We "hand" it over and "lease" it back … am I missing something?
That sounds a bit daft to me. There must be a piece of that puzzle, a BIG piece, missing.
| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| How would people feel if… (Princes Park to AFL) http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8489 |
Page 1 of 4 |
| Author: | Synbad [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | How would people feel if… (Princes Park to AFL) |
we handed PP over to the AFL and leased it back??? Just curious |
|
| Author: | camel [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
We "hand" it over and "lease" it back … am I missing something?
That sounds a bit daft to me. There must be a piece of that puzzle, a BIG piece, missing. |
|
| Author: | Sydney Blue [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Your not talking about handing over our PP are you . why would we want to hand over Murph  
|
|
| Author: | TruBlueBrad [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
obviously the AFL would be responsible for upgrading and maintaining PP |
|
| Author: | TheGame [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: How would people feel if.... |
Synbad wrote: we handed PP over to the AFL and leased it back???
Just curious What so the Kanga's could be equal tenants? I don't care really what happens now with the place. It's no longer our home ground. |
|
| Author: | Sydney Blue [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
camelboy wrote: We "hand" it over and "lease" it back … am I missing something?
That sounds a bit daft to me. There must be a piece of that puzzle, a BIG piece, missing. They would take on the debt and up date it and we would lease the premises back off them . good for us but cant see what benifit it would be to the AFL |
|
| Author: | camel [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sydney Blue wrote: camelboy wrote: We "hand" it over and "lease" it back … am I missing something? That sounds a bit daft to me. There must be a piece of that puzzle, a BIG piece, missing. They would take on the debt and up date it and we would lease the premises back off them . good for us but cant see what benifit it would be to the AFL Well, that's a pretty big piece don't you think.
|
|
| Author: | Sydney Blue [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
camelboy wrote: Sydney Blue wrote: camelboy wrote: We "hand" it over and "lease" it back … am I missing something? That sounds a bit daft to me. There must be a piece of that puzzle, a BIG piece, missing. They would take on the debt and up date it and we would lease the premises back off them . good for us but cant see what benifit it would be to the AFL Well, that's a pretty big piece don't you think. A hugh piece - but everything comes at a price - |
|
| Author: | verbs [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sydney Blue wrote: A hugh piece - but everything comes at a price -
Hello? You want a piece of me? |
|
| Author: | camel [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sydney Blue wrote: A hugh piece - but everything comes at a price - And depending on the terms and costs of the lease, that price may well be worth paying. |
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Correct me if I am wrong, we would only be assigning our lease of Princes Park (as the Lessee) from the Melbourne City Council (the Lessor) over to the AFL, we dont actually have freehold ownership of Princes Park. |
|
| Author: | TheGame [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
AGRO wrote: Correct me if I am wrong, we would only be assigning our lease of Princes Park (as the Lessee) from the Melbourne City Council (the Lessor) over to the AFL, we dont actually have freehold ownership of Princes Park.
That's what I thought. |
|
| Author: | Synbad [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
yes but we have about another 30 years .....as the leasee.. so we can sell the rights to the AFl.. they can redevelop it and we become the anchor tenant among other tenants.. |
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Synbad wrote: yes but we have about another 30 years .....as the leasee.. so we can sell the rights to the AFl.. they can redevelop it and we become the anchor tenant among other tenants..
They will only want it to harvest the turf and relay it at TelstraDome  , the surface of which was absolute crap over the weekend, but seemed to escape criticism. 
|
|
| Author: | camel [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
AGRO wrote: They will only want it to harvest the turf and relay it at TelstraDome Haha, GOLD! Well, I guess they have drop in pitches for cricket, why not try drop in ovals. At least PP gets full sun.
|
|
| Author: | Kaptain Kouta [ Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
camelboy wrote: AGRO wrote: They will only want it to harvest the turf and relay it at TelstraDome Haha, GOLD! Well, I guess they have drop in pitches for cricket, why not try drop in ovals. At least PP gets full sun. Wasn't the original concept for entire drop-in fields, rahter than the atchwork rubbish that's there now? As for the concept of the original post, I have no problem with it, especially if it takes a large financial burden off our back, and places the debt at the door of AFL house. |
|
| Author: | SurreyBlue [ Tue Feb 28, 2006 9:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Not a bad idea, as long as we maitain anchor club and have 51% of vote when it comes to future alterations/innovations/developments. Princess Park is Carlton and should always be Carlton. Take that away from us Collo/AFL and you have NO CARLTON. Essendon* still control Windy Hill. Hawthorn will control AFL Park. Collingwood control Lexus Centre
Richmond control Punt Road Why should we sell our soul? If AFL want to develop our stadium for there own usage and piss down our back .... then NO. If the AFL want to work with Carlton to develop "our ground" for others to use also, then welcome aboard. |
|
| Author: | camel [ Tue Feb 28, 2006 9:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I like the 51% caveat. The devil will be in the detail that's for sure. So, when do we get the detail? 
|
|
| Author: | Synbad [ Tue Feb 28, 2006 9:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
SurreyBlue wrote: Not a bad idea, as long as we maitain anchor club and have 51% of vote when it comes to future alterations/innovations/developments.
Princess Park is Carlton and should always be Carlton. Take that away from us Collo/AFL and you have NO CARLTON. . Were actually leasing it till around 2030 or something... |
|
| Author: | dannyboy [ Tue Feb 28, 2006 9:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
yep its all in the details, but as a concept sounds fine to this little bunny. |
|
| Page 1 of 4 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|