BrandNewGuy

Here's Meadow's appalling statement yesterday, deliberately trying to strangle the club financially. A shameful document full of untruths. I don't want to say "I told you so" but I told you so... These predators have no interest whatsoever in the survival and future of the football club. https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQOjkHcEDIG_HOykx2V2P4Tn2XXmVXL5VpUrwsqQ-CQ3orJzG4YDZLM_yTjHXfrbQXG89TG6J1pWYRh/pub "Statement from Meadow Residential Re: Dulwich Hamlet Football Club Following the recent Court hearing between Dulwich Hamlet Football Club (DHFC) and the London Borough of Southwark and the subsequent withdrawal of our planning appeal in respect of the Champion Hill site, there has been considerable public comment regarding the relationship between Meadow Residential and DHFC. This statement clarifies our position and the main facts. For many years, one of the main difficulties faced by DHFC is that the stadium and the football club are separated. This was the situation when Meadow Residential became involved with the Club, along with DHFC?s former partners, Hadley Property Group. We purchased the Champion Hill ground from the liquidators at a point when DHFC had no future and was potentially homeless. Meadow did not buy and does not own Dulwich Hamlet Football Club (DHFC). As developers, clearly our intention was to work with DHFC, to successfully develop the site and in doing so build a new stadium and a secure financial future for the Club. Since 2014, along with Hadley, we have managed the stadium, and with the agreement of the director of, and majority shareholder in, DHFC, provided funds on a monthly basis to meet the costs to run the football club. This funding has allowed DHFC to continue to operate, despite having a significant trading deficit. We have pursued a solution that wipes out DHFC?s substantial debts and provides a new stadium that can sustain a growing club. As well as guaranteeing the future security of the club, we have insisted that as part of the deal, the club itself becomes owned by the community, using the model pioneered by experts Supporters Direct. As the club has grown exponentially in this period, we have built a new bar in the corner of the stadium, and refurbished parts of the ground that were previously unusable. We have also paid the salary of an experienced venue manager to overhaul operations, to ensure that DHFC can provide as good a match day experience as possible. We have also provided financial support for fundraising events for important local and international causes that the supporters care about. We have supported the manager, Gavin Rose, ensuring that he has the resources to operate the playing side. We have not sought to ?run? the footballing side of the Club. We do not own DHFC and our interest has been focused on the planning opportunity, rather than tackling the many operational issues that give rise to DHFC?s unstable finances. We have always taken the view that as much as possible we want DHFC to be able to operate without our direct involvement, aside from providing the financial support and resources for it to meet what is required and expected of it, with agreement from the major shareholder. Whilst acting in the best of intentions at the time, with the benefit of hindsight we might have been unwise in not intervening to address the substantial playing budget of over ?8,000 a week gross, including a generous bonus structure for the players. It may also have been unwise to have agreed to pay the fines of players. We have, perhaps belatedly, attempted to address these issues and our recent attempts to try to improve cost management and increase revenue at the stadium have caused some upheaval. Our investors provided the funding for us to support DHFC, because it was part of a wider development project. We are currently funding in excess of ?170,000 a year to keep DHFC afloat and to meet the shortfall in income. However, the recent Court case and the fact that the Club has lost its lease on the Green Dale astroturf site, means we have had to fundamentally review our position. We have withdrawn our planning appeal and we are now considering our legal and commercial positions. Our investors will not allow us to continue providing the financial support without a viable development solution for the site and some prospect of our recovering the very substantial funds that have been invested. We accept that all parties: Meadow, London Borough of Southwark and above all DHFC, are now in a very difficult situation. Without Meadow?s funding DHFC will be forced to close in the near future. Without the support of Southwark Council we will not be able to develop the site and recover our investment. We are now actively seeking to work with DHFC and to talk to Southwark Council, to see if a way forward can be found to build a spirit of cooperation and allow DHFC and the stadium project to continue."

Having had their redevlopment plans scuppered, Meadow Residential are now playing hardball with the foobtall club. Utterly reprehensible behaviour. Here's the statement from the football committee released today: "A Statement from The Football Committee Monday, 6th November 2017 On the 26th of October 2017, the football committee were informed that Meadow Residential (current ground owners, and club management company as appointed by Nick McCormack) were to end their contractual obligations in regards to player payment and club finances. We were told that as of November 1st 2017, all financial management and payments would revert back to DHFC Ltd?s majority shareholder and Director, Nick McCormack. As a football committee, made up of fans of the club who volunteer 1000?s of hours a year to help run the club we love, we were asked to take on what we feel are untenable positions and responsibilities without detailed information on the health of the club in terms of its finances, or without a say in the management of what we see as club facilities. We have been told that as per the terms of our license, we are entitled to net profit from match day activities (after costs have been deducted from the turnstiles and the bar). However we have no say in the management, pricing or efficiency of the match day operations, therefore our profit is dictated to us. On the 2nd of November, we sent a large list of concerns, and urgent questions to be answered to try and make sense of the situation, that have yet to be fully addressed. We hope that Meadow and it?s subsidiaries will be forthcoming with information ASAP, in an effort to rectify what has been a very worrying period for the football club since their planning appeal was pulled after the greendale lease appeal was lost and ending Meadow's development plans. We want to assure the fans, players, and all those associated with the club we will do all in our power, along with our partners at DHST and at Aspire, to secure a future for the football club that puts the community and club first. The Football Committee - Dulwich Hamlet Football Club #DHFC Updated 11:58 - 6 Nov 2017 by Liam Hickey" http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/dulwichhamlet/news/club-statement-regarding-ongoing-developments-with-2065612.html

Surma? Haven't been there for ages.

