guest3063
|
Yes Another Pedj, but firstly they need to know a price that said business is on the market for, before providing the proof of funds.
|
|
|
|
GrangeParkCobbler
|
Yes Another Pedj, but firstly they need to know a price that said business is on the market for, before proving the proof of funds.
Was just writing the same! Its not a second hand car transaction! Owner sets the price.....buyer agrees the price....owner and buyer carry out due diligence checks.....club changes hands. Shouldn't it be that simple?
|
The Hotel End GTA Champion 2006/07, 2007/08, 2011/12, 2012/13, 2018/19 and 2023/24
|
|
|
Another Pedj
|
Well I stated on here before they will need to demonstrate funds of circa £4M
|
|
|
|
GrangeParkCobbler
|
And is that just for the club??.....not even thinking about the CDNL part?
|
The Hotel End GTA Champion 2006/07, 2007/08, 2011/12, 2012/13, 2018/19 and 2023/24
|
|
|
meccanostand
|
Id say 100% yes to your answer. One of our board members in particular is probably more 'cynical' than any of 'said posters' and he will know Im referring to him if he reads this! Personally speaking, Im not supportive of the current regime anymore. They want to sell the club, when we asked for a price we were told that we had to 'show proof of funds'. That says everything. We aint got a scooby what he wants for the club. And you can bet your bottom dollar that anyone who has shown an interest (and I know for a fact that he was meeting up with someone a couple of weeks back who ticks all of the boxes,my source was not trust related though) will be made to sign all kinds of confidentiality stuff which is my guess, why nothings come out in the public domain. One small subject that hasn't been discussed that much is Kelvin Thomas' role at Torquay and success or otherwise at attracting new owners there. Also his relationship with the Torquay United Supporters Trust.
|
|
|
|
|
guest48
|
Sorry, Drilling but that response coming from a Trust director is truly pathetic and if kicking the can down the road as you are on this particular issue is the best you can do then I'm afraid it is simply not good enough. With the office of being a Trust director comes responsibility and I am seeing precious little of that.
Please remember that the role of being a Trust director is purely voluntary and is at your own expense, most of the board hold down fulltime jobs as well. With this being a very busy time of the year we haven't had a board meeting since the end of November, so I'm pretty sure that Drilling , like myself, had no idea about any emails, they certainly didn't go to the Trust contact section. The board are quite scattered around and don't live in each others pockets, so whoever received the emails will probably bring them up at next weeks meeting.
|
|
|
|
GrangeParkCobbler
|
A lot can happen in a year.......or not!
|
The Hotel End GTA Champion 2006/07, 2007/08, 2011/12, 2012/13, 2018/19 and 2023/24
|
|
|
guest3114
|
Was just writing the same! Its not a second hand car transaction! Owner sets the price.....buyer agrees the price....owner and buyer carry out due diligence checks.....club changes hands. Shouldn't it be that simple? Depends GPC. If there are multiple parties there will be multiple negotiations. All of the potential bids may include quite different caveats. It’s unlikely that many, if any, would include straight up front cash offers. Given that’s the most likely scenario I can’t see the current board showing much of their hand. I come back to the same old point, what is it we actually want as a collective? To my mind no one really has been able to answer this other than pie in the sky dreamland stuff. It’s all well and good demanding the current board are on their way, that’s an easy band wagon to climb on. The real dilemma is who and what comes next and how is that influenced by the supporters, especially the who bit. The Trust should try to agree on what we would like to see as a collective and what if anything can be done to influence this? Until that gets resolved this is all petulant foot stamping born of frustration and nothing more.
|
|
|
|
GrangeParkCobbler
|
Depends GPC. If there are multiple parties there will be multiple negotiations. All of the potential bids may include quite different caveats. It’s unlikely that many, if any, would include straight up front cash offers. Given that’s the most likely scenario I can’t see the current board showing much of their hand. I come back to the same old point, what is it we actually want as a collective? To my mind no one really has been able to answer this other than pie in the sky dreamland stuff. It’s all well and good demanding the current board are on their way, that’s an easy band wagon to climb on. The real dilemma is who and what comes next and how is that influenced by the supporters, especially the who bit. The Trust should try to agree on what we would like to see as a collective and what if anything can be done to influence this? Until that gets resolved this is all petulant foot stamping born of frustration and nothing more.
All fair comment. As I said earlier it probably is time for the Trust to step up and at least canvass opinion from the fan base. Then perhaps they could agree on that way forward, drag a few more ‘voices’ on board and exert some real pressure.
|
The Hotel End GTA Champion 2006/07, 2007/08, 2011/12, 2012/13, 2018/19 and 2023/24
|
|
|
guest3264
|
Just a suggestion; has the Trust spoken to a local bsiness person, who has credibility with most supporters, to be the focal point for any other potential investors (including a Trust group) to head up a concerted bid for NTFC? I suggest the Trust ask a certain Estate Agents owner to head a sustain public campaign? The Trust could be the catylyst? I believe a broad base of owners woud give a more realistic longterm stratergy for the development and focus for fans.
Naive maybe! Best option of getting over the line maybe!
|
|
|
|
Vintage Cobbler
|
Please remember that the role of being a Trust director is purely voluntary and is at your own expense, most of the board hold down fulltime jobs as well. With this being a very busy time of the year we haven't had a board meeting since the end of November, so I'm pretty sure that Drilling , like myself, had no idea about any emails, they certainly didn't go to the Trust contact section. The board are quite scattered around and don't live in each others pockets, so whoever received the emails will probably bring them up at next weeks meeting.
