Thanks for your overview, its honest and informative.
Perhaps more expertise on the Board is the most important.
Franchising anything comes with guanteed income BUT a cost in that the club is not best represented in the products... catering, mercandise etc. Thats something for the new guys on the Board to consider.
If income from next season's tickets is ring fenced against next year's expenditure then thats OK, though I think we both share some concerns about that.
My primary worry for City (a bit similar to the Bulls) is that that their property is held by someone else udrer a lease that is more valuable than the saleable value of the property itself. I expect that this makes the Landlord intransigent to any move away from the site.

the best way to view Lawn is that he went to the same charm school as Chris Caisley. He means well, and has to a point, put his money where his mouth is, but he has a point! Who owns the new state of the art Tong training venue , the council. could the bulls have afforded somewhere like that on their own, probably not.

The council, along with the PCT has a duty to encourage healthy lifestyles of all living in the district. what better way to get kids involved than having successful, thriving profesional sports teams, playing and training at modern stadia, and training in venues that can welcome community involvement?

I live in Wibsey and support the bulls, so would welcome the OSV happening. but i also support City, and work with local kids ona daily basis. The reality is that the best use of the councils promised £15m would be to house both clubs at VP and then develop Odsal / richard dunnes as a training / community venue. The top carpark could be converted to the new plastic grass pitch that is hired out like goals is, and the facilities could be made available much more cheaply to local clubs and community groups. if that happened, then the council could probably secure more money in grants from it???

Lawn is speaking for Bradford City. As a board member of the board, and chairman, he has a legal duty to do his best for the shareholders, and this is [iexactly[/i what he's doing. City have a large annual rent to pay and bringing the Bulls in to share would certainly help him in that regard. Whilst in many ways I wish him (and City) all the best, none of this can work if it isn't mutually beneficial, and to be honest I can see many benefits to City and few benefits to the Bulls in all this.

I have to say though that Lawn's lack of knowledge about the Odsal sports village (as highlighted by comments from Peter Hood) speaks volumes. I also find a certain irony in Lawn being against the council funding sports facilities whilst simultaneously complaining about the fact he can't find anywhere to train in Bradford. As a mate of mine would say, "it does my 'ead in".

what I find particularly worrying is the sheer amount of dis-information being spread by city. I nearly came to blows this evening with a typical middle aged city fan this evening who spouted a load of rubbish. According to him he was sick of paying council tax to support bulls when city didnt get a penny. When it was pointed out to him that bulls dont get a penny from the council he responded that we couldnt possibly afford to pay the upkeep on the stadium on an 8k average gate. He totally ignored the fact that we did a deal with council to maintain the stadium ourselves in exchange for the 4.5million settlement payment ( which if we hadnt agreed to council would have been forced to pay approx 20 million over remainder of lase in upkeep). He also took umbrage over the fact we pay a negligble rent and totally ignored fact in exchange for this we pay the maintenance costs of ground.

What I find particularly worrying is that he got his 'Facts' from articles in the city program. If city are spreading this sort of easily disproved rubbish in their programs then surely we as a club should be taking issue with it.

The worst aspect is that the T&A seems to have an agenda of, every few days they come up with quotes, filled with misinformation, from various members of City's supporters club. Over a period of time, with constant repetition, this rubbish becomes accepted as the truth. It's OK that Peter Hood has made a rebuttal, but it's only a one off, and the drip drip drip of lies and half truths has more resonance due to all the extra exposure.

Is it that city supporters club is better coordianted at feeding 'stories' to the media? I have Radio Leeds on at home when I get up in the morning & arrive home from work. The amount of coverage that Leeds Takes get is way disproportionate to their appeal, rarely a day goes by without an interview with Back or his assistant; but I have come to the conclusion it must be the dark sides media manipulation unit constantly churning out stories for a hungry media. RL seems to be very poor at feeding stories, or even non-stories to the press.

bcafc.livewwware.co.uk/viewtopic ... 4df7fb7b41 Wednesday night. Opportunity to have a chat with Mr Carling also.

bcafc.livewwware.co.uk/viewtopic ... 4df7fb7b41 Wednesday night. Opportunity to have a chat with Mr Carling also.

The city probably are better co-ordinated, maybe even have media people in their ranks for all I know. It is annoying though.........

As for the Tykes, didn't they win their championship or the cup or something? I got so tired of hearing about their great success on Radio Leeds I turned the radio back onto Chris Evans!

Look North were just as bad on Monday night, lots of Wendyball, all about the Tykes winning the cup and NO PROPER RUGBY AT ALL!!

No, unfortunately they managed to stay in their top division, by kicking 4 penalties.

City are better co-ordinated= one bloke's obsession.