I can do the 14th but not the 7th. I fancy a Christmas curry...

If you're an ale fan, you might want to get to the EDT earlier ? FREE beer! See attached. Might join y'all in the pub post-curry...

The EDT's music is never too loud.

Music-related vowel omissions ? eg HMLTD, We Are FSTVL etc. Look, just put the vowels back and don't be so silly... TWTS

Well, they actually adapt brilliantly in towns. Which doesn't mean life can't be rough for them, but it's easier than life in the countryside.

Busy that night, alas.

A commanding 4-0 win at Merstham this evening puts Dulwich Hamlet top of the league. But Billericay have five games in hand...

James, please could you possibly chase up the siuation with regard to the lease on Green Dale fields? Meadow Residential have now given up their planning appeal for the two applications regarding the proposed DHFC/housing development, but it's not clear from their latest statement if they're carrying on with the legal case against LBS trying to keep the Green Dale lease.

3-2 home win against Burgess Hill Town. Should have been much easier than that but several huge chances were squandered in the first half. Still, joint top of the table with Hendon (though Billericay Town have several games in hand). And an amazing 1,971 crowd. Onward and upward, despite the off-the-pitch shenanigans...

mikeb Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I asked DHST earlier in the year if they had seen > financial information on the club to substantiate > the claims that (a) the club is not viable in > current form and (b) it will be viable with the > new stadium. They said Meadow's financial > officers had given them "access to financial > information which is vital to us to be able to > formulate a business plan for the new ground". > > It would be good to see a detailed income > statement, particularly splitting out transactions > with related parties. Given that the chairman of the football committee, Liam Hickey, said the following on the DHFC fan forum today, I'd suggest we'll never get anywhere near financial transparency from Meadow: "Remember it was in Meadows [sic] interests to show the club makes losses to justify a new stadium."

It has no impact on the fields used by the Charter School and there is no way they would receive planning permission to be built on.

The "New Southwark Plan - Area Visions and Site Allocations" has identified possible development spaces in the borough for more than 40,000 dwellings. And it also makes it clear that town centres such as Peckham need leisure facilities and other amenities to prevent whole areas from becoming 'dormitories'. So this is a good piece of news.

Robert Poste's Child Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Seems a bit intolerant. We used to say 'rude' (which it was intended to be ? I have irrational rage), but 'intolerant' is the sin du jour, I suppose.

Twats

Heading to The Lounge to see what people are talking about and be faced with numerous new posts in feckin Word Association (II) and 5 letter word game thingy, with their 14,579 posts between them. Grrrr ? bugger off, gamers!

Musiquepiano Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dear Dan, > > Bravo to getting 400 Daffodil bulbs! I will share > this with my neighbour whatsapp group and > hopefully some of us will be able to join you. I > am planning to join you at 10am. > > Coninuidetnaly I have just heard from LibDem > Assembly Member Caroline Pidgeon today and it > sounds quite promising. Please see the below for a > response from the Mayor. > > Security of quietway routes - Greendale - > Camberwell to Dulwich > Question No: 2017/3839 > Caroline Pidgeon > A constituent was recently mugged on a proposed > quietway route between Dulwich and Camberwell > along Greendale, which is a pedestrian and cycle > path which is not overlooked, is overgrown in > parts and poorly lit, with only one CCTV camera. > What action are you taking to ensure that > appropriate security measures are in place on > cycle quietways? Will you look at introducing > CCTV on certain quiet routes? What specific plans > do you have to improve the safety on Greendale? > > Written response from the Mayor > As part of the Quietway route selection and design > process, TfL works with the highway authority or > land owner to ensure that the scheme design > includes the appropriate measures to reduce crime > and disorder and provide a safe environment for > users. This includes a review of lighting and > surveillance, which is upgraded where necessary. > Vegetation clearance is also carried out as part > of the Quietway implementation process. Future > maintenance of overgrowth once a Quietway has been > opened is the responsibility of the local > landowner or highway authority. > > TfL agreed to fund CCTV on Greendale in November > 2016 following a request from the London Borough > of Southwark to improve surveillance. This is yet > to be delivered along this route, but will be in > place before the Quietway is opened to the > public. > > Caroline Pidgeon is now in touch with TFL to > determine the timeframe of this process. But that's for the main Green Dale cycle path / footpath, not for the small footpath leading from Green Dale to Abbotswood Rd, which I thought was the focus of these concerns? For clarity, the footpath runs bottom-left to top-right here, between the two fields.

