I appreciate that Vintage and I’m not having a go I’m really not. What ever the ins and outs Worcester have invested a significant amount of money in the infrastructure because they believe it to be viable. All I am trying to point out is that it is not straight forward and you have to evaluate each case on its merits. The fact is that investment in the infrastructure at NTFC has a place. The decision about what to spend and when needs to be carefully planned but I would be part of the big picture and has a place. As I keep saying the major stumbling block is the capital. Beds would have you believe this an be achieved through increased attendance at the gate, food and beverage sales etc etc. But because we would have had no capital investment this would need to be achieved with Sixfields in its current state. However, he claims that this is the very thing that prevents us from increasing attendance etc. It’s the proverbial chicken and egg and is nothing more than total lunacy. This debate needs a dose of common sense and the bleeding obvious if it is going to gather momentum. Despite appearances I am not having a go at Beds either at the end of the day. I get frustrated because it detracts from what should be a discussion about realistic and viable options to drag the club out of what we universally accept is the endless cycle of being in the doldrums at best.
Some good points but probably not best to give to much credence to the back and forth on an anonymous internet messageboard with regards viability of anything.