Melbourne Cobbler
|
Um, two of my least favourite places in the country have flyovers. Luton and Coventry. Both sh1tholes. Add to that, Hammersmith, Newport, where the M4 goes past your bedroom window, and I cannot see why anybody would want to live near one. Or 75.
Don’t worry kid, they’ve planted some flowers in front of them. Also on the plus side they now haven’t got to put up with clanging bells every 15 minutes morning noon and night, every cloud.
|
|
« Last Edit: April 14, 2021, 15:41:21 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).
|
|
|
singcobb
|
Joining forces with the Saints to explore building a new 20,000 capacity shared Stadium would be the ideal way forward. Hand the keys for Sixfields back to the Council and move forward, its becoming apparent the Cobblers future is not at Sixfields.
Ntfc have a contract and I'm certain that the council will insist on that contract being honoured and force Ntfc to continue with the upkeep until the end of the lease period. Also note that at the end of the lease period any remedial work must be done by the tennant or it will be charged to the tennant by the owner. We need to keep Sixfields as the training ground when we are in the Championship.
|
|
|
|
Manwork04
|
Ntfc have a contract and I'm certain that the council will insist on that contract being honoured and force Ntfc to continue with the upkeep until the end of the lease period. Also note that at the end of the lease period any remedial work must be done by the tennant or it will be charged to the tennant by the owner. We need to keep Sixfields as the training ground when we are in the Championship.
And then the executive car park when we fur fill our destiny of becoming Premier League.
|
Rule Britannia
|
|
|
guest3429
|
Why would the Saints want anything to do with us?
If you consider the stadium as its own entity, double its income. The only difference it that we would be private tenants rather than council s cum.
|
|
|
|
guest3429
|
We need to keep Sixfields as the training ground when we are in the Championship.
Until then, it can be used for what it was designed and most suitable for, a community stadium. Local cup finals, school days out, womens leagues, Its a knockout and car boot sales. Or give it to the academy.
|
|
|
|
|
Terryfenwickatemyhamster
|
If you consider the stadium as its own entity, double its income.
The only difference it that we would be private tenants rather than council scum.
I doubt it would double anything. At a generous estimate they just about break even from our part of the deal. I've never really worked out what we bring in from match day revenue, including season tickets. I’d imagine it’s quite a bit south of 2 million. I can’t much change out of 1.3 million on just the players wages. Throw in the rest of the staff that take an income, there's your season match day money gone. Yeah, there’s a few quid in endorsements, hospitality, conferencing etc. There’s no money at all in lower league football. In fact, I doubt it there is more than a handful of teams that operate at a genuine profit in any league. Where as far as I know, the Saint show a very healthy return. We have to be realistic, as you were in what you was saying previously. The only thing that is viable, is the enabling money from the adjoining land. And that should only ever be signed over to ANYONE, in receipt of a full legally agreed development plan, that shows a clear path to the ground development. In fact, total child’s play to any developer worth their salt.
|
|
|
|
Manwork04
|
I doubt it would double anything. At a generous estimate they just about break even from our part of the deal.
I've never really worked out what we bring in from match day revenue, including season tickets. I’d imagine it’s quite a bit south of 2 million. I can’t much change out of 1.3 million on just the players wages. Throw in the rest of the staff that take an income, there's your season match day money gone. Yeah, there’s a few quid in endorsements, hospitality, conferencing etc.
There’s no money at all in lower league football. In fact, I doubt it there is more than a handful of teams that operate at a genuine profit in any league. Where as far as I know, the Saint show a very healthy return. We have to be realistic, as you were in what you was saying previously. The only thing that is viable, is the enabling money from the adjoining land. And that should only ever be signed over to ANYONE, in receipt of a full legally agreed development plan, that shows a clear path to the ground development. In fact, total child’s play to any developer worth their salt.
Amen to that mate.
|
Rule Britannia
|
|
|
Shoemender
|
I doubt it would double anything. At a generous estimate they just about break even from our part of the deal.
I've never really worked out what we bring in from match day revenue, including season tickets. I’d imagine it’s quite a bit south of 2 million. I can’t much change out of 1.3 million on just the players wages. Throw in the rest of the staff that take an income, there's your season match day money gone. Yeah, there’s a few quid in endorsements, hospitality, conferencing etc.
There’s no money at all in lower league football. In fact, I doubt it there is more than a handful of teams that operate at a genuine profit in any league. Where as far as I know, the Saint show a very healthy return. We have to be realistic, as you were in what you was saying previously. The only thing that is viable, is the enabling money from the adjoining land. And that should only ever be signed over to ANYONE, in receipt of a full legally agreed development plan, that shows a clear path to the ground development. In fact, total child’s play to any developer worth their salt.
