By Jason McKeown
At Valley Parade, the Kop roof leaks when it rains, the pitch is undermined by significant drainage problems, there are moments of supporter congestion outside the North West corner after matches, and the Bradford End is usually closed due to its lack of facilities.
Bradford City’s home of more than 120 years is showing its age. One of the most unusual stadiums in the country – built half-way up a hill that means you enter one side of the ground from above the pitch and the other side below it – it’s not had any major structural upgrades in almost a quarter of a century.
For more reasons than others clubs, Bradford City has strong emotional ties to their own stadium. It is sadly the scene of horrendous tragedy, where in 1985 54 Bradford City supporters and two Lincoln City fans lost their lives in the fire disaster. But the considerable financial challenges in the modern era of playing at Valley Parade is a millstone around the club’s neck.
Whilst other clubs with much lower resources can allocate more of their finances to delivering playing success, the Bantams have to find the cash to pay rent that totals just short of £500,000 (it went up this season, from £410,000 previously, as part of the deal that sees it rise every five years). That’s around £9,000 a week – probably the equivalent cost of two if not three good League Two players.
In Stefan Rupp’s recent open letter to supporters, the City chairman spoke about the ground situation, where the current 25-year lease is due to come to an end in 2028. Rupp wrote, “I am considering all of our options to ensure the most favourable outcome for the club in the long term, to safeguard its finances, even if that comes at a cost to me. This is how I see matters for the club as a whole.”
Whilst it’s a woolly commitment, it has understandably prompted plenty of supporter debate about what Bradford City should do about where they play in the long-term. The decisions facing Rupp and the club will have huge ramifications on the future of the club.
At WOAP, we’ve had a few supporters email us with questions about the ground situation. So – strap in folks, read-o-meter calculates the read time of this piece as 24 minutes 25 seconds – let’s talk about what’s happened, how we got to this position and what strategic options are available to the club.
How did we get here?
For the purposes of this piece, we’re going to focus on the last 40 years and the path the club has been on.
That takes us straight back to the Valley Parade fire disaster, which came at the end of the 1984/85 season, where City had been crowned Third Division champions. A packed crowd were present to watch the talented City team lift the trophy, but just before half time in the game against Lincoln, fire broke out in the Main Stand. It was a wooden structure that had been in place since 1908 with barely any changes. With the cruellest of ironies, the stand was about to be torn down. Instead, awful tragedy occurred, with significant loss of life and hundreds of others injured and/or traumatised.
In the aftermath, City played home games at a mixture of Huddersfield’s Leeds Road stadium, Leeds United’s Elland Road, and then back in the city of Bradford at Odsal, the home of Bradford Northern (now Bradford Bulls). A campaign to get Bradford City back to Valley Parade was successful, and public money was given to the club to rebuild Valley Parade. They returned home in December 1986, with a new Main Stand and Kop.
A new Bradford End was built during the early 90s – the basic two tier structure we still have today. The modest stand is a neat symbolism of the lack of vision at the time.
And then came Geoffrey Richmond.
Richmond bought the Bantams in 1994 and brought fierce ambition. He saw a middling football club in a big city and recognised a potential others had not, implementing a five-year plan that ended with the club achieving top flight football for the first time in 77 years. Along the way, Richmond transformed Valley Parade.
Famously in 1996, Richmond announced plans to build a 4,500 capacity Midland Road Stand ahead of a midweek match that attracted a crowd of barely 4,000. In 1998, the club reluctantly tore down the much loved Kop terrace to comply with post-Hillsborough government legislation. Costing £2.5 million, the all-seater Kop’s rise from the ground was a backdrop to City’s promotion run-in, and opened in time to welcome Premier League football.
Within a matter of months, Richmond was onto the next part of his ground redevelopment vision. A second tier on the Main Stand, and the construction of the North West corner – coming at a combined cost of £7.4 million. Work began the same weekend City defeated Liverpool on the final day of the season to survive relegation. But when construction finished, the Bantams were doomed to a return to the Football League.
Richmond had further plans to increase Valley Parade’s capacity to around 40,000. This included building a second tier onto the Midland Road stand, and redeveloping the now dwarfed Bradford End. But these ideas never came to pass. Getting planning permission would have been a real challenge – the Kop and Main Stand redevelopments only just got through, after some protracted political squabbles. But more crucially, the plans were canned because City were heading for financial implosion.
What went wrong?
In the summer of 2000, Richmond gambled on City’s future and lost. The club exited the Premier League 12 months later with the weight of a huge wage bill from splurging on players like Benito Carbone. In 2002 ITV Digital – which had bought rights to the Football League at a hopelessly overinflated price – went bust, and City were in big financial trouble. They went into administration in 2002 with debts of £36 million.
Those debts included a hefty mortgage to the lender, Lombards, for the construction of the Main Stand and North West corner, which totalled £7.5 million. Richmond would later admit the Main Stand work was a “major mistake”, stating, “It was too big a financial strain on the club, but it characterised my chairmanship. I wanted to improve both on and off the pitch, establish the club in the Premiership and give it the capacity to do so.
“However, the £7.5 million loan proved to be an albatross round our neck.”
As documents from the administrators laid bare the full extent of City’s overstretch, it was clear they had few assets and several liabilities. David Conn wrote in his excellent 2003 book The Beautiful Game?, “The march to glory had been done on tick. Everything was rented: the floodlights, furniture, kitchen fittings, CCTV, the shop tills, everything.” There were 26 different lease agreements in place – which even included the paint on the walls of the Main Stand.
Conn went on, “The ground, symbol of Richmond’s ambition, was mortgaged to Lombard, owed £6.5m. Bradford also had a £4.6m overdraft with HSBC Bank and owed the Inland Revenue £919,000.”
How did Valley Parade get to be sold?
City survived that troubled summer of 2002, with Richmond departing and Gordon Gibb, the owner of the Flamingo Land theme park, buying half of the club alongside the Rhodes family (he paid £1.875 million, with this entire injection of cash going straight to HSBC).
But the problems did not go away. The club’s projected post-administration cash inflows proved hopelessly optimistic. On the field they just survived relegation from Division One in 2002/03, but the tight purse strings that considerably limited the playing budget soon caught up with City, and they were relegated in 2003/04. A return to the lower two divisions, where they’ve since remained.
One of the biggest threats to City’s future, post-2002, was the mortgage on the Main Stand. The club was struggling to make the repayments and Lombards was apparently not the most sympathetic of lenders. The suggestion was they could claim ownership of the ground and, with it, push City into liquidation. That’s why Valley Parade was ultimately sold.
Gibb and Rhodes agreed a deal to sell the land adjoining Valley Parade (car parks and the site of the club offices and shop) to Prupim (Development Securities) for £2.55 million. And Gibb used his family pension fund to buy the stadium itself for £2.5 million. Under the terms of the deal with Gibb, City would play rent-free at Valley Parade for 12 months, before beginning to pay rent to the pension fund from 2003 for 25 years. The lease will run out in 2028.
Julian Rhodes told me in 2013, “We had absolutely no choice. There was no one else who would have bought it. We managed to get someone else (Prupim) for the club shop and office block, because they could see an alternative use if the club went belly up. But there was no one else prepared to do that for the stadium.”
