The Hotel End
March 29, 2024, 01:15:40 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Arcade Downloads Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register Chat  

Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?

Pages: 1 ... 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 [1249] 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 ... 2181   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?  (Read 1821196 times)
Melbourne Cobbler and 19 Guests are viewing this topic.
DrillingCobbler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5339


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search Windows User Combination
« Reply #24960 on: June 22, 2019, 10:07:51 am »

I have heard, read, digested...every angle of this 'debate'. For a fairly long time now.

Its interesting because at the end of the day, we all soak up and take in information differently.

As I see it, in simplistic terms. KT is looking to make £ from the land, and in return we get a new East Stand. The 'grey area' I guess is how much cash versus 'infrastructural investment' is deemed fair, both morally and ethically?

I have zero grasp of the numbers, what they potentially could be etc. For any of the parties involved.  So personally, at this time I'm 'a fence sitter' and will keep an open mind as we trundle along to the next level of the game.

Redevelopment aside, in the 4 years of KT's stewardship, huge 'investment' has been made on the pitch. We all know that it hasn't got us anywhere, but 'that's football' to a large extent. Whether that £ came from the promised land overseas or whether it came direct out of DB's pocket, is a side issue. I am perhaps more relaxed than I should be at this moment in time about the 'toxic debt', but that's because I'm struggling to see how it could be 'called in' with any effect. Of course, it could be used as a leverage in negotiations.

Either way. The East stand, as a bare minimum, needs to get resolved. Moving forward, I (personally) cannot wait for the day when NTFC becomes a football club in its own right, and land is not part of the bloody day to day discussions. The day when we have owners, KT or otherwise, that run the club purely as a Football Club and there's no other agenda's. I think its worn a lot of us down over the years, countless broken promises, political intervention and a split in support opinion over the matter.

Report Spam   Logged
Vintage Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2531


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #24961 on: June 22, 2019, 10:25:00 am »

Drilling - as I said KT and others are wearing you down.  It is all deliberate.  This is exactly what KT is doing to us the supporters so that we reach a stage of indifference, to NBC in refusing to sign the legal document correcting the boundary so that it bends to his will, to him and DB making millions, to the club and its future owners having the square root of zero.  We have to stand up to this and be strong and determined. 

The land was taken from the club in 2013 in highly questionable circumstances and has since been acquired by CDNL under KT & DB's ownership for the princely sum of about £200,000.  The potential development gain on this land by selling off commercial units is very substantial. This is land that was leased by NBC to NTC with the use of the land restricted to sports use.  Think about it.
Report Spam   Logged
guest3293
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #24962 on: June 22, 2019, 10:34:15 am »

Drilling - as I said KT and others are wearing you down.  It is all deliberate.  This is exactly what KT is doing to us the supporters so that we reach a stage of indifference, to NBC in refusing to sign the legal document correcting the boundary so that it bends to his will, to him and DB making millions, to the club and its future owners having the square root of zero.  We have to stand up to this and be strong and determined. 

The land was taken from the club in 2013 in highly questionable circumstances and has since been acquired by CDNL under KT & DB's ownership for the princely sum of about £200,000.  The potential development gain on this land by selling off commercial units is very substantial. This is land that was leased by NBC to NTC with the use of the land restricted to sports use.  Think about it.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Report Spam   Logged
Vintage Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2531


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #24963 on: June 22, 2019, 10:40:45 am »

Why? There is no need for any of them to turn up at the ground again. KT could jet off back to the States never to be seen again, flog the land and let the club sink into oblivion? I understand what you are getting at Vintage and there is no doubt we as a support base have been let down over the East Stand, but it just doesn’t make any sense to me?

Melbourne - you are missing one critically important point.  The Council will not allow development to proceed without KT finishing the East Stand.  Until that happens KT has nothing to sell as regards CDNL and selling NTFC would not help his relationship with NBC as freeholders and the local planning authority. As you know full well, the difference in value between a land-holding company without planning consent and one with is significant.  The expense of completing the East Stand is relatively small compared to the prospective profit from development on the CDNL land (remember its footprint goes right down to the far fence in the direction of Franklins Gardens).  So, KT has to keep the supporters quiet until he achieves his aim which is to get CDNL the nod on planning approval. There is an umbilical cord between the club and CDNL but it will be cut when KT gets his way.
Report Spam   Logged
MCHammer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1342


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search 1000 Posts Apple User
« Reply #24964 on: June 22, 2019, 11:36:06 am »

I have heard, read, digested...every angle of this 'debate'. For a fairly long time now.