Barton - full-time or part-time really makes no difference to subjects about which Trust directors should be aware. Let me make it clear that the Trust directors' commitment to the cause is undoubted and appreciated by me but it has to be a matter for concern when no knowledge of what I raised is put up by you when I posted about this issue on page 1172 of this thread on 23 November at 16:13 and you yourself posted a response on November 24 at 11:20 am to which I responded on November 24 at 11.30. All you and the Trust directors need is set out in these exchanges which you appear to have slipped from your memory. If you don't consider what I have raised as being of importance I would appreciate knowing your reasons.
|
|
|
|
guest3086
|
One thing the fans would like is absolutely clear. A completed East stand. The current owners have said from day one this was their intention but nothing has happened. In fact it appears now they don't even think it is necessary.
One thing has bothered me for an age now. Why does the Trust not have a position on the board? My understanding is that this was written in to the original Sixfields agreement and was re-inforced by the council when they agreed to write off the £10 million debt. It is either a requirement or it isn't. Please could someone from the Trust answer yes or no and if it is why is it not being enforced?
|
|
|
|
meccanostand
|
One thing the fans would like is absolutely clear. A completed East stand. The current owners have said from day one this was their intention but nothing has happened. In fact it appears now they don't even think it is necessary.
One thing has bothered me for an age now. Why does the Trust not have a position on the board? My understanding is that this was written in to the original Sixfields agreement and was re-inforced by the council when they agreed to write off the £10 million debt. It is either a requirement or it isn't. Please could someone from the Trust answer yes or no and if it is why is it not being enforced?
Finishing that god awful stand is never going to be a panacea, especially if it is going to be funded from monies from development of land in the Sixfields area. There should have been so many more questions on whether Cardoza's carbuncle was value for money for the club on a development worth over £100mil (if I remember rightly). Or whether the small capacity increase was worth works being done at all.
|
|
|
|
BedsCobb
|
Finishing that god awful stand is never going to be a panacea, especially if it is going to be funded from monies from development of land in the Sixfields area. There should have been so many more questions on whether Cardoza's carbuncle was value for money for the club on a development worth over £100mil (if I remember rightly). Or whether the small capacity increase was worth works being done at all.
Too much emphasis is going into 'finishing off the East stand' as being the end to all our problems, as it will contain some very welcome corporate boxes and sponsors lounge/ resturant etc, but it still wont allow the Cobblers to build up its supporters base befitting of its catchment or even allow us to survive in let alone sustain a challenging league 1. Instead of refering to ' doing up the East' should be referred to as part 1 of the Sixfields redevelopment programme to make it clear to the likes of Thomas and Cardoza that it is fully understood what this club requires and that half arsed short term schemes are not wanted.
|
|
|
|
guest3264
|
Too much emphasis is going into 'finishing off the East stand' as being the end to all our problems, as it will contain some very welcome corporate boxes and sponsors lounge/ resturant etc, but it still wont allow the Cobblers to build up its supporters base befitting of its catchment or even allow us to survive in let alone sustain a challenging league 1. Instead of refering to ' doing up the East' should be referred to as part 1 of the Sixfields redevelopment programme to make it clear to the likes of Thomas and Cardoza that it is fully understood what this club requires and that half arsed short term schemes are not wanted.
Beds, please show me who has said finishing off the East stand 'will be the end to all our problems'!....................or is it another Beds fantasy fact?
|
|
|
|
BedsCobb
|
Beds, please show me who has said finishing off the East stand 'will be the end to all our problems'!....................or is it another Beds fantasy fact?
What is Thomas's master plans for Sixfields after he's finished the East? We dont even know what he has planned for that..Well I do Unless we have an outlined future plans and stages, nothing happens.
|
|
|
|
Vintage Cobbler
|
It's difficult not to conclude that just as our owners ran rings around the Council on CDNL they are doing the same with us supporters.
|
|
|
|
GrangeParkCobbler
|
Beds, please show me who has said finishing off the East stand 'will be the end to all our problems'!....................or is it another Beds fantasy fact?
What he’s probably trying to say is that there has been no mention of anything other than finishing off the stand. No mention any more of a conference centre, no mention any more of a hotel on the west car park, no mention of any other improvements to Sixfields itself. I’m not saying this is fact, but it seems most fans would be happy with a completed stand to gaze across at.
|
The Hotel End GTA Champion 2006/07, 2007/08, 2011/12, 2012/13, 2018/19 and 2023/24
|
|
|
guest48
|
Barton - full-time or part-time really makes no difference to subjects about which Trust directors should be aware. Let me make it clear that the Trust directors' commitment to the cause is undoubted and appreciated by me but it has to be a matter for concern when no knowledge of what I raised is put up by you when I posted about this issue on page 1172 of this thread on 23 November at 16:13 and you yourself posted a response on November 24 at 11:20 am to which I responded on November 24 at 11.30.
All you and the Trust directors need is set out in these exchanges which you appear to have slipped from your memory. If you don't consider what I have raised as being of importance I would appreciate knowing your reasons.
What I said in my last post was that I had no knowledge of any emails sent to the Trust and that is 100% true. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you are the gentleman who sits very close to one of the board members in the West Stand, the said board member does keep us up to date with what he, and yourself, find on the companies house site, but as I stated, we have not met since the end of November. Of course the issues you raise are important but, also, it's important how we use information and that is discused by the Trust board, not individuals. Why not come along to a board meeting? I know you live 70 miles from Northampton but we have a board member who lives over 50 miles away, I'm sure we could arrange a meeting to talk specifically about the ownership and your input would be appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|