guest3359
|
This board is always ready to bubble over at the slightest comment. WDD, agree the tone of your message was aggressive "dive in and veto". Might not have meant to be but even I read it that way. Random, your reply was also overly aggressive. Can you both shake hands / kiss and make up. It had been nice on here for a couple of weeks Random, can I take it from your reply the Trust weren't aware this was the plan? And we still don't even know if its true or a new tabloid fishing for subscribers.
|
|
|
|
wazzacobbler
|
Sorry what WNC members are on the Trust ?
I presume WhiteDogDo is referring to the 2 West Northants Councillors which are liaising with the Trust board. This is what annoys me the most about a lot of the posts on here from all people. A little explanation to correct a misconception is all that is needed here, not a passive aggressive question that tees up the next post that will then look to make the poster look bad. Would you talk to someone in this way face to face? Probably not. More leeway would be given. Sorry to pick on you here, random. It's just that your post was the most recent example of it. Far too many posts tend to not explain themselves fully - a part of the social media problem perhaps? I'm gonna get back in my box now. Good day gents.
|
Host and Producer of the It's All Cobblers To Me podcast @CobblersToMe @charlescommins
|
|
|
tcobb
|
The new Random soon vanished, the Old Random is back.
|
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.
|
|
|
guest3429
|
Poised with pencil sharpened and note book to the ready for the exciting and innovative plans that will drive the club forward over the next coming decades.
|
|
|
|
Manwork04
|
Is it any wonder, the tone of this country’s media is a disgrace. It’s all too aggressive, at the end of the day we are all on the same side. WDD question is valid but is there any need to put the veto bit??
|
Rule Britannia
|
|
|
GrangeParkCobbler
|
The article is a bit vague and lacking in any detail.
As far as I understand things an independent valuation of the land was being carried out and this has now been completed. The Club's aspirations as per the terms of the deal were to acquire the freehold of the land. I suppose it depends on what the valuation is before deciding whether the deal can progress under those terms. Thats a matter for the club and council to discuss.
The Trust can not "veto" any process.....the club and council have made it clear that independent processes are being carried out.
The ideal scenario would be that the valuation of the land is acceptable to both parties and a deal can proceed along those lines. Then we get to the point of whether the club "claws back" that first £3m of council money to pay for the completion of the East Stand (which needs to be built before any land deal gets signed off...unless that changes as a result of this meeting....) along the lines of the plans unveiled earlier this year.
The Trust is not aware of any land valuation figure, nor is it aware of any other plans/details of the deal other than what the Club put out this year.
|
The Hotel End GTA Champion 2006/7, 2007/8, 2011/12, 2012/13 and 2018/19
|
|
|
guest168
|
The new Random soon vanished, the Old Random is back.
wow, how long have you been waiting to post that!!!! Did i not just politely reply to you question / accusation that I am making numbers up re the £20m? But obviously you just ignored that bit as it didn't fit did it? Yes I am pissed off that some come on here at the earliest opportunity to have a go at the Trust, or slyly try to mock saying we don't know something or similar. and it's the same posters every time like clock work, BOTN will be along any minute. AGAIN, if you are happy with a £3m stand from £20m deal then say so, and let others know why we should be supporting it? Sorry but I just think it will be a missed opportunity that will resign us to history repeating itself for the next 20 years or more. The presentation slide you need to look again is the one that shows that, generally the average capacity for the league above is 50% higher. And please bear in mind we are already well below the average for L2. The whole £20m development plan will deliver us 202 seats. I don't understand how some of you think it is a good deal for NTFC
|
|
|
|
Risdene
|
wow, how long have you been waiting to post that!!!!
Did i not just politely reply to you question / accusation that I am making numbers up re the £20m?
But obviously you just ignored that bit as it didn't fit did it?
Yes I am pissed off that some come on here at the earliest opportunity to have a go at the Trust, or slyly try to mock saying we don't know something or similar. and it's the same posters every time like clock work, BOTN will be along any minute.
AGAIN, if you are happy with a £3m stand from £20m deal then say so, and let others know why we should be supporting it? Sorry but I just think it will be a missed opportunity that will resign us to history repeating itself for the next 20 years or more.
The presentation slide you need to look again is the one that shows that, generally the average capacity for the league above is 50% higher. And please bear in mind we are already well below the average for L2.
The whole £20m development plan will deliver us 202 seats. I don't understand how some of you think it is a good deal for NTFC
and Executive Boxes.......and a Conference Centre?...........and a Hotel?.........I do not know! We should all agree we need a 15,000 seater Stadium with facilities and whoever can get NTFC to that situation should be given the Freedom of the Teyn!!!!
|
|
|
|
tcobb
|
Sorry Random but your whole attitude is awful. I just asked how you knew, GPC states there is no valuation yet, waiting on report from independent valuation. Yet you keep bagging on about £20m, good help the Trust with people like you on the Board.
|
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.
|
|
|
guest2608
|
Is it any wonder, the tone of this country’s media is a disgrace. It’s all too aggressive, at the end of the day we are all on the same side. WDD question is valid but is there any need to put the veto bit??
Cheers Manwork, I felt it was valid too. As an ex military man the word veto to me means stop or pause an action. I never meant that word as aggressive, however it appears to have been taken that way by dear Derek. Veto in my context meant, will the trust object to the plans or have they already pre approved. Sending a little cuddle to Derek, sorry to upset you.
|
|
|
|
BackOfTheNet
|
. and it's the same posters every time like clock work, BOTN will be along any minute.
