Belle Vue National Stadium

[waiheke1]

To employ Riders, knowing full well that you have no intention of paying them is totally wrong, even more so when one of them is an ex Rider of high standing, they shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a Speedway track, along with the Leicester and Coventry Promoters.

So you have evidence they had no intention of paying them?

[Phil The Ace]

Who cares now about the dodgy bends 3 and 4 when finally the track produced races like this

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=30RQkaWJh9A

 

And this

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BI_VXpOmwyk

Edited February 17, 2017 by Phil The Ace

[Lord Skid]

Ahh, so if all the Aces Riders have been completely paid up to date, then I stand corrected.

[Aces51]

Morton had been in the local paper saying so ...being a man of print I am shocked you miss it ....but just for you , http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/other-sport/speedway/belle-vue-aces-chris-morton-12139248

 

What Morton said in that article was "“I have taken time to reflect on my position and, following a recent press release from Belle Vue CEO David Gordon, I wish to make it clear I did not agree to these comments being made or released,” he said. “This does not fully represent myself or my thoughts and opinions. David and I have worked together and have not always agreed.

I have let David know that our partnership has now come to an end.”

So he didn't say that the comments were untrue but that he didn't agree with them being made or released and that they did not fully represent him, his thoughts or opinions. Gordon had resigned so their partnership was at an end anyway.

Now consider that his promoting licence had been revoked by the BSPA, he was hoping to remain involved with BelleVue and, as we now know, he and Gordon Pairman were hoping to take over the reins, which would involve gaining the approval of the BSPA.

I have no idea what Morton's thoughts and motives were at that time. However, if you or I were in that position we might want to take action to try to distance ourselves from what the BSPA had judged as behaviour warranting the revocation of our licence but without actually saying anything was untrue.

Edited February 18, 2017 by Aces51

[Sidney the robin]

More guff .. It's not irreverent about the meeting going ahead even Gordon understands that was major factor in Belle vues problems this year ..yet again you ignore that there were problems with 3rd and 4th bends from the outset and the clerk course has already there were problems ever before nightfall on the day of the meeting ...to keep saying the track ok and then there was only a problem with the 3rd and 4th bend because of the drop the temp dropping is a lie it had been there from the outset .

 

Chris has nothing to do with Dave Gordons take on the Belle Vue story last year because of most of it is just a lie

When you read posts like this for the life of me i don't know why Phil Rising bothers with this forum.Some of the crap he takes is unreal, none of us really know the real goings on in this case.Mr Rising for me has been great over the years on this forum helped lots of people i don't know why he bothers to be honest.

[Halifaxtiger]

 

What Morton said in that article was "“I have taken time to reflect on my position and, following a recent press release from Belle Vue CEO David Gordon, I wish to make it clear I did not agree to these comments being made or released,” he said. “This does not fully represent myself or my thoughts and opinions. David and I have worked together and have not always agreed.

I have let David know that our partnership has now come to an end.”

So he didn't say that the comments were untrue but that he didn't agree with them being made or released and that they did not fully represent him, his thoughts or opinions. Gordon had resigned so their partnership was at an end anyway.

Now consider that his promoting licence had been revoked by the BSPA, he was hoping to remain involved with BelleVue and, as we now know, he and Gordon Pairman were hoping to take over the reins, which would involve gaining the approval of the BSPA.

I have no idea what Morton's thoughts and motives were at that time. However, if you or I were in that position we might want to take action to try to distance ourselves from what the BSPA had judged as behaviour warranting the revocation of our licence but without actually saying anything was untrue.

 

While what you say is true, it need not have stopped Speedy Star asking Chris Morton for his opinion.

 

When you read posts like this for the life of me i don't know why Phil Rising bothers with this forum.Some of the crap he takes is unreal, none of us really know the real goings on in this case.Mr Rising for me has been great over the years on this forum helped lots of people i don't know why he bothers to be honest.

 

I greatly appreciate Phil's contributions to this forum but that doesn't mean that he is beyond criticism. Indeed, as a member of the speedway establishment (for want of a better word and I apologise to him in advance) he must realise that he is more likely to get it than most.

