Close to £11m at end November 2011, all of it funded (not sure of correct technical term) as loans by David Hughes. As we've been losing about £2m per season, that will now be up to about £15m.

Thats a rather depressingly large figure, and i certainly cannot see RFL coming up with that, or necessarily anyone else..............................

Heres how i read it having no inside information and just using commonsense approach. The broncos have no assets but debts of £15M? and are losing £2m a season. You cannot sell businesses like that and DH knows it and is just looking for a benefactor to take over trying to keep the club going be it as a losing concern but with a potential to break even with the right investment/management ? For the new owner to take over he will just want DH to write them off his debts before he is prepared to take them over. Its just straightforward paperwork that needs to be completed as part of the process if the Hive deal gets off the ground.

Yes there's only one person paying off the debts, DH.

The issues to be resolved with the RFL and other SL clubs probably revolve around who's running the academy, the size of the stadium, overseas player exemption.

That sounds about right, presumably DH has given up on the "debt" wants someone else to come in and share the burden for a year or two?

Lets just see what happens......................................

Stop all the crap, lets just settle and move on finally, awful season, we DID NOT win wooden spoon, season over...............................

It all starts from NOW.............................................

Good luck on this

13 days to go.

12 days to go.

Do you think theres a Council Meeting within that time frame? I can't see how anything can be decided before this issue with the usage of The Hive is resolved.

Next residents meeting not until October thehivelondon.com/news/future-re ... -meetings/

Next residents meeting not until October thehivelondon.com/news/future-re ... -meetings/

I know there's issues with upgrading the stadium floodlights etc but is there definitely an issue with us playing there? Do Barnet need permission or maybe they already have it covered as the owner has in the past expressed an interest in buying a rugby club?

I wouldn't be at all surprised if we had another season at The Stoop if Hive issues can't be resolved in time for SL fixture scheduling. The SL fixtures are usually published right after the end of the autumn internationals. That's the RLWC this season, final being on November 30th, though obviously the SL fixtures have to be nailed down by then, so probably a mid-November deadline? That's a long way after our current 2 weeks and counting.

The club have now confirmed that we are definitely leaving the Stoop. I think the new ground is sorted and we are waiting on a few other things to fall into place in terms of academy, and RFL etc.

Just had a potter over to the Barnet forum, and there's a theory that the playing restrictions only apply to soccer - probably because no-one thought that anyone would want to play either rugby code there, but who cares? Not our problem

As far as floodlights are concerned, there was trouble with them at the Stoop in the Branson era, so we just bought in temporary lights on a match-by-match basis.

As of late last week no deal was in place with The Hive. The length of the lease was causing a little debate. It does look like The Hive or oblivion though.

I'm not hearing any rumours of planning issues re us playing there.

Have you a link?

Quote ="Snoopy"Have you a link?'" www.onlybarnet.com/forum/viewtop ... 5&start=15

Quote ="Snoopy"Have you a link?'" www.onlybarnet.com/forum/viewtop ... 5&start=15

I think your right. Im not getting the impression the new part/owner is a big RL/Broncos fan so i presume he sees it as a way of sharing the costs of running the stadium with us to the benefit of Barnet FC. So if Barnet can't play there the owner of Barnet will probably not proceed. Would DH go it alone there ?

Firstly, I'm glad the club has their future all but sorted and I'm grateful to Barnet Football Club and Tony Kleanthous that they've stepped in to help the club.

However, what will change apart from the venue? Now that a new man has come on board will there be any assurances that the club will have a fully stocked shop come the first home game, will the fans find anything out first hand or still have to rely on social media and other club's sites for new, will the club settle in Barnet and make ties within the local community, will ticket details be posted up well in advance to the season starting and will their be any marketing for home games? Probably the biggest question is will the side be competitive? Without a competitive side, I cannot see anyone but the die hards turning up at The Hive.

I know that nothing has been announced and this is very premature but I see no changes barring the new home.

There's very little goes up in Barnet about the football club, they used to have a club shop on the high street but that is now a sandwich shop, you'd barely know they were there at all when they were based at Underhill. I wouldn't expect to see much promotion and advertising, that neck of the woods could be difficult too (Edgware). To the north is a fairly well off Jewish area, West is Asian and South & East is Afro/Caribbean. I know it seems like I'm stereotyping but we tend to attract people not in those demographics generally.

I've had a relatively comprehensive read of materials in the public domain, particularly the documentation around what the Hive can and cannot be used for and planning permission rules.

It looks like there is no opportunity to increase the maximum crowd size beyond the existing fixed total which is a tickle under 5200. If one area increases in size, a corresponding area must decrease in size.

The fundamentals are that there is planning permission to play sports at the Stadium and there is seemingly no barriers around number of games or what type of sports are played on the ground. Basically there are no restrictions in the existing documentation, save for a restriction on league two football, but I don't believe it would hold if legally challenged, as it would be improbable to justify now that there are already paid crowds etc and thus the principle has already been established.

The residents concerns are almost certainly around the impact on house price. Other factors such as parking, floodlights and traffic are really a petty inconvenience as only midweek fixtures could really be a bother and only then very occasionally. The Council did not initially bother doing exhaustive study of everyone nearby's possible view and now it seems they are trying to be troublesome by challenging any progress or slight variation of the plan with red herring's and throwing in a spanner in the works.

Kleanthous appears to be incrementally adding to the Stadium in a way in which it would be difficult to reasonably block at each stage so if he does not get e.g. new floodlights he can always ask later so I don't see this as an issue.

What I think is going on is that Kleanthous has insisted that a kind of deduplication exercise takes place at Broncos - so for example he has a Facilities Manager and so do Broncos - he will insist that the Broncos employee is removed.

Otherwise when he buys in he will have issues in removing them as the new owner. This would be at many levels including compensation, time taken and TUPE.

He would not want a straightforward liquidation and then to buy in because of the points deduction which would just about guarantee bottom spot for next year.

This I think we will see roles lost at the Broncos, mainly duplicate ones, roles changed at the Hive (which insist that staff also work for the Broncos) and then Kleanthous will become the primary owner, with Hughes secondary.

Thus I am optimistic for the future with this scheme in place; after all we would not make some employees redundant but all of them if we were to fold.

I think also there has been a degree of opportunistic behaviour from the Broncos in looking to shed dead wood without additional compensation by letting the club look like it is gone. I think the guys who came onto the field for the last home game were symbolically released, but the rest they are looking to keep like Cookie etc.

Rammo

Well it's all speculation at the moment. What I find interesting is the success the club has had keeping things under wraps and preventing any leaks of information. On the other hand, maybe there's no information to leak!

I think the nuts and bolts have leaked out. Its what is agreed that we are waiting to hear.

Seems to be getting closer to completion, at times like this, it is completely correct in business to keep matters private.