It's been nearly a month since I last commented on this thread so I don't know why you feel the need to drag me into it.
|
|
« Last Edit: November 02, 2021, 19:53:20 pm by BackOfTheNet »
|
Report Spam
Logged
|
The Hotelend Grand National* Sweepstake Champion 2020
|
|
|
West Stand
|
wow, how long have you been waiting to post that!!!!
Did i not just politely reply to you question / accusation that I am making numbers up re the £20m?
But obviously you just ignored that bit as it didn't fit did it?
Yes I am pissed off that some come on here at the earliest opportunity to have a go at the Trust, or slyly try to mock saying we don't know something or similar. and it's the same posters every time like clock work, BOTN will be along any minute.
AGAIN, if you are happy with a £3m stand from £20m deal then say so, and let others know why we should be supporting it? Sorry but I just think it will be a missed opportunity that will resign us to history repeating itself for the next 20 years or more.
The presentation slide you need to look again is the one that shows that, generally the average capacity for the league above is 50% higher. And please bear in mind we are already well below the average for L2.
The whole £20m development plan will deliver us 202 seats. I don't understand how some of you think it is a good deal for NTFC
Genuine question, can the council take into account slides about capacity, the 'debt', what the owners will do with proceeds etc. Surely the council's responsibility is planning law and getting the best return for the taxpayer?
|
|
|
|
guest168
|
Genuine question, can the council take into account slides about capacity, the 'debt', what the owners will do with proceeds etc. Surely the council's responsibility is planning law and getting the best return for the taxpayer?
Hi West, I could answer this but i would be very interested to know if others can give their opinions. What do you think whitedog, Tcobb, BOTN, Deepcut and Woody Come on lets here you say something other than having a go at the Trust at every single half opportunity you have
|
|
|
|
Deepcut Cobbler
|
Hi West, I could answer this but i would be very interested to know if others can give their opinions.
What do you think whitedog, Tcobb, BOTN, Deepcut and Woody
Come on lets here you say something other than having a go at the Trust at every single half opportunity you have
Have you slipped your leash tonight?
|
“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old: Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn. At the going down of the sun and in the morning We will remember them.” Laurence Binyon
The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2009
|
|
|
guest168
|
Have you slipped your leash tonight?
see just more sarcasm, Go on answer West Stand's question? do you actually even have an opinion? or god forbid an actual thought about NTFC
|
|
|
|
Deepcut Cobbler
|
see just more sarcasm,
Go on answer West Stand's question? do you actually even have an opinion? or god forbid an actual thought about NTFC
Not sarcasm, a genuine question.
|
“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old: Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn. At the going down of the sun and in the morning We will remember them.” Laurence Binyon
The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2009
|
|
|
guest2608
|
The article is a bit vague and lacking in any detail.
As far as I understand things an independent valuation of the land was being carried out and this has now been completed. The Club's aspirations as per the terms of the deal were to acquire the freehold of the land. I suppose it depends on what the valuation is before deciding whether the deal can progress under those terms. Thats a matter for the club and council to discuss.
The Trust can not "veto" any process.....the club and council have made it clear that independent processes are being carried out.
The ideal scenario would be that the valuation of the land is acceptable to both parties and a deal can proceed along those lines. Then we get to the point of whether the club "claws back" that first £3m of council money to pay for the completion of the East Stand (which needs to be built before any land deal gets signed off...unless that changes as a result of this meeting....) along the lines of the plans unveiled earlier this year.
The Trust is not aware of any land valuation figure, nor is it aware of any other plans/details of the deal other than what the Club put out this year.
Thanks very much pal, that's a reasonable and polite response. Very much appreciated.
|
|
|
|
guest2608
|
Hi West, I could answer this but i would be very interested to know if others can give their opinions.
What do you think whitedog, Tcobb, BOTN, Deepcut and Woody
Come on lets here you say something other than having a go at the Trust at every single half opportunity you have
Jeeez, you are a sensitive flower aren't you? I got a great reply from GPC, I don't think I need to engage with you any more. You'll either melt or explode... Not sure it's good for you so I'll just speak to GPC going fwd
|
|
|
|
tcobb
|
Excellent response GPC thank you. As for planning apart from stimulating that the East Stand is finished I'm not sure the council can attach to many more conditions. If the owners of the club want the money back they have put into the Club from any profits, I don't see the Council or anybody else being able to stop them.
|
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.
|
|
|
guest168
|
Excellent response GPC thank you. As for planning apart from stimulating that the East Stand is finished I'm not sure the council can attach to many more conditions. If the owners of the club want the money back they have put into the Club from any profits, I don't see the Council or anybody else being able to stop them.
Thank you Tcobb for at least putting your view forward. The council own the freehold, it is their land, they have to sell it to KT / DB for them to build so can put any conditions on they want The council get developers to build roads, schools, community centres, etc etc, because they create the profit, from £170k to £20m in the case. So all in all if you (us fans) wanted a better deal than a basic East stand fit with 202 extra seats, now is the time to say so. The owners have already had the money back they put in the club (or you could say the money they got they put into the club) from the Chinese. Surely you / they can't have it all ways. The owners are not entitled for a return on their profit, like all business owners you have to earn it. And many many football owners have lost millions and millions, so no for me, they have already received some money for their investment. Another £6m for their share, council get £6m and the stadium gets £6m isn't unreasonable to me. Council are the key and they should not be rubber stamping anything through, look what happened last time.
|
|
|
|
|