There was no legal commitment to finish the stand but we did make a commitment to finish the stand.......ok, that makes sense!
The "deal" does not see us paying out for the building of the stand and then getting that money back off the council....... in that case why did the Council put a £3m maximum on the building of the stand? They (the Council) have basically said the Club can't build a super stand costing £10m for example? Why is this? Because its been interpreted (rightly or wrongly) that the Council will ultimately pay for that....it is their asset thats being improved after all.
We've got the funds to do the stand......if so why hasn't it been done for 5 years?
If the Council own the land and CDNL (NTFC) lease the land, why the need for NTFC to purchase the land from the Council in the first place? Why don't the Council employ developers and get their cut that way, and then improve their asset themselves?
If there is no condition that the stand is completed before the land can be developed, then CDNL/NTFC could sell the land, use £6/7m to pay themselves back, and then sell the club debt free....but still completed stand free!
Can't help thinking that was 23 minutes of waffle from KT with no new news whatsoever.
As for the Club/Trust spat.....some of what he says is probably true (fan ownership for example) but to suggest that they have interpreted a FOI request wrongly and put out a statement which suits their agenda is a bit worrying.
Agreed. It was indeed 23 minutes of waffle from KT which could meaningfully have been said in 60 seconds. What I find most bizarre is not his dissatisfaction with the Trust but the levels that ther recent release seems to have irked him. He who protests most?