Its interesting because at the end of the day, we all soak up and take in information differently.

As I see it, in simplistic terms. KT is looking to make £ from the land, and in return we get a new East Stand. The 'grey area' I guess is how much cash versus 'infrastructural investment' is deemed fair, both morally and ethically?

I have zero grasp of the numbers, what they potentially could be etc. For any of the parties involved.  So personally, at this time I'm 'a fence sitter' and will keep an open mind as we trundle along to the next level of the game.

Redevelopment aside, in the 4 years of KT's stewardship, huge 'investment' has been made on the pitch. We all know that it hasn't got us anywhere, but 'that's football' to a large extent. Whether that £ came from the promised land overseas or whether it came direct out of DB's pocket, is a side issue. I am perhaps more relaxed than I should be at this moment in time about the 'toxic debt', but that's because I'm struggling to see how it could be 'called in' with any effect. Of course, it could be used as a leverage in negotiations.

Either way. The East stand, as a bare minimum, needs to get resolved. Moving forward, I (personally) cannot wait for the day when NTFC becomes a football club in its own right, and land is not part of the bloody day to day discussions. The day when we have owners, KT or otherwise, that run the club purely as a Football Club and there's no other agenda's. I think its worn a lot of us down over the years, countless broken promises, political intervention and a split in support opinion over the matter.

Great post Drilling and pretty much sums up what I believe the majority of fans feel like.
Report Spam   Logged
Melbourne Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4639



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Spammer 25 Posts in one day Avatar Search
« Reply #24965 on: June 22, 2019, 12:07:15 pm »

Melbourne - you are missing one critically important point.  The Council will not allow development to proceed without KT finishing the East Stand.  Until that happens KT has nothing to sell as regards CDNL and selling NTFC would not help his relationship with NBC as freeholders and the local planning authority. As you know full well, the difference in value between a land-holding company without planning consent and one with is significant.  The expense of completing the East Stand is relatively small compared to the prospective profit from development on the CDNL land (remember its footprint goes right down to the far fence in the direction of Franklins Gardens).  So, KT has to keep the supporters quiet until he achieves his aim which is to get CDNL the nod on planning approval. There is an umbilical cord between the club and CDNL but it will be cut when KT gets his way.
But he won’t get the nod without developing the stand? Meanwhile he is hemorrhaging away a fortune to keep supporters quiet on the off chance he can manoeuvre a position to obtain planning? Too tenuous for me, if that’s true the mans a complete fool.
Report Spam   Logged

Not a real supporter but unelected chair of the Northampton Town Honorary Supporters Club. (Please note: any opinions given may not necessarily be shared by proper supporters. In incidents of conflict the views of real supporters shall take precedence).
MCHammer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1342


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search 1000 Posts Apple User
« Reply #24966 on: June 22, 2019, 12:22:13 pm »


Whatever I may think of our owners and the running of our football club, stupid they are not.  Consider if you would the comments you make in the context of the 5USport relationship. That is all I will say. 

Your comment about backing the current manager in the transfer market is, I suggest, just what the owners want supporters to focus on whilst KT concentrates on bending NBC to his will.  But the reality is that the playing budget has been slashed.  The big earners Crooks, Van Veen, Taylor and others are off the payroll. Largely, this close season has been a case of one in one out.  I expect Adams is on a good deal but the remainder will be inexpensive acquisitions.  What many are seeing as good news may be tempered by bad news if Pierre is sold and certainly that possibility cannot be ruled out. Remember NTFC's income is not solely reliant on DB's money.

There are no contradictions in what I have written and what I have written is what is in progress.

Vintage you only seem to want a very limited debate that suits your and the Supporters Trusts perspective.  Which ironically is one of your major criticisms of what KT is doing.

Your comments above re slashing the wage bill is a massive contradiction along with the requirement he finishes the East Stand with his own money.  Wage bill for instance.  Toxic £5m debt mostly wasted on managers and players....bad.  Selling high earners and slashing wage bill....also bad.  What's he supposed to do then?  It's clear from the signings made we are providing a decent playing budget this season for our level.  If Pierre being sold brings the club back to a more stable financial footing would that not be the right thing to do?  If the club became Community Owned tomorrow what do you think the first thing they would have to do?  Can't have it all ways.

The East stand.  What's you realistic best outcome as far as the East stand goes if KT remains as it seems he currently will?  In addition what's your realistic best outcome for the East stand if he sold up to a community ownership tomorrow?

