Councillors seek reassurances over Port Vale loan
FINANCE leaders insist they expect Port Vale to pay their council loan on time.
The club has twice breached the terms of the £2.25 million city council loan, agreed as part of a 20-year deal in 2006.
-
Figures show the cash-strapped club has met every planned repayment so far.
But payments only covered monthly interest of £9,409.72 until March 2011. Loan repayments of £10,718.60, plus interest, have been paid as agreed thereafter.
Former city councillor Mike Barnes quizzed the council last night on whether an initial "repayment holiday" would mean the repayment package had been delayed.
But councillor Sarah Hill, cabinet member for finance, said: "As far as I am concerned, we expect the money to be repaid over the timescale originally agreed."
More Port Vale articles:
Martin Tideswell: There's no reason why Lloyd and Co can't face their public
Gerald Sinstadt: Buyer beware when it comes to window shopping
Port Vale: MP snubbed in bid to help Valiants
Old-fashioned love for matchmaking comedian
Port Vale: We're ready to hunt down Shrewsbury, says Adams
Port Vale: club can help me achieve personal ambitions, says Loft
6 Comments
by valmick
Saturday, March 03 2012, 1:00PM
“The point is Stoke were in no position to finance a new stadium without the council`s help. It may have turned out ok but there was a risk taken with taxpayers money. The project was sold as (a) regeneration of land through the demolition of the Victoria Ground (b) the provision of a fine community stadium to the benefit of ALL citizens and (c) a new ground for Stoke to play at. Well we got one part of the deal I suppose. Maybe in hindsight we will be able to say the same thing about the investment in the Vale. Who knows!”
by stokemaveric
Friday, February 03 2012, 11:28PM
“pvcoo1 this is the official report of the internal audit report 2010 and i hope that this will clear up any misguided views that you vagrants may have over the sale of the brittannia stadium it is as follow...PLEASE READ...
executive summary appendix 4.2...the council ORIGINALLY INVESTED £3.14 MILLION POUNDS
AND SUBSEQUENTLY RECIEVED £480,000 BY WAY OF DIVIDEND PAYMENTS IN ADDITION TO IN KIND COMMUNITY PAYMENTS.. IN CASH TERMS THE COUNCIL RECIEVED AN ADDITIONAL £1.6 MILLION OVER AND ABOVE ITS ORIGINAL INVESTMENT..THE FUNDING OF THE NEW STADIUM THROUGH SDC ALSO FACILITATED THE REGENERATION OF WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY DERELICT LAND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DID NOT RECIEVE VALUE FOR MONEY IN IN THE SALE OF ITS SHAREHOLDING IN THE COMPANY...basically the council sold its share in the britannia stadium...and in real terms at a profit what is the problem???”
by pvfc001
Friday, February 03 2012, 10:03PM
“How come the council weren't bothered about the tax payers money when they loaned the money for Britannia stadium. The story was that they needed the ground where the old stadium was yet it still stands disused.
They then sell the Britannia to Stoke City for peanuts - a huge sum of tax payers money lost. The money that Vale owe is nothing in comparison to what the council lost on the building and subsequent sale of Britannia Stadium - as I stated before favouritism!!!”
by stokemaveric
Friday, February 03 2012, 12:35PM
“pvfc001 the council are nt in any position to write off £2.25 million pounds...the club has twice breached the loan agreement which could have resulted in the council re-calling the loan immedeatley which would have put the club in threat of closure,the council [and therefore the council tax payers of stoke on trent] are already in danger of losing the money if the club goes into administration..dont you think the council are doing you enough ''favours''....???”
by pvfc001
Friday, February 03 2012, 12:15PM
“How come vale have to pay the loan back yet Stoke City didn't. Favouritism or what!!!!”
by ValiantFosse
Friday, February 03 2012, 10:32AM
“But what was the Gib loan for?”