Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?

[GrangeParkCobbler]

I thought there was a deadline of so many months. But you would know the answer to that. So rather than answering with a question, you could simply say “there is no deadline” or “the outcome is due by”.

Whenever I see a response from anyone associated with the Trust board, either past or present, I get the distinct impression that they are always ready for a fight. How ironic that they are called the Trust. When it appears it’s the one thing they lack 😂😂

No, seriously there is a deadline, that set under the legal ACV process. Others seemed to think there was a deadline for the Trust to announce their plans, based on the statement where we gave a timescale for the release of those plans. I was merely asking which deadline you were referring to.

I'm not quite sure how anyone reads my simple comment of "which deadline is that?" and then from that sees "how easy it is to be anti-Trust board".......maybe its just me? It certainly was only me from the Trust board who commented at all, and then only with the short aforementioned question.

Others are spot on with regards to the deadline as far as the ACV land is concerned, and it seems that despite the whole land deal being called in for judicial review, the Trust is still bound by the terms and timescales of the original "notice of intention to sell" by WNC.

Anyway....as it is, there will be a statement and an update tomorrow........that's tomorrow, Wednesday 27th July!!  ;

[Terryfenwickatemyhamster]

Did any of the anti NTFC trust group

There is no such thing. No more than there is a groundswell of support for KT

It is the likes of you and Manwork who create this polarisation and division to support your point. The Trust board has received a really good run on here in terms of giving them time and benefit of the doubt, to produce something worthy of acclaim. If they fail to rise to the challenge, the pressure then falls on the club to come with something tangible. In no way does it, or should it give the club a clear run with no accountability to the future of the club and the support. But a basic lack of maturity obscures some on here from seeing any further than a basic two horse race.

The only one way street here, is with the anti club brigade, who have failed to accept any alternative perspective. Labelling anyone who won’t character assassinate KT and DB as anti Trust. Rather than understanding the most basic challenges to achieving an amicable outcome for all.

[Carton Lid]

There is no such thing. No more than there is a groundswell of support for KT

It is the likes of you and Manwork who create this polarisation and division to support your point. The Trust board has received a really good run on here in terms of giving them time and benefit of the doubt, to produce something worthy of acclaim. If they fail to rise to the challenge, the pressure then falls on the club to come with something tangible. In no way does it, or should it give the club a clear run with no accountability to the future of the club and the support. But a basic lack of maturity obscures some on here from seeing any further than a basic two horse race.

The only one way street here, is with the anti club brigade, who have failed to accept any alternative perspective. Labelling anyone who won’t character assassinate KT and DB as anti Trust. Rather than understanding the most basic challenges to achieving an amicable outcome for all.

Come on now Nigel, you know dam well that there are some posters on here who blame the Trust for global warming , Brexit and the Russian invasion, so don't come up with "The only one way street here, is with the anti club brigade", you know that's b*llocks and so does everyone else, it really is a two way street and you know it.

[JSO]

Did any of the anti NTFC trust group see the most recent interview with Jake Sharp and cdnl/Thomas?
What did you make of it?
What part of cdnl/Thomas answers to straight forward questions made you feel we are better off with cdnl than moving forward with a NTFC supporters trust led future?

I just dont understand the loyalty and belief shown to CDNL/thomas after their poor performance these past 7 years..

Surely it's now time for change..

Time for a change to what exactly?

[BedsCobb]

Not sure it’s worth explaining but I‘ll give it a go - the Trust’s project with the ACV is to raise up to £250k pa for an infrastructure fund - nothing wrong with that if it succeeds - they have made it clear they have no intention of buying/running the club and the amount just mentioned wouldn’t touch the sides anyway. The current owners bankroll the club and without getting into the weeds of director loans and the way the club is run - the point being the first example is not an alternative to the second and simply shouting “time for a change” is wishful thinking.

We are a mid table 4th division club, that being based in a large sporting town, it should be well capable of sustaining the day to day running of such a club without accumulating vast debt, even putting in place some of the infrastructure that's been missing these past 20 years.

We certainty dont need cdnl in order to tread water for another 7 years..
It really is time for an alternative to the Cardoza/Thomas land obsessed ownership of the past 2 decades.