The contradiction, for some including the trust, as I pointed out a couple of days ago is that they claim to want KT to do as promised and finish it with the £3m he claimed/claims he has set aside.  Now assuming we are realistic and this isn't just a generous gift which anyone with any business sense would understand are we happy for that to be added to the existing debt?  What standard of completion of the East stand is acceptable?  Complete it within the current plans and footprint?  Restricted view seats and all?  Is that good enough?  Would that live up to the promises made?

Of course the reality is that the supporters trust are just using this to "flush" out KT.   Trying and failing to raise discontent among the wider fan base to try and pressure a sale to a community ownership.  Which of course then would still leave the challenge of funding the completion of the stand and to what level?

Here's the next question.  Is all enabling development bad?  So Tel may make what get called flippant comments but it's a valid point that nobody on the Trust or their supporters ever address.  Especially since they have either been told or have made a collective decision not to engage in any difficult debate on here or anywhere else for that matter that they can't control.  Imagine how "pat on the back chummy" their new message board will be.  A terrible way to start prospective community ownership which should be all about open and honest public debate with nothing hidden and no secret agendas.  Having to asnwer the difficult questions when needed.  It's a fact that the trust have had serious discussions with at least one business man who would have wanted enabling benefit to support his investment.  Maybe that's ok?  Maybe it's not?  But it's a discussion and a decision that should be had publically not behind closed doors with only select individuals allowed to know under the false veil of commercial sensitivity.  Wonder who else gets criticised for using excuses like that?  Contradictions aplenty here.

The way I see the East stand is we are at a stage where we have a final shot at getting it right.  I have no idea whether KT has the intention to do that but I see no viable alternative barring a multi millionaire coming in and doing so.  If we finish that stand to it's most basic level and then surround it by non football club related development then that's it.  The club is what it currently is and will never be any more than that.

Finally this is why I'm also undecided re the ACV status on that land.  While I agree with it in principle we may have ended up shooting ourselves in the foot.  I mean it's not unrealistic to think that if the supporters trust get their way the stand gets finished as is within it's current footprint the minimum amount of boxes possible.  It then gets hemmed in by a velodrome, swimming pool or some artificial pitches.  Remember this is what they suggested to the council.
 Imagine that.  Is that what everyone really wants?  How does that benefit the football club?  It's what our Supporters Trust are advocating on our behalf.  Yep a Supporters Trust that's main reason for existence is to represent and aid the benefit of the football club and it's supporters.
Report Spam   Logged
Melbourne Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4639



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Spammer 25 Posts in one day Avatar Search
« Reply #24967 on: June 22, 2019, 15:27:20 pm »

Some valid points raised. My main question remains unanswered and I would love an attempt by KT or the club to answer it. What was the original plan when buying the club? Had they hypothetically spent the money on the East Stand then at this point in time they would have to sell the club and assets for 9 million just to break even? Assuming a relatively modest return after tax of 20% and you are looking at 11 million. This seems a ridiculously low return given the risk, uncertainty in a results driven business and time involved? So what was the expectation and or the intention when the club was purchased? What was the plan and exit strategy at the outset, I’m genuinely intrigued?
« Last Edit: June 22, 2019, 15:30:22 pm by Melbourne Cobbler » Report Spam   Logged

Not a real supporter but unelected chair of the Northampton Town Honorary Supporters Club. (Please note: any opinions given may not necessarily be shared by proper supporters. In incidents of conflict the views of real supporters shall take precedence).
Vintage Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2531


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #24968 on: June 22, 2019, 15:35:46 pm »

MC Hammer – your lengthy comments directed at me deserve a full reply point by point.

- KT has reduced the wage bill to L2 levels.  What I was saying was supporters should not think that KT is suddenly and generously investing significant new money in the club.  He is not.  DB, the money man, has been to about 3 matches in 3 seasons so he cares deeply about the football club.  Wake up supporters.  KT’s PR machine is good and well oiled, aided by a supplicant and uncritical local media (Chron & BBC).  As I commented, he needs to keep the supporter base quiet whilst he progresses the reason why DB is backing him with funds.  The revised and reduced budget is not too heavy a drain on DB’s resources.  KC has a budget in line with L2 and our current level of support. Nothing more and nothing less.  We all hope KC has used the budget wisely.  But bear in mind the club independent of our owners has its own source of revenue from the EFL, t.v., STHs, sponsorship, ticket sales and so on. That continues regardless of who owns the club.  It is not great but if the club lived within its means it would not go belly up. Certainly, it would increase revenue with more local participation.  Exeter City which has no debt are an example of community ownership. There are others - Wimbledon, Hearts, Motherwell.  So if the club became community owned it would not be starting with a zero bank balance if a sale was completed outside of Administration.