So are the dream team worth their salt, or is total childs play a bit too difficult considering it's gone on for about 5 years?
|
|
|
|
EB Claret
|
If we DID have equal status to the Saints while sharing a stadium how many of us would be happy to pay the Saints' prices to watch our rabble??
|
|
|
|
guest3338
|
How much is a Saints price?
|
|
|
|
EB Claret
|
How much is a Saints price?
When I looked a couple of years ago prices started at £38.
|
|
|
|
guest3338
|
When I looked a couple of years ago prices started at £38.
Jeez. Could never understand the attraction of watching a sport live where half the time you cant see where the ball is or what's happening to it. Much better on telly.
|
|
|
|
GrangeParkCobbler
|
How much is a Saints price?
Yet season tickets are available for as little as £185 (limited quantity at the front of the Barwell Stand), or more commonly priced at £465 for the season, that will get you 11 Premiership games, 2 or three European pool games, 2 or three Premiership Cup games, free entry to pre season friendlies and Wanderers (second string) games.
|
The Hotel End GTA Champion 2006/07, 2007/08, 2011/12, 2012/13, 2018/19 and 2023/24
|
|
|
guest3338
|
Yet season tickets are available for as little as £185 (limited quantity at the front of the Barwell Stand), or more commonly priced at £465 for the season, that will get you 11 Premiership games, 2 or three European pool games, 2 or three Premiership Cup games, free entry to pre season friendlies and Wanderers (second string) games.
So 17 games at circa £27 each..that's more realistic isn't it? I've actually been to Franklin Gardens just once, for a representative game when I was a schoolkid. I think it was East Mids vs BaaBaas but I couldnt be sure. Did see the Rugby Lions a few times when they were mixing it with the top sides though. I wonder what position HRH played during his formative years?
|
|
|
|
Terryfenwickatemyhamster
|
So are the dream team worth their salt, or is total childs play a bit too difficult considering it's gone on for about 5 years?
As I have sad until I’m bored with it. If the council don’t want to let the land go to the club, then just get on and sell to someone else. If they do want to let it go to the club, just make sure that any agreement is watertight in terms of the use of the enabling money and its division between the development of NTFC, plus what the owners can personally gain from it. It actually is child’s play.
|
|
|
|
JollyCobbler
|
As I have sad until I’m bored with it. If the council don’t want to let the land go to the club, then just get on and sell to someone else. If they do want to let it go to the club, just make sure that any agreement is watertight in terms of the use of the enabling money and its division between the development of NTFC, plus what the owners can personally gain from it. It actually is child’s play.
Thomas and Bower hold the land leases? Not the council.
|
|
|
|
guest3429
|
I doubt it would double anything. At a generous estimate they just about break even from our part of the deal.
I've never really worked out what we bring in from match day revenue, including season tickets. I’d imagine it’s quite a bit south of 2 million. I can’t much change out of 1.3 million on just the players wages. Throw in the rest of the staff that take an income, there's your season match day money gone. Yeah, there’s a few quid in endorsements, hospitality, conferencing etc.
There’s no money at all in lower league football. In fact, I doubt it there is more than a handful of teams that operate at a genuine profit in any league. Where as far as I know, the Saint show a very healthy return. We have to be realistic, as you were in what you was saying previously. The only thing that is viable, is the enabling money from the adjoining land. And that should only ever be signed over to ANYONE, in receipt of a full legally agreed development plan, that shows a clear path to the ground development. In fact, total child’s play to any developer worth their salt.
I'm in total agreement as you know with regards to Sixfields and the land, the club needs other income to survive just as any other club. The (fantasy) question posed was if both clubs shared a facility in which case you can separate the financial income of the "brands" and the revenue stream of the "stadium." The football club play more fixtures and therefore a shared facility would generate greater income than being sat empty. The Cobblers would also enjoy greater revenue from the improved facilities and matchday experience. We all know having two stadiums a mile apart is nuts and that "Northampton" should have a stadium, better for everyone, including the residents and shoppers! However, this is Northampton...
|
|
|
|
|
Terryfenwickatemyhamster
|
Thomas and Bower hold the land leases? Not the council.
The council are the landlords. They are the enforcing party of anything encompassed within the original lease. Plus they made changes (June 2018) to try allegedly clear the path for the East stand development.
|
|
|
|
|