How much would you need to win on the lottery to seriously consider buying the club? I remember reading Griggs spent around £40m of his own wealth to get Rushden into the EFL for a couple seasons.

But Max's problem was that he started with a park team playing in a small village. £40M spent on NTFC at that time would have established us at Championship level based in the 24th biggest place in the UK, not England, the UK !

Thought Wormy had a decent game and didn’t stop for 90 minutes Dyche was steady enough. List will be alright if he gets a centre forward to play off. Oh and it was bloody hot 🥵 and no one likes Millwall 😛.

What are you on? Everyone on here could see that Dyche was to blame for the third, despite him not being on the pitch.

You can and I can assure you, as will The Chairman, that it was appropriate to this current subject.

So what were they Rim?
To say the only reply I got was a shrug of the shoulders is taking vagueness to a new level, when you haven't said what the question was 

. I also raised the issue of the statement in the clubs accounts that listed the activities of the Trust Board as costing the club money.

So are you suggesting that a multi million pound company made a bid for some land on the back of advice from a part time supporters group?
Maybe Cildara, being a land company, saw that that NTFC were getting the land for a very good price, knew the true value of the land and topped NTFC's bid.
Lets not forget that KT and Cildara were know to each other previously

M
I have had two face to face conversations with The Trust Chairman, both ended with his 'shrug of the shoulders' and "so what?" reactions.

Rim, that's a bit vague, Can I ask what the questions were to glean that response ?
You could have been asking him if he knew the winning lottery numbers

As the Trust are such overwhelmingly nice people, and are very keen to restablish severed links with the club and their membership, why dont they agree to underwrite the cost of a barrel?  After all, it would go some way towards proving wether or not a box park was financially viable.

Been there, done that. There was no real ale in Carrs Bar before the Trust agreed to underwrite any losses, but there were no losses. The trick is knowing what sized barrels' to buy.

Good grief. Maybe one day the penny will drop.

I'm just wondering if you will ever see the irony in what you posted. You are saying it's OK to only speak to one group of supporters , as long as they are the group you favour. What would be your reaction if the IFR said "We are only going to talk to the Trust as they are the only independent supporters group"
  You can't have it both ways 

Yeah, my interpretation is that the club need to engage with a representative group of fans. The FAB is a representative group of fans, isn't it?

No more so than the Trust, if you want to use that wording to block the Trust it can be used in exactly the same way to block the FAB. So is that your view of how things should be done? Speak to only the fans who agree with your thoughts?
All fans groups should be represented, if one group proposes something that's rubbish, it wouldn't get through would it ?

[if the IFR feels clubs are not engaging with a representative group of fans,]

Thank you for your correspondence of 11 June, to the Minister for Sport, Media, Civil Society and
Youth, Stephanie Peacock MP, about the ‘Trusts First’ campaign concerning the Football Governance
Bill. I am replying as a member of the Ministerial Support Team.
The Football Governance Bill will create a new Independent Football Regulator (IFR), which will enforce
new standards for fan engagement in decision-making, guaranteeing fans an effective voice in the key
issues that have an impact on them. The government appreciates that there may be some instances
where fans do not feel they are represented by their club’s supporters’ trust. That is why the bill takes
an approach that will allow for flexibility and does not specify a set form or process for engaging with
fans. As such, it does not give supporters trusts any formal primacy over any other sort of fan group.
Under the measures in the bill, clubs will be required to have an appropriate framework in place that
allows them to regularly meet and consult fans on key strategic matters and supporter interests. Where
fans feel represented and the consultation is already working, clubs are unlikely to need to make any
changes. However, if the IFR feels clubs are not engaging with a representative group of fans, then it
will be able to take action to rectify this issue.
I hope this information is helpful.
Yours sincerely,
Ministerial Support Team

 Reading that I'm assuming that the Trust have a case for action as they are/were excluded from the FAB ?

NTFC Supporters Trust Club 500
The winners for June 2025 are:
£250 - Ian Naylor of Moulton
£100 - Anthony Stimpson of West Sussex
£50 - Alan Dix of Knuston
Your cheques are in the post folks.
New members are welcome only £5 per month and much more chance of winning than the National Lottery, full details at
www.ntfctrust.co.uk

RIP Wayne Larkins, great cricketer for NCC and also a very footballer

Much like what this thread has become.

Roger loves Cobblers, let’s not forget that.

Let’s also not forget that’s he’s wrong 

Yes I do love the Cobblers and that's why I would have liked 15% of the land to be left for use of the football club and is that really wrong? Still leaves 85% for warehouses.
  I think any real Cobblers fan as got to think that we are being short changed, there's plenty to go round but we don't seem to be getting our little share.