- East Stand realistic outcome?  Not good for us supporters.  KT is in my view uninterested in the stand and devoting his efforts to the CDNL land and development.  With his eye on CDNL profit (the ownership is 50:50 KT/DB whereas KT has reduced his shareholding in Ventures from 22.5% to 10%) the less he can get away with on East Stand expenditure the better from the perspective of his bank account.  But should I worry when KT assures us he is always acting in the “best interests’ of the club? Answer, I worry.  As to what would be the outcome of the East Stand under community ownership – it could hardly be worse than the shell that awaits us once more at the start of next season.  Much would depend on the make-up of the community owners if that ever happened.  But, as I see it, your question is academic.  The Council are not going to give the nod to KT on CDNL development unless he completes the East Stand and only then with outline planning consent can he sell CDNL or actually undertake development. I have no idea what our owners intend but I suggest the former is more likely than the latter.

- The contradiction.  There is none.  KT committed to completing the East Stand and on the back of that promise/understanding, call it what you may, he was allowed by NBC to buy the club for £1.00 and with it £10.5 million of debt was forgiven.  KT stated publicly that about £4 million was available. The Council was totally deficient in not making that a legally binding obligation.  I could say more on that subject but there’s no point.  In my book it would not be a gift from our owners but the fulfilment of an obligation.  Of course, the cost of completing the stand will add to the debt but on the other side of the balance sheet it will also provide an increased asset value to NTFC.  On plans it is past time for KT to make these available to us all. Why he is ducking this?  I can tell you that what he has shown to Trust directors I am told would not enable a contractor to proceed to finish the stand.

- Your comments about the Trust using this to “flush” out KT are il-informed and well wide of the truth.  As to the Trust trying and failing to raise discontent amongst the wider fan base, your comments are an absolute disgrace.  You need to back up comments like this with hard evidence.

- You miss the point I was making by a mile.  Ask yourself who stands to gain from any enabling development.  It is not NTFC or any future club owners who will benefit.  Any development would be on CDNL land. KT is refusing to sign the legal document to restore the NTFC/CDNL boundary to what it should be if it was not for an error by the Council. So, leasehold land right up to the rear of the East Stand, bar a small footprint, “belongs to” CDNL and any development profit would go direct to CDNL and not the club whether it is by the sale of plots or future rental income. The club and with it the supporters stand to miss out unless you believe the ever generous KT/DB are going to decide otherwise.  I don’t for a moment think so.

- I am only aware of discussions between the Trust and prospective partners in a community ownership scheme in general terms but the idea that the Trust should disclose any details about such initial discussions is plainly ludicrous and you know that.

- The risk of the stadium being surrounded by non-football related development is high, extremely high.  The consequences are just as you say. That is a good reason alone for you to get behind the Trust and support its effort at resisting what is in progress rather than making some of the unwise comments that you have posted today about the Trust.

- The ACV status is not a “material consideration” NBC has to take into account if a formal planning application is made.  That is not going to happen unless KT is given what I describe as the “nod” from NBC.  So, in these circumstances object though the Trust and others would object to the application the Council would in all probability exercise its discretion to disregard the ACV status.
Report Spam   Logged
Coolcat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8004



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search Windows User Level 6
« Reply #24969 on: June 22, 2019, 17:04:04 pm »


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Are you laughing in French or English?
Report Spam   Logged
Mathius
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 720


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #24970 on: June 22, 2019, 17:14:04 pm »

MC Hammer – your lengthy comments directed at me deserve a full reply point by point.

- KT has reduced the wage bill to L2 levels.  What I was saying was supporters should not think that KT is suddenly and generously investing significant new money in the club.  He is not.  DB, the money man, has been to about 3 matches in 3 seasons so he cares deeply about the football club.  Wake up supporters.  KT’s PR machine is good and well oiled, aided by a supplicant and uncritical local media (Chron & BBC).  As I commented, he needs to keep the supporter base quiet whilst he progresses the reason why DB is backing him with funds.  The revised and reduced budget is not too heavy a drain on DB’s resources.  KC has a budget in line with L2 and our current level of support. Nothing more and nothing less.  We all hope KC has used the budget wisely.  But bear in mind the club independent of our owners has its own source of revenue from the EFL, t.v., STHs, sponsorship, ticket sales and so on. That continues regardless of who owns the club.  It is not great but if the club lived within its means it would not go belly up. Certainly, it would increase revenue with more local participation.  Exeter City which has no debt are an example of community ownership. There are others - Wimbledon, Hearts, Motherwell.  So if the club became community owned it would not be starting with a zero bank balance if a sale was completed outside of Administration.

