Ok I don't know the full in and out's of why the ground sale is taking so long, but for Pools to move on, my opinion is we need IOR to own the ground.

Bradford Park Avenue (a team Pools last played about 1970) currently in the Northern Premier League, re established 1988, have put plans in to build a new 20,000 seat stadium. Far to big for the current league and I can't understand it, but when you see teams in lower leagues than Pools, building new or improving old it makes you think, just what IOR could do with the Vic if they owned it. I not suggesting making it 20,000, but larger away end, more/better facilities for home fans, giving them the so called "match-day experience" could well improve the attendances in a lot of games . So come on the council let's get the Vic sold to IOR. Covenants can be added to stop the sale of the ground in a couple of years, I just think it's time more was done, probably , by both sides to get it complete.

You can't tell me Bradford Park Avenue aren't getting grants etc for this new stadium, which IOR could get if they owned the ground.

Spot on with this post. Don't know what's taking so long or who's fault it is but let's hope it gets sorted soon. Don't blame IOR as i wouldn't put money into extending a house that i didn't own, so why should they put money into extending a stadium that they don't own. Come on Hartlepool Borough Council let's get the ball rolling and make our club bigger. Here's hoping.

what i want to know seems ior are renting the ground from the council do they do what we used to do when the bogs are blocked do they phone the council up and ask for someone to go and unblock them,and another thing if something needs repairing does the council do it

IOR getting the ground would not just see an improvement inthe football club but an improvement in that area of the town.

The sooner it happens the better, Pools fans should be putting more pressure on the council to make it happen.

I still don't see what improvement people think they'll see if IOR get the ground. I'm happy to be persuaded otherwise but I've posed the questions loads of times and no-one has ever been able to provide a decent answer!

A big improvement in the ground and area around it for a start.

I personally like the ground the way it is, the only thing I'd like to change is the size of the away end; otherwise I don't see what improvements we need other than improved facilities for disabled supporters which are currently nothing short of disgraceful.

I have heard of some of the improvements outside the ground which would benefit the area but I can't say they've made me desperate to see the sale of the club.

Everyone just seems desperate to see the sale go through and I've never seen why.

The improvements are the away end, with a 3,500 stand at the Rink End the Vic is your perfect football ground for a club of our size also facilities in and around it will bring other revenue streams into the club.

Why do they need to own the ground to do this though? It's costing them a fortune having such a small away end, the only people losing out are them. It baffles me!

I think they do yes, IOR are at Pools for the long term would you keep pissing money down the drain renting a house when you had the means to buy it?

Harold Hornsey improved the 'Vic substantially by having two brand new stands built and he didn't own the ground either.

So why can't IOR do that?

That's surely a totally different scenario to this?

I don't see why IOR need to own the ground to extend the away end and make a shit load of money for themselves.

How much is paid in rent to HBC?

so IOR build a new stand at the rink end which improves the overall value of the vic,
the council then decide they want more money for the ground
so in effect IOR would pay twice for the stand.
its not exactly rocket science why they want to own the ground first

dare I say it, the ground also gives IOR something tangible to negotiate with when/should they ever decide to sell.

That said, if selling the ground means keeping IORs investment continued then surely we should all be happy for it to be sold

it's in the councillors interests to keep it going the longer it takes the more expences they get

no they get a fixed allowance each year so no need to turn up at all now

okay i stand corrected,anyway did you buy owt nice in next?