The two deals meant City had earned £5 million to pay off Lombards and reduce that pressure. This included paying Lombards a lump sum so they would agree to a new deal where City paid off the remaining balance owed over a 10-year period instead of five years. Gibb said at the time, “It will save the club around £4 million in mortgage repayments. At a moment’s notice, all the club’s assets could have been sold under the old arrangements, to make sure Lombard’s were repaid the massive debt they were owed. This solution benefits the club substantially, and the Gibb family gives the club a landlord they can trust with the club’s future.
“In short, the club no longer has a massive millstone of debt.”
The announcement of the sale of the ground and land was at the time reported as good news for the future of the club. “The effect of this deal will be to release the stranglehold on the club’s cashflow,” revealed City’s then-CEO Shaun Harvey. “In the current climate, it is very difficult to generate finance for any football club.”
A question that continues to irk is whether Gibb underpaid for Valley Parade. At the time Harvey denied this was the case. “The directors felt that this was the best option available to the club in the long-term. The aim is for the properties to return to the club’s ownership at the earliest opportunity when the club’s financial strength allows.”
Optimistically, Harvey added, “With the final piece of the jigsaw in place, we can finally concentrate on building a Bradford City for the future rather than concerning ourselves with its pure survival.”
Why did the situation get worse?
Alas, this wasn’t the silver bullet to City’s financial woes that had been hoped. Within a few weeks, accountant and Bantams supporter John Dewhirst was asked to review City’s financial position and produce a report. His findings were not good. The club would run out of cash within weeks, unless there was a capital injection.
It was here that Julian Rhodes and Gibb fell out. The Rhodes family had agreed to put in a further £3 million, but in return wanted greater overall share of the club. In other words, Gibb’s equity would reduce. This incensed Gibb, who quit as chairman. With the two at loggerheads, City went back into administration in February 2004. The situation looked even more desperate than in 2002.
In the same interview I did with Julian Rhodes in 2013, he reflected, “From Gordon’s point of view he was young, he’d put a lot of his family’s wealth into the club and yet we were still after more. I was very surprised that he offered to do the property deals at the end of 2002/03. We had the option to sell the office block and club shop or the stadium, but really we needed to do both. Gordon offered to buy the stadium, which I was surprised at given only a year before he had parted with a lot of money to buy half the club, but I suppose he saw it as offering a bit more security.”
In the summer of 2004, the administrators tried to find a way forward and set up a CVA agreement – where people who are owed money by the club (creditors) agree to receive a portion of what they’re owed and write off the rest. But Gibb, one of the biggest creditors, was not happy with the terms. He voted against the CVA agreement, explaining – in words that remain just as relevant now as then – it was a legal requirement to push for the rent the pension fund was owed. “It is quite simple, if any agreement or deal is not in the commercial interests of the pension fund, then you cannot enter into it. This deal obviously wasn’t. It would have been a contravention of Inland Revenue rules and I was not at liberty to do that… I will do a lot for the club, but I won’t go to jail for it.”
Only last ditch negotiating with other creditors (such as Ashley Ward) saw the deal receive enough votes to pass. Gibb did launch a high court appeal, stating, “Our concern is that this is all a wheeze not to pay rent for the foreseeable future to the detriment of the pension fund.” He was unsuccessful.
City were saved but had a very unhappy landlord. In less than a year, Gibb had gone from chairman to no longer having a relationship with the club. In the 2006 book by David Markham and Lindsay Sutton, The Bradford City story: the pain and the glory, Gibb reflected on the stadium deal, “It seemed a sensible solution for Bradford City and a sustainable one for my family. If the prime motivation had been purely commercial gain, we would have been looking at alternative investments.”
What’s happened since?
Relations with Gibb have for the most part remained icy. In 2007 Mark Lawn bought just short of half of the club alongside the Rhodeses, and did look into buying Valley Parade back. The asking price from the Gibb family pension was rumoured to have doubled. Lawn understandably wasn’t prepared to meet it, telling us in 2011, “He’s overvalued the ground. And right now he’s getting about a 15% return on his investment every year. You tell me where you can get that, with a 25-year guarantee?
“I would say that we have offered Gordon Gibb a fair return to buy it back. If he was a Bradford City fan, he would have let it go at what we’re offering, because he was going to make a good profit on the figures that we offered him. I can’t quote the figures but he wanted nearly double what we offered.”
After four years of struggle in League Two that saw City flirt with relegation to non-league, in 2011 the Valley Parade situation came up again. With the two rental deals with Gibb and Prupim costing a combined £650,000 a year, City approached Gibb with a request to renegotiate the rent. Lawn said, “We simply can’t afford the rent at this level (League Two). I won’t take this club into extinction but that is where we are heading if we stay at Valley Parade with the current overheads.” David Baldwin, then CEO added, “We’re not running up masses of debt. We’ve spent the money available to us and want to make sure going forward that we stay within a break-even budget. Other clubs run their stadium for a fraction of the cost of ours.”
The proposal was that, whilst City were stuck in League Two, they should pay less rent – to give them a better chance of financing on the field progress – with the rent increasing if City returned to League One, and going up even further if they made it to the Championship. Gibb was not interested in the offer. Lawn threatened to break the lease and move City to Odsal, even suggesting they would rip up the Valley Parade seats and install them at Bradford Bulls’ home.
“There are 5,600 seats there already and we own 25,000. We own the Valley Parade seats, floodlights, the generator, the lifts, the sound system and anything else that is loose. If we go from here it will be an empty stadium, not a football stadium. Those seats could be replaced back at Odsal.” Gibb did not blink, even with the likes of Stuart McCall offering to try and broker a deal.
Instead, Lawn, Julian Rhodes and associate director Roger Owen went to Prupim and agreed a deal to buy back the land, funded by their own wealth. A year later, they were able to sell the club shop and car park to the One in a Million charity, who turned it into a school that is still there now. It was a good piece of work by the trio, and the freeing up of £370,000 annual rent helped City to become more successful on the pitch.
Cue the history makers, Chelsea and all the fun of the Parkinson era. The issue of the Valley Parade rent became less of a concern, as City pushed at the top end of League One with crowds surging. Had they made it the Championship and stayed there, the rent would have been little trouble at all.
That didn’t happen.
Where are we at now?
Clearly the personal history between Gibb and Rhodes has prevented constructive discussion for some time. But with Rhodes no longer involved, current CEO Ryan Sparks has in recent years opened up positive dialogue with Gibb. The ex-chairman has been back for games and this year agreed a deal for his Flamingo Land business to sponsor the sleeve of City shirts for two seasons.
On announcing the partnership, Gibb declared, “I have forged really strong links with Ryan and his team in recent years, and hopefully this partnership can be the start of a renewed positive relationship between us here at Flamingo Land and Bradford City for years to come. I want to see the club continue to progress on and off the field, and we are willing to do whatever we can to support that.”
Such warm words would have been unthinkable 10-15 years ago. Though in 2018 Gibb did talk of trying to buy back the club by launching a joint bid with the late Jack Tordoff. This was the summer where it was all going wrong for Edin Rahic.
The recent thawing of relations suggests City might be able to have more constructive discussions when it comes to deciding what to do when the lease ends in 2028. Although it should always be remembered that such decisions are not fully Gibb’s to make. As we’ve said earlier, the ground is owned by the family pension fund, which has a legal obligation to achieve the best return for its investors.
