Ground sale could work for Walsall

Walsall blogger Mark Jones analyses the potential pitfalls and benefits from the freehold on the Saddlers ground going up for sale - and reckons it could be a good thing.

With last Monday's long-awaited announcement that the Banks's Stadium freehold is up for sale, to say speculation has been rife would be mildly understating it.

I thought I would put my twopennies worth in - and that's all I can afford before anyone asks - so here are a few thoughts of my own.

Walsall Football Club used to own their ground, supporters have invested heavily into the club themselves over the years and, politically, this might be a good time to exert some pressure on the Town Hall.

There is always the possibility that some big bad wolf of a property developer might buy the land, evict the football club and murder us all in our beds - it's possible folks.

The other side of the coin is that it might just be the first step towards a brighter future for the football club.

It has the potential for the club to work together with fans on a scale unimaginable less than 12 months ago is there if they really want it. Or, of course, nothing much will change.

My first point is worth re-iterating to give the whole thing a context. The impact of the decision to split the ownership of club and ground in the late 1980s, right before the sale of Fellows Park, was as pivotal a moment in the club's history as anything that ever happened on the pitch.

Understanding that is crucial in helping anyone understand why the club, or more precisely the landlord, have arrived at this point right now.

Equally the failure of the club's custodians to try and reclaim the freehold in our early days at what is now the Banks's, when the land must have been available at a small fraction of the price being banded about now, should be at the forefront of everyone's minds.

My second point is based on this crude piece of economics. Last year I calculated that in season 2009-10 I put roughly £500 of my own money into the Banks's Stadium coffers through my season ticket, matchday expenditure, spending in the club shop etc. At today's prices, that amounts to over £10,000 grand during the tenancy at the Banks's.

Multiply that figure by the 3,000 regulars who've been attending through thick and thin, then add on those who came in happier days and then do the maths - it's enormous!

And what 'return' do we expect on our 'investment?' To see the club achieving its full potential, being the best it can or showing some ambition to move to the next level would suit me.

How often have we done that in 21 years? Take out promotions under Chris Nicholl and Richard Money, along with the Ray Graydon glory years, and the footballing balance sheet doesn't exactly look healthy.

My third point is a bit of a tangent but well worth some consideration. You don't have to be a political animal to realise that the Tories and their Liberal Democrat chums could be in for a bit of a kicking in the upcoming local elections.

Even if the balance of power doesn't change, come May there could still be some new faces on the council and a few existing bods sweating on their wafer-thin majorities.

In short there might be a lot of councillors, of all persuasions, who will suddenly want to be seen as doing something for the good of the town and who want to align themselves with any campaign that promotes the town's football club. It might just be time to exploit them for once.

My fourth point - like a fairy story to try and make your kids go to bed early or eat their greens, the Property Developing Ogre has been used a few times over the years.

It could happen of course, but evicting the club and then trying to acquire the necessary planning permission in what would be fraught and highly controversial circumstances would generate a huge amount of negative publicity, a fair amount of abuse and potential 'anti' campaigning and generally a lot of headaches.

Why would any individual or organisation want to put themselves into that kind of position, for a huge financial outlay, when there's plenty of land elsewhere that could be developed relatively hassle-free?

A bit of organisation from fans' groups and applying the right kind of pressure on the council would easily be enough to keep the wolves away.

Skipping to my seventh point – it's worth noting because we could easily end up with new landlords charging us a similar amount of rent, with built in RPI-linked annual rises, and the club having to work incredibly hard at bringing in the revenue just to try and stand still. Only the personnel would be different.

It is possible that this could then turn nasty, as mentioned in point four, but that's just another bridge we would have to cross at a later date. However the potential positives of points five and six are huge.

I'm not saying anything out of turn in suggesting that there are current board members who want out of the club, whilst there are others who have made all the right noises recently about taking the club forward.

It's these directors who will play a crucial role in any negotiations with a future landlord. It's they who will need to work closely with supporters, possibly as a kind of ad-hoc pressure group, for the benefit of the club.

For me there are two possible options that would put the club's best interests first.

One would be to persuade the council to buy the freehold and then sell it back to the club over a fixed time period.

OK, that would annoy Mr. Angry-Council Taxpayer of Streetly - which in itself is reason enough to do it - but aren't Walsall fans also council taxpayers?

Doesn't the local authority also have a duty to the community to look after one of the Borough's biggest employers?

Buying up land is not exactly the riskiest of financial deals and the council would eventually get their money back, with a reasonable amount of interest to boot.

As for the football club, in the short and medium term we'd be paying back a loan equivalent to the size of the rent, but we would be regaining the status of owning our own ground once more and the long-term rewards of that would be massive.

The other possibility is much more straigh-tforward – the club simply cuts a deal with the present landlord to turn the existing rent into a series of repayments over a fixed amount of time.

They get their money, just on a deferred basis, and we get the benefits mentioned above. Whilst I'm no expert in these matters, is there any legal or financial reason why this couldn't happen?

We all knew the day would finally come when the rent situation would change, this week's events have signalled the beginning of the end of one era.

Some are worried, some are sceptical, personally I'm happy – it's been a long long time coming.