Worcester - Atlas have until 2nd May to complete purchase

[baldpaul101]

If that is correct & Chris Holland has enabled the Atlas buyout to go ahead, that is NOT the same as just renting a stadium that would have remained empty otherwise.

Personally I am not comfortable with that at all.

[westwaleswasp]

Not good.

[Vespula Vulgaris]

I don't like the feel of this one little bit.

[will311293]

I don't like the feel of this one little bit.

Me neither, already felt like a cuckoo in 6ways but this feels like a very clever business decision but morally wrong.

I am assuming that Hollands gone upfront cash for O'Toole and Atlas to make the purchase and either agreed a reduced rent/larger % of revenue from the stadium which increases funding at Wasps, therefore funding new stadium he has spoken of.

However, if Holland funds Atlas, with their major asset the stadium and surrounding facilities, if Atlas default or miss consecutive payments, in theory Holland can repossess the stadium?

This again feels very uncomfortable for me

[Neils]

I don't like the feel of this one little bit.

+1

[NellyWellyWaspy]

This feels every bit like Wasps acquiring Sixways by the back door.

As I said in an earlier post, this feels like the Ricoh saga all over. Behind closed doors, ANYTHING could have been done, said and agreed.

For example, Holland could have persuaded Atlas to buy WW from Begbies, with the understanding that they deliberately let WW go under, all under the guise of Wasps acquiring a stadium by the back door.

If I was a WW fan, that is exactly what I would see. Wasps fiddling with the bids so that the Diamond consortium could not buy the club, with Atlas the winner, and for Atlas to then kill WW and take a loan off Wasps, fail to keep up the payments, and Wasps get the stadium for cheap.

That doesn't have to be true, but is has the ring of truth, and WW fans will think it is. And so the Ricoh Saga starts again, but this time our haters will be more vocal and have good reason. Can't see this ending well. Not sure how Holland thought this would turn out well.

[Trevs Big Tackle]

How directly involved is Holland in new Wasps? Is he a director / owner? Or is he just a chap who owns a training ground Wasps rent and now owns an interest in a stadium Wasps might rent?

[W2APS]

He owns all that Wasps currently is.

Let's look at this in a positive way. Holland/Wasps have control over Atlas not screwing us over. If they do he can sell the stadium on to Dimes or some other properly interested rugby party.

[Robson9]

If that is correct & Chris Holland has enabled the Atlas buyout to go ahead, that is NOT the same as just renting a stadium that would have remained empty otherwise.

Personally I am not comfortable with that at all.

Spot on. The whole thing stinks and sounds like a total stitch up.

I'd be seething if I was a Warriors fan, and its no surprise that the general sympathy across the sportnetwork messages boards is with them, while sympathy for wasps is withering (if it was even there at all).

If Holland has actively helped Atlas buy the club so Wasps can get a free stadium (a sale to Atlas which has effectively killed Worcester) then I hope Holland is prepared for new Wasps to become quickly the most hated club around.

[bigad82]

Are there any rules in having a financial interest in 2 clubs?

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Are there any rules in having a financial interest in 2 clubs?

Well, as Warriors no longer exist ... if they do, it is in the bottom most league, and I do not think dual interests of that nature are barred.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Things are getting very heated over on the Warriors forum. They are all slowly coming to the (obvious) conclusion that I did. This is all a very big stitch up.

Here is the conspiracy theory.

Warriors went under. Only their owners to blame for that. Fair does.
Wasps (Holland and Richardson) see a way out of the huge mountain of debt Wasps are in. Let Wasps fail, buy Sixways from their administrator, Wasps go down a league, and come away with massively reduced debt and a more rugby centric, easier to operate ground.
Richardson sells his holdings in the EPIC to Holland, to appear to give Holland control and give him clean hands.
Wasps fail. Hollands buys the brand, doesn't bother to acquire the CBS Arena.
Holland helps Atlas buy Sixways and Atlas let Warriors die by officially refusing to pay rugby creditors (more of that later).

Just how much will the rugby creditors of Wasps amount to? Players wages, yes, but only insofar as they are not mitigated by the players getting work elsewhere (or even retiring and taking work in another trade).

Rugby creditors are not defined. Exactly how much of the player wages would be considered a rugby debt? Not a lot is my guess. Some ex players may even have been offered a contract at Wasps Mark II, on the condition that they do not make a claim. My guess is that Wasps have agreed to pay rugby creditors, with no intention of paying a penny unless forced to. Once they start playing in the Championship, they will invite claims to be made from rugby creditors, and refuse every claim, with each claim going to arbitration ...

At some point, Atlas will conveniently stop paying Holland, and he will foreclose, and take the land and stadium. Then what? Here's where it gets really smelly. Before they default, Atlas will start the process to get a change of use for (and demolition of) Sixways. I have little doubt Holland and Atlas already have a buyer lined up. Atlas will lose the stadium to Holland, just as the the deals and permissions are getting sorted.

You see, arguably, there is no longer a community need for Sixways, as Warriors no longer exists, and so don't need it. Ah, you say, aren't Wasps playing there? Not for long say Wasps, we have our own stadium back much nearer our fanbase and natural home ground (wherever the heck that is).

So, the potential developers of Sixways fund the building of the real Wasps Mark II stadium, at no overall cost to Holland or Wasps. Who the heck HAS funded it then? All the creditors of Wasps and Warriors, and the good folks of Worcester, who lose use of the ground.

[WonkyWasp]

So this is the end of Wasps?

[St Bruno]

Bigad,
There's a difference between having an interest in a club (ie owning shares in it) and holding a debenture against assets of that club. Chris Holland does not, for example, have any voting rights in Atlas Worcester's dealings.

The way I see this is that Atlas could not raise the finance from USA, at least in part because the RFU said they couldn't carry out their "right and proper" persons checks. 6ways in the meantime was largely gathering dust. It's a wasted rugby resource.

CH has, it seems, lent (some of) the money to Atlas to buy from the administrator and that has enabled us to rent the otherwise disused 6ways.

I see nothing "morally wrong" or distasteful in this whatsoever.

There is no evidence I've seen that Wasps persuaded Atlas to let WW go under - as mentioned above. There is also no evidence that Wasps are intent on buying 6ways by the back door. If they wanted to buy it, they could have done the deal with Begbies directly.

All I see in this is that we've got some sort of proposed rental deal (yet to be approved by RFU) and the benefit of a debenture over a loan made. All the conspiracy theory being banded around is just ill-founded nonsense in my book. (Sorry NWW - I just don't agree)

I say thank you to Chris Holland and the Legends for rescuing us and giving us the chance of playing in the Championship in September.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

So this is the end of Wasps?

No. The end of Warriors, for sure. But, it might be that Wasps are more likely to survive, living in part off the blood of the dying Warriors. Maybe a team name change from Wasps to Vampires?

In fact, if what I (very tongue in cheek) suggest might be what has happened, and might be what will happen, is actually (sort of) true, it would make the survival of Wasps more likely. Would, could, Warriors have survived? Maybe, but we will never know.

Would you be 'happy' supporting Wasps if you knew for sure that what I suggested might have been, was in fact true?

I must say it does not sit well with me. Could I go into plausible deniability mode and say, we don't know for sure ...