 

In the case you point out, though, the criticism is absolutely baseless and wholly unreasonable. I believe that Speedy Star could have made a more comprehensive and wide ranging investigation, but I don't for one minute think it is a whitewash or a put up job to support David Gordon.

[Grand Central]

Just trying to move the discussion along a little ...

What does the future hold, realistically, for Speedway at the NSS?

 

It would seem 'clear' that those in the 'in the know' here regard MCC as being untrustworthy blackguards.

Just as Mr Gordon does.

 

He certainly puts forward a strong argument about being very harshly treated by them.

To the point that they made a viable speedway promotion just about impossible.

And this is despite him being able to produce paperwork, reports and agreements that SHOULD have prevented them being able to act in that reprehensible fashion.

 

For 2017 there are new people with strong business records that show that they may be better equipped to deal with such 'despots' in City Hall.

But it is the same MCC that are entering into further agreements with these new parties.

 

Are those agreements and arrangements to be so much more watertight in 2017 than DG's in 2016?

 

Do those 'in the know' here have confidence that there is to be a better outcome this time?

Edited February 18, 2017 by Grand Central

[Shale Searcher]

The crux of the matter is once the "water barrier" layer had been omitted from turns 3 & 4, and the fact the track is banked from outside to inside, would create an unbalanced water table, and the water would run down the banking, through the dodgy layer, and then break through the surface via capillary action, the barrier layer would have prevented the water from rising to the surface..

However, if the Speedway season started in July, they would probably have been ok as the track immediately below the race surface would have "cured" and not have caused problems until the autumn!

Then Belle Vue would have had a bigger problem than the one they have now!!

[OveFundinFan]

To employ Riders, knowing full well that you have no intention of paying them is totally wrong, even more so when one of them is an ex Rider of high standing, they shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a Speedway track, along with the Leicester and Coventry Promoters.

a) Did the riders not get paid at all

or

b] did the riders get paid for some of their rides

 

if its a) then there needs to be a very good reason not to pay them

if its b] perhaps the management was juggling what income was coming in to not only to pay the riders something but also pay off other bills.

 

for example, DG in the SS says "we had spent and committed over £350k in the immediate run-up to the stadium opening on track and stadium equipment, stadium systems and IT Technology and were now facing zero income on top of the losses sustained from the cancellation of the Grand Opening Meeting. We lost revenue from seven home meetings and had the expense of six away fixtures. Our cash flow was shot to pieces and we never recovered".

Remember these problems, meetings being cancelled, expenses paid for away matches, were clearly caused by the neglect of ISG to build the track to correct specification, and the neglect of MCC to ensure their contractor was doing the job they were employed (contracted) to do.

The fact (clearly) is MCC sent a "Pay Less Notice" dated 29th April to ISG [which included £696,782 "for loss and damage arising as a direct consequence of the Track Defects as notified under Early Warning 21], just 18 days after the Loss Assessor used by BV calculated BV loss was £696,782. In other words MCC gave notice to ISG they were stopping payment of the total sum BV loss Assessor calculated - if that sum had been paid to BV (clearly it wasnt going to ISG) then BV would have been in the position to pay riders fully.

 

And I totally agree what Aces51 #1768, Fred Flange #1769, and Sidney the Robin #1770 said. Well done.

Edited February 18, 2017 by OveFundinFan

[Shale Searcher]

Should Belle Vue have refused to run meetings there until all the "SNAGS" had been put right?

 

And once they had opened the turnstiles, were in fact agreeing and accepting the NSS in the state it was?

[Grand Central]

So, Fred, there is some reason for optimism.

That rental of the entire stadium giving the potential for 'selling' much more this time to meet the bills could be a game changer.

 

But only if they can realise that market fully, which must be a big 'if'.

And there may still be huge pitfalls if the Stadium build is still not completed to full specification.

 

I suppose we may find out next week if the new guys have struck the right sort of deal on all that.

[Tsunami]

So, Fred, there is some reason for optimism.

That rental of the entire stadium giving the potential for 'selling' much more this time to meet the bills could be a game changer.

 

But only if they can realise that market fully, which must be a big 'if'.

