Update on Proposed Hotel Development by TCSL at Falmer

seagullsovergrimsby · Dec 17, 2014

Kikikaikai said:
I doubt very much it will be another 4 start hotel given it's location, facilities proposed and capacity. More likely we will see a big name chain construct a 3 star property. Hotel companies have been sniffing around and various meetings have taken place. If the application is approved then we should probably expect to see a Holiday Inn, Hampton by Hilton, Courtyard by Marriott type hotel

The 4* accreditation is aimed at the footballer's WAGs :wink:

Lincoln Imp · Dec 17, 2014

seagullsovergrimsby said:
The 4* accreditation is aimed at the footballer's WAGs

Bet it won't be as good as the Travelodge outside Scunny's ground.

Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo! · Dec 17, 2014

Kikikaikai said:
I doubt very much it will be another 4 start hotel given it's location, facilities proposed and capacity. More likely we will see a big name chain construct a 3 star property. Hotel companies have been sniffing around and various meetings have taken place. If the application is approved then we should probably expect to see a Holiday Inn, Hampton by Hilton, Courtyard by Marriott type hotel

Why would these companies be looking to undertake a build that isn't commercially viable? The lease on the site will also be between the Council and TCSL (ie not a third party).

kevtherev · Dec 17, 2014

Don't need to be a rocket scientist to see where the clubs priorities lie.

The Merry Prankster · Dec 17, 2014

Lincoln Imp said:
I'm pleased it won't conceal the long-awaited new Albion sign on the East Stand wall - trying to work out what that badly-designed nonsense says after dark is providing locals and passers-by with hours of amusement.

This. I stared at it for a long time assuming it took a while to reach full luminosity but, no, it remained unreadable. I am confused as to how this can be. One assumes that you have to use a specialist firm for this kind of thing and one would further assume that they knew what they were doing. Appears either we didn't or they don't.

Rookie · Dec 17, 2014

kevtherev said:
Don't need to be a rocket scientist to see where the clubs priorities lie.

Making money to reinvest in the squad? Granted I'm no rocket scientist.

keaton · Dec 17, 2014

Lord Bracknell said:
It's interesting that the report does not envisage a four-star hotel at Falmer offering much competition with the hotels in the rest of the City. I guess this means that there is an element of speculative development about this proposal. We can only keep our fingers crossed.

Is that because it will only be open 30 times a year? The Argus seemed to say this, but reading the documents i'm not sure

nwgull · Dec 17, 2014

kevtherev said:
Don't need to be a rocket scientist to see where the clubs priorities lie.

Why are rocket scientists credited with being experts at everything? Most brilliant physicists that I know are absolutely clueless when it comes to making money and commercial decisions.

But anyway, I'd imagine that the club's priorities are to reduce the losses down from 8-10m every year. You got any better ideas or money to donate?

Chicken Runner61 · Dec 17, 2014

The Merry Prankster said:
This. I stared at it for a long time assuming it took a while to reach full luminosity but, no, it remained unreadable. I am confused as to how this can be. One assumes that you have to use a specialist firm for this kind of thing and one would further assume that they knew what they were doing. Appears either we didn't or they don't.

Its shit that sign - its really badly made and there were bits falling off it after six months - It was supposed to be hexagonal but If I remember right they just used a flat box and bodged up the joints.

kevo · Dec 17, 2014

Barham's tash said:
Can also envisage occasions where as an Albion fan in exile I might take advantage of if for midweek games.

I'm also in exile and I like the idea of going to midweek games, heading to Dick's Bar afterwards and then staggering across the concourse to the hotel - rather than normal late journey home nightmare. Probably wouldn't be able to afford to do it very often though!

Vegas Seagull · Dec 17, 2014

Alex said:
Why would these companies be looking to undertake a build that isn't commercially viable? The lease on the site will also be between the Council and TCSL (ie not a third party).

