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

Recommended Posts

Posted
16 minutes ago, gonnabeblueforever said:

Old news, members and staff have know this since before Christmas 

I'm not surprised that the staff know a deal has fallen through... lol

Posted
11 minutes ago, los dedos said:

So where was the training ground pre Belvoir drive then ?

Didn't they have some connection with Victoria Park before Belvior for a while?

Posted
37 minutes ago, fox766 said:

Mr greedy bastard Soulsby wanted more money!!! Must need a new exstention and new kitchen for his house. What a useless twat, only he could fûck that up. :mad:

I think Soulsby is the Council's equivalent to Rudders at LCFC in terms of popularity! lol

Posted
On 1/5/2018 at 14:18, urban.spaceman said:

Loughborough might be helpful for M1 access but as the site's right next to the M1 wouldn't the air pollution be a factor for maintaining world-class athleticism?

 

Belvoir drive is going to be worse, but it is an interesting point. I have been interested in the subject for a long time, and an interesting thing I read recently is that strenous exercise in heavily polluted areas is not really such a good idea, especially if you are older.

 

I know that most of the bad effects of air pollution from traffic fall away quite quickly with distance, and that it is urban air pollution that is the major worry right now. I think/hope any good sports science department will be aware of the importance of air quality, and will stop us doing anything dumb.

 

Kudos for picking that up though, the recent evidence on air pollution ought be making us all concerned. Bring on electric vehicles with some extra tech, to suck up tyre and brake contributions to the issue.

 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, fox766 said:

Mr greedy bastard Soulsby wanted more money!!! Must need a new exstention and new kitchen for his house. What a useless twat, only he could fûck that up. :mad:

I heard this too although the extra money would go directly into the council coffers not Peter soulsby directly. (Apologies if you knew this and was making a joke).

Posted
1 hour ago, fox766 said:

Mr greedy bastard Soulsby wanted more money!!! Must need a new exstention and new kitchen for his house. What a useless twat, only he could fûck that up. :mad:

 

55 minutes ago, Blue Fox 72 said:

I think Soulsby is the Council's equivalent to Rudders at LCFC in terms of popularity! lol

 

Easy targets one and all, nice to see Soulsby standing up to for local taxpayers... :thumbup: 

Posted
18 minutes ago, The whole world smiles said:

I heard this too although the extra money would go directly into the council coffers not Peter soulsby directly. (Apologies if you knew this and was making a joke).

 

To be fair, it does look like a joke to me....

Posted
1 hour ago, Blue Fox 72 said:

I think Soulsby is the Council's equivalent to Rudders at LCFC in terms of popularity! lol

Nowhere near as unpopular as rudders. Soulsby is pretty popular where it matters for a politician - the ballot box. half of Leicester's electorate voted for him... Twice.

  • Like 1
Posted

Yes didn't actually mean what I said and was said in jest. Hope that clears this matter up . In saying that still don't like the bloke. :D

Posted

Nice to see we can blow 25 million on bog average footballers but that the hard pressed council is getting none of our wedge. I wonder how much they want for Bradgate Park where Jock Wallace trained his players?

  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, foxgas said:

Nice to see we can blow 25 million on bog average footballers but that the hard pressed council is getting none of our wedge. I wonder how much they want for Bradgate Park where Jock Wallace trained his players?

Would you pay £12 million for something originally quoted at 1.2 ?. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, jonthefox said:

Would you pay £12 million for something originally quoted at 1.2 ?. 

We probably would for a player!

  • Haha 1
Guest Bob Hazels shorts
Posted
44 minutes ago, jonthefox said:

Would you pay £12 million for something originally quoted at 1.2 ?. 

How can they be quoted at £1.2 million.

 

Doesn't take a genius either selling or buying to see it had a restrictive covenant.

 

Council are obliged to get the best price any other would cause more uproar.

 

City council holding the freehold and leasing it to LCFC would be the best business for them. They owned Grace road and sold it for nothing and I believe several other notable locations (Filbert street?) LCFC building and holding onto the freehold of the land and new properties on Belvoir Drive would be interesting, or could effectively become landlords

 

Surely though its not in the city? so any revenue could be blown on useless projects and the Soulsby bar empire,

Posted
1 hour ago, Bob Hazels shorts said:

How can they be quoted at £1.2 million.

 

Doesn't take a genius either selling or buying to see it had a restrictive covenant.

 

Council are obliged to get the best price any other would cause more uproar.

 

City council holding the freehold and leasing it to LCFC would be the best business for them. They owned Grace road and sold it for nothing and I believe several other notable locations (Filbert street?) LCFC building and holding onto the freehold of the land and new properties on Belvoir Drive would be interesting, or could effectively become landlords

 

Surely though its not in the city? so any revenue could be blown on useless projects and the Soulsby bar empire,

I think it was because the council set the value after they found out who was buying it.

Posted

Good price only if it was still going to be a golf club ...     ie an amenity for the public as opposed to an opportunity for a developer, eg home builder, to get a bargain.   Seems reasonable to me and sounds like LCFC were after a bargain ..  they didn't get it ...   move on. 

Posted
14 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

Good price only if it was still going to be a golf club ...     ie an amenity for the public as opposed to an opportunity for a developer, eg home builder, to get a bargain.   Seems reasonable to me and sounds like LCFC were after a bargain ..  they didn't get it ...   move on. 

didn't realise it is a public course

Posted
1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

didn't realise it is a public course

Might not be ...   (I'm not a golfer) ...    but I suppose its still something the public could use if they wanted to join ...    I can see where the council are coming from.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

Might not be ...   (I'm not a golfer) ...    but I suppose its still something the public could use if they wanted to join ...    I can see where the council are coming from.

me too but im sure there was a compromise that would have been acceptable to both parties whereby the council got a whack.

Posted
Just now, st albans fox said:

me too but im sure there was a compromise that would have been acceptable to both parties whereby the council got a whack.

I think the council have to get the best price they can but, if they are having problems shifting it, then yes a deal should have been struck ....    hopefully the council will get what they want and LCFC will find somewhere else ...     seems like a lot of time wasting though

Posted

Lads listen to this carefully .This is gospel

The covenant that it would remain a golf club was naf all to do with Peter Soulsby or LCC.Man is a fool though trying to get credit.

The land was sold in 1991 for £635 k including a group of old farm buildings .It was not  sold off on the cheap it went out to the best bids through a specialist agent with planning in place already for the golf use

The company that were successful instigated the inclusion of a covenant to say that it would be a golf course with public access to help their bid for the purchase.This was included in the subsequent transfer.

It would not be unusual for a sell on type clause to be included say for residential development but LCC DID NOT put that in the covenant . merely stated  that the land should be a golf course with public use and bear in mind LCC have recently closed western park for mucho cash development .

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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