Peterborough Panthers 2023

[Crump99]

8 hours ago, Daniel Smith said:

Why should the land owners keep a stadium functional for Peterborough Panthers just for, at most, 30 days a year??

Coventry has a much better argument due to it's multi use functionality with Speedway, Stockcars & potentially Greyhounds again. Peterborough doesn't offer that. 

The EoES is multi-use facility though and it should have been developed as such with the retention of Peterborough Speedway; as per first draft of the new Peterborough Local Plan in 2015/16. In 2022 the landowners (EEAS) initially said they had no problem with the speedway running. It's AEPG who have all but closed the events venue, isolated Peterborough Speedway and pushed the unviable, lack of use narrative (you've bought) while trying to con PCC that their so called leisure led concrete jungle offers the city and region more than an effectively managed events venue, speedway track and Arena venue.

[Daniel Smith]

4 minutes ago, Crump99 said:

The EoES is multi-use facility though and it should have been developed as such with the retention of Peterborough Speedway; as per first draft of the new Peterborough Local Plan in 2015/16. In 2022 the landowners (EEAS) initially said they had no problem with the speedway running. It's AEPG who have all but closed the events venue, isolated Peterborough Speedway and pushed the unviable, lack of use narrative (you've bought) while trying to con PCC that their so called leisure led concrete jungle offers the city and region more than an effectively managed events venue, speedway track and Arena venue.

Don't disagree but Peterborough Speedway group desperately need to get people that sees the venue as a 'viable use' on board asap. 

Going alone is just flogging a dead horse. 

Do Truckfest care they're gone, does the Caravan Club care they're gone, does EquiFest?? 

Whilst things are difficult for EEAS & AEPG right now, they know they can bide their time

[Crump99]

47 minutes ago, Daniel Smith said:

Don't disagree but Peterborough Speedway group desperately need to get people that sees the venue as a 'viable use' on board asap. 

Going alone is just flogging a dead horse. 

Do Truckfest care they're gone, does the Caravan Club care they're gone, does EquiFest?? 

Whilst things are difficult for EEAS & AEPG right now, they know they can bide their time

My understanding is that financial accounts show that the venue as a whole is, and has been, viable (even during Covid?). I'm sure that those details will be delivered and debated at a more appropriate time.

Those events mentioned will be disappointed no doubt but will soon move on, as they have, but I'm sure that they'd return if the EoES was open to them and others again. They have no skin in the game though and their very existence isn't under threat so there is no reason why they would want to join the campaign group.

The EEAS/AEPG want this done (Butterfield said last week that he wants to start tomorrow) and whether they are prepared to sacrifice time and money sitting and waiting is very much open to question? Flogging a dead horse might seem pointless but we're further down the line than Coventry, in terms of evidence and preparedness,  and look at that outcome after years. I'm sure that Brandon Estates thought that they'd just bide their time and claim the prize?

[Daniel Smith]

9 hours ago, Crump99 said:

My understanding is that financial accounts show that the venue as a whole is, and has been, viable (even during Covid?). I'm sure that those details will be delivered and debated at a more appropriate time.

Those events mentioned will be disappointed no doubt but will soon move on, as they have, but I'm sure that they'd return if the EoES was open to them and others again. They have no skin in the game though and their very existence isn't under threat so there is no reason why they would want to join the campaign group.

The EEAS/AEPG want this done (Butterfield said last week that he wants to start tomorrow) and whether they are prepared to sacrifice time and money sitting and waiting is very much open to question? Flogging a dead horse might seem pointless but we're further down the line than Coventry, in terms of evidence and preparedness,  and look at that outcome after years. I'm sure that Brandon Estates thought that they'd just bide their time and claim the prize?

Here's the problem, you can't use past accounting as an argument for viability as all those businesses & events have moved on. 

You need future accounting from businesses & events that want to come in as the land is. 

As I said, Speedway needs help, you're flogging a dead horse going alone. 

Peterborough's situation isn't comparable to Coventry & Oxford as they have the multi-use of the facility. 

With the land vastness of the EoES, Peterborough cannot argue the viability of the stadium & 'fictional' accounting without other businesses on board. 

Or the other option is a simple one, find a multi millionaire to buy the land from EEAS

[OldNutter]

12 hours ago, Daniel Smith said:

Don't disagree but Peterborough Speedway group desperately need to get people that sees the venue as a 'viable use' on board asap. 

Going alone is just flogging a dead horse. 

Do Truckfest care they're gone, does the Caravan Club care they're gone, does EquiFest?? 

Whilst things are difficult for EEAS & AEPG right now, they know they can bide their time

Past viability can and has  been used as an argument against development if the loss of viability is/was due to actions of the developer having induced the loss of viability in support of the changes.  Clearly, the actions taken by AEPG when they took ownership of the management company for the Showground from EEAS in refusing bookings from all of the existing events can be used to prove that the closures were induced.  That could mean that the viability evidence is already cast in stone, ready to be unearthed at the right time.   The legal system has the capability to effectively wind the clock back if that is likely to affect material evidence.  Add that to the consideration of precedence in legal cases such as may occur if the planning decision is taken to appeal and the case could well already be well established.

Biding time can be a double-edged sword, and borrowing lots of money is no longer as cheap as it was a few years ago, making time much more of an enemy than it was a few fears  ago.

