The proposed deal in the last format we saw was impossible to support because it didn't include any proposals for clear, binding commitment in terms of benefits to the football club. As it stands, the deal refers to splitting profits. What will those profits be after the pretty steep £3m to finish the East Stand in line with the last shoddy iteration of Cardoza's ever-worsening plans including restricted views, the required remediation of the contaminated land before it can be sold, and no doubt many other expenses...
The most recent idea floated was that the owners would like to parcel the land up and sell it for development. This for me is not an approach that would be favoured by people who plan to be around for very long to ensure the club is ok after the deal is done. It also gives a one-off lump of revenue rather than providing any continued income (developing on the land and letting it out would do this). We've already seen that it is pretty easy for one-off lumps of money to go missing around football clubs, and other places to be fair.
So without even a commitment of a percentage of profits, let alone some ballpark figures, guaranteed to go the the club, how is this a supportable proposal for any Cobblers fan? It's quite easy to run a project with high costs (including consultancy fees and salaries) which doesn't show any profit (50/50 to go to WNC and NTFC in the proposed deal) but still makes a lot of money for the people involved along the way. This has to be as close as possible to watertight, it is a one-off opportunity to avoid the club being devoid of any assets and hemmed in by sheds on sold-off land, with no opportunity for further income and a pretty crap completed East Stand.
It could be that the addition of detail to the current plan would provide the required reassurance and the Trust might then be able to support it, as long as such detail was legally bound into any agreement. We look at the results of verbal commitments made six years ago every time we look to our left from the North Stand...
I don't think WNC would approve the deal in its current format regardless of any lobbying from the club, the Trust or anyone else. It doesn't provide any assurance whatsoever of a positive outcome for any party.
What else could be done with that land? I'd love to see some ideas from the owners about football-related developments, or things that would create an ongoing income and enhance the matchday experience. If that land isn't suitable due to contamination, then share some thoughts as to what you'd do with the stated amount of profits that would be guaranteed to be used for the benefit of the club. I know KT said his approach was to under-promise and over-deliver, but so far we've only seen the first part of that. Why so averse to sharing a vision for the club? We know plans can go wrong and make people look silly, but if you don't have a plan at all the risk is stagnation.
Everything seems to be about flogging that land asap, to the detriment of any other creative thinking which we could all get behind and potentially contribute to. The only ideas I've seen have come from supporters, but our owners are experienced "football people" and want to create a "local feel". Surely there's something better we could do than flog off the club's only asset as quickly as possible.
I'd like to know your view on this too. What do you think?
While you raise some interesting points I just can’t grasp why the trust seem to think that the football club need their blessing?
Surely the club will reiterate that the trust didn’t want a place on the board and so their viewpoint is irrelevant.
It does seem that only the trust board fail to see this.