What has always been clear throughout this period is just how reliant the Gibb pension fund is on Bradford City remaining at Valley Parade. If in 2028 City announce they wish to vacate and move somewhere else, the pension fund is left without any realistic replacement tenant, and has a property it would cost millions to demolish, in a part of the city where it would be hard to sell the land for a profit. Lawn said in 2011, “We talked to the Council and apparently Valley Parade is built on contaminated land. They say it would cost £3.5m to get (the stadium) down and clear it up. The land would be worth £2.5m but those are only their figures, not mine.”
Given City’s financial limitations of the last 25 years, and the robust terms of the lease, the pension fund haven’t had to worry too much about walking away, hence quoting a huge amount to sell the asset and not entering rental renegotiations. In 2028, the pension fund’s hand is slightly weaker. City won’t face any financial penalties for leaving Valley Parade.
Not that City have a strong bargaining position themselves. They could move to Odsal, maybe, or indulge the council in their endless proposals to build a new stadium for the Bulls by requesting to get involved (more on this below). They could threaten to build their own stadium somewhere else too.
Whether any of these are realistic options remains doubtful. There are people who know a lot more about such things than me who argue City should build a new ground. That the emotional weight of history that Valley Parade unquestionably has should be respected, but shouldn’t hold the Bantams back. Many other clubs have built new grounds and seen their fortunes transformed. Why not City?
Valley Parade is old, worn out and needs some maintenance. But its 25,000 capacity is ideal for the club’s long-term potential. And although the lack of facilities near the ground is a frustration for many supporters, Valley Parade’s close proximity to the city centre and train station make it a decent location.
If City didn’t have the lease question mark and owned their own stadium, there would be no question of them moving somewhere else. Ultimately, the first choice of most people connected with the club would be to remain at Valley Parade post-2028.
The Gibb family pension fund will be well aware of that.
What are the options?
In 2019 Sparks confirmed to WOAP that, when the lease runs out, there is an option in City’s favour to take up a further 25-year lease. “In favour” would suggest the club can take up the option if they want, in the same way they can choose to extend Brad Halliday’s contract due to the terms of the deal with the City right back.
Renewing is certainly a strong possibility. But committing for another quarter of a century does risk tying the club up to rental struggles that could continue to hold it back.
You would assume that City don’t have to just accept this option, and could push for even better terms. Nevertheless, the idea that City sign on for another 25 years of not owning their own home isn’t something that would inspire supporters. It also restricts the long-term appeal of the club to would-be investors. WOAP understands one recent interested party in buying the club were soon put off when they found out more about the lack of assets the club owns, and the financial commitments of playing at Valley Parade.
That all begs the question of whether Rupp would be prepared to buy the ground? Let’s go back to his words in the open letter, “I am considering all of our options to ensure the most favourable outcome for the club in the long term, to safeguard its finances, even if that comes at a cost to me.”
At the March Supporters Board meeting, attending by Ryan Sparks, the meeting notes state, “An attempt to purchase Valley Parade may be explored as a viable option based on the options around new rent prices. Valley Parade does need serious work down to maintain it and that is a challenging situation to fund serious repairs in a ground the Club does not own.”
There might be some room for a more realistic price to buy Valley Parade. Rupp certainly has the personal wealth to purchase it. Though of course he would expect that outlay to be recouped when the day arrives that he sells the club.
It’s easy to talk about spending someone else’s money, but if not owning Valley Parade puts investors off the club, buying it back would make Bradford City a more sellable asset. Because the next owner of the club isn’t running a business that pays the best part of half a million pounds rent a year before a ball is even kicked. If Rupp is considering buying back the ground, he will probably only pay an amount that he can add on to the asking price of the club itself. Though with this move, the club would become more sellable.
Even if Rupp wants to continue owning the club, by buying the ground he’d own a business set up to have a better chance of success without this considerable running cost.
Is there another way?
Bradford council has been very supportive of the Bulls when help for City has been sporadic at best. The council owns Odsal and has leased it to the RFL – the lease is currently on sale. and is yet to attract a buyer. The Bulls reportedly pay a peppercorn rent to the RFL of under £100k a year.
In 2022 the council submitted a proposal to earn funding from the government’s “Levelling Up Fund” to redevelop Odal. They were unsuccessful. Had they been awarded the £50 million applied for, Odsal would have transformed into a top class sporting venue, complete with 25,000 capacity. After the news of the rejection, the legendary Bulls coach Brian Noble declared, “Something needs to happen if [Odsal] is to continue being a sporting environment in the long-term”.
In October 2023, the Bulls released a statement asking for help form the council, claiming the poor state of Odsal is holding them back from reclaiming a place in the Super League. “Over the past 30 years, virtually all major rugby league clubs, from the Mersey to the Humber, have had significant stadium improvements. Some cities and even towns, for instance, Wigan, have two fit-for-purpose, 21st century venues. None of these developments would have been possible without the active collaboration of the various local councils. It’s that simple.
“The RFL, as leaseholders of Odsal Stadium, by putting the lease up for sale, have signalled very clearly that they aren’t prepared to make the investment required to bring Odsal up to the required standard.”
Odsal has a long and very unsuccessful history of dashed proposals. We are await to see what happens next.
As much as the Bulls might be frustrated with the council, they won’t find much sympathy from Valley Parade. Over the years City fans have repeatedly asked why the council doesn’t provide the same level of engagement, interest and financial support in Bradford City’s fortunes.
Given the council’s huge financial problems of late, it’s very unlikely they will be able do anything financially right now. Buying back Valley Parade, for example, is rightly low down the list of priorities for the city. It’s just not going to happen anytime soon.
But you do wonder if the council and the Bulls could work more closely with City. In many ways, Bradford Sport continues to be restricted by the fragmentation of its major clubs, just as it was when Bradford Park Avenue was a Football League club. Whereas the likes of Huddersfield and Wigan – towns with lower populations – see their football and rugby league teams perform much stronger, partly through shared stadiums, City and the Bulls struggle on separately.
With the Bulls finding it challenging to get back to the Super League and urging the council to help them get Odsal up to a standard where they will be allowed back into the top flight, and City struggling to get going again in League Two, both clubs share much in common about our respective stadium issues holding us back.
We really should talk more often, as we’ve got plenty of familiar concerns.
In the meantime, maybe the lack of interest from the council is a topic that would be worth talking about more – especially with local elections coming up.
What can we expect to happen in the next few years?
The first question we all want answering is what Rupp might plan to do. After his statement, BBC Radio Leeds have reported the City chairman has agreed to an interview with them later this month. I’m sure the question of the stadium will be one of many on Jamie Raynor’s list.
Beyond that, as we get closer to 2028, the noise on this topic is going to get louder. Right now, as we talk about it in 2024 – 21 years on from Gibb buying Valley Parade – there is no question that the deal has hindered the football club. But equally there probably would be no Bradford City at all without Gibb buying the ground. It is the price the club paid for its 90s excesses that gave us good times but big financial problems. There are many, many good reasons why City continue to flounder in League Two, but the financial challenges of not owning your own stadium or training ground are clearly not helping the overall performance of the club.
We might see some mind games ahead. Threats to move to Odsal. Contests of who blinks first. But hopefully, the work Sparks has done to improve relations (something which, at a time of huge criticism of the CEO, he deserves credit for) leads to improved negotiations.
If signing up for another 25 year lease consigns Bradford City to 25 more years of struggle, it’s a terrible deal no matter the terms. Especially as it would take City all the way to 2053. It’s unlikely Rupp is going to be the Bradford City owner in 2053, but whatever he does and doesn’t do in the next few years will have longer-term consequences on the future of the club.
Let the debate begin.
