Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
VCD Athletic to close down
Comments
-
thanks - suppose the devil is in the detail.Swindon_Addick said:
There are suspicions in some quarters that SE Dons offered the landlord more money and that's why VCD got kicked out. It seems only fair to point out that the person behind SE Dons has denied this, saying that VCD losing the lease was nothing to do with them and they've just taken up the vacated space. Hard to tell from outside, of course.MrOneLung said:Why are SE Dons getting the grief here?
is it not an issue between VCD and the ground owner?
Would it not have benefitted both sides to ground share though ?4 -
Pretty sure he's mates with the guy who founded them.KBslittlesis said:This stinks to high heaven.
Doesn't the snake have something to do with SE Dons too or did I dream that?1 -
Andy Ansah is their chairman now, saw him last week up at Bexleyheath goals watching their ladies academy trials0
-
I cant get over the main guy accent/fake voice he puts on. The man is nearly 40 😂ValleyGary said:
Would have been same level now as VCD got relegated and Se Dons got promoted.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
What level were VCD at?WSS said:Southern Counties East
Would SE Dons be able to afford much higher rent than VCD?
SE Dons being a YouTube team have better sponsorship so deeper pockets. They had a big budget for their league last season.
They all think they’re proper big time at SE Dons, really unlikeable outfit.0 -
100+ years and get evicted to this lot.Swindon_Addick said:
There are suspicions in some quarters that SE Dons offered the landlord more money and that's why VCD got kicked out. It seems only fair to point out that the person behind SE Dons has denied this, saying that VCD losing the lease was nothing to do with them and they've just taken up the vacated space. Hard to tell from outside, of course.MrOneLung said:Why are SE Dons getting the grief here?
is it not an issue between VCD and the ground owner?
Whole thing stick and hope SE dons fail big time.4 -
Read this.R0TW said:
100+ years and get evicted to this lot.Swindon_Addick said:
There are suspicions in some quarters that SE Dons offered the landlord more money and that's why VCD got kicked out. It seems only fair to point out that the person behind SE Dons has denied this, saying that VCD losing the lease was nothing to do with them and they've just taken up the vacated space. Hard to tell from outside, of course.MrOneLung said:Why are SE Dons getting the grief here?
is it not an issue between VCD and the ground owner?
Whole thing stick and hope SE dons fail big time.
2 -
Surely the only reason VCD would decline a new lease is that it was too expensive?1
-
Nothing is that simple. There were issues of trust.North Lower Neil said:Surely the only reason VCD would decline a new lease is that it was too expensive?0 -
Which particular snake are we talking about? Defoe, Parker, Taylor, someone else?KBslittlesis said:This stinks to high heaven.
Doesn't the snake have something to do with SE Dons too or did I dream that?1 -
Taylor.
Defoe, I never got that bothered about.
Parker, I use a word not suitable for this forum.
NO I'M STILL NOT OVER IT!3 -
Sponsored links:
-
Classy statement. The wax seal really elevates it.Crusty54 said:
Read this.R0TW said:
100+ years and get evicted to this lot.Swindon_Addick said:
There are suspicions in some quarters that SE Dons offered the landlord more money and that's why VCD got kicked out. It seems only fair to point out that the person behind SE Dons has denied this, saying that VCD losing the lease was nothing to do with them and they've just taken up the vacated space. Hard to tell from outside, of course.MrOneLung said:Why are SE Dons getting the grief here?
is it not an issue between VCD and the ground owner?
Whole thing stick and hope SE dons fail big time.9 -
7 -
Says it all3
-
Except that Charlton Women had to pay for the full upkeep of the ground during the seasons they played there. This information was kept secret from the landlord at the time.ValleyGary said:Says it all
I understand that there issues that that are not fully explained.
A lot of money needs to spent to upgrade the pitch and build a new stand.0 -
Good to hear from VCD and their side of what they have been through. One thing I don’t quite understand from that statement is why they accepted the £30k from Oakwood for the plant & machinery, when they already had a higher offer. Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front. They should go in and remove their equipment immediately.1
-
The new team didn't kick out VCD. The landlord failed to reach agreement with VCD.TelMc32 said:Good to hear from VCD and their side of what they have been through. One thing I don’t quite understand from that statement is why they accepted the £30k from Oakwood for the plant & machinery, when they already had a higher offer. Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front. They should go in and remove their equipment immediately.0 -
He never said or even hinted that they did.Crusty54 said:
The new team didn't kick out VCD. The landlord failed to reach agreement with VCD.TelMc32 said:Good to hear from VCD and their side of what they have been through. One thing I don’t quite understand from that statement is why they accepted the £30k from Oakwood for the plant & machinery, when they already had a higher offer. Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front. They should go in and remove their equipment immediately.4 -
Becauze the cost of relocating probably wasnt worth itTelMc32 said:Good to hear from VCD and their side of what they have been through. One thing I don’t quite understand from that statement is why they accepted the £30k from Oakwood for the plant & machinery, when they already had a higher offer. Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front. They should go in and remove their equipment immediately.1 -
Really?Covered End said:
He never said or even hinted that they did.Crusty54 said:
The new team didn't kick out VCD. The landlord failed to reach agreement with VCD.TelMc32 said:Good to hear from VCD and their side of what they have been through. One thing I don’t quite understand from that statement is why they accepted the £30k from Oakwood for the plant & machinery, when they already had a higher offer. Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front. They should go in and remove their equipment immediately.
"Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front."1 -
The note says that they’d already agreed a deal for a higher amount.Radostanradical said:
Becauze the cost of relocating probably wasnt worth itTelMc32 said:Good to hear from VCD and their side of what they have been through. One thing I don’t quite understand from that statement is why they accepted the £30k from Oakwood for the plant & machinery, when they already had a higher offer. Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front. They should go in and remove their equipment immediately.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Thank you for your response. My sister still has friends at her old employer, Specsavers, if you would like me to pass their details on.Crusty54 said:
The new team didn't kick out VCD. The landlord failed to reach agreement with VCD.TelMc32 said:Good to hear from VCD and their side of what they have been through. One thing I don’t quite understand from that statement is why they accepted the £30k from Oakwood for the plant & machinery, when they already had a higher offer. Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front. They should go in and remove their equipment immediately.2 -
VCD’s note…and my response…quite clearly state that it is the landlord (Oakwood) and not the new team who are moving in that they have done the deal for the plant & machinery with, having previously agreed a higher deal with an unnamed third party.Crusty54 said:
Really?Covered End said:
He never said or even hinted that they did.Crusty54 said:
The new team didn't kick out VCD. The landlord failed to reach agreement with VCD.TelMc32 said:Good to hear from VCD and their side of what they have been through. One thing I don’t quite understand from that statement is why they accepted the £30k from Oakwood for the plant & machinery, when they already had a higher offer. Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front. They should go in and remove their equipment immediately.
"Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front."I’ll let you go back and try reading it again.1 -
Yes but my point is if the cost of transportation is equal or more to difference in amounts. I sincerely doubt VCD left them out of goodness of heartTelMc32 said:
The note says that they’d already agreed a deal for a higher amount.Radostanradical said:
Becauze the cost of relocating probably wasnt worth itTelMc32 said:Good to hear from VCD and their side of what they have been through. One thing I don’t quite understand from that statement is why they accepted the £30k from Oakwood for the plant & machinery, when they already had a higher offer. Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front. They should go in and remove their equipment immediately.1 -
They certainly didn’t leave them “out of the goodness of (their) heart”. It’s a common lease clause that you have to leave a property as you took it on and they refer to this. In this case VCD had invested in the ground over the years and, even if this enhances the value of the property, the landlord can insist that all such additions are removed. For the stuff they mentioned, I would expect the purchaser to have arranged transport to wherever they were needed.Radostanradical said:
Yes but my point is if the cost of transportation is equal or more to difference in amounts. I sincerely doubt VCD left them out of goodness of heartTelMc32 said:
The note says that they’d already agreed a deal for a higher amount.said:
Becauze the cost of relocating probably wasnt worth itTelMc32 said:Good to hear from VCD and their side of what they have been through. One thing I don’t quite understand from that statement is why they accepted the £30k from Oakwood for the plant & machinery, when they already had a higher offer. Why on earth do a lower deal with the snakes who’ve effectively kicked them out and then not get the funds up front. They should go in and remove their equipment immediately.
I financed a deal for one of the Big 4 accountancy firms to build a “bridge” between two of their buildings in the City a few years ago. Huge glass & steel construction high above the streets. They also needed to a financial guarantee in place to ensure that they would remove the construction and return the buildings to their original state if they moved.0 -
Well when Roland kicks us out we had better take our floodlights and scoreboard with us.4
-
1 -
Orpington Town Football ClubFootball is competitive by nature. Rivalries exist, clubs compete, and it’s normal that not everyone sees eye to eye.But every now and then, you come across people who share the same values, ambition, and relentless work ethic. That’s exactly what we found in SE Dons FC.As a club, we’ve watched with admiration what SE Dons have achieved in such a short space of time. Their journey is a testament to what can be accomplished through hard work, dedication, and a clear vision. In many ways, we see similarities with our own ambitions and where we want to take Orpington Town FC.This ground share partnership is a fantastic opportunity for both clubs. It brings together two ambitious organisations that are committed to growth, development, and creating the best possible environment for players, supporters, and the wider community.For Orpington Town FC, this represents another important step forward in our journey. As we continue to build and develop, having the opportunity to work alongside a club of SE Dons’ stature is something we are incredibly grateful for.A special thank you must go to the Chairman of SE Dons, Andy. From the very first conversation, he has been incredibly generous with his time, knowledge, and advice. His experience within the game has been invaluable to us, and he somehow managed to make what could have been a very complicated deal seem remarkably straightforward.We would also like to thank everyone at SE Dons FC for their trust, support, and willingness to work together. We are excited about what lies ahead and look forward to building a successful partnership both on and off the pitch.Two ambitious clubs. One ground. One shared vision for progress.0
-
Two clubs from nowhere near the area.
Sounds about right.
🙄0 -
Not blaming either club but it does beg the question as to why VCD couldn't have shared?
My guess is that they would have but the owners of the ground didn't want them.
3 -
VCD basically explained this in their statement right? Their youth teams would have had to fold under the ground share terms offered. I don’t know enough about SE Dons or Orpington Town but I’d imagine they don’t have the youth set up that VCD didHenry Irving said:Not blaming either club but it does beg the question as to why VCD couldn't have shared?
My guess is that they would have but the owners of the ground didn't want them.3