[Daniel Smith]

1 hour ago, OldNutter said:

Past viability can and has  been used as an argument against development if the loss of viability is/was due to actions of the developer having induced the loss of viability in support of the changes.  Clearly, the actions taken by AEPG when they took ownership of the management company for the Showground from EEAS in refusing bookings from all of the existing events can be used to prove that the closures were induced.  That could mean that the viability evidence is already cast in stone, ready to be unearthed at the right time.   The legal system has the capability to effectively wind the clock back if that is likely to affect material evidence.  Add that to the consideration of precedence in legal cases such as may occur if the planning decision is taken to appeal and the case could well already be well established.

Biding time can be a double-edged sword, and borrowing lots of money is no longer as cheap as it was a few years ago, making time much more of an enemy than it was a few fears  ago.

You're right, but only if all the businesses help fight the cause & highlight the effects moving has had on their businesses & show they had intended to stay. 

You can't use historical figures of many businesses to fight a standalone case if these businesses have relocated successfully.

Peterborough Speedway are flogging a dead horse going at this alone. 

[Crump99]

 

6 hours ago, Daniel Smith said:

Here's the problem, you can't use past accounting as an argument for viability as all those businesses & events have moved on. 

You need future accounting from businesses & events that want to come in as the land is. 

As I said, Speedway needs help, you're flogging a dead horse going alone. 

Peterborough's situation isn't comparable to Coventry & Oxford as they have the multi-use of the facility. 

With the land vastness of the EoES, Peterborough cannot argue the viability of the stadium & 'fictional' accounting without other businesses on board. 

Or the other option is a simple one, find a multi millionaire to buy the land from EEAS

I bow to your knowledge if that's the case. It doesn't make sense to me. I don't know how actual accounts are less worthy as evidence than the real fictional future financial benefits as drawn up by consultants contracted to the land promoters.

If the save the speedway campaign e-mailed/contacted all of those events thrown out by AEPG (possibly including some others who might be interested) & asked if they would return in future to a well run and open Showground? Then by using those past accounts (or what those events paid previously) then it should be easy enough to come up with a future figure.

 

 

Edited January 25 by Crump99

[Daniel Smith]

43 minutes ago, Crump99 said:

 

I bow to your knowledge if that's the case. It doesn't make sense to me. I don't know how actual accounts are less worthy as evidence than the real fictional future financial benefits as drawn up by consultants contracted to the land promoters.

If the save the speedway campaign e-mailed/contacted all of those events thrown out by AEPG (possibly including some others who might be interested) & asked if they would return in future to a well run and open Showground? Then by using those past accounts (or what those events paid previously) then it should be easy enough to come up with a future figure.

 

 

That's exactly it. If those past businesses are willing to return then they would need to have their name within the fight with the Speedway. Then past accounting becomes viable along side future accounting. 

It will become extremely difficult to find 'new' businesses to take on the fight. 

I know it comes across as a doom merchant but I think it's fair for fans to understand the challenges of a standalone fight. 

Going back to the original post, regarding what are AEPG doing. If they can prove Peterborough 'offers nothing' to the community outside of match days & away from the EoES, Peterborough Speedway absolutely 100% needs past & future businesses alongside. 

AEPG are looking for those final nails

[Crump99]

15 hours ago, Daniel Smith said:

I know it comes across as a doom merchant

Just a touch. Bratters and co are well aware of the challenges they face both now and in the future. They have to remain positive and see what happens when AEPG play their next card. They do appear to hold the aces and Chapman allowed the fat lady to fully test her vocal chords in 2023 and is still clinging on in 2024 to assist both her and AEPG but she has yet to burst in to song!

[TTT]

Happy retirement Hans Andersen, Thank you for everything.

[Bald Bloke]

1 hour ago, TTT said:

Happy retirement Hans Andersen, Thank you for everything.

A great servant to British speedway over the years. All the best to Hans.

[Flappy]

All gone very quiet regarding our future I predict a multi ear scrap

[Racin Jason 72]

What’s the latest on negotiations on purchasing the promoting rights off Buster ? 

[Pitch]

2 hours ago, Flappy said:

All gone very quiet regarding our future I predict a multi ear scrap

This is my concern also. It Could be a few years to get back on the showground. I can't help thinking I wish somehow get some land and get on with creating a new track like Workington. I doubt it is that simple though and I am grateful for the consortium's efforts.

[Rob B]

27 minutes ago, Pitch said:

This is my concern also. It Could be a few years to get back on the showground. I can't help thinking I wish somehow get some land and get on with creating a new track like Workington. I doubt it is that simple though and I am grateful for the consortium's efforts.

Workington didn't have to get new land, that track had been there for 20+ years as a training track. 

[yaxley panther]

The protest we had just before Christmas , something was said in the lines of " we thought we would get the promoters license this week  but it now looks like it will be sometime next week " , not sure whether there was an update on this or not , I would like to think I've been on the ball ?

[Hackney]

2 hours ago, Rob B said:

Workington didn't have to get new land, that track had been there for 20+ years as a training track. 

No plan B it's the showground or nothing we will still be in the same position this time next year chasing a pipe dream.

[Haza]

I see on Facebook they’ve started taking the Grandstand down 

[TTT]

Told you.

We're done now imo.

[Haza]

2 minutes ago, TTT said:

Told you.

We're done now imo.

Certainly doesn’t look good - in fact  I think now  more energy should now go into to finding an alternative site than trying to get the Showground back into operation . As you say we’re done now . A new site and track is the way forward Workington has shown what can be done .