Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Clegg: Town Keen to Own Freehold
Clegg: Town Keen to Own Freehold
Wednesday, 12th Oct 2011 01:09

Town chief executive Simon Clegg has revealed that the Blues would like to own the freehold of Portman Road. Clegg confirmed that the club offered to buy the land on which their stadium is built earlier in the year but says they and landlords Ipswich Borough Council were some way apart in their valuations.

While the Blues own Portman Road's stands and other buildings, IBC own the land with Town having signed a lease on the 8½ acre site in August 2001, the term lasting 125 years from June 1969, with rent reviews carried out at seven-year intervals.

Clegg says ultimately the Blues would like to own the land: “We are keen as a club in the long-term to have the freehold of Portman Road.”

Earlier in the year, with the club and IBC in dispute over back rent, the chief executive confirmed that the club made a bid - believed to be around £1 million - to buy the land: “I don’t really want to go into figures, but we did make a substantial offer to the council earlier in the year and they felt that the offer didn’t value the ground in the same way that they did. It is fair to say that there was some considerable distance between us.”

Clegg says that despite the impasse regarding the backdating of rent, the Blues aren’t currently looking to relocate: “Not at this moment in time. We find ourselves in an advantageous position geographically, bearing in mind where we are in the centre of town.

“You only have to look at clubs who have moved further afield, only just down the road in Colchester, to see the impact that actually has on people.

“But I can only state what our policy is at this moment in time. Who knows what influences may impact on that decision-making process further down the road.”


Photo: Action Images



Please report offensive, libellous or inappropriate posts by using the links provided.



Marcus added 01:44 - Oct 12
I'm against this. If an asset stripper takes over the club the current arrangements protects us.
0

Racylad added 06:33 - Oct 12
Under no circumstances should the club ever own the ground, it stops the land being sold to a developer as it stands can only be used for sports playing.
0

confoosed_dot_com added 07:49 - Oct 12
No way. Don't want to be another Derby or (God forbid) Bolton with a soleless out of Town stadium
0

MJallday added 08:03 - Oct 12
so that rules us out of going to the olympic stadium then! :)
0

JewellintheTown added 08:50 - Oct 12
Worked well for Stoke
0

brittaniaman added 09:01 - Oct 12
We could have probably bought it with the money that was wasted on Priskin !!
0

ozzydog added 09:08 - Oct 12
Council should retain ownership and club should pay up.
Supporters owning it maybe worth looking into,but how that effects excisting share holders would have to be considered.

Think reaction from Town fans shows the lack of trust longterm in Evans and co even though he has put a fortune into the club.
0

Marshalls_Mullet added 09:36 - Oct 12
PHIL Can you pls clarify;

"Town having signed a lease on the 8½ acre site in August 2001, the term lasting 125 years from June 1969, with rent reviews carried out at seven-year intervals."

Were the terms altered in 2001 when the new stands were built? Surely the original lease was signed close to the commencement date?
0

Marshalls_Mullet added 09:38 - Oct 12
Would rather see the Council retain ownership.

Not sure it will benefit ITFC if ME owns it, will lead to a relocation and redevelopment of the site.

It will need to be a very large bid for the Council to give up ownership of such a large site close to the city centre.

Foodstore would require c.6 acres. ME would be straight into discussions!
0

olimar added 09:52 - Oct 12
"Think reaction from Town fans shows the lack of trust longterm in Evans and co even though he has put a fortune into the club."

Not necessarily. Fans are sensible enough to recognise that the club could easily be in different hands in 20 years time, or sooner, and its about protecting from the next owner and the one after that- we have no idea who they might be and what their motives might be.

As things stand, the club has lots of internal debts and only the players as real tangible assets. If the club is sold, the new owner would find himself with external debts again (to MEG, unless MEG write off all the debts as part of a sale) and only players as tangible assets. If the new owner were buying land aswell, that changes things dramatically, because its an obvious and clear way to cut that debt.
0

murfoid added 13:33 - Oct 12
@ MarcusSg

"I'm against this. If an asset stripper takes over the club the current arrangements protects us."

Spot on - except for the 'if' clause. Does anyone really expect Evans to do anything else other than try to maximise his return in any way he can?
0

vestanpance added 13:40 - Oct 12
There's only two reasons why anyone would want to buy the freehold to a town centre football ground. Firstly, to sell the land at some future point in order to make money. Secondly, to make the club a more attractive purchase so that any future buyer could sell the land to make some money. If Ipswich Council sell the land without an enormously watertight Restrictive Covenant, they will be guilty of putting the final nail in ITFC's coffin.
0

Weddell added 13:59 - Oct 12
Club owning freehold is definitely a bad thing. I think this is something the supporters club / supporters trust should be expressing views on.
0

sotd78 added 14:46 - Oct 12
A far better test of ME and his long-term objectives would be to retain the ground ownership with IBC but sell him the land surrounding the ground. Let's see what he would do then - build us a nice hotel/casino complex perhaps?
The ground should stay in public ownership - then at least there's always a stadium (however delapidated it gets) into which a club can be formed. I follow ITFC not Franchise Evans.
The clubs attitude to its ground shows in the state of stadium. Some of the seting is near to its sell-by date, the top of SBR is filthy green algae covered. Pride of Anglia. Bah.
0

TractorRoyNo1 added 15:57 - Oct 12
good while the council owns the land it will reamin for football some other owner less generous than mr evans would sell it to asda / tesco / etc
0

Marshalls_Mullet added 16:27 - Oct 12
SOTD78 - The land is in the ownership of IBC, but the upkeep and repair will be the responsibility of ITFC.

The Stadium itself is owned by ITFC and has nothing to do with IBC.
0

PhilTWTD added 16:54 - Oct 12
Marshalls_Mullet

Off the top of my head, I think the lease was re-signed when the Ipswich Town Stadium Company Ltd was set up to deal with the bond which paid for the stands in 2001. From last night's documentation:

Under a lease dated 17th August 2001 Ipswich Town Stadium Co Ltd
are tenants of approximately 8 ½ acres of land at Portman Road. The
Council is the freehold owner of the land and Ipswich Town Stadium
Co Ltd have the benefit of a 125 year term from 1st June 1969 and the
lease provides for the rent to be reviewed every 7 years. Ipswich Town
Football Club Co Ltd are guarantors to the lease and also occupy by
virtue of a sub lease.
0

Marshalls_Mullet added 16:57 - Oct 12
Thanks Phil, was just curious.
0

broomfield123 added 10:34 - Oct 13
if we bought the land then we would be better of financially. I think it makes sence to buy the leasehold. It would give us greater control and better grip of wherewe want to head. If ME wants to build a holet ,casino etc then its all extra revenue as a company. Extra revnue clearly crates better succes all round
0


You need to login in order to post your comments

Blogs 295 bloggers

Ipswich Town Polls

About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2024