I'm not sure whether the Council selling the Ground to IOR is in the best interest's of the Community Charge Payer's of Hartlepool? whilst i'm not totally against the sale, i think both sides are looking at all possibilities before coming to a decision and if this takes a long time then so be it.
I am aware that H.B.C have to make substantial savings in their Budget for 2010/11 and the sale of the Ground could be a distinct possibiilty, however where the public purse is involved the Council will always proceed with extreme caution.
If you feel so strongly about the subject why don't you start by lobbying your ward Councillor, its their role to seek answers to questions asked by residents of their Ward.

no the missus wanted some shoes. how happy was i fooking shoe shopping on a sunday morning

because ward councillors in my ward are unresponsive to requests that actually involve doing anything other than photo opportunities.
and where the public purse is involved, extreme caution, you are having a laugh arent you. how many council workmen each day between 8.30 and 9.30 do you see having their breakfasts in the van/wagon costing us taxpayers money i know the grass cutters only use the toilets at seaton so will ride their little mowers from the fens etc to seaton to take as long as they can

The sale/or not of the Ground will attract interest and probably response from the populace of Hartlepool, that's why the Council will proceed with caution.
The fact that some bloke's supposed to be cutting grass are skiving will not generate enough interest amongst people, although i agree something should be done about, but alas i fear nowt would happen.

I think you actually contradict yourself there TPP mate you state



Maybe you'll see an improvement in the away end and the disabled facilities if IOR own the ground. I'm not desperate as such to see the sale of the ground but I do believe it should be further on than it appears to be. What is it now something like 4 to 5 years since Turner was made D.O.S and the sale of the ground was supposedly on his agenda in that role.

IOR, and Hornsey, have improved it while not owning it, I can't see IOR doing any more than basic work on it until they own it. That means the area's you want improving, the away end and more importantly the disabled area and facilities wont have money spent on them.

The area's you want improving could see Pools make more money , but more importantly simply make the match-day experience I mentioned better for our own disabled supporters alone.

No one has convinced me that the sale will be a bad idea and I've never seen why.

sorry but the only people who will show any interest in the ground sale are the supporters and not all of these are from the town the populace know that even if the sale of the ground goes through it will not impact on what we pay the council. the council will still waste money on creating unnecessary jobs.
https://www.northeastjobs.org//JobDetails.aspx/7192
being a prime example of a waste of £30000+ per year
are there any council elections due that you are electioneering for bill?

I have yet to see a good reason why development work could not be started on the ground despite it not being owned by the club.

The land will not be more valuable because there's a new stand on it. The stand would belong to the club, not to HBC.

In addition, is there not 70 years left on the lease? For all intents and purposes, with a lease of that length, it's just the same as owning it freehold. Other than the usual applications for planning permission, there really is nothing to stop the club building a new stand if they wanted to.

does it make a difference owning the ground as regards getting grants to upgrade it,what i mean is would they get more money if any by owning the ground rather than just renting it,also maybe ior should pay the council what the council paid for it

do we actually know why the sale negotiations are taking so long (presumable price) and if so, is all the information available on a public forum

How about the club having an open day to include their development plans should they agree a purchase price.

It seems to me there are a lot of questions surrounding the sale of a public asset and yet the public aren't involved/kept in the picture.

I'm not a (Hartlepool) council tax payer so I guess I don't qualify in any case

Reminds me of the old adage......Whats blue and white and sleeps four?





A Hartlepool Housing van

Good reason why IOR don't develop ground in my opinion, I'll use you 70 years left on lease, HBC say in 71 years time, we (that's HBC) want our land back to sell to Morrisons because they want to extend the supermarket and they've offered us £100 million for it. Sorry IOR/Pools you have to move. Ok figures slightly elaborated, but what do IOR do if that situation arises , they could possibly lose millions.

The stand may well belong to the club, the land it's on WONT.

Would you build something on land you didn't you own knowing that whoever did actually own the land may say to you well take that away we want the land.

If you lived in a council house would you build a conservatory, extend a garage with extra bedroom above it, then pay the council rent on it, knowing that you may move. resulting in expense that you can't recover.

I'm not saying the land will be more valuable if IOR/Pools own it but the grants that are available simply because they do become available, whilst they don't own it those grant's may not be possible.

To move on, IOR simply have to own the ground, IN MY OPINION.

And what do you think the value of the stand will be in 70 years? What if there was a stand at the ground now that was built in 1940. What do you think that stand would have cost to build in 1940 and what do you think it would be worth now? It’s peanuts. And why do you think IOR will still be the owners in 70 years time. That would mean they owned the club for 80 years. Who was the last person/company to own the club for 80 years?