The question Rog was the distance from the warehouse development to the back of the stand. The running track alternative was subjected to a similar series of questions directly to the Board by me personally that they promised to respond to but subsequently didn’t and failed to remedy any of the issues surrounding, it sticking to a theme. So rather than not remembering it, I distinctly do and spent time and effort engaging with the board over it. Happy to discuss the details of this as a seperate issue as and when required. 👍🏻

There would be no warehouses to measure from if the running track had been left separate

Another opportunity to object from the “no” men is the simple answer. What distance was identified as reasonable by the crusaders, I don’t recall seeing it specified? I mean they spent 10 years demanding that the stand be completed, yet not once was the exact distance from any development identified as being acceptable as far as I am aware. Neither was the minimum budget, minimum capacity post development, or minimum parking spaces, minimum numbers or size of boxes or any other exact figure to the best of my knowledge.

Well that's the trouble Dale, your knowledge doesn't remember lots of people saying "Leave the old running track" out of the warehouse development.

A very good win of a very entertaining game. 9 of us went to Slovakia and watched the first 2 England games and most of us got together last night, in the pub, to watch the victory, a great ending to a really good tournament !
  Roll on Albania & Serbia !!

Of course it is. But do you think I will get an apology…. No chance. 😂

I shall be taking my tape measure down to South Wales next April and if any of the buildings are nearer than the warehouse at Sixfields, I'll buy you a pint Nigel, but I'll expect a pint from yourself when I'm proved right 

With regard to your question, my honest answer would be that warehousing on the edge of an access road to an existing industrial estate, is infinitely more preferable to an underused box park/burger joint (totally in the wrong location, due to lack of footfall) a boxing gym, and a truck park with zero facilities that charges twice as much as the FULLY equipped Red Lion ten minutes away. (Dereks figures not mine).

But what about the things I mentioned, sufficient car parking for the new stand, 4G pitches which can bring in a fortune 24/7 and if the fan zone was good people would walk the extra 200 yards. You must agree that any of them are better than an 18Mt warehouse

Sometimes its best to just move on to something else.  

Yes sometimes it is but also sometimes it's good to ask some questions. Nigel doesn't seem to want to answer so I'll ask you, Do you not think that there are better things for NTFC that could have been built rather than an 18 Mt high warehouse ?  Car Parking? 4G pitches? Fan Zone?, I'm not saying use all the land, just the old running track and this would still have left 85% of the land for the owners to do what they liked with, give me a honest answer.

Firstly. Cardiff has a BMW dealership and a self storage facility well within the parameters you set.

Secondly. Is it just possible that people are bored of you taking every angle you can to knock everything they do.

You are as entitled as anyone to express your point. But you will notice,  hopefully, that a lot of people don’t agree with you.
 

Take a look on Google Earth and then tell me that there is something built within 25 Mts of the Cardiff City Stadium , I went there a few years ago and there was nothing anywhere near and I've just checked on Google and this appears to still be correct, we will find out in April.
 Regarding a lit of people not agreeing with me, that's probably down to the fact that anyone who has an alternative view is subject to bullying on here, I've got a thick skin and it doesn't affect me, but everyone's not the same. Ask yourself why you are down to around a dozen posters on here and the answer is no disagreeing with the management.
    Now answer this honestly, do you really think that there is nothing that could be better for NTFC than having an 18Mt high warehouse 25 Mts from the back of a nice new stand? And take into account that the owners still have 85% of the land to develope and make a profit from, if they don't want to spend much money, at least, they could have enough car parking spaces for everyone using the nice new stand

Roger, it was you, once again that brought the Trust into it. By saying they were right.So you brought up the Trust again. Then I responded, by stating that they can't be right, because they jumped into bed with a property developer, who had zero interest in the club at all. Namely Cildara. Seems like you want your cake and eat it. You bring up the Trust, then moan when they get mentioned in the same field as your comments. You ask for examples of other grounds that have structures within the same dimensions as the proposed Sixfields development. Then you start moaning and shifting the goal posts when people respond, proving there are many. 

Read it again Nigel, I said what the Trust SAID was right, nothing about what they did. The fact is that the Trust said we would get warehouses right up to the back of the East and that is 100% correct. I asked for examples of other new grounds with buildings as close, you replied with one of your examples being Cardiff which has nothing built around it at all. Also surely you and your mates will admit that building a swimming pool or a row of restaurants is a lot more appealing than an 18 Mt high warehouse. The club are selling corporate seats at £120 per game with "Parking available on request" but with 10 boxes and Toller Lounge catering for around 80 people, the car park would be insufficient, so maybe they could have built a bigger car park, like on the original plans
    I stick by what I said, the owners could have developed 85% of the land and just left the old running track for the benefit of NTFC and everyone would have been happy, they didn't need to be greedy.