- East Stand realistic outcome?  Not good for us supporters.  KT is in my view uninterested in the stand and devoting his efforts to the CDNL land and development.  With his eye on CDNL profit (the ownership is 50:50 KT/DB whereas KT has reduced his shareholding in Ventures from 22.5% to 10%) the less he can get away with on East Stand expenditure the better from the perspective of his bank account.  But should I worry when KT assures us he is always acting in the “best interests’ of the club? Answer, I worry.  As to what would be the outcome of the East Stand under community ownership – it could hardly be worse than the shell that awaits us once more at the start of next season.  Much would depend on the make-up of the community owners if that ever happened.  But, as I see it, your question is academic.  The Council are not going to give the nod to KT on CDNL development unless he completes the East Stand and only then with outline planning consent can he sell CDNL or actually undertake development. I have no idea what our owners intend but I suggest the former is more likely than the latter.

- The contradiction.  There is none.  KT committed to completing the East Stand and on the back of that promise/understanding, call it what you may, he was allowed by NBC to buy the club for £1.00 and with it £10.5 million of debt was forgiven.  KT stated publicly that about £4 million was available. The Council was totally deficient in not making that a legally binding obligation.  I could say more on that subject but there’s no point.  In my book it would not be a gift from our owners but the fulfilment of an obligation.  Of course, the cost of completing the stand will add to the debt but on the other side of the balance sheet it will also provide an increased asset value to NTFC.  On plans it is past time for KT to make these available to us all. Why he is ducking this?  I can tell you that what he has shown to Trust directors I am told would not enable a contractor to proceed to finish the stand.

- Your comments about the Trust using this to “flush” out KT are il-informed and well wide of the truth.  As to the Trust trying and failing to raise discontent amongst the wider fan base, your comments are an absolute disgrace.  You need to back up comments like this with hard evidence.

- You miss the point I was making by a mile.  Ask yourself who stands to gain from any enabling development.  It is not NTFC or any future club owners who will benefit.  Any development would be on CDNL land. KT is refusing to sign the legal document to restore the NTFC/CDNL boundary to what it should be if it was not for an error by the Council. So, leasehold land right up to the rear of the East Stand, bar a small footprint, “belongs to” CDNL and any development profit would go direct to CDNL and not the club whether it is by the sale of plots or future rental income. The club and with it the supporters stand to miss out unless you believe the ever generous KT/DB are going to decide otherwise.  I don’t for a moment think so.

- I am only aware of discussions between the Trust and prospective partners in a community ownership scheme in general terms but the idea that the Trust should disclose any details about such initial discussions is plainly ludicrous and you know that.

- The risk of the stadium being surrounded by non-football related development is high, extremely high.  The consequences are just as you say. That is a good reason alone for you to get behind the Trust and support its effort at resisting what is in progress rather than making some of the unwise comments that you have posted today about the Trust.

- The ACV status is not a “material consideration” NBC has to take into account if a formal planning application is made.  That is not going to happen unless KT is given what I describe as the “nod” from NBC.  So, in these circumstances object though the Trust and others would object to the application the Council would in all probability exercise its discretion to disregard the ACV status.

Good post. I don't think the council should make any further concessions to our owners. They [DB & KT] should fulfil their promises.
Report Spam   Logged
Coolcat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8004



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search Windows User Level 6
« Reply #24971 on: June 22, 2019, 17:20:22 pm »

MC Hammer – your lengthy comments directed at me deserve a full reply point by point.

- KT has reduced the wage bill to L2 levels.  What I was saying was supporters should not think that KT is suddenly and generously investing significant new money in the club.  He is not.  DB, the money man, has been to about 3 matches in 3 seasons so he cares deeply about the football club.  Wake up supporters.  KT’s PR machine is good and well oiled, aided by a supplicant and uncritical local media (Chron & BBC).  As I commented, he needs to keep the supporter base quiet whilst he progresses the reason why DB is backing him with funds.  The revised and reduced budget is not too heavy a drain on DB’s resources.  KC has a budget in line with L2 and our current level of support. Nothing more and nothing less.  We all hope KC has used the budget wisely.  But bear in mind the club independent of our owners has its own source of revenue from the EFL, t.v., STHs, sponsorship, ticket sales and so on. That continues regardless of who owns the club.  It is not great but if the club lived within its means it would not go belly up. Certainly, it would increase revenue with more local participation.  Exeter City which has no debt are an example of community ownership. There are others - Wimbledon, Hearts, Motherwell.  So if the club became community owned it would not be starting with a zero bank balance if a sale was completed outside of Administration.