Categories: Opinion
widthofapost.com 
A third solution, if viable. Would be for a group of supporters to raise enough funds themselves to buy the ground and to make it a community asset. This in my opinion is truly the best option because, in allowing someone else to buy it, like Rupp for instance. City face the same dangers when the ultimate parting of ways happen between Rupp and the club…Rupp holds the club to ransom with the ground. We are back to square one. Now hear me out. A small group of financially secure supporters, and a couple of financially and legally knowledgeable people look at the feasibility of buying VP. If, as this article suggests, VP is worth approximately £2.5 million. We supporters could raise this amount quite comfortably by putting in £1,000-£2,000 each – we would only need 2000-3000 supporters being willing and able to do this. It is achievable. The ground then becomes a community asset and the milestone of rent and ground expenditure disappears – this is the ONLY way BCFC will become successful again. As the only people the supporters can trust with this issue, is the supporters themselves. The issue now is, mobilising a strong passionate movement, motivated enough to do it….Who is with me?
I’ll put £2000 in the pot ro save our ground
me too
as the article says, were VP to demolished and the site cleared, then the land would be worth £2.5million. The current stadium would likely have a Gibb/Flamingoland pension fund asking price more than double that figure.
Not if Gibb knows we can walk away. In 2028 Gibb would need to do a deal, otherwise his asset, isn’t much of an asset. We should at least look into the feasibility of this as a first option. Why close down the idea before we have had chance to get the idea and fans group off the ground?
I am no businessman, nor a mathematician but go with it.
Working on an assumption of a £4 million outlay for VP (as surely the lease is a decreasing asset for Gibb the nearer it gets to expiring?), the club could offer 4,000 x £1000 investment chunks for sale.
For that, for each chunk, the investor gets lets say a 5% annual return in League Two, 6% in league one, 8% in the championship and however unlikely, say 10% in the premiership.
The clubs annual interest payments, certainly initially, would be far lower than they pay now, and the ground would be owned by a supporter investment group. The terms could be over say a 10 year period, after which the original investors can remain involved at the original rate, or the club could buy the chunk back for a prearranged fee, for instance £1300, so every investor wins.
The club, not the group, would be responsible for the upkeep of the stadium, ie not the investors so limited risk.
Supporters would effectively be locking a grand away for a decade but with interest, as one does in other ways.
I guess there would need to be legal protection, in case of bankrupcy etc or investor death, but on the whole, from my stance, surely its a possibility to through in the mix or have I missed anything?
5% on 4000 chunks of £1000 is £200,000 annual interest, is this league two sustainable?
yes as a long time supporter I would be up for that. Anything that ends this stalemate. However, I would like to see us move to a purpose built stadium.
We’re in a situation where there is no easy way out. But it needs an open discussion or debate.
The club has just been on a downward decline for the last 21 years, and even whenever we’ve had success or showed signs of consistent improvement, we lack any foundation across the club. A large part of which has been down to the cost of VP and the hindrance it has on everything.
I’m of the opinion that we can’t just sign up to a similar deal. There has to be some kind of attempt of change, alternative option, some movement on one side. Heck, I’d even consider a modernised Odsal with improved transport facilities, at least for some bargaining power.
There is the huge emotional attachment to VP which is used ny some to instantly dismiss any discussion of moving away. But the reality is it has been taken advantage of, will be done so again, and you do wonder what kind of tribute it is when it’s becoming such a barrier to progress, worn out, and just an overall block to any kind of future for the club.
At VP recently I went to 3 different bathrooms in the Upper Main stand. Not one had hot water in. While a minor inconvenience and use as a joke by some, it’s been like this for years and just shows the lack of care, attention and just basic respect for the ground and those who use it.
I don’t want another 25 years of this. I’ve not renewed for next season after 28 of the last 29 years, and a similar agreement will see my support likely revert to a passing interest in the club.
As someone too young to affected by that day, I am keen to be considerate to the feelings of those who were.
However, personally I would be inclined to agree on this point – are we remembering those fans in the best way by holding onto the thing that potentially holds the club back?
Could we work with the families and supporters still in attending on a tasteful way to remember those fans elsewhere, whether that be at Odsal, Huddersfield or somewhere else. Could that be in the shorter term just to put us in a better position to ultimately end up back at Valley Parade under our ownership.
As Jason points out, Ryan can come away with credit for improving our position RE the stadium relationship. As CEO these are the types of things that should be his focus, and hopefully with the Sharpe’s appointment, this can be his priority leaving Sharpe to focus on the football.
Unfortunately, the club haven’t engaged fans effectively and the fans absolutely have to be able to help shape the way forward whatever that may be.
We can’t forget or trivialise what happened that day, that’s obvious.
Personally, a VP which is starting to dilapidate, used as a bargaining tool in an argument between extremely wealthy men and is partly the reason why we’ve barely grown or developed over the last 21 years certianly isn’t a fitting memorial or tribute to what happen. Certianly as the football club struggle in the basement division and have been looking over their shoulder more than once over these years.
Every season it seems, we’re getting overtaken by a variety of ‘smaller’ or recent non-league clubs. It’s not about the ground issue, but many just seem so much more well-equipped to grow, modernise and progress as a a club and business than we are.
Even if we’re to be promoted a few times in the next few years, we still lack that stability that allows us to bounce back if we do have a bad season.
When we do have a bad season, it’s like a knockout blow that takes years to recover from.
For me it’s a bit (and I stress, a bit) like being trapped in a mortgage on a home that’s been in the family for generations and badly needs modernising. You know you can’t afford it but some family members don’t want to consider an alternative.
There’s no easy answer but staying in the same arrangement is the worst thing we can do.
we need to be working on options to improve our negotiating position
unfortunately 3 looks most likely
please don’t sign an unaffordable deal again
Where do you think City could go to? Huddersfield already have Town and the Giants playing there. The pitch could struggle to cope with three professional teams playing on it. Rugby League runs from mid February until October, so there could also be fixture congestion. Why would the Huddersfield clubs want City playing there? I think many would find it very hard to go to the East of Pudsey soccer ground! Again do they need the income from a ground share rent, l wouldn’t think so. There could be the option of Headingley RL ground, but again from a distance they seem to have no need to host City. Would supporters really want to start travelling to these grounds. I agree with your assessment of Odsal. Location and the cost of making it a viable option would be substantial. A ‘new’ place would probably cost anywhere between £35-45 million to build. The topography of Bradford doesn’t lend itself to the construction of a suitable stadium. If it were to occur, then a three way venture involving the Bulls and the Council would be required. I think we are likely to remain at VP for the foreseeable future. Reducing the rent and improving the infrastructure seems essential. I do wonder about the Richard Dunn site having the potential to be developed as a Training site.
whilst not being the long term solutio to the problem surely the owner of the stadium is responsible for any repairs deemed necessary. As far as I am aware this is the situation with any rented property with the tenant responsible for internal decor etc.
Hi Paul – this is very much not the case with majority of commercial leases. As a commercial tenant, if you have a lease of the whole of a property, you would in most instances be responsible for all repairs. If you have a lease of part of a property, you would usually be responsible for internal repairs but it would be common for the landlord to be able to charge back a proportion of the costs of external repairs via service charge.
City’s lease is a lease of the whole of the property and, as such, they are obliged to keep the property in good repair. This is not an unusual term for such a lease.
Thanks Kieran. Obviously I wasn’t aware of the true situation re rental leases
Thank you Jason for your time, effort and bravura skill in crafting this comprehensive account of the state of our nation, the Bradford City world in itself.
