The three year plan

[cricketfieldclarets]

Can anyone remember the much maligned at the time three year plan tha Kilby brought in? I seem to recall on claretsmad days it was widely ridiculed at a time we were struggling. I remember it being a forward thinking and creative idea for the time but came at a time when we often had to sell our best players.

Was part of the plan to sell or buy back the ground (how did it ever come to that)?
Did we get promoted within the plan?
Was selling the ground a good idea in the end?

I am sure it was a success, by chance or plan in the end but can't remember what the plan entailed.

[Quickenthetempo]

It has all worked out in the end but make no mistake selling the ground cost us a pretty penny. High rents and I presume buying back for a higher price.
A lot of fans were rightly annoyed at the time when we had to pay for the CF roof despite being a tenant.

[cricketfieldclarets]

Yeah, alls well that ends well but was wondering if it was all coincidence or good planning. I guess the timely success means we will never know and it thankfully never became a big issue in the end.

Was selling the ground part of the three year plan?

[Royboyclaret]

First of all let's be clear that, not for the first time or the last, the gesture by Barry Kilby of providing the funds to buy the ground was yet more evidence of just how much Burnley FC means to him.

Barry and former director John Sullivan formed a company called Longside Properties and, with the club struggling to compete in the Championship in 2006, they purchased the ground for £3.2m and the club became tenants paying rent at £330k per year. This arrangement lasted for three years when the club were again in need of cash and BK and JS sold the ground to Lionbridge Ltd where it remained until 2013.

The agreement was always that the ground could be returned to the ownership of the club at the appropriate time and in 2012/13 sufficient funds were raised via fixed-rate bondholders to repurchase the Turf and eventually the ground returned home. That final part of the journey was not without difficulties and suffice to say we, as fans, should be forever thankful that Turf Moor returned to it's rightful home, when the outcome might have been so different.

[Quickenthetempo]

First of all let's be clear that, not for the first time or the last, the gesture by Barry Kilby of providing the funds to buy the ground was yet more evidence of just how much Burnley FC means to him.

Barry and former director John Sullivan formed a company called Longside Properties and, with the club struggling to compete in the Championship in 2006, they purchased the ground for £3.2m and the club became tenants paying rent at £330k per year. This arrangement lasted for three years when the club were again in need of cash and BK and JS sold the ground to Lionbridge Ltd where it remained until 2013.

The agreement was always that the ground could be returned to the ownership of the club at the appropriate time and in 2012/13 sufficient funds were raised via fixed-rate bondholders to repurchase the Turf and eventually the ground returned home. That final part of the journey was not without difficulties and suffice to say we, as fans, should be forever thankful that Turf Moor returned to it's rightful home, when the outcome might have been so different.

How much did Lionbridge Ltd pay for the ground and how much did we pay to get it back?

[Royboyclaret]

The price paid by Lionbridge is not on public record, however Barry said at the time that he and Sullivan about broke even on the deal.

£3.2m was raised by the bondholders to buy the ground back, but let's just say the final settlement was considerably more.

[cricketfieldclarets]

Were we ever at risk of not getting it back?

[ClaretTony]

It has all worked out in the end but make no mistake selling the ground cost us a pretty penny. High rents and I presume buying back for a higher price.
A lot of fans were rightly annoyed at the time when we had to pay for the CF roof despite being a tenant.

Not selling the ground might well have cost us far more - we needed that money desperately at the time.

John B was the man behind buying it back a few years ago.

[claretdom]

Its a shame a lot of those fans who were annoyed didn't feel like lending the club a few million at the time when the club needed it.

[Juan Tanamera]

Its a shame a lot of those fans who were annoyed didn't feel like lending the club a few million at the time when the club needed it.

I've thought about lending the club a few million many times, and if I had that sort of money.....

[Quickenthetempo]

Not selling the ground might well have cost us far more - we needed that money desperately at the time.

Yeah I realise we were in a desperate situation and needed to at the time.

Its a shame a lot of those fans who were annoyed didn't feel like lending the club a few million at the time when the club needed it.

Why would you have to lend millions to the club to be annoyed at the fact that despite high rents as a tenant we were deemed to be responsible for the upkeep and safety repairs needed to use the facility.

Would you rent a house with no roof or that you were expected to pay for a new one?

[ClaretTony]

Yeah I realise we were in a desperate situation and needed to at the time.


Why would you have to lend millions to the club to be annoyed at the fact that despite high rents as a tenant we were deemed to be responsible for the upkeep and safety repairs needed to use the facility.

Would you rent a house with no roof or that you were expected to pay for a new one?

Totally different kind of rent back than a house. I think the cost of renting the ground back would have been an astronomical figure if there was no requirement on the club to maintain and improve. The rents weren't high.

[Longside4evr]

This was the plan once that had everybody's tail wagging

[Royboyclaret]

"Were we ever at risk of not getting it back?"


cricketfieldclarets..........Perhaps you recall a thread on here (possibly last Nov/Dec time) which linked a national newspaper interview with Mike Garlick in which he mentioned a legal cock-up?

[cricketfieldclarets]

Its a shame a lot of those fans who were annoyed didn't feel like lending the club a few million at the time when the club needed it.

That doesnt even make sense.

[cricketfieldclarets]

"Were we ever at risk of not getting it back?"


cricketfieldclarets..........Perhaps you recall a thread on here (possibly last Nov/Dec time) which linked a national newspaper interview with Mike Garlick in which he mentioned a legal cock-up?

I dont was that in our favour?