[BedsCobb]

There is no such thing. No more than there is a groundswell of support for KT

It is the likes of you and Manwork who create this polarisation and division to support your point. The Trust board has received a really good run on here in terms of giving them time and benefit of the doubt, to produce something worthy of acclaim. If they fail to rise to the challenge, the pressure then falls on the club to come with something tangible. In no way does it, or should it give the club a clear run with no accountability to the future of the club and the support. But a basic lack of maturity obscures some on here from seeing any further than a basic two horse race.

The only one way street here, is with the anti club brigade, who have failed to accept any alternative perspective. Labelling anyone who won’t character assassinate KT and DB as anti Trust. Rather than understanding the most basic challenges to achieving an amicable outcome for all.

Just for clarity, I'm anti cdnl not club (ntfc)

[BedsCobb]

Time for a change to what exactly?

A more professionally organised, ambitious and Northampton and county centric club, one that has vision and targets that works closely with the town it represents.
(Pease avoid pointing out the clubs token gestures in the community,  that is expected of all clubs).


See all our rivals, Posh Oxford, MK etc and those of Rotherham Doncaster Brentford Lincoln, Preston etc etc that kind of club.
(Please avoid pointing out Rushden and Darlington as an excuse for ntfc to remain giving thanks for our lowly and debt ridden position)

[BackOfTheNet]

Given we're supposedly so tinpot and underdeveloped, I thought this was interesting in the Chron yesterday.

https://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/sport/football/the-league-two-teams-with-the-best-and-worst-infrastructure-and-where-mansfield-town-northampton-town-doncaster-roves-hartlepool-united-crawley-town-and-grimsby-town-rank-3781437

We're pretty much midtable in League 2.

Also, referring to the club's considerable community efforts as "token gestures" is hugely disrespectful to the large number of people who both work and voluntarily give up their time to deliver them. Maybe pick up a copy of Rodney Marshall's book "Only Connect" so you have a clue what you are talking about, Beds?

[BackOfTheNet]

Anyway, moving on from Beds latest drivel, it's good to see the Trust are announcing something today and I look forward to seeing what their idea is.

[guest3494]

Given we're supposedly so tinpot and underdeveloped, I thought this was interesting in the Chron yesterday.

https://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/sport/football/the-league-two-teams-with-the-best-and-worst-infrastructure-and-where-mansfield-town-northampton-town-doncaster-roves-hartlepool-united-crawley-town-and-grimsby-town-rank-3781437

We're pretty much midtable in League 2.

Also, referring to the club's considerable community efforts as "token gestures" is hugely disrespectful to the large number of people who both work and voluntarily give up their time to deliver them. Maybe pick up a copy of Rodney Marshall's book "Only Connect" so you have a clue what you are talking about, Beds?

I couldn’t work that table out could you?
Really didn’t make much sense without an explanation under each score.

[BackOfTheNet]

I couldn’t work that table out could you?
Really didn’t make much sense without an explanation under each score.

No, it's very vague. It does seem to have some actual academic research behind it though so it would be interesting to see the underlying data.

[Manwork04]

I couldn’t work that table out could you?
Really didn’t make much sense without an explanation under each score.

I thought the same thing, Swindon were below us in terms of stadium and infrastructure???
Without seeing the methodology behind the scoring it makes no sense whatsoever.

[Peter Frost]

Come on now Nigel, you know dam well that there are some posters on here who blame the Trust for global warming , Brexit and the Russian invasion, so don't come up with "The only one way street here, is with the anti club brigade", you know that's b*llocks and so does everyone else, it really is a two way street and you know it.

I think you miss the point here - firstly anyone who blames the trust for anything outside their sphere of influence is just being stupid and looking back I really can’t see any such examples - yes there are a few one liners against the trust but again actually not that many - Nigel’s point and I share the frustration is that one can support the overall objectives of the Trust, agree with some but not all of their views and actions (surely the fundamentals of a democratic organisation?) - however if one doesn’t join the chorus of criticism directed towards the owners, one is insulted & patronised by some of the more vitriolic trust members and advisers- these same individuals consistently state there is no dialogue from KT towards the trust - but do they really think their continued action is going to improve that situation? - even the ACV will require a degree of cooperation and while the Trust continue to have some (but certainly not all) individuals who seem more concerned about being right than trying to improve relationships I continue to have concerns. What really hacks me off with these individuals whilst always willing to criticise the owners never offer a positive comment on anything the club does well off the field - and yet they somehow claim the title of being better, wiser supporters than the rest of us.