I remember sitting in the very public ‘press conference’ thrown by Geoffrey Richmond to hail the arrival of Benito Carbone, and thinking to myself that this was madness. A couple of national journalists wondering how City could afford 40k a week wages were howled down by excited supporters.
Richmond was in his element, holding court, playing to the gallery, clearly delighted with the publicity, deaf to any suggestion of risk. In reality it was all a gamble and one that the club and its supporters are still directly and indirectly paying for.
It’s now become one of those impossibly complex no-win situations – analogous, if you like, to one of those seemingly intractable political problems of a nationalistic kind that keep resurfacing. I wouldn’t expect Herr Rupp to throw his own money at it – or the council to spend public resources.
The current financial climate is particularly bad and destined to get worse. Who is going to come forth and buy the ground on our behalf? The chances are slim though not impossible.
Sometimes the best course of action is to soldier on and hope for the best. For old supporters like me it’s the only action. But I will say one thing of a less gloomy kind: it only takes a smidgen of success on the field to make the picture somehow appear rosier. If we were in the Championship, the current rent would not be a problem.
I understand that the current rental agreement has incremental increases in rent. Therefore, if City were in the Championship the rent would be significantly higher.
Hi Philip,
That isn’t correct. Whilst that idea was discussed in the press at the time the lease was entered into, that didn’t end up being one of the agreed terms of the lease. The rent payable under the lease is the same whether we are in League 2 or the Premier League.
I’ve not heard that, Woody. I hope you are wrong or we will be penalised by success!
What a wonderfully well thought out and written recent history of our club which for many of our younger supporters will come as a shock having not lived through the period.
its difficult to know how things will play out come 2028 and the lease renewal but what i would say is that the club needs to be prepared for all eventualities. It definitely needs an alternative solution because signing up for another quarter of a century is not viable for the business especially if we continue to languish in the lower league.
I have no solution personally but i do like the ideas put forward by Scott and TN, firstly i agree with TN, the ground isn’t fit for purpose anymore and what would it cost to bring it back to life if a deal was brokered to buy back the club? It might be difficult to do both.
On the other hand as Scott mentioned, the idea of a community club which could be a way forward for supporters. Taking Scott’s idea one step further, what if this was a combined community effort to create a community stadium at Odsal? As a city of this size and population perhaps it is viable that other funding would then become available to bring the stadium to fruition and fit for the next century and the next generation of fans of both clubs to enjoy. Perhaps Bradford City Council might be open to this idea. Regeneration of the Richard Dunne site could also offer a training ground and much needed parking closer to the club. It all comes at a cost but come 2028 we must have other viable options available to us. Perhaps the formation of an action group could start speaking to counterparts at the community owned clubs in league football at Exeter City, Chesterfield FC and AFC Wimbledon. As well as those with partial fan ownership such as Accrington Stanley, Luton Town, Norwich City and Swansea City. Our future as a club could well be in our hands.
What a wonderfully well thought out and written recent history of our club which for many of our younger supporters will come as a shock having not lived through the period.
its difficult to know how things will play out come 2028 and the lease renewal but what i would say is that the club needs to be prepared for all eventualities. It definitely needs an alternative solution because signing up for another quarter of a century is not viable for the business especially if we continue to languish in the lower league.
I have no solution personally but i do like the ideas put forward by Scott and TN, firstly i agree with TN, the ground isn’t fit for purpose anymore and what would it cost to bring it back to life if a deal was brokered to buy back the club? It might be difficult to do both.
On the other hand as Scott mentioned, the idea of a community club which could be a way forward for supporters. Taking Scott’s idea one step further, what if this was a combined community effort to create a community stadium at Odsal? As a city of this size and population perhaps it is viable that other funding would then become available to bring the stadium to fruition and fit for the next century and the next generation of fans of both clubs to enjoy. Perhaps Bradford City Council might be open to this idea. Regeneration of the Richard Dunne site could also offer a training ground and much needed parking closer to the club. It all comes at a cost but come 2028 we must have other viable options available to us. Perhaps the formation of an action group could start speaking to counterparts at the community owned clubs in league football at Exeter City, Chesterfield FC and AFC Wimbledon. As well as those with partial fan ownership such as Accrington Stanley, Luton Town, Norwich City and Swansea City. Our future as a club could well be in our hands.
Thanks Jason for your time and effort of all the research required, to produce this very informative and interesting article.
Agreed. We are lucky to have such a service Thanks to all at WOAP towers
A change must happen. Bradford needs City and the Bulls to buy and share Valley Parade. It’s the only solution
cards we shared VP with the Bulls and they shafted us, free use while they were being paid £360,000 that year in ‘compensation’ !!!!. Moving to Odsal would see declining crowds, standing in torrential rain or blizzards as we did after the fire, would be a slow death of the club . I appreciate the comments made, but this is unduly pessimistic, my understanding is the rent is around £350,000 PA, a lot yes but on the other hand, any interest in the club would be exactly that. Coventry were mentioned, in and out of a soulless stadium, same as Reading, Rotherham spent years at the Don Valley when the owner , claiming to buy the ground to help the club, booted them out. The comment on the pitch is ill informed at best, all the main drainage was replaced two years ago, the current state is completely down to torrential rain , interspaced with hard frost, unusual conditions, exacerbated with two games in 72 hours. It’s a fact that negotiations between Gibb and the club are the way forward, but meanwhile, an improvement on the pitch, and a couple of promotions will push this doom scenario into the background
Really informative Jason, thank you. I was at the Lincoln game on that fateful day in 1985, & still struggle with it to this day. For that reason, whatever happens in the future, Valley Parade will always have a very special place in my heart. However, sharing Odsal Stadium with Bradford’s two football clubs was first talked about seriously back in the late 60s, & would have almost certainly have saved Bradford (Park Avenue) from a long & painful death if they had moved there when it was being offered as a viable option by the Council at the time. As expected though, the Bradford supporters we’re dead against the move, the Board decided to carry on at Park Avenue. As a result, the club had to leave their Park Avenue ground less than 5 years later, before ending their days at Valley Parade, which seems ironic nowadays. I suppose the point I’m trying to make is, that our Club’s financial security most take priority over any emotional sentiment, no matter how strong that sentiment might be. I dearly hope we can stay at Valley Parade for another 120 years, but it cannot be at any cost. Thanks again Jason.
A great article Jason. A superb summary of the last 40 years or so at Valley Parade.
Interesting figures quoted by Mark Lawn:
“We talked to the Council and apparently Valley Parade is built on contaminated land. They say it would cost £3.5m to get (the stadium) down and clear it up. The land would be worth £2.5m but those are only their figures, not mine.”
Given 13 years has elapsed since these figure were banded about and the cost of living has soared along with Brexit and rising costs of labour. So what now the cost? Given the cost of materials has increased massively along with demolition and plant hire the figure maybe nearer the £5m mark for demolition and clearing. The price of land in Manningham to purchase where valley parade once stood maybe around the same today around the £2.5m mark. A grand total of £7.5M before the cost of redeveloping the land for private or commercial use even commences.
Quoting these figures who realistically would buy Valley Parade other than the club itself to free itself from the albatross around the clubs neck? The current situation is massively contributing to holding the club back financially and from progressing out of league 2 and moving towards challenging the championship. The 6 weeks of madness was a very costly judgement indeed.
