Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?

[JollyCobbler]

Wouldn’t the same option have been open to NBC to pursue or did the need for a gazillion focus groups, discussion meetings, planning forums, cabinet meetings prevent the likelihood from happening?

Yes it would have been safer if NBC had time to secure the leases. On the papers I viewed this week NBC did acknowledge there was a 'risk' posed by someone moving in and gazumping them on securing the CDNL leases held by the liquidators. But, and here's the thing, NTFC were only days away from HMRC's court petition, and the Thomas group wouldn't complete with the 10 million debt still overhanging the club. If the council had held out until everything was wrapped up nicely, NTFC faced going out of business.

This is why the council have remained tight lipped. Because, yet again, they allowed themselves to get mugged. But, and it is a big but, if NBC hadn't allowed the deal to go through the Cobblers may well have gone to the wall.
Northampton Borough Council gambléd because they were trying to preserve the status of NTFC. Unfortunately, they then got shafted by the very same people who shook hands with them and signed an MoU aimed at preserving the club and recovering lost monies.

Did NBC act with due diligence? Possibly not. But what they did do was to act in the best interests of Northampton Town Football Club. And then our saviors screwed them over.

And just to add, on the MoU the Thomas group stated it was their intention to complete the East Stand with funds available. That was in 2015. 'Nuff said!

[barnabas]

Yes it would have been safer if NBC had time to secure the leases. On the papers I viewed this week NBC did acknowledge there was a 'risk' posed by someone moving in and gazumping them on securing the CDNL leases held by the liquidators. But, and here's the thing, NTFC were only days away from HMRC's court petition, and the Thomas group wouldn't complete with the 10 million debt still overhanging the club. If the council had held out until everything was wrapped up nicely, NTFC faced going out of business.

This is why the council have remained tight lipped. Because, yet again, they allowed themselves to get mugged. But, and it is a big but, if NBC hadn't allowed the deal to go through the Cobblers may well have gone to the wall.
Northampton Borough Council gambléd because they were trying to preserve the status of NTFC. Unfortunately, they then got shafted by the very same people who shook hands with them and signed an MoU aimed at preserving the club and recovering lost monies.

Did NBC act with due diligence? Possibly not. But what they did do was to act in the best interests of Northampton Town Football Club. And then our saviors screwed them over.

And just to add, on the MoU the Thomas group stated it was their intention to complete the East Stand with funds available. That was in 2015. 'Nuff said!

But wasn't the issue of the leasehold covered in the CVA for CDNL, which proposed that if KT & Bower paid the £170k to get the CVA through then no further action would be taken to realise the leasehold?

[guest2487]

So many opinions and guess work it's pointless. There is a few facts knocking around from Manwork but even then without context it's impossible to provide anything other than an opinion.

[guest2539]

Life is no always fair and I like to think I am streetwise and realistic. I believe most of the critisism aimed at KT, by a few posters, stems from NBC's incompetance rather than actions by KT! Of course KT wants to financially benefit and if he does so legally then so be it, welcome to the real world. This goes back to my original point that anybody could have bought the club to make 'SO MUCH MONEY' but the queue was non existant.

All I ask is NBC make a dcision so we can find out what future NTFC has rather than having speculation.

[BackOfTheNet]

Life is no always fair and I like to think I am streetwise and realistic. I believe most of the critisism aimed at KT, by a few posters, stems from NBC's incompetance rather than actions by KT! Of course KT wants to financially benefit and if he does so legally then so be it, welcome to the real world. This goes back to my original point that anybody could have bought the club to make 'SO MUCH MONEY' but the queue was non existant.

All I ask is NBC make a dcision so we can find out what future NTFC has rather than having speculation.

I can't agree with that, I'm afraid. I'm pretty hard nosed about business and broadly back Thomas in what he's been trying to do; he clearly wasn't doing it out of the goodness of his heart but if he could save the club and make himself and his partners a few quid along the way then all to the good, everybody wins.

However, the end doesn't always justify the means. Screwing someone over because they are incompetent and you can doesn't mean you should, particularly when the well meaning idiot has just gone out of their way to help you. It's like being invited in out of the rain by a befuddled OAP and then scamming them out of their life savings.