And there may still be huge pitfalls if the Stadium build is still not completed to full specification.

 

I suppose we may find out next week if the new guys have struck the right sort of deal on all that.

One would guess that the new owners have signed a slimmed down contract based on what is already built, meaning it should be cheaper, and let's MCC off the hook to complete the rest of the stadium. There has to be that treat at the end of this messy rainbow.

Edited February 18, 2017 by Tsunami

[Halifaxtiger]

So, Fred, there is some reason for optimism.

That rental of the entire stadium giving the potential for 'selling' much more this time to meet the bills could be a game changer.

 

But only if they can realise that market fully, which must be a big 'if'.

And there may still be huge pitfalls if the Stadium build is still not completed to full specification.

 

I suppose we may find out next week if the new guys have struck the right sort of deal on all that.

 

I think the significant difference will be that the new promotion will be entirely aware of the state of the stadium before they enter into any agreement. Furthermore, the council doesn't have them over any sort of a barrel regarding the future of the Aces.

 

Given the calibre of the businessmen involved, I doubt very much if they will have their pants pulled down.

[Aces51]

Should Belle Vue have refused to run meetings there until all the "SNAGS" had been put right?

 

And once they had opened the turnstiles, were in fact agreeing and accepting the NSS in the state it was?

 

They never accepted the stadium which is why they had a month by month licence agreement with the council.

[Halifaxtiger]

Should Belle Vue have refused to run meetings there until all the "SNAGS" had been put right?

 

And once they had opened the turnstiles, were in fact agreeing and accepting the NSS in the state it was?

 

The way I see it once it was clear that there were major issues Belle Vue had two options : ride at NSS in its incomplete state or close down.

 

David Gordon said many times that there was no future at Kirky Lane and given the state of the stadium and the dwindling gates I think he was right. He would almost certainly not have been able to return to the dog track in 2016.

 

The thing is closure might not have been for just one season. There were rumours at the end of 2016 that NSS was to be turned into an athletics track (and it wouldn't take much). You can imagine how the council would have reacted to a refusal to move in.

 

You can argue that Morton & Gordon were foolish to run in the circumstances but before doing so it is necessary to stand in their shoes. Closing the most famous name in speedway (possibly for good) isn't something to be taken lightly.

 

The stadium was incomplete but it can't be said that it wasn't fit for purpose because meetings actually ran.

 

My initial view was that some rent should have been paid considering the fact that it was used, but David Gordon has made it clear that had he done so it would have been an acceptance of the stadium as it was. You can't blame him for not doing so given 158 pages of faults.

Edited February 18, 2017 by Halifaxtiger

[PHILIPRISING]

 

While what you say is true, it need not have stopped Speedy Star asking Chris Morton for his opinion.

 

 

WE did but he didn't wish to compromise his hopes of having a continuing role with Belle Vue.

[Halifaxtiger]

 

 

While what you say is true, it need not have stopped Speedy Star asking Chris Morton for his opinion.

 

 

WE did but he didn't wish to compromise his hopes of having a continuing role with Belle Vue.

 

Answers our friend again, doesn't it ?

[rocket007]

Hi I am a relative newcomer to this forum and through following this thread I would like to ask if any of the Temperary Stands put up for the SWC, have now been removed, and if they have is building work as to the original plans now being carried out to completion. If none of this work is being done, then I would imagine the new promotion must be working on a lease for only a half built Stadium, or on condition that the Stadium is completed to original plans.

[waytogo28]

Fred Flange clearly does not know the meaning or irony. I was using all my later 'clearlys" merely to bait you Fred. Get it now?

[ouch]

Interesting that the pitch usage was mentioned.

 

Following the charity match at the test event the pitch couldn't be used again as the contractor ISG had incorrectly installed a concrete kerb around the perimeter. Aces fans might recall turning up for a meeting and seeing the black granules that made up part of the pitch in a clearly visible band around the pitch.

This was following the repair to the pitch in August that only then allowed BVA to hire it out, which they did but too little to late.

 

The roof over the Craven suit also leaked badly and this affected the potential to gain revenue from hiring this out. As far as I know the roof is still leaking.