The true worth of the land/Valley Parade is to the the Flamingo Land Pension Fund in that once the deal finishes in 2028 it will have benefited to the tune of around £12m over the 25 year lease term. That’s a handsome return. So the true worth of buying Valley Parade from Gordon Gibb will be what? Surely he will want £6m-8M in the here and now to reinvest into the Pension Fund? Would the stake holders of the fund have to vote to accept this or not? Is it that simple to just buy back valley Parade?
Given the finances of of the council will not permit involving themselves in redeveloping Odsal and there are no investors waiting in the wings to buy the club then we really do have a dilemma from which there is no escape because of mutually conflicting and dependent conditions.
The only real option I can see given there are no funds available to relocate to a new stadium is that Stefan Rupp negotiates buying back Valley Parade for the for an agreed price lets say £6m. Once purchased If the club can sell 12k season tickets for the next 10 seasons with an extra £60 surcharge then Rupp can be paid back his outlay in around 10 years time. Thus freeing the club to upgrade the stadium and pitch and developing a strategy for success on it.
The ground itself can then be listed as a community asset and once again be back where it belongs to the fans of Bradford City Football Club.
Jason I congratulate you on this article.. It is brilliant.
I have no idea what the answer is.
What I do know is that Bradford has a failing football club,a failed football club ,a failing rugby league club, no senior rugby union club and a possibly reborn failed cricket ground.
But I do not know the answer and fear there might not be one.
Thats my worry too John.
there’s 9 acres for sale on Parry Lane, cleared for development, no further to walk from Interchange than VP is. Options are available.
To me the choice is – You can leave VP now and maybe start pushing the club forward finally or we can stagnate, fold and still have to leave when a phoenix club is formed.
Not an easy one. Mortgage for any ownership by the club would probably be as much as rent as Lombard loan shows.Best solution perhaps Gibb owns the club ( where the company has Net Liabilities with only the Golden Share as an asset).Problem Rupp wants his money back both for his purchase of BCFC and the funds he has had to further find following the 1.6 million Rahic year loss and losses each and every year of Rupps 8 years.Absolutely no easy solution with Bulls also losing millions over last 12 years.If a business never makes a profit they are always going to be owing someone. Rent is pretty much covered with 8.5 million Turnover. Pathetic expensive players at 3.7 million are a bigger finance drain than stadium cost.The stadium is not the reason the club is in a mess.Smokrscreen side show though the best interest move before 2028 is a big challenge. 5 or 6 million to buy VP or what is a credible alternative? There currently is none.New grounds are expensive. Ask Everton in danger of going bust as they struggle to get more finance as Bramley Dock development overshooting the estimate to build. Likely to end up 750 million.These are serious numbers in capital outlay.
We need to make sure we have serious alternatives to renewing the lease. If we do we can play hardball with our negotiations. The ground without a tenant is worthless and would probably cost more to demolish than it’s worth. If we have a viable alternative and Gibb still wants silly money, walk away and leave him with the mill stone around his neck and not ours!
We cannot afford to make the same mistakes again, the last one cost us 25 years of decline.
Hi Jason – a great article (as ever) but I would like to add a couple of observations please:-
i) At lease expiry, and assuming both parties wanted to renew (and the existing lease was not contracted out of the L&T Act 1954), the rent in the new lease would need to be set in accordance with current market levels. If the parties could not agree on this it would ultimately be determined by the Court. I suspect the rent was originally set at an artificially high level anyway to reflect the risk for Flamingo Land’s pension fund at the time, and also City’s weak bargaining position. Since then the rent has probably been uplifted every 5 years on an indexed basis resulting in a figure that is considerably in excess of current market levels. I would be astonished if the current market rent for the stadium were anywhere near what the Club are paying under the current lease. Interestingly, the most recent (publicly accessible) rateable value for the stadium begins with a ‘1’ and not a ‘4’.
ii) At renewal the parties are at liberty to agree a new lease of any duration – there is no automatic obligation to take a new 25 year lease again. If the parties cannot agree then again it would go to Court for determination.
Apologies if the above is a bit ‘tech-y’, but if the Club do progress with a renewal of the lease there should be scope for some significant rent reductions. Whilst there are several caveats with this, the circumstances that applied back in 2003 have changed, and legislation now protects City’s position. Whilst accepting that the Club purchasing the ground would be the most desirable (if unlikely) option, the forthcoming lease renewal process should provide an opportunity to rebase the whole arrangement on to a more sensible footing.
These are very relevant points and, just to confirm, the lease is NOT contracted out of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 and so the statutory rights of renewal would potentially be an option.
Whilst there is, as Jason has mentioned, a contractual right of renewal in the lease (in the club’s favour) the way that it is structured would result in an increase in rent so the chances of the club exercising that contractual right are close to nonexistent. It would absolutely be the 1954 Act route resulting in a market rent that would be the more attractive option.
I agree entirely.
If the intention is not to buy the ground, but to enter into a new lease, then this is the perfect opportunity to either renegotiate with the landlord, or apply to the court for the rent to be set.
The sensible way would be for both parties to jointly appoint a Valuer in the near future, to determine the rent. That way both parties know what the ultimate rent at renewal is likely to be, and provide amply time to negotiate.
As Bantam Surveyor will know, the Landlord cannot simply refuse the lease. He has to prove one of several ground for opposition (S30 54 Act). These are quite substantial hurdles with extensive case law behind them, and I cannot see him being able to prove to the court that he meet any.
Once a number of matters to be disregarded are taken into account, such as tenant’s occupation, their fit out etc, the net rent may well be significantly below that passing. which the Landlord really needs to consider.
My favourite topic! Excellent summary Jason, and a conversation we simply have to have as a fanbase if we are to expect those with the power to effect change to do so. A long article deserves a long comment…
My position has been the same for some years – VP is a much loved home with huge emoitional ties (I was there in the Bradford End in 85) but we have to explore other options in the long term. Whether those options are ultimately achievable is another matter but we gain nothing by sticking our heads in the sand or our fingers in our ears.
Any hope of the Council actively funding a new stadium or the required improvements to Odsal is as you say a forlorn hope. But there are other ways the Council ‘could’ help its pro sports clubs. Chesterfield’s Council actually included a policy in the Local Plan requiring a new stadium for the club to be built on a specific site. BDMC Planning Policy could do similar, by allocating a piece of land in the Local Plan for a stadium. The vast majority of stadia built since the 1990s have been built on derelict former industrial sites, albeit some in unpopular and isolated locations. There aren’t many suitable sites in Bradford but there are some. Issues of land ownership can potentially be overcome via a Compulsory Purchase Order, which was how the Broadway development was (eventually) able to be started and completed as it enabled the procurement of the site so the existing buildings could be demolished. The site between Valley Road and Canal where they hold a fairground, and the buildings on its periphery like Halfords, is coincidentally almost exactly the same size as the footprint of VP. Makes you think… Its flat, right next to Forster Square station and walkable from the Interchange, highly sustainable in planning terms. Its currently earmarked for housing I believe, but there have been no planning applications for the site in the past 5 years. With some work to ensure the stability of the Bradford Beck culvert, a little realigning of the roads around the site, you could not pick a better spot. The value of a stadium in that location is also tied up with any future plans for the repurposing or revitalisation of the failing city centre, with the massive increase in visitors to the actual centre a stadium for one or two of the cities bigget clubs would bring.
