Eales versus the world

For a such a happy go lucky man of the people, Darryl Eales seems to be picking a lot of fights at the moment.

First there was a bit of a to-do about flags, then the spat with the City Council over the development of Horspath as a potential training base for the club, then there was the scrap over the pace of the deal being forged between Oxvox and Firoz Kassam for the stadium.

The good news is that the club is focusing on the right things. Investing in the players is fun but its short term fun. If you’re losing £1m a year, success is short-term and eventually you’ll pay, and that’s no fun at all.

The club needs to invest in its infrastructure to build a sustainable future; increased focus on the stadium and training facilities cannot be more welcome.

The other good news is that there seems to be a growing realisation that sports provision in Oxford is inadequate. It’s a middle-class problem, but if there's going to be significant amounts of development in the city as part of the proposed "brain belt", then services need to keep up. For a city as thriving and affluent as Oxford; sports provision seems wanting.

Even Ian Hudspeth, the leader of the County Council seems to recognise this; quite a departure for a council bigwig to recognise that there is more to the city than students and academics. Sadly his City counterpart Bob Price is less ambitious given his apparent view that all this is really just a bit of a shame.

One of the surprising things about this, however, are the tactics that Darryl Eales is using to try and get things moving.

The club's response to the Horspath decision wasn't the best. It focussed on how important the facility would be to the club and its ambitions, ignoring the council's requirement to spend tax payers’ money wisely for the public's benefit. The council cited the club’s historical financial viability and lack of experience, both of which are quite reasonable points, but the club should also have made a much greater play on its potential for attracting others into the scheme as a community service.

Then, there was the statement around the speed of progress on the stadium purchase. On this, Eales is right, OxVox’s claim that it's going to take five months to get a heads of agreement signed is baffling. Why will it take so long? In simple terms, if you have a buyer and seller and a price, the rest is details. It shouldn’t take five months to reach an agreement in principle when negotiations have been going on for two months, at least, already.

So, do we have a buyer, seller and a price? Well, the buyer is notionally OxVox and they’re definitely keen. I’ve done the maths; 800 members paying about £3 each a year gives them about £2,400 to throw at the deal, which leaves them about £11.997m short of the supposed asking price. So who else is pitching up money? And more importantly, is this the problem?

And then there's the seller. Let’s make no bones about it; Firoz Kassam is a funny chap. He is extraordinarily successful which, of course, brings its own issues. People like Donald Trump and Nigel Farage point to their financial success as justification of being ‘right’ about the world. Success can do that to you. It’s not just looney right-wingers; look at Bono, Bill Gates and Richard Branson; all have unimaginable success which can, in their own heads, legitimise their view of the world.

There’s a psychopathy that goes along with extraordinary success. Without it, you wouldn’t take the actions, risks and decisions you might without a heightened sense of your own ability and, often, a reduced sense what impact it might have on others.

For example, Kassam made his money as a 'slum landlord', housing the homeless in his hotels; a ethically challenging line of work. But he has been able to justify it in terms of the money he has. The £6 million he personally made from the sale of The Manor was, in his view, deserved because he took risks that others wouldn’t. That’s true, but to hold that view you also have to dampen any moral opinion you might have that, perhaps, the club should also have benefited from the sale of the asset it had owned for over eighty years and he had owned for about two.

So, Kassam may be a money-grabbing bastard with no moral sense. However, outwardly he makes periodic claims he feels a moral obligation to protect the club. It’s not one to rule out completely. Even during the darkest times during his tenure he parked his green Bentley in front of the stadium on a match day. Not exactly the actions of someone who didn’t feel commitment to the club and was happy to hide. Or maybe it was the actions of a man with a rampant ego.

Is Kassam just toying with OxVox? Maybe, it fits with the convenient view that he is some kind of Dick Dastardly character. But a man who has made as much money as him doesn’t strike me as someone who wastes time playing games just for the sake of it.

Oxvox seem pretty adamant that a deal is being put together, and it might be just a question of finding meeting time with Kassam, other interested parties and the various experts they might need to progress things, Oxvox are doing all this stuff part-time, after all.

