No...
The reason there are currently no buyers, is because the assets of the club amount to diddly squat without the enabling land. Plus the huge amount of capital required to bolster up a pathetic little stadium that was not fit for purpose from day one.
The land will always be the only thing that will attract owners, other than the Trust. And you know as well as me, we would be in exactly the same position with the Trust in charge. The fact that the stadium is leased is the issue.
There is not one thing stopping the council flogging the land to DB and KT based solely on the caveat of seeing a direct return back into the football club. In fact, the council could flog the land tomorrow and put the money into improving the stadium that they own themselves. All they would need to insist upon, is controlling the contractor payments.. The last ownership and the current ownership will not develop the stadium without that land, can everyone just get that into their heads, so we can least move past crying over the same spilled milk.
I am so bored of hearing the same regurgitated shyte doing the rounds. The council are the ones we should be concentrating our efforts on. They own the fcuking stadium. They can impose reasonable upkeep on the tenant anytime they like. And if you and anybody believes that they signed over the ground on the understanding that there was sufficient funds to complete the East stand, put their bloody feet to the fire and ask for the the documentation around that agreement. If they can’t provide it, then there's your answer. It would clearly mean it was the council who served up the club and the supporters as sacrificial lambs to any potentially unscrupulous owner who came along.
The Trust should be looking at the source of the agreement, for anything potentially actionable, rather than joining in all the crying about the big bad lying boys, who have crapped on us.