So what if the land doesn’t belong to the club?

If I had 70 year lease on it and everything else was to my liking, yes, why not? I’d worry about it when I was 109 years old.

You’re saying IOR may move the club? Why would they buy the land if they want to move the club? That’s exactly a reason HBC shouldn’t sell them the ground.

Ownership of the land has nothing to do with it. Didn’t Darlo get grants for their new stand at Feethams, but they didn’t own the land (did we get grants for the CK stand when the club owned the ground?).

But your opinion doesn’t have any rationale working for it. Unless there is some breakpoint in the lease they’re not happy with, there is absolutely no reason for IOR not to redevelop. I wouldn’t be surprised if HBC were offering to lengthen the lease to 100 years. I’m not saying I don’t want the club to own the ground. I’m just saying that just because the club doesn’t own it, does not justify the club not redeveloping it.

You are missing the important ingredient here mr Waldo.
It has got nothing to do with you. Your opinion stands for nothing. Until you own the club what you recommend is totally irrelevant.
IOR have decided they need to own the ground................nothing else matters or is relevant.

...if you own the ground you qualify for grants, if you don't, ...you don't. It's not rocket science, just good business.

What a pointless post.

Shut down the Bunker - none of us own the club, therefore there's no point discussing anything.

Where is this documented because it's contrary to what I'm aware of.

can you document what you are aware of then?

ta.

security of tenure

To be eligible for funding, your club must be a member of the English Football League and either own the freehold of the site you want to develop or have a lease with at least 10 years left before it runs out. You may be eligible if your club has a licence agreement, but we will consider each licence agreement separately.

What is pointless, Mr Waldo, is your stance on the matter....................which is the point I am making............which you have missed.
Put simply..............you are wasting your time mate............IOR will do what IOR will do, with or without your input.
They see it as they have to own the ground................end of story.

Browsing through my collection of HUFC programmes (as I frequently do due to the lack of recreational opportunities in rural Northumberland) I chanced upon the extract below refering to the ongoing attempts to purchase the ground from our dear friends at Artlepool Borough Council.

"If the present negotiations for the purchase of the Ground are successful it is intended to proceed as soon as possible with the erection of a new Main Stand."

My immediate thought was that it is good to see IOR being so positive regarding concluding the deal although a focus on the players rather than ground might be wiser as we don't want to go the same way as our dear friends across the A66.

I they happened to glance at the date of the programme......... 12th April 1947 versus Stockport County!

My next thought was that I won't hold my breath expecting the deal to be concluded soon!

Waldo I wasn't saying IOR would move, I was actually saying What if the council decides to sell the land to a third party and IOR/Pools have no option but to move. Two different scenario's

Totally agree and they would look even more stupid to their clients by showing off a new stand / facilities they have paid money for and then admitting they dont own the ground as that could be viewed as a bad buisness model.

Why don't they just build their own ground then?

I think they should build it in a field near Greatham. good access from the A19.

thats what they thought at darlo good access from the a66 only problem was people just carried on to teeside park to do some shopping

Potentially the worst idea in the world and would kill our club, what the hell is around there apart from Fens shops and the Bull and dog

i love you sometimes

So, the main reason we should be selling the ground to IOR is so they can impress their oil mates?

Sell, sell, sell!

You do realise that the point you are getting your knickers in a twist over is so blindingly obvious, I would have thought it did not require making.

Do you really think I am adding my posts thinking “I fully expect IOR to read these posts and agree with me and start the re-development”?

The rather, or so I thought, obvious point I was making, especially in light of those people who have said the club needs to own the land to obtain grants, was that the club does not need to own the land before they have access to development grants.

If your point is that ‘IOR will do whatever they want to do so there’s no point discussing it’, then I suggest you de-register from the forum because ‘discussion’ is clearly not your bag.

What is there at any new ground? all you need is a few burger vans, and we'll just buy overpriced lager inside the ground.