So, you're now suggesting that the ex-owner of Wasps paid not one penny in costs for the project? I find that very hard to believe. I don't know, but I would imagine he incurred considerable costs in getting the project as far forward as he did.
Do you have any evidence that he did? I'm sure that WSDL (the company set up to represent London Wasps and Wycombe Wanderers) will have incurred costs that may be attributed to the stadium proposal but I'd expect that much of that was spent on marketing the idea in order to raise funding.
I don't imagine he paid WDC's costs, but why would he if they were looking to invest in a project that would give them a considerable retunr over many years?
Swansea Council made a similar revenue assumption that was illfounded. Five years later they still hadn't received a penny back from tbe operator of the Liberty Stadium that they paid for. Seem to recall that Doncaster's new stadium ended up costing the local ratepayers a large sum of money without any return too.
So, WDC didn't withdraw from the project then? Which means they must still be in it. Why then have we gone through the recent months of torment, culminating in Hayes selling
not only Wasps, but seemingly WWFC too? Was it really he who pulled the plug on the project when WDC were still happy to go forward with it? I honestly hadn't realised that was the case!
WDC decided not to proceed following the review of the Strategic Outline Business Case which identified that WDC would have to pay £31.5M and WSDL £50M (for which it was later discovered that no evidence of funding had been provided). Proceeding with the project would have exposed WDC to £81.5M. So, WDC stopped 'their' project which was to part fund a new stadium. If the clubs had been able to fund the entire project themselves then WDC would, I'm sure, been happy for the project to proceed. Whether it would have then passed the planning requirements (and Green Belt constraints) isn't known.