[Peter Frost]

I thought the same thing, Swindon were below us in terms of stadium and infrastructure???
Without seeing the methodology behind the scoring it makes no sense whatsoever.

It’s click bait rubbish - no substance and reminds me of a conversation with Liz Truss

[Deepcut Cobbler]

"Each club has been given a rating out of 100, with the lowest rated teams first up."
And then the first team is Doncaster at the top with 90.26 of whatever?
Lost it's credibility immediately.

[DrillingCobbler]

"Each club has been given a rating out of 100, with the lowest rated teams first up."
And then the first team is Doncaster at the top with 90.26 of whatever?
Lost it's credibility immediately.

I did have a glance and 'predicted' that Barrow would be 24th. I wasn't wrong!! 

[BedsCobb]

Given we're supposedly so tinpot and underdeveloped, I thought this was interesting in the Chron yesterday.

https://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/sport/football/the-league-two-teams-with-the-best-and-worst-infrastructure-and-where-mansfield-town-northampton-town-doncaster-roves-hartlepool-united-crawley-town-and-grimsby-town-rank-3781437

We're pretty much midtable in League 2.

Also, referring to the club's considerable community efforts as "token gestures" is hugely disrespectful to the large number of people who both work and voluntarily give up their time to deliver them. Maybe pick up a copy of Rodney Marshall's book "Only Connect" so you have a clue what you are talking about, Beds?

Firstly they put us in a favourable lowly 16th place, we should be bottom if all things were properly considered.

Secondly I'm not belittling the great efforts of volunteers working on community projects,  it's the fact the owners  and co use this as a shield to hide their inadequate progress in the urgent need to build up the clubs infrastructure.. Not that I'm expecting them to do it anyway 

[BackOfTheNet]

"Each club has been given a rating out of 100, with the lowest rated teams first up."
And then the first team is Doncaster at the top with 90.26 of whatever?
Lost it's credibility immediately.

Just because the Chronic's clickbait department get hold of something and present it in a shoddy fashion doesn't diminish the value of the underlying research, which is worthy of consideration at least because it was written by a recognised academic.

A quick Google dug up this (which I admit I have only skimmed as I haven't yet had a chance to read it properly):

https://blog.betvictor.com/campaigns/most-investible-football-clubs/

This seems to encompass the part about infrastructure ratings.

On a lighter note, everyone's favourite legal advisor has peeped out from under his tin hat on Facebook to suggest I am, and I quote, "a club insider?" for thinking being 14th in this study is alright, neatly illustrating the point Peter made a short while ago!!


Edit: I've now had a proper look at this and I think it's from a while back. We score 48% here rather than 62% so either a) the methodology has changed b) the scores have been revised or c) the Chron have got it wrong, but in the data given here the score is composed of:

10% - Stadium Age - 7%
15% - Stadium Condition  - 3%
15% - Training Facilities - 8.5%
10% - Youth Facilities  - 8.5%
20% - Youth Recruitment - 10%
20% - Corporate Facilities - 11%
10% - Transport Links - 0%

Whatever has changed, this at least gives an idea of the methodology used.

[BedsCobb]

I couldn’t work that table out could you?
Really didn’t make much sense without an explanation under each score.

Basically,  if you have just 6400 seats to sell for big games to an inclusive catchment of over 300,000 within 10 miles.
Have no corporate boxes.
No good sized matchday supporters bar.
Zero growth in attendances during the past 20 years.
Low involvement with local business  and sponsorships .

You will be bottom of the teams listed.
Hope that helps.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

A more professionally organised, ambitious and Northampton and county centric club, one that has vision and targets that works closely with the town it represents.
(Pease avoid pointing out the clubs token gestures in the community,  that is expected of all clubs).


See all our rivals, Posh Oxford, MK etc and those of Rotherham Doncaster Brentford Lincoln, Preston etc etc that kind of club.
(Please avoid pointing out Rushden and Darlington as an excuse for ntfc to remain giving thanks for our lowly and debt ridden position)

So in one post you criticise accumulating debt and in the next you run off a string of clubs with debt that dwarfs ours. Peterborough £14 million, at Brentford the owner is in for £100 million, MK £13 million in debt, over at Rotherham Tony Stewart is reportedly in for £50 million etc. So which is it, eye watering debt or not and if the former who exactly is putting there hand in their pocket? You must have had another bang on the head? I’m sorry but if you are going to keep coming out with these ridiculous statements you have to realise they will inevitably get shoved back up your arśe.