed in.



We're guessing again that it involves a dispute which may be part of it and maybe not.



A few of the things supposedly been involved.



Some rent was owed for before the talk of buying the Shay came to light.



The talks included the rent being absorbed into any purchasing agreement.



Not too long ago the deal for the Shay was taken from the table at least in the short term.



Both parties went of to give more consideration to the potential sale.



Could the deal be back on again after due process with similar terms for the rent included.

Now that would explain the silence and will get a certain section going again





Total speculation but the above was part of the original plan so is feasible.



Other than that, again we are either skint and can't pay it.



We are not skint and won't pay it.



In either case.



To continue playing from the Shay or anywhere else we will have to pay it.

Thanks,so only really the Shay potential sale could justify our actions.

I'm trying to be positive but surely the possible Shay purchase came long

after arrears had already built up ?

When does Gavin's daft Asset of Community Value (ACV) run out? Is it six months from the date of his application or six months from the date Calderdale Council decide to sell?