[Vintage Cobbler]

I think our owners stand to make more than "a few quid" from the land they and not the club. hold.  The 2 leases should be merged and/or be placed in the ownership of NTFC and KT & DB will still stand to gain substantially from a sale of their 80%+ holding in the club through Ventures.  We are probably talking about significant sums of money that could be a watershed for our club.  If supporters want to continue to bump along the bottom then continue to make noises in favour of KT.  If he shafted the Council, which is the current theme of this thread, think who could be next.

[claretparrot]

Posters on both sides of the fence are still making leaps (admittedly the leaps are getting smaller). I still agree with AS among others that we don't have enough information to make an informed judgement.

However... If I were the council, and the current theory put forward by JC is accurate, I would have been responding to KT's second statement quickly and in the strongest terms. The fear of sounding like you ballsed up a bit is nothing compared to the need to defend yourself against false accusations of foul play, surely!?

[Monty]

Looks to me like Team KT have something the council wants, the council has the power over vetoing any development so at the moment the football club is the one that's getting shafted the most. There must be a deal to be worked out that benefits KT, Council and NTFC - why doesn't everyone try to go down that path rather than the current impasse where no-one is going to win?

[Manwork04]

Looks to me like Team KT have something the council wants, the council has the power over vetoing any development so at the moment the football club is the one that's getting shafted the most. There must be a deal to be worked out that benefits KT, Council and NTFC - why doesn't everyone try to go down that path rather than the current impasse where no-one is going to win?

Yes KT and DB do have something the council wants, the land leases which would yield enough money for the council to pay off the Sixfields loan.
They have to hammer out a way forward so that everybody wins, unfortunately the club will come a very poor third.
The ideal scenario would be the council gets the £10m back, the club gets a new east stand the same as the west with boxes and an extended south stand with the rest going to KT an DB.

[Zen Master]

Was the full planning permission granted to build the 255 houses plus additional bits? The conference centre and hotel were to be added to the West so nothing stopping that from happening although that would be directly attached to the club.

[guest2539]

Looks to me like Team KT have something the council wants, the council has the power over vetoing any development so at the moment the football club is the one that's getting shafted the most. There must be a deal to be worked out that benefits KT, Council and NTFC - why doesn't everyone try to go down that path rather than the current impasse where no-one is going to win?

I believe there was a meeting with the new Chief Executive of NBC on Tuesday................progress?

[everbrite]

But wasn't the issue of the leasehold covered in the CVA for CDNL, which proposed that if KT & Bower paid the £170k to get the CVA through then no further action would be taken to realise the leasehold?

 
Ah - interesting comment from a newbie. Might be interesting to see JC comment on Barnabas point?

[Zen Master]

Yes it was covered in the CVA and is on page 4 last paragraph on the documents for the 3rd of November.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08589683/filing-history

[cobblerwatch]

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........

[Zen Master]

Here is the MoU. Can’t see any mention in it of £4 million. It does mention about the completion of the East Stand and also about the leases.
As CDNhttp://www.northamptonboroughcouncil.com/councillors/documents/s48420/Memorandum%20of%20Understanding%20-%20TC%20181115%202.pdfL never went into liquidation it never lost the control of said leases.

[Manwork04]

That MoU is one of the most badly written and meaningless documents I have ever read.
The council fully expected to get the land back from the liquidator and made it clear that the east stand was to be finished.
BTW the council fought hard to block KT and DB getting the land.

[Zen Master]

Their vote was worth less than Buckingham’s so did not block the agreement

[JollyCobbler]

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.

[clarkeysntfc]

Stunning incompetence by the council, even with KT's group telling them what was going to happen with the leases they still managed to screw up.

I believe they've gone through 6 planning officers in the period since KT took over. An organisation in chaos.

[GrangeParkCobbler]

The MoU.......

2e.....The Football Club will establish arrangements with the Supporters Trust for their
involvement in the Football Club as soon as possible and at the latest by 31
st March 2016.

How did that work out?? And what did the Trust do about the "non-compliance"?

4. The Football Club shall have the exclusive use of the East Stand room hire on match days at no
cost to include, but not limited to, Hospitality Boxes; Executive Lounge; Terracing and
Concourse.

Seems to suggest that the East stand would be run as a separate entity to the rest of the ground? Why would this provision be there? Because someone else ran the stand and this was to stop them renting it out to other parties on matchdays??