The listing of Richard Dunn’s by Historic England should also be used as an opportunity by all concerned. Its clearly not sustainable as a sports centre and has already been replaced, but is protected from demolition (rightly in my opinon, its an iconic building), so in order to avoid it becoming a white elephant the entire site could be redeveloped into a training facility for all three clubs and potentially the wider community. My lad is a scholar at BPA so I’ve spent a lot of time down at Horsfall this season, and whilst the first team is struggling with the lack of funds available to it, Horsfall itself never appears to be unused for more than an hour at a time, with both BPA and Albion Sports mens teams playing and training there, all BPA academy and age group teams for both male and female players, West Bowling ARLFC, and many other independent organisations such as Man Utd sessions for younger kids. Clearly we’re a long way from 4 or 5g pitches in the EFL but Horsfall provides a beacon of what can be achieved with good quality pitches and facilities which could be an inspiration for similar facilities for City.
In my ill fated and ultimately fruitless meetings with both Rhodes and Sparks about stadium options I was told of the terrible past relationship between the club and the BDMC, such as Kris Hopkins who apparently hated the club, and efforts by Sparks to build a better relationship by having conversations with the Strategic Director for matter such as town planning, highways etc. I could google the name of the directorate but its not that important. What is important is that these relationships are cultivated and the club seeks to improve the co-operation between itself, the council and the other two pro clubs.
There are undoubtedly reasons others will put forward telling me why my suggestions are pie in the sky, and they may ultimately be right, sadly, but if you don’t explore all possibilities nothing ever changes. At the very least the impending lease expiration brings these matters into sharper focus and we can only hope we come out of the other side in a better position than we are now.
Love the idea of a new stadium in the vicinity to VP / city centre. I hate out of town stadiums and so would hate Odsal. Been to Newcastle and Leicester both close to the city centre and the atmosphere on match days in the local bars etc is fantastic. Anywhere around City Vaults / North Parade on match day is special especially when the team is doing well. I would hate for this to be lost.
if not a new ground, then remaining at VP would need to come with a caveat – proper investment in the ground, and sort the pitch out once and for all – the best drainage / under soil heating to future proof it for 20+ years. I personally think the Bradford end needs replacing and the building housing the control room, shop etc
Personally I think the club should have been making plans for when the lease ends years ago so they have a stronger hand in the negotiations. I think if it looks like we are seriously considering moving and have got a plan on how that could be achieved that would give us the strongest hand possible.
If the club can get valley parade back for 5/6 million it should be a no brainer to Rupp to me. Over twenty five years the club’s going to be paying double that if we dont get a much better deal on the rent and owning the ground will make the club more sellable for him. It will turn valley parade from a mill around the clubs neck to an asset.
If Rupp isn’t serious about buying back Valley parade then maybe there’s no better time to cut his losses and sell, atleast it would potential give potential a little bit of time before the lease runs out to sort something rather than potentially being tied into a long lease at £500,000 a year. It might be a long time until the club is in that position again.
I’ve always thought that Gibb might one day own the club just because he would immediately add value and assets to the club straight away which would make selling it easier.
The council have never seriously answered the question as to why they have been willing to bail out The Bulls but not City. I and many others would love to know the reason.
We need to start looking into what it would cost to build to a new stadium, not necessarily because it’s definitely what we will end up doing but so that we have something to compare Gibbs asking price to and to negotiate with him.
Anyone know how much Gibb got for his half of the club when he sold it back to Rhodes?
Having read this excellent account together with these excellent contributions, it is apparent that the club has run out of steam. Little wonder that the club has got nothing meaningful to say. Indeed, I extend a level of sympathy to Mr Rupp.
As a new supporter, this kind of history and background information is brilliant. Truly gives an insight into why the club is how it is, and shows why decisions made in desperation are only ever in one parties favour. Thanks Jason and WOAP team 👍
Jason great read.
I was wondering if Gibbs didn’t buy the stadium back then, what would have happened to the club. I guess we would of been kicked out of the football league but likely to have been reformed like Bury. My view is we would, in that scenario, eventually ended back in the football league after multiple promotions. Probably be league one or two and not being taken to cleaners with the stadium rent 😀
Right this comment might be very controversial to any Bulls fans in here, but we know the council are skint so wouldn’t a way to atleast partially finance a new stadium for both city and the Bulls be to turn odsal into a tip/quarry. Surely the tipping rights would be worth millions. If filled with builders type waste eventually you would have a nice flat piece of land to sell right on the door step of the motorway to sell and have further money to the pot.
A new stadium could be built in the city centre used for football, rugby and big gigs, the footfall would support the city’s shops, bars and food places and help with the city’s regeneration.
If the council charged only £250,000 a year rent to Bradford City they would be making a million pounds back every four years before the bulls rent and any rent for any big gigs.
By providing footfall to help business survive the council would also receive more in business rates.
Bradford city and Bradford Bulls are probably two of the only positives the city as got. Football is the countrys national sport so Bradford city especially has the potential to bring so many people (away fans) into the city who would never dream of visiting Bradford for any other reason.
The former Supporters Board (prior to the reformed very much club controlled present manifestation) were effective and trusted ( at arms length).by Mark Lawn.
We were privy to several conversations about the ground ( as we could enter into discussions in places where the club could not) we were seen as a useful element of the club.
So on behalf of the club we did obtain information.which was sensitive at the time but is not now with the passage of several years.
The stadium.waa at that time worth £2,5m but the cost of demolition.even allowing for the recycling of materials ( mainly steel).would be around £2.5m.
If these prices/ costs are still valid then that makes the land worthless.
This seems to be confirmed by what Mark Lawn states in Jason’s text.
I believe also that the current Supporters Trust did some work ( without the backing of the club) where they applied successfully to have the stadium.designated as a ‘Community asset) which restricts any change of use.
it resulted in VP only having use as a sports facility.
The club were not happy at the time.
Maybe Manny can confirm.or deny this.
I don’t know whether this is still the case and whether the status can be easily changed.
The supporter’s trust withdrew their nomination to list VP as an Asset of Community Value. Even if listed it wouldn’t have restricted use in that way. The restriction on disposal would be on the club’s lease rather than the freehold title in this case.
thanks for the clarification.
Some great suggestions if it was not for the one thing that will prevent it happening. Finance.Wheres the money going to come from? Bradford Council broke.( Which will not change quickly if ever or at all).City always struggling financially in 121 years. Bulls playing in front of less than 3000.We have been at VP in 121 years.Gibb has had a good return.Thank you Jason for explaining why Gibb/ Rhodes fell out.All about money. The alternative schemes ( which are only dreams) will cost hundreds of millions.There is no money to achieve any of the suggestions. So VP is falling apart.Jaded sure.Its not that bad and certainly not falling apart as it was for most of my support from 66 onwards until 86.One hopes Mr Rupp and Mr Gibb can come to amicable arrangements that sees a deal that in all the circumstances past and present allows a sale to whoever owns the club.Very complicated as Mr Rupp does have the club For Sale presently. The success of the Football team is not dependent on owning a stadium.What a mess the City of Bradford is in.
Rupp doesn’t exactly have the club for sale, he is open to offers as 99% of owners are. Absolutely agree that we could still have been much more successful this last 20 years even with stadium issues.
it’s common knowledge confirmed by Herr Rupp that if he received the right offer he would sell tomorrow.