They do, but if push comes to shove, it would be a legitimate form of protest.

Given Meadow's complete lack of financial transparency, any more money going into their coffers might just disappear from the club altogether, so here's an only-half-in-jest suggestion for fans on Saturday and subsequently ? pay all gate money into buckets/boxes earmarked specifically for the footballing side of the business and not for Meadow / Healey via the turnstiles. Would fans be let in?

A more measured article in The Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/football-league/dulwich-hamlet-bankruptcy-southwark-council-meadow-green-dale-a8006571.html "... Southwark have spent an estimated ?450,000 on this legal process and on Monday a hearing at the Central London County Court decided that Dulwich Hamlet must pay ?150,000 within the next 14 days if they are to proceed with the process. Dulwich Hamlet do not have money and Meadow have repeatedly insisted that they are not liable for it either. This means that at the end of October the lease for Green Dale will revert to the council. This will make Meadow?s ?80million development plan almost impossible, although their planning appeal is still due to be heard by the planning inspector on 12 December. But with little prospect of success, Meadow now say that they are ?reviewing their options? about what to do next. Meadow own the Champion Hill ground, but not the club itself, but say that only through their development plan can the club survive. They say the council is forcing the club to bankruptcy by blocking their development plans. This view is disputed at Dulwich Hamlet, who point to their attendances as proof that the club could survive by itself. ?Meadow are disappointed at the Council?s actions,? a Meadow spokesperson said. ?We are reviewing the planning options but hope that the Council will see sense and think again on the club?s lease.? While Meadow blame the Council for ?undermining? Dulwich Hamlet, council leader Peter John insisted today that he has the club?s long-term interests at heart. ?Greed of property developer is unnecessarily threatening Dulwich Hamlet,? he tweeted. ?Southwark is and always will be on the side of the club.? "

... 3. Notice that when there's potentially something to lose, it's DHFC Ltd who are the party concerned and are put in the firing line. Why not Greendale Property Co Ltd? Or Healey Development Solutions Ltd? Meadow clearly do not have any interest in defending the club.

Lots of spin from the developers here. A couple of initial observations: 1. "With the club losing more than ?100,000 a year..." Show us the books! Something Meadow have refused to do. 2. "It is sad that the council has chosen to undermine Dulwich Hamlet with legal action to take away the land that is integral to the stadium project." They're not 'taking away the land'. They are taking up their right to what they own, the lease having expired early last year. The continuing mismanagement of the site is a key reason for LBS wishing to refuse a new lease.

From the Mail Online this morning. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4992328/Dulwich-Hamlet-given-14-days-come-150-000.html "Dulwich Hamlet face bankruptcy after a court gave the south London club 14 days to find ?150,000 to continue their fight to build a new stadium. One of the best-supported clubs in non-League football and known for developing players, Dulwich are caught in the middle of a row between Southwark Council and Meadow Residential, the firm which wants to build housing on the site of the club's current ground at Champion Hill. Monday's court ruling concerns Dulwich's request to renew their lease on Green Dale, some adjoining land which includes an artificial pitch. This land is crucial to the Dulwich Hamlet/Meadow redevelopment plan as it is where the club's new 4,000-capacity ground will be built - by Meadow - before the Hamlet are handed over to their fans, free of debt. Unhappy with Meadow's plans for the wider site, worth at least ?80million, Southwark Council is blocking Dulwich's request to renew the lease on Green Dale, which the local authority owns. With the club losing more than ?100,000 a year, the council has sought and been granted 'security of costs', effectively a deposit on any costs the council would be owed by Dulwich if the club lose the lease case when it goes to court in December. A defeat then would cost Dulwich more like ?450,000 but the club cannot afford the ?150,000 security of costs bill and are once again left to rely on Meadow's stomach for the battle with the council. In a statement released to Press Association Sport, a spokesperson for Meadow said: 'For over three years Meadow has provided significant financial support to Dulwich Hamlet while pushing forward a development project to give Dulwich Hamlet a new stadium and a sustainable long-term future, under fan ownership. 'It is sad that the council has chosen to undermine Dulwich Hamlet with legal action to take away the land that is integral to the stadium project. 'We are disappointed that the council has shown itself unwilling to support the club and its future, in the way Meadow has.' Dulwich have lost play-offs to reach the Vanarama National League South, English football's sixth tier, in each of the last two seasons and are currently second in the Bostik Premier, formerly known as the Isthmian League. But last weekend's game against Needham Market attracted nearly 2,500 fans, a crowd that most clubs in the National League, and some in Sky Bet League Two, would be delighted with. This popularity is based on the club's proximity to central London, which gives them a large potential fanbase, access to lots of local talent and a media profile out of proportion with their league status. But as neighbours Charlton, Millwall, Wimbledon and other non-League clubs have discovered in recent years, a London address also brings challenges due to property values in the capital and those challenges are only growing for Dulwich Hamlet."