Sifting through the facts and the opinions here I'm getting the impression that the KT skeptics are not necessarily calling him out for pulling a flanker on the lease acquisition (after all it was a free market and if he as a businessman was more nimble to spot an opportunity arguably why not) - what seems to nark particularly was the backdrop to the acquisition & perhaps why the council stepped back was the promise of the 4 million to develop the stand irrespective of any land or lease arrangement - translating the councils consistent wording on nothing to do with the leases stops that particular development then they have a point and KT has perhaps chosen other business interests ahead of that of the football club - wiser posters on the subject please advise if I've (finally) got it........
It was KT who mentioned 4 million ring-fenced, but I don't believe he ever stated this was purely for the stand, did he? However, part of the MoU covers his intention to complete, and infers finances already available.
As for the CVA issue, which Barnabas and a few others mentioned, once KT's group successfully acted it was difficult for the council to do anything other than take the hit. I have been told they made legal moves to block KT acquiring the CVA deal, but I must stress this is just hearsay and I've found no evidence of this.
It is a strange one though, as in the statement they released recently, KT and DB insisted they only made moves to acquire CDNL because of an issue with the lease, wherein a part of the East Stand had been signed over to CDNL. This is weird, and again I've found nothing showing this issue.
However, if this should turn out to be the case, then, as Manwork suggests, surely it should be possible to strike a deal wherein everyone wins, ie; Impressive new stand; council recoup their ten million, plus terms applicable to their previous land deal, and KT's group make good money.
I'm still inclined to believe the club is just a means to an end. Though, just like when the Cardozas' were here, I have no problems at all with our owners making a pot; just so long as the club reap some benefit, and - in this instance - the council too.