[url=http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/Exclusive-39Last-chance39-for-Bradford.6261729.jp?bcsi_scan_B651DDF40A879524=P1TY38Z4JOjCGyFRS0chKAwAAABPwcsL&bcsi_scan_filename=Exclusive-39Last-chance39-for-Bradford.6261729.jpCity's latest contribution.[/url Rhodes wants the Bulls plus money (from the Council!). In contrast to some recent disinformation, he's honest enough to acknowledge the limitation on the Council's contribution to any Odsal scheme.

Yet more disinformation and plain lies.

The last few lines of what he is reported as saying made my blood boil:

"Moving the Bulls in here would also prevent the council spending another £15m on Odsal, money that could be spent on worthier causes than a sports stadium.'

"The council has wasted enough money on Odsal already and the question needs to be asked how they got into the position where they were paying the Bulls so much to play there in the first place"

Can someone not get an injunction to stop people like him LYING about the £15m to be spent "on a sports stadium"? If people like him lie enough about it, or so misrepresent the truth that it amounts to the same thing, then it will become established fact in people's minds.

Its about bloody time the Bulls did something to stop this libelous nonsense being repeated as if fact.

And as for whatever happened years in the past, the council are paying nothing now and so to keep dragging up the past is totally disingenuous.

I'm afraid all this barrage from City has destroyed any support or sympathy I ever had for them. They seem to be treating us like an adversary to be overcome. Well in that case, good fortune to their adversaries.

If you were a successful business person & you were being libelled you would do something about it, immediately. I assume most Bulls directors are business people, so why are they letting City get away with murder? Would the Kaiser stay as quiet?

I'll assume that was your usual sarcasm?

[url=http://www.boyfrombrazil.co.uk/2010/04/political-parties-talk-sports-in-bradford-lib-dems-%e2%80%98will-not-support-stadium-solely-for-bulls%e2%80%99/Some of this article[/url is fairly relevant.

It seems it is only the current council who believe that the OSV has any chance of going ahead.

Reading that article, and leaving the party political wänkerage out of it, there seems to be encouraging unanimity amongst the parties quoted that the district needs a decent sporting complex.

Maybe one day the City lot will see that there is no room to build that at VP, and that the OSV is where it should be at? Hence the original vision? That is if they are being genuinely objective, and not using this as way of trying to preserve their playing at VP?

Incidentally, for the avoidance of doubt I am not so emotionally attached to Odsal that I could not conceive of the club playing elsewhere. On the contrary, I want to see the Bulls playing out of a decent stadium which maximises the opportunities for securing its financial future. No fussed where that is as long as its in decent travelling distance of the majority of the fans. If VP had space around it and quick access from the motorway, if it was a conventionally-laid out ground with a full-size pitch and with ample car parking on-site, and if there was no Low Moor station on the horizon, I'd not have an issue with groundshare there, under a separate stadium operating company.

But VP does not tick enough boxes for me.

He's only putting forward a cheaper more viable option for both clubs, I don't see the reason for such hostility from Bulls fans to City.

I'd expect Mr Hood to reject the offer and keep on hyping up OSV. Don't get me wrong, Odsal is a decent stadium, brilliant PA system and two modern stand, but the rest of it badly run down and I understand that the Bulls will be reluctant to leave their home. But for the future of both sporting clubs and the city, it's essential.

However, I do thing Mr Rhodes will have inevitably upset Bulls fans by saying, "Odsal being sold for a decent pot of money" as that's their historical home.

Here is the response:

No it was a genuine question, not to you directly, but in genuine support of your post.
This time I will ask you directly so there can be no misunderstanding; Adey, why do the Bulls appear to be letting this libel go apparently unchallenged?

www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... 0_minutes/ Avenue could be in the same division as City the season after next...

www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... 0_minutes/ Avenue could be in the same division as City the season after next...

and nothing seems to be happening with their stadium plans at thornbury. If Hood had any sense he'd be working behind the scenes to get avenue back on board at Odsal. Would remove a lot of the objections to plans main beneficiary being bulls and also attract extra grant options from football league to help with funding.

Beats me! Its got me puzzled. So far its seems to be the Council more than the Bulls who are making any running in refuting the wänkerage against the Bulls being discharged from the City soil pipe. Maybe they are hedging their bets, and not burning bridges (its metaphor night tonight...) for if the OSV/New Odsal finally never happens? Cos I'm sure that if some form of OSV does not happen, then it'll be VP for sure. Or maybe they are just wisely not being drawn into the public slanging match which it seems so obvious some in the city camp are itching for to advance their aims? So basically, dunno!

Maybe he is?

I thought the strategy was to avoid making the osv sound like a Bulls thing. But with no other spokesman for it...

[url=http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/football/Come-and-see-Village-plan.6264420.jpHood's response in the YP[/url.

Is it bordering on disinformation to suggest that Bulls own the stadium - without the qualification that it's the leasehold that the club owns?