It is possible that Kassam has developed a god-complex over the club, that he believed only he knows truly what is good for it. It may also be the case that he’s simply looking for someone to truly recognise what he’s achieved with the stadium. Nothing he has done comes easily; it’s one of the things frequently overlooked about rich people – they can be odious and ostentatious and their moral compass may be constantly skewed, but it is rare that their money has been easy to come by. Look at it from Kassam’s perspective, he’s built a football stadium, something nobody had achieved in Oxford for nearly a century and yet he is painted as evil and an anchor to the club’s future success. Maybe trusting people associated with the club is more difficult for him because he feels taken for granted or that his legacy will be trashed once he has gone. It probably doesn't help that the club refer to the stadium as 'Grenoble Road' effectively wiping him from history.

But broadsiding everyone as Eales has been doing is a strange thing to do when there is such a delicate game of politics to play. So, what is he playing at?

It seems unlikely that after a successful career making lots of money and a couple of years turning the club around, that he has suddenly lost his mind. One of his great strengths is his emotional intelligence and empathy towards fans. He too may be frustrated that despite everything he’s done for the club he still can’t get himself a seat at the table when it comes to discussing the future of sport in the city. It’s that god complex again, but it's understandable, the university boat crew aside, Oxford United is the biggest sports name in town and we seem to have a minority say in what happens in the city. It's difficult to imagine the university not having a say in the development of higher education in Oxford or BMW not having a place at the table when talking about employment and economic development. Why are the club being left out when it comes to sport?

Or, maybe it’s cleverer than that and he’s putting pressure on OxVox to pull their finger out; Ian Hudspeth implied last week that developing a world class facility at Water Eaton is something that should be pursued. Eales needs to know which bus to hop on and farting around may not work for him in terms of making that decision.

Perhaps, even, Eales is acting as the unofficial mouthpiece for a frustrated OxVox. It seems very unlikely that they haven’t spoken informally about the future of the ground and relations between the trust and club are supposed to be good. The trust are keeping schtum, which doesn't mean anything, either way, but they've got a lot to lose if they're seen as causing problems, maybe a grumpy tenant threatening to walk away is something that will move things along.

What seems unlikely is that Eales is ready to simply torpedo Oxvox out of the negotiations out of sheer frustration, things are likely to be more complicated than that. One thing is certain in that it seems like the opportunity has never been greater for the club and the city more generally to resolve the issue once and for all.
SaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSave

Filling a gaping hole in our lives?

We know we've only got three sides; we're told often enough. But this morning's news that Taylor Wimpey want to build some flats and with it a new stand, may change all that. Or will it?

Sometimes I gaze out from the South Stand over to the Vue cinema as the drizzle comes down from the slate grey skies and the sounds of haunted men drift into the nothingness beyond the horizon. Time, it seems, is passing.

While it seems like no time at all, we’ve been at the Kassam for more than a decade. There are an increasing number of people who only know it this as our home. That phrase, ‘home’, is still a slap in the maw because it rarely feels anything like that.

The name, of course, doesn’t help – Kassam will forever be a byword for failure; relegation from the Championship to the Conference, the sale of our spiritual home (and most valuable asset) and a move to a hollow shell of a replacement. The gaping open end, a source of tiresome ridicule from other fans, is a reminder that this is no theatre of our dreams; it’s merely the extension of a low grade entertainment complex.

And yet, on this greyest, grimmest day, as we navigated our way around the flooded plains of this and other counties, we were presented with some light. News came through of the possibility of a fourth stand. Is it really right that, to paraphrase Atomic Kitten, Taylor Wimpey's house building plans will make us whole again?

The idea appears to be formative to say the least, there is little ‘official’ information about it, but the BBC website’s opening word in their coverage speaks volumes. ‘Advice’ is being sought by Taylor Wimpey for a possible residential development around the stadium. Oxvox, who remain understandably neutral on the matter, call it a pre-planning meeting. Advice meaning; talks, a chat, a friendly call. No concrete mixers.

It isn’t difficult to see the attraction of using one of the sites, the overflow car park; it’s a great flat expanse that’s being used for home games, and then, only in part. The corners of the stadium – which has piqued our interest due to the possibility of another stand is a less obvious or attractive option.

Rather than Taylor Wimpey suggesting they build the fourth stand, it appears that it is an Oxford City Council requirement of any planning approval. That stands to reason, but you might reasonably assume that this is just as likely to prevent them from progressing their interest.

