Edinburgh - new home required….

[Mr Blobby 2,662]

3 minutes ago, JamesHarris said:

Is this a simple lesson in don't announce publicly you are going to build a new stadium until it has been officially signed off? A clear case of McEgg on the Edinburgh promoters faces. 

I’ll repeat like I said earlier. They announced the plans of what they were going to do if they got it. The club have never once said they have the land. 
Again it was announced to drum up interest and extra funds for the project. Unfortunately the council choose a different bidder. 

[King Jamie 356]

4 hours ago, Gazc said:

A ground share with Glasgow for one season is that a possibility?.

Not ideal but needs must.

1996 at Shawfield, the company made a loss of £60K (or perhaps £66K, can't remember). The impact of that is still obvious in the balance sheet even now.

Granted it was one big league at the time and hopefully any potential repeat wouldn't incur quite so much financial damage but I'm not convinced it would be first choice among the directors.

As you say though, needs must.

[Fenway Bleachers 2,665]

1 minute ago, King Jamie said:

1996 at Shawfield, the company made a loss of £60K (or perhaps £66K, can't remember). The impact of that is still obvious in the balance sheet even now.

Granted it was one big league at the time and hopefully any potential repeat wouldn't incur quite so much financial damage but I'm not convinced it would be first choice among the directors.

As you say though, needs must.

Once bitten, twice shy..

Not sure the Monarchs would go West again given current financial plight, given the past “ experiment”

What day would they run? Fridays spoken for. How many would travel? Some Monarchs fans have not returned to Ashfield since 2015, would that change? 
With uncertainty , riders liable to look elsewhere for security in 2023, than risk losing out on getting fixed up. 
Would all sponsors stay loyal? 
Maybe a year or 2 out is inevitable. 
 

[torpointfanatic22 268]

Gutted for you Monarchs, hope another solution is found shortly. 

[MattB 177]

Sadly this does not come as a surprise to me.  As soon as they went public with their plans, I felt that they had jumped the gun in terms of leading Monarchs fans to think that it was in the bag.  I feel very sad for the Monarchs fans, but less sympathetic towards their promotion and officials for making rather rash and bold statements that they've not been able to keep (regardless of whether they've been let down by the council or not).

Sadly,  its another club that appears to be heading for the wilderness.

Edited September 7, 2022 by MattB

[Mr Blobby 2,662]

What part of the club made the fans aware that it wasn’t in the bag and we didn’t have the land and we had just put a bid in for it are people are struggling to grasp.

[tyretrax 2,253]

5 hours ago, Jaizer said:

Shawfields still there technically. Well was last time I was at the dugs which admittedly was some years ago 

Shawfield still there but not in use.

[Noelinho 922]

49 minutes ago, tyretrax said:

Shawfield still there but not in use.

Looking purely at financials, wouldn’t Ashfield make more sense? The track is already there, it’s equipped, and therefore there’s a certain amount of sunk costs already invested in the Tigers.

Of course it relies on agreement - maybe Tigers’/Monarchs’ management have reasons not to make an arrangement (concern over Edinburgh supporters coming to the Glasgow track, maybe concern over the Glasgow track getting too much racing!) , but if both were options, surely Shawfield would cost more.

[King Jamie 356]

12 hours ago, Fenway Bleachers said:

Once bitten, twice shy..

Not sure the Monarchs would go West again given current financial plight, given the past “ experiment”

What day would they run? Fridays spoken for. How many would travel? Some Monarchs fans have not returned to Ashfield since 2015, would that change? 
With uncertainty , riders liable to look elsewhere for security in 2023, than risk losing out on getting fixed up. 
Would all sponsors stay loyal? 
Maybe a year or 2 out is inevitable. 
 

 i can see where you're coming from, especially in relation to race night and rider security.

If Monarchs don't run in 2023, they'll lose their Friday evening seniority and face hosting a number of home meetings on 'off nights' if / when they return.

And obviously a ground share at Ashfield would mean a move from Friday in any case, hence why it won't be top of the any potential 'choice' list.

[ruckerroo 792]

Is 2023 at armadale officially a million ?

[Noelinho 922]

To be fair, we've discovered Glasgow and Edinburgh could rotate Friday nights and aside from the odd rain-off, still fit their fixtures in before others are ready for the playoffs!

You could guarantee Friday night speedway every week and I reckon you'd only need a couple of extra Sunday fixtures. Especially if away fixtures were coordinated well - I know that's asking a lot for the league, but it can be done.

[Fromafar 10,375]

11 hours ago, Noelinho said:

Looking purely at financials, wouldn’t Ashfield make more sense? The track is already there, it’s equipped, and therefore there’s a certain amount of sunk costs already invested in the Tigers.

Of course it relies on agreement - maybe Tigers’/Monarchs’ management have reasons not to make an arrangement (concern over Edinburgh supporters coming to the Glasgow track, maybe concern over the Glasgow track getting too much racing!) , but if both were options, surely Shawfield would cost more.

Really can’t see Edinburgh moving to Glasgow.

[Noelinho 922]

1 minute ago, Fromafar said:

Really can’t see Edinburgh moving to Glasgow.

I agree, I'm just comparing the options. I think a break is inevitable.

[Fromafar 10,375]

1 minute ago, Noelinho said:

I agree, I'm just comparing the options. I think a break is inevitable.

Only real option would be another season at Armadale.Don’t think will happen though(  could be wrong)

 

[heathen52 385]

Im sorry for Edinburgh fans that they have lost out in there bid for the land, however Councils tend to have many faces depending on who they are speaking to.

Let me give an example down here in the West Midlands or to be more precise Cradley Heathens the 2 local Councils nearest to our former home Sandwell MBC and Dudley MBC, Lion Farm Playing Fields comes under Sandwell MBC and is one of the many HM The Queens Diamond Jubilee Fields given protected status of in perpetuity, however Sandwell MBC have given a developer an option to build a shopping outlet on this site, therefore they are prepared to overturn the "In perpetuity status" given to the Fields, now lets move to Dudley MBC a site was recently identified as possibly being suitable and only roughly a mile or so from the old Dudley Wood site, the Council leaders response to this site was as follows. 

For information this site is a Field in Trust site and was dedicated as a Queen Elizabeth II Park as part of the Queens Diamond Jubilee. 

Therefore, this site would not be supported.

However, I am happy to meet again if other sites are available.

 

So we have 1 Council (Sandwell MBC)that will happily overturn an in perpetuity protection notice but the neighbouring Council (Dudley MBC)who use the same protection to prevent Speedway returning.

 

I can only wish Edinburgh Speedway all the best in there search for suitable land.