- East Stand realistic outcome?  Not good for us supporters.  KT is in my view uninterested in the stand and devoting his efforts to the CDNL land and development.  With his eye on CDNL profit (the ownership is 50:50 KT/DB whereas KT has reduced his shareholding in Ventures from 22.5% to 10%) the less he can get away with on East Stand expenditure the better from the perspective of his bank account.  But should I worry when KT assures us he is always acting in the “best interests’ of the club? Answer, I worry.  As to what would be the outcome of the East Stand under community ownership – it could hardly be worse than the shell that awaits us once more at the start of next season.  Much would depend on the make-up of the community owners if that ever happened.  But, as I see it, your question is academic.  The Council are not going to give the nod to KT on CDNL development unless he completes the East Stand and only then with outline planning consent can he sell CDNL or actually undertake development. I have no idea what our owners intend but I suggest the former is more likely than the latter.

- The contradiction.  There is none.  KT committed to completing the East Stand and on the back of that promise/understanding, call it what you may, he was allowed by NBC to buy the club for £1.00 and with it £10.5 million of debt was forgiven.  KT stated publicly that about £4 million was available. The Council was totally deficient in not making that a legally binding obligation.  I could say more on that subject but there’s no point.  In my book it would not be a gift from our owners but the fulfilment of an obligation.  Of course, the cost of completing the stand will add to the debt but on the other side of the balance sheet it will also provide an increased asset value to NTFC.  On plans it is past time for KT to make these available to us all. Why he is ducking this?  I can tell you that what he has shown to Trust directors I am told would not enable a contractor to proceed to finish the stand.

- Your comments about the Trust using this to “flush” out KT are il-informed and well wide of the truth.  As to the Trust trying and failing to raise discontent amongst the wider fan base, your comments are an absolute disgrace.  You need to back up comments like this with hard evidence.

- You miss the point I was making by a mile.  Ask yourself who stands to gain from any enabling development.  It is not NTFC or any future club owners who will benefit.  Any development would be on CDNL land. KT is refusing to sign the legal document to restore the NTFC/CDNL boundary to what it should be if it was not for an error by the Council. So, leasehold land right up to the rear of the East Stand, bar a small footprint, “belongs to” CDNL and any development profit would go direct to CDNL and not the club whether it is by the sale of plots or future rental income. The club and with it the supporters stand to miss out unless you believe the ever generous KT/DB are going to decide otherwise.  I don’t for a moment think so.

- I am only aware of discussions between the Trust and prospective partners in a community ownership scheme in general terms but the idea that the Trust should disclose any details about such initial discussions is plainly ludicrous and you know that.

- The risk of the stadium being surrounded by non-football related development is high, extremely high.  The consequences are just as you say. That is a good reason alone for you to get behind the Trust and support its effort at resisting what is in progress rather than making some of the unwise comments that you have posted today about the Trust.

- The ACV status is not a “material consideration” NBC has to take into account if a formal planning application is made.  That is not going to happen unless KT is given what I describe as the “nod” from NBC.  So, in these circumstances object though the Trust and others would object to the application the Council would in all probability exercise its discretion to disregard the ACV status.

Reading through all the previous posts, got to say, with you totally on the above. All points addressed well fella!
Report Spam   Logged
Manwork04
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9314



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Windows User Mobile User Spammer 25 Posts in one day
« Reply #24972 on: June 22, 2019, 18:47:36 pm »

MC Hammer – your lengthy comments directed at me deserve a full reply point by point.

- KT has reduced the wage bill to L2 levels.  What I was saying was supporters should not think that KT is suddenly and generously investing significant new money in the club.  He is not.  DB, the money man, has been to about 3 matches in 3 seasons so he cares deeply about the football club.  Wake up supporters.  KT’s PR machine is good and well oiled, aided by a supplicant and uncritical local media (Chron & BBC).  As I commented, he needs to keep the supporter base quiet whilst he progresses the reason why DB is backing him with funds.  The revised and reduced budget is not too heavy a drain on DB’s resources.  KC has a budget in line with L2 and our current level of support. Nothing more and nothing less.  We all hope KC has used the budget wisely.  But bear in mind the club independent of our owners has its own source of revenue from the EFL, t.v., STHs, sponsorship, ticket sales and so on. That continues regardless of who owns the club.  It is not great but if the club lived within its means it would not go belly up. Certainly, it would increase revenue with more local participation.  Exeter City which has no debt are an example of community ownership. There are others - Wimbledon, Hearts, Motherwell.  So if the club became community owned it would not be starting with a zero bank balance if a sale was completed outside of Administration.