I’m no civil engineer, but it seems logical that the stand and flats would need to be integrated and that it would be easier to build them in one go rather than piecemeal. Football stands don’t appear expensive things to build; they are hardly architectural triumphs and the fixtures and fittings needed are pretty limited. If you’re building on the corners of the South and North stands, it would take much to fill in the gap in between.

However, the report quotes an Oxford City council suit saying that any development must not compromise the completion of a fourth stand. That implies that the stand does not need to be integral to the plan or a pre-requisite of its approval. It is more that it prevents Taylor Wimpey from simply building a wall of flats along the west end of the stadium where a stand might one day be built.

Nor do the two sites under consideration appear to be a single plan, it could be one, or both, or neither. As I say, the fourth stand site, the area of most interest to most Oxford fans, would seem the least attractive to the developer.

There are more requirements to ensure approval – there would need to be adequate parking for 15,000+ capacity (which presumably would be the size of a four sided stadium), and the plan would require some provision of shops to serve the new housing.

Where would the cars go? How would the new residents get to their houses, particularly on a match day? Parking restrictions around the ground leave few options; the fields beyond the Grenoble Road are possible, but would need some development, presumably. Then there is the infrastructure required to allow people access to the flats and houses. And then there’s Firoz Kassam, not known as an easy man to work with. You might reasonably wonder whether there are easier ways of building 250 houses than using the Kassam Stadium, and you might think that Taylor Wimpey will think the same.

My guess, and it is only a guess, is that this is not going to happen. Someone in the Oxford City planning office received a call from the developer and fed it through to Radio Oxford. The rest spiralled from there. That they are so willing to discuss it, suggests the council are managing the story for some gain – perhaps to chivvy along some development or perhaps for some simple PR and political capital. But, ultimately this is a story which has broken way too early. If I’m reading this right the feeling of desolation from gazing at the Bowlplex logo will be in place for some time yet.

Hyperbollocks!

Seven days ago we were complaining about London Welsh's tenancy at our ground and the impact it was having on our pitch. Suddenly the tables have been turned with Welsh announcing its intentions to buy the stadium. It may want to, but can it?

When it was announced that Radio Oxford had some 'interesting' news relating to Oxford and London Welsh Twitter was, as always, agog. One tweeter, quite rightly, corrected me by making the distinction between news which is 'interesting' and that which is 'big'. Radio Oxford weren't claiming big news (although they subsequently took a big amount of airtime discussing it), they claimed it was interesting.


On Friday morning, Phil Gayle and friends announced that London Welsh were in discussions with Firoz Kassam to buy the stadium. Twitter was agog, this was big.

Let's look at this in stages; the first is the detail of the release itself. This appears to have come from a very general discussion with London Welsh about life in Oxford. Part of the day-to-day cycle of PR that happens to coincide with Saturday's games. In it they talk about working in the community. Perhaps the conversation started with the subject du jour; the pitch. It wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that this discussion might evolve into something about long term plans and relations with both Kassam and Oxford United. Good journalism aims to find angles, and when I say angles, I mean new audiences to read their stuff. An Oxford United angle opens a whole new audience.

What they actually confirmed is that they planned to remain in Oxford. Which is not an unreasonable thing to say; people are not exactly flocking to their games; they look like a cuckoo in the nest at the moment. There is nothing very London or Welsh about Oxford. I've been going to the Kassam Stadium for long enough to know that the alleged 10,000+ gate they claimed to have against Wasps recently was likely to be less than half that in reality. And that's a big game in their world. If they can establish themselves as an Oxford resident, then perhaps casual Oxford rugby fans would start going to their games.

To reinforce their long term commitments to the city, they said they were interested in the stadium. And, more crucially, that they were looking at ways of buying it, including how to finance it. So, this is more a casual interest in owning the stadium, not an imminent purchase.

The ambition is there; it's the same stated ambition of Woodstock Partners, but as they have found out, vision without finance is hallucination. The second thing to consider is whether London Welsh have the finance to actually do the deal. I have more important things to do than pour through their accounts, but the fact is that Welsh were in administration 3 years ago. They weren't saved by some Russian oligarch, they were saved, via the fraudulent behaviour of their receiver, by their previous owners. It's one of those deals that sends chills down your spine when you hear about it with a football club. There appears not to have been any new money in the club, just a financial restructure which made the problems go away… for now?