They will be running it NOT paying for the build. They will give say £1m to franchise it per year (intercontinental own 10 but run 1,000 Worldwide) taking profits above that. It is only 'commercially unviable' if you want to include the build costs in the payback. If done with 'cash' outright, as TB can, it does not require finance & the councils independent assessment is misplaced

Vegas Seagull · Dec 17, 2014

keaton said:
Is that because it will only be open 30 times a year? The Argus seemed to say this, but reading the documents i'm not sure

Try 365, the car park next to it is owned by the council and they want to cover their interest/earnings when usage increases after build

Lower West Stander · Dec 17, 2014

Vegas Seagull said:
They will be running it NOT paying for the build. They will give say £1m to franchise it per year (intercontinental own 10 but run 1,000 Worldwide) taking profits above that. It is only 'commercially unviable' if you want to include the build costs in the payback. If done with 'cash' outright, as TB can, it does not require finance & the councils independent assessment is misplaced

True, but Bloom would still want a decent IRR on his money if he paid in cash.

Whilst there is certainly an argument that this could be viable, I for one am not convinced. I just can't see holidaymakers staying in it given the journey into the town and its not as if you can walk anywhere from it either. Its also slap bang between two universities, full of noisy students (esp at night!). Hotels are notoriously fickle investments - high risk reward stuff (even allowing for the franchise argument) and given the fact that the club is losing money and performing badly on the pitch, this all sounds like a very hairy investment to me.

I also find it ironic that Barber has gone back on his FFP stance but the club is looking at investing in a hotel and all the risk that entails.

Still Tony is gambler......

Ninja Elephant · Dec 17, 2014

Mustafa said:
This won't contribute to FFP. If it did, then any chairman could include their other businesses!

I would imagine TB just wants to stop losing so much money.

It was said before that the building of the hotel wouldn't negatively impact FFP, but the proceeds generated WOULD contribute to FFP. And that's largely the point, as I understood it.

kevtherev · Dec 17, 2014

Rookie said:
Making money to reinvest in the squad? Granted I'm no rocket scientist.

How about making money, so Bloom can get a return on his investment, that he is never going to get from the football side, unless we reach the prem. Which lets face it, is as far away atm than it has been at any stage in the last 5 years. We were closer to getting to the prem in league 1 at Withdean under Gus, than we are now. Quite simply because we had a better team.

Stat Brother · Dec 17, 2014

Mustafa said:
This won't contribute to FFP. If it did, then any chairman could include their other businesses!

I would imagine TB just wants to stop losing so much money.

Ninja Elephant said:
It was said before that the building of the hotel wouldn't negatively impact FFP, but the proceeds generated WOULD contribute to FFP. And that's largely the point, as I understood it.

I seem to remember a financial thread with a graph showing the horrendous out goings v income of each team, or something like that.

The only possible way of getting the revenue matching, and even then it still didn't, (but who wants to stay in Bolton) were those clubs with a secondary income, that being hotels.

Stat Brother · Dec 17, 2014

Mustafa said:
Interesting. That almost sounds like an FFP loophole - but I suppose, if we're in the position to exploit it, then so be it.

But surely the other super rich owners will do the same thing, thus rendering FFP ineffectual?

I cant remember what the context was, and don't have any idea how to find it now.
All I do remember is NSC saying 'hang on how come Norwich has got all that extra cash'.
Followed by 'we need one of those, pronto'.

severnside gull · Dec 17, 2014

Ninja Elephant said:
It was said before that the building of the hotel wouldn't negatively impact FFP, but the proceeds generated WOULD contribute to FFP. And that's largely the point, as I understood it.

Indeed. If it is owned/operated by the club or through a joint venture of which the club is part then surpluses would count towards FFP under current (or foreseeable future) rules.

Kikikaikai · Dec 18, 2014

Alex said:
Why would these companies be looking to undertake a build that isn't commercially viable? The lease on the site will also be between the Council and TCSL (ie not a third party).

The lease can be between the Council and TCSL however the management rights will be held by the company hired to run the hotel

Stat Brother · Dec 18, 2014

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Update on Proposed Hotel Development by TCSL at Falmer

#cpfctinpotclub

Well-known member

Primary data is fact

Well-known member

Pactum serva

Greetings

Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls

Well-known member

We stand where we want!

Well-known member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Doctor Elephant

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Charlatan?

Well-known member

Share this page