Academy on the move again?

[Mosiah]

Was this 99 year a sure thing or just speculation and chat?

[Karl]

TK, I think the comment you made on Leases is too general and doesn't hold true in many cases. Leases are something that happens around the world and people do the samething...lease and develop.

It was a 99 year lease at $1. Can you get better than that?
You could even negotiate an extention of the orginal lease in the contract. You could also add terms that make it virtually impossible to break...such has a huge penalty.

I won't be fooled by this one....I review Leases as part of my daily job. Imagine if we could take that 22MM and invest it for 99 years.....wow, we probably could build 10 more academies

Plush: I had not gotten down to your post above...but, I was thinking the same thing as I made my reply to TK's.

Joke...TK joking and he slapped me over the head not too long ago on his Real Estate knowledge and investments!

[Karl]

I can answer this considering I was in the same situation 4 years ago. My youth club was in the same position where a guy with a large piece of undeveloped land was going to lease it to us for $1 dollar a year. The lease was going to be for 30 years. We were free to develop what we wanted on it fields, buildings, pubs, stadium etc.,

Ths issue is even though you are getting the land virtually free the owners can pull it out from under you once you build up the property value by building your facility there. It would make no financial sense to put all the money into developing something you do not own. Fortunately for my club we had people who were knowledgeable enough to steer us away from this direction as tempting as it was.

Now if the school wanted to give the JFF the land that is one thing. Outside of that the JFF is smart to stay away from this. I would respectfully disagree and say they are being wise in this situation. They were not getting the land for free by any means. It would have been a mirage. (Balla 3:16) - T.K.

What was the financial position of your club?
...and, was the location you eventually bought most suitable for serving 30 years?

I am sure even Mosiah would agree that the JFF, in a real sense, had and still has "no money"?!
Right Mosiah?

The JFF was depending on FIFA grants to establish a 1st class facility and no doubt to subsidise operationing costs for a few years.

Besides the JFF's lease was for 99 years! Enough time to come to grips with running an academy and for the JFF to become finacially stronger. Enough time to enable a financially sound JFF to build other Academies.

Can the JFF afford the Munro Villa facilities? Is there a way to move the academy, dispose of the current facility, build new facilities, create/build/construct a more efficient -fitting more readily and easily with JFF needs and needs of our football/needs for development of our football - multi-purpose 'entity' (= academy/administrative and teaching institution, etc.) and lower costs?

If Yes, move it.
If no, keep it where it is!

btw - What is the value of the Munro Villa property? ...and, demand for such property in that area?

Could the JFF get rid of the property and realise funds that could be set against cost of purchasing new premises? ...or, along with the 99 year lease enable the construction of complete first class entity ...and provide creation of a 'fund' to assist in annual operating costs of the Academy? ...are there other alternatives on how to better serve the JFF's aims, better assist in football development and protect Jamaica's interests?

...could the JFF "twin" with an existing facility?

Where all these and other alternatives explored by the Boxhill administration? If yes, Where are the documents setting out the findings?

If the alternatives where not explored...could you blame anyone for saying "par for the course" for the Boxhill regime?

[Mosiah]

Why yuh gi so much rc chubble?!

[Plush]

Baddaz, I'm totally against moving the acadaemy. We already invested so much in Munro so it makes sense for us to complete it. I also like the fact that it's outside the city.
I was just speaking from a pure investment standpoint

[Baddaz]

Imagine if we could take that 22MM and invest it for 99 years.....wow, we probably could build 10 more academies

plush... point well taken... the fact, is we dont know all the terms and conditions or options associated with the proposed lease arrangment...

as you said about the investment... that would be all good if it was stated and executed as the objective for pursuing the lease arrangement... not sure, i have the confidence that any of the administrators would commit to the investment...

my primary objection is the consideration give to the location of the academy across from the portmore mall... whats with the fixation of everything being in a cluster... munro has been a fine institution for years at the same location... that location has never been an issue... why is the location now an issue with the academy...

if its not next door to the stakeholders house, its unacceptable...

[Baddaz]

agree.. spend yuh money and own something... not everyting free is good... dat is a fundamental jamaican problem... love of freeness...

[Mosiah]

Read it, and while it may make all the sense in the world (both points of view) I would like to think there were other factors that brought about the move to Munro.

[T.K.]

A lease comes with a contract that has to be agreed by both parties , In said contract was it stipulated that if the lease is broken by the owners of the property then all investment on said property shall be returned monetarily?

I can't imagine any property owner agreeing to that. At the end of the lease, if they decided not to renew, they would tell you to take your raw materials and move right? Or am I wrong and still looking too narrowly at it from my one experience? Plush chime in here please. - T.K.

[Sir X]

Thanks plush I didnt see your response , Mo is just penny wise and pound foolish..ead nuh good!

[Sir X]

A lease comes with a contract that has to be agreed by both parties , In said contract was it stipulated that if the lease is broken by the owners of the property then all investment on said property shall be returned monetarily?

[T.K.]

Ah bet yuh never hear from X again about dis. Yuh waan bet?!

Read Plush's post below. He has a background in this stuff and his opinion differs from mind. So I would trust his take on it more than mine. I was just trying to relate it to my experience with my club because we had the same debate as we're having on this forum about the same thing. - T.K.

[Mosiah]

Ah bet yuh never hear from X again about dis. Yuh waan bet?!

[T.K.]

TK, I think the comment you made on Leases is too general and doesn't hold true in many cases.

My friend I defer to the expert.

I was just relating it to my own experience and buying our own property outright turned out to be a windfall for us. There was no need for us to risk building up his land value while we had to worry in another 30 years of whether the family was going to sell or not. In our case we made the right decision I felt. - T.K.

[Plush]

I notice Mosiah carefully avoided this statement. Always looking for away to Bash the current admin. I guess Burrell was the one who held up the FIFA funds and Boxhill hands were tied. So Mosiah, will we be soon hearing a call to re-elect Boxhill....This must be a joke.

TK, I think the comment you made on Leases is too general and doesn't hold true in many cases. Leases are something that happens around the world and people do the samething...lease and develop.
It was a 99 year lease at $1. Can you get better than that?
You could even negotiate an extention of the orginal lease in the contract. You could also add terms that make it virtually impossible to break...such has a huge penalty.
I won't be fooled by this one....I review Leases as part of my daily job. Imagine if we could take that 22MM and invest it for 99 years.....wow, we probably could build 10 more academies