So where might the cash be coming from? The Aviva Premiership TV deal is worth £152 million over 4 years, even if that money were divided equally between each team in the division, which is unlikely, that's only £3.2 million per club per year. Nice money if you can get it, but not exactly enough to buy a £12 million stadium and run a successful rugby club. Sponsorship is likely to be fairly limited because the media coverage is hidden away on the BT platform which has a total available audience of 750,000. How many of that audience is likely to be a rugby audience? 10%, 5%?. The limited BT football deal is worth about 6 times the rugby deal, which gives you an idea of proportionate interest in various sports. And gates are small, as I've discussed.

It seems unlikely that Welsh have the finance in place; London Wasps, a dominant European force in rugby never achieved their ambition of having a ground of their own in Wycombe (either Adams Park or somewhere new). And that was during a time when rugby and the economy, as a whole, was booming.

So, the money needs to come from somewhere else, or the price of the stadium needs to drop. Assuming that Firoz hasn't had his heart melted by the changing shape of the ball, let's assume that he's prepared to stick at the £12 million asking price. Why wouldn't he? He currently has two tenants paying him rent, why drop the price? So, perhaps there's an outside investor ready to bankroll the deal. There are 'heavyweight guys in the Welsh community' claims London Welsh MD John Taylor sinisterly. Perhaps. There are some attractive elements to a deal like that; the entertainment complex, which is accessible and has parking, has revenue coming in 7 days a week and the conference centre offers similar opportunities. The hotel may also be attractive. But the stadium is the stadium. You can't do much more with a stadium than play sport in it. Or host Elton John. Maybe they're planning a series of Tom Jones specials?

You might buy the ground as a loss leader to get the money from the hotel, conference centre and entertainment complex. But assuming that you're a reasonably minded investor; you might want to see the stadium making some sort of money or at least covering some of its losses. Welsh are hardly packing them out, current average attendance is 4,303. But they've only played 6 games. That's 25,800 paying punters; 61,000 less than Oxford fixtures have brought in this year; amounting to perhaps £2 million difference in ticket sales year (a rough estimate). And their position in the Aviva Premiership remains precarious to say the least. Suddenly Oxford United become an important part of this deal. Like the minor partner with a deciding vote.

Oxford offers a pretty sound income stream; even in lean times it attracts solid attendances playing more games; that's decent money for tickets and other concessions. That's rent on the club shop, and so on. Has anyone seen any London Welsh merchandise in or around the Kassam? They don't have the footfall. Football is still bigger than rugby by some distance. Rugby's profile is driven, in part, by the quality rather than quantity of its audience. It's a more targeted, affluent, middle-class clientele, but it's not necessarily large. Not by comparison to the massive, but hugely varied football audience. This works for rugby at a national level because the scarcity of international fixtures allows tickets to be sold at a premium, alongside sponsorship and TV rights. It offers a concentration of well-off people with money to spend. At a club level, they simply don't have the volumes of people for interest levels to rise much above that of the lower leagues of football.

Which takes us to the final stage. What kind of landlord would London Welsh be? There's something suspicious about Welsh's stated ambition; short of some 'heavyweight Welsh investors', there's no real substance to their credibility. They don't have money, they don't have crowds, and they don't have success on the pitch. I would worry about their financial stability. On the other hand, they are a sports team who might be interested in sport rather than rent (as we have at the moment). If Welsh were able to do what Oxford can't and buy the stadium and with it achieve stability that could be a good thing. They won't survive without the income/rent from football, so they have little choice but to work with us. That means pooling resources benefiting from improved sports facilities, stadium development, joint marketing and so on. The pitch is the only thing that doesn't benefit from the deal but overall, but presumably there's a emerging science on how to achieve the balance between the two sports; enough clubs are doing it now.

One final thought; whilst this might just be a casual conversation which has got out of hand, you might want to question if this was serious then why is it public? Big financial deals are sensitive things; they tend not to be done in public. Investors don't want people knowing what kind of money they have available. Why release the information so readily? Especially when there's a second interested party involved; why publicise something to encourage your competitor into the bid? That means you will either lose or get into a bidding war. If you were serious in the short term, you'd keep it under wraps. So, perhaps this is just a marketing ploy by Firoz Kassam and/or London Welsh to try and draw Oxford into a deal they're currently reluctant to get into.