- East Stand realistic outcome?  Not good for us supporters.  KT is in my view uninterested in the stand and devoting his efforts to the CDNL land and development.  With his eye on CDNL profit (the ownership is 50:50 KT/DB whereas KT has reduced his shareholding in Ventures from 22.5% to 10%) the less he can get away with on East Stand expenditure the better from the perspective of his bank account.  But should I worry when KT assures us he is always acting in the “best interests’ of the club? Answer, I worry.  As to what would be the outcome of the East Stand under community ownership – it could hardly be worse than the shell that awaits us once more at the start of next season.  Much would depend on the make-up of the community owners if that ever happened.  But, as I see it, your question is academic.  The Council are not going to give the nod to KT on CDNL development unless he completes the East Stand and only then with outline planning consent can he sell CDNL or actually undertake development. I have no idea what our owners intend but I suggest the former is more likely than the latter.

- The contradiction.  There is none.  KT committed to completing the East Stand and on the back of that promise/understanding, call it what you may, he was allowed by NBC to buy the club for £1.00 and with it £10.5 million of debt was forgiven.  KT stated publicly that about £4 million was available. The Council was totally deficient in not making that a legally binding obligation.  I could say more on that subject but there’s no point.  In my book it would not be a gift from our owners but the fulfilment of an obligation.  Of course, the cost of completing the stand will add to the debt but on the other side of the balance sheet it will also provide an increased asset value to NTFC.  On plans it is past time for KT to make these available to us all. Why he is ducking this?  I can tell you that what he has shown to Trust directors I am told would not enable a contractor to proceed to finish the stand.

- Your comments about the Trust using this to “flush” out KT are il-informed and well wide of the truth.  As to the Trust trying and failing to raise discontent amongst the wider fan base, your comments are an absolute disgrace.  You need to back up comments like this with hard evidence.

- You miss the point I was making by a mile.  Ask yourself who stands to gain from any enabling development.  It is not NTFC or any future club owners who will benefit.  Any development would be on CDNL land. KT is refusing to sign the legal document to restore the NTFC/CDNL boundary to what it should be if it was not for an error by the Council. So, leasehold land right up to the rear of the East Stand, bar a small footprint, “belongs to” CDNL and any development profit would go direct to CDNL and not the club whether it is by the sale of plots or future rental income. The club and with it the supporters stand to miss out unless you believe the ever generous KT/DB are going to decide otherwise.  I don’t for a moment think so.

- I am only aware of discussions between the Trust and prospective partners in a community ownership scheme in general terms but the idea that the Trust should disclose any details about such initial discussions is plainly ludicrous and you know that.

- The risk of the stadium being surrounded by non-football related development is high, extremely high.  The consequences are just as you say. That is a good reason alone for you to get behind the Trust and support its effort at resisting what is in progress rather than making some of the unwise comments that you have posted today about the Trust.

- The ACV status is not a “material consideration” NBC has to take into account if a formal planning application is made.  That is not going to happen unless KT is given what I describe as the “nod” from NBC.  So, in these circumstances object though the Trust and others would object to the application the Council would in all probability exercise its discretion to disregard the ACV status.


Absolutly spot on Vintage, I think time is running out for KT and his endless spin.
Report Spam   Logged

Rule Britannia
BackOfTheNet
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5883


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search Level 6 Combination
« Reply #24973 on: June 22, 2019, 18:55:33 pm »

Interesting points all around and it makes a refreshing change to see some intelligent and civilised debate on this topic rather than the usual repetition of the same point ad nauseam.

For what it's worth, personally I relate more to MC Hammer's viewpoint than Vintage's.
Report Spam   Logged

The Hotelend Grand National* Sweepstake Champion 2020
Another Pedj
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1322


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search Apple User Windows User
« Reply #24974 on: June 22, 2019, 20:09:12 pm »

Good post. I don't think the council should make any further concessions to our owners. They [DB & KT] should fulfil their promises.

But if they do the toxic loan increases by another 2 to 3m
Report Spam   Logged
everbrite
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20217


Steve Howard best since Cliff Holton


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
20000 Posts Search Apple User
« Reply #24975 on: June 22, 2019, 21:06:15 pm »

Reading through all the previous posts, got to say, with you totally on the above. All points addressed well fella!