Continuing to rent makes no sense at all. In 10 years we will have spent £5 million at today’s price. Why not do something innovative like offer a 10-year season ticket at today’s value. 1000 of these at £2500 gives 2.5million and a possible buy back. The loss in future season ticket revenue would be offset by not paying rent each year. There’s surely room to think outside the box!!
Thank you Jason for another brilliant article, as always well researched and well written. It becomes the definitive guide to the current state of affairs of our beloved football club. We are in a mess, caught between a rock and a hard place, and I believe that our future is in the balance, resting somewhat precariously on the relationship between Gibb and Rupp. I hope that the good work that Sparks has done in getting Gibb back into the fold can lead to some sort of deal between the two parties. As Nelson Mandela once said, “it’s good to talk”
With 4 years unexpired on the lease, Gibbs investment interest is worth around the £2.5m people seems to be floating (probably less to be honest). Anyone buying it (aside from the Club, which is a Special Purchaser) will need to be comfortable that City will renew on broadly similar terms.
Clearly, this is an unknown right now, so it’s a brave investor who buys a stadium, with little in the way of underlying / alternative asset value. Paying 5x rent with only 4x years left is a gamble not many funds or investors will take.
To build an alternative stadium, excluding land cost, would be around £3,500 per seat. So for a 25,000 capacity stadium, built to a fairly standard spec, would cost over £80m. I suppose it could be cost engineered down to say £60m, but the loan repayments would be £2m plus per annum, and the club would need to have 40% equity in, or engineer some very expensive and risky development and bridge funding.
The Club’s problem is that it cannot stare down Gibb. He knows we have no alternative but to sign up, even if only for 10 years. The only workable alternative in the near future, is Odsal, but it’s messy and it’s far from ideal.
As others have said thank you Jason for a very interesting article which corrected some of my understanding of the history that has brought us here.
I had already thought about submitting an article to WOAP with my son, which was all about how the stadium should be bought by the fans and then managed on behalf of the club with a close relationship with the owner whoever he or she was.
in bullet points:
‘After all is said and done, a lot more is said than done’ – whatever the outcome we need action not words and we need it to start THIS year
This is always a fascinating topic and very emotive. Ever since the ground was sold to keep the club afloat it has been perceived as a drag on our progress. Whilst it’s yearly rental would net us 3-4 good league two players or 1-2 very good league one standard players, it doesn’t really explain the players we have signed that have not excelled at the club. We got promoted and got to a major final with the same set of circumstances as we find now. So the VP rental cost is just one of our problems.
I’m sure our more ‘enthusiastic’ fans and those of visiting clubs also cost us in terms of stewarding and policing the large crowds we get, but I’m not bashing the fans. We are all bantams after all. The point is that there are costs everywhere with football clubs and that has to be taken into account.
I see the options as:
All have their merits and drawbacks. The most likely scenario is option 2 based on fan and owner statements. For Rupp to buy the ground, he would gain a lot of favour from our loyal fans. I’d prefer a fan ownership model and would be willing to invest the little money I have if it was possible. This would need some serious expertise but the business case is there and probably writes itself.
Option 1 is the least costly for the owner but but doesn’t really progress the business in terms of assets and saleability. It’s the lowest risk option to some degree.
Option 3 is either ground share somewhere hateful until the ground owner blinks (could be a long wait considering he has had his money out of the site) or spend £50 mil on a stadium which nobody would dream of funding, I believe. I think this is the most high risk and least likely outcome.
I’m sure there will be an outcome in the next few years. But I believe the issue and cost of the ground lease is secondary to the big costs of changing managers, playing styles and players so often. We really need to crack the football department strategy as a priority whilst working on the infrastructure concerns as a long term concern. Here I am not interested in bashing individuals at the club. What’s done is done and cannot be changed.
As a fan, I don’t want to leave VP. It’s a special place and has so many memories for me. To watch it change so incredibly during my lifetime is a source of pride and I hope to see a thriving team, a passionate crowd and the positive benefits that brings to the city of Bradford as soon as possible.
I totally agree with you.
Maybe a small group of fans with a background of skills and expertise could start to explore viable and realistic alternatives ON BEHALF of the club.
I would hazard a guess that those currently running the club do not have the resources in terms of time and skilsets to do this and might even welcome it.
it would go a long way to repairing the massive disconnect between the supporters and the club which exists.
As a completely left field, while in the bath, what if thought – Odsal stadium, with a training academy at the Richard Dunn site.
Great suggestions from your readers. There’s no easy answer but am I right in thinking that City draws a majority of its support from the northern part of the city? If so, any “new” stadium would have to be north of the centre. Marley at Keighley?? Council owned, lots of space, as far from Keighley rail station as VP is from Forster Square.
I’ve spoken to four fellow supporters who live in Skipton and while we’re ready to drive/train to Manningham we definitely could not face battling through the traffic to Odsal.
Need a Euromillions winner to come along – start buying tickets!!
I’ve only been coming to watch Bradford for the last two seasons so apologies for anything I get wrong or misunderstand.
After reading this article and seeing some of the comments I saw some that stuck out. As someone who grew up in the North West I witnessed my local team Northwich Victoria get a Chairman who promised the world. We got a lovely out of town stadium but that killed us (we had decent success but crowds decreased with it being out of town…and right next to rivals Witton).
Would it be a mad pipe dream to get Bradford City, Park Avenue and Bulls to get together and have a lovely training facility based around Richard Dunne centre (if it is listed and can’t be knocked down). Community pitches for extra income in the evenings etc.
Then totally renovate Odsal (tear it down and get a 20-25k stadium). In the interim the Bulls and City use Valley Parade so the current owners get decent rent and both teams reduce costs (realise a new stadium build would mean this saving is irrelevant).
This would be a watered down version of Man City and their Etihad Campus. The women’s team could play at the Richard Dunne facilities as could Academy teams. It would make a big difference to the area, lots of jobs and close to travel links. A dedicated bus service from the centre to take fans to and from games too means city centre pubs etc still get footfall.
Realise this isn’t cheap but the council must surely see the benefit…the costs can be shared between 2-3 clubs and it would certainly future proof the status of clubs both locally and nationally. E.g The RFL look at stadiums, supporters, services etc to see if Bulls should be in the Superleague…it’s a huge win for them. Bradford City get a great stadium as well…Valley Parade can be sold but keep a memorial for 1985. Arsenal and Man City moved and their old places are still respectful of what happened whilst benefitting the local community.
Anyway, that’s my thoughts. It appears I’ve recently been hooked by the Bantams and I want them to develop and be the team for the City we know they can be. Let’s convince Darragh MacAnthony this is is next venture and a fab legacy.
Thank you, Jason, for such a well researched and informative article which must’ve taken ages to compile. It’s something all supporters should see and particularly those protestors who want Rupp and Sparks out.
Thanks Jason, excellent as usual.
How about acting as a fulcrum and calling, chairing a meeting for supporters who are interested in developing a solution and potential investing?
Stick with a manager for a couple of full seasons at least. And if we gave any supporters out there who have the time, the skillsets and energy to form a supporters group that aims to raise money that can be used to buy onto a position on the BCAFC Board Of Directors or some form of part ownership. That would be far more positive and welcome than any supporter group that simply wants to complain and protest. Some of us supporters would welcome the opportunity to pay regular amounts into a ‘pot’ for the purposes of financially backed negotiations -as and when needed.
I see a protest group as one of the worst things imaginable. Work within the existing structure and make incremental tweaks and adjustments whenever and wherever possible. As for the manager, he has done remarkably well in very difficult circumstances.