Jesu - dont encourage him; there are few on here who ought to befriend Mr Precis!
Report Spam   Logged

2020 Grand National S/S 3rd Place
Terryfenwickatemyhamster
Administrator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5108


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
5000 Posts Level 6 Windows User
« Reply #24976 on: June 22, 2019, 22:00:53 pm »

Absolutly spot on Vintage, I think time is running out for KT and his endless spin.

Is it... Is it really?

Out of quite a few thousand supporters, I reckon I'd struggle to fill a mini bus with those actively trying to oust KT.

The unfortunate truth is that we need a really bad season to see any groundswell of opinion on the anti KT front. If we get anywhere near promotion, the East Stand will fall straight off the supports agenda. It seems that those who are opposed to KT can make all the noise they like. All he has to do is sign a slightly above average player, and the support is putty in his hands.

Opportunities have been missed through poor advice.
Report Spam   Logged
guest3293
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #24977 on: June 22, 2019, 22:21:15 pm »

Are you laughing in French or English?

 Grin
Report Spam   Logged
Lukey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 200



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Level 4 Combination Topic Starter
« Reply #24978 on: June 23, 2019, 03:27:36 am »

Is it... Is it really?

Out of quite a few thousand supporters, I reckon I'd struggle to fill a mini bus with those actively trying to oust KT.

The unfortunate truth is that we need a really bad season to see any groundswell of opinion on the anti KT front. If we get anywhere near promotion, the East Stand will fall straight off the supports agenda. It seems that those who are opposed to KT can make all the noise they like. All he has to do is sign a slightly above average player, and the support is putty in his hands.

Opportunities have been missed through poor advice.

Totally agree, haven't seen protests or large groups  making their feelings known,  we have been relegated when we didn't have financial issues so I think most are thankful that he came in and kept us going when things looked to be heading up suit street.
Report Spam   Logged

Prejudice cannot be hidden,
Arrogance for the color of skin.
Its ugly head is here again
Racism is lurking within.

"Cynthia BuhainBaello"
BedsCobb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3343


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Eighth year Anniversary Combination Topic Starter
« Reply #24979 on: June 23, 2019, 08:17:10 am »

Totally agree, haven't seen protests or large groups  making their feelings known,  we have been relegated when we didn't have financial issues so I think most are thankful that he came in and kept us going when things looked to be heading up suit street.
It may have gone un noticed to you but after 20 years suffering at the hands of land grabbing speculators, we barely attract 1.5% of Northampton town football clubs 300,000 exclusive catchment.
That has to be seen as the largest and most prolonged protest of all football league clubs during these past 20 golden years of footballs fashionable renaissance.
My one man 'Thomas out'  hill top protest will be in full swing V Walsall.

 
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 [1249] 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 ... 2181   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Parental guidance is urged as this messageboard may not be suitable for all persons especially those under the age of 16 as the forums may contain words, phrases and expressions not considered appropriate for a younger audience so please express caution. If any posts in the forums offend you, please let us know and we will look at them and if we agree with your complaint, we will remove them. You are personally responsible and potentially liable for the contents of your posting and may be sued should your posting contain content of a defamatory or other illegal nature. Every message posted leaves a traceable IP number. We check the forums at various times of the day and remove offending posts. Other supporters are welcome but abusive or silly posts will be removed and the offenders potentially barred from future access to the site. We advise that you never reveal any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example: telephone number, home address or email address), and please do not include postal addresses of any kind. This messageboard is not endorsed or in any way affiliated with Northampton Town FC. All postings on this board become copyright of The Hotel End & may not be reproduced without the permission of the board administrator. By signing up to this message board you agree to this. The Hotel End cannot be held liable for the actions or postings of its members. The Hotel End reserve the right to edit, delete, move or close any thread for any reason. The Hotel End may disclose user information to government authorities at their discretion or when required by law. The Hotel End may also disclose user information when The Hotel End has reason to believe that someone is causing injury to or interference with its rights or property, other The Hotel End users, or anyone else that could be harmed by such activities. By registering for The Hotel End, you agree to indemnify The Hotel End its representatives, and agents, and hold them harmless from any and all claims (including claims for legal fees) which may arise from your participation on the The Hotel End. You also agree that The Hotel End is not responsible for the materials posted by users of The Hotel End. In addition, you grant The Hotel End and its affiliates, worldwide, royalty-free perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display any message or content posted on The Hotel End and/or e-mail sent by you to The Hotel End (in whole or in part). The Hotel End reserves the right to make the rules up as it goes along. Thank you - The Hotel End I love Quidco
Bookmark this site!
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy