Melbourne Cobbler
|
There was a legal challenge.
What happened?
|
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).
|
|
|
|
Melbourne Cobbler
|
Manny that’s not a legal challenge, that’s a statement in the press. Perhaps they didn’t make the payment and kept the money people had invested with them in China. Who knows there are all sorts of possibilities including the one some have suggested. All I am stating is which is most likely, this conspiracy theory is away with the fairies as far as I am concerned, only my opinion though mate.
|
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).
|
|
|
Manwork04
|
Manny that’s not a legal challenge, that’s a statement in the press. Perhaps they didn’t make the payment and kept the money people had invested with them in China. Who knows there are all sorts of possibilities including the one some have suggested. All I am stating is which is most likely, this conspiracy theory is away with the fairies as far as I am concerned, only my opinion though mate.
I think the trust have more “ evidence “ but you’ll have to ask them Melly.
|
Rule Britannia
|
|
|
|
Melbourne Cobbler
|
There you go, that 5U Sport gentleman is not wearing a tie. Never trust any businessman in an open necked shirt, everyone knows that.
|
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).
|
|
|
Shoemaker
|
I think the trust have more “ evidence “ but you’ll have to ask them Melly.
There’s evidence online that at the time the supporters trust were fully supportive of kelvins stance. Maybe they’d care to mention why that was , if they ever fully investigated the situation at the time and why four years down the line they seem to have a polar opposite opinion. Surely if any of the board members who were on the trust board then , remain on it now , then surely their positions are untenable What faith can supporters have that they may not change their minds again next week??
|
|
|
|
Terryfenwickatemyhamster
|
Are you sure it wasn't? At the last minute there was more than just KT's bid on the table...what do you think swung the council to go with him? Just the fact he got in first? The "proof" of £11m in ready funds? The non-legally binding commitment to finish off the stand? A combination of all the above perhaps?
I did have to laugh at one of your earlier posts, you claimed not to be bothered about the stand..in fact it barely raised much more than a "whimper above your head"......
You do realise that no stand = no land, no land could well equal no club?
Sounds like you are readying yourself for the home games on the Racecourse already.......
I’m genuinely not bothered at all. It’s a shame that once again you question my word for it. I asked the question purely to provoke a response that absolutely bolsters my argument. Not to protect KT or DB. But to amplify the point that I have persistently made, that our issues stem from a lack of due diligence by the council. Surely you can see my point. Why has the Trust board never, not once, took the council to task? How can it be that the current OWNERS of Sixfields, allowed a lease to be signed, according to you and Random, that laid us bare to the current situation? Is it only me that can see that if that happened, almost parallel to Cardoza taking us for a ride, it must warrant significant attention, certainly equal, if not more than that levelled at those who you allege exploited the situation. I can assure you, like with the Chinese money. All of my questions are for one reason and one reason only. It’s time to just shut up or produce evidence. The Trust is suffering. The club is suffering, and certainly the support is not being served by any of this epitome of “smoke and mirrors”. Just fcuking grow up all of you 🙄🙄🙄
|
|
|
|
Manwork04
|
I’m genuinely not bothered at all. It’s a shame that once again you question my word for it. I asked the question purely to provoke a response that absolutely bolsters my argument. Not to protect KT or DB. But to amplify the point that I have persistently made, that our issues stem from a lack of due diligence by the council.
Surely you can see my point. Why has the Trust board never, not once, took the council to task? How can it be that the current OWNERS of Sixfields, allowed a lease to be signed, according to you and Random, that laid us bare to the current situation? Is it only me that can see that if that happened, almost parallel to Cardoza taking us for a ride, it must warrant significant attention, certainly equal, if not more than that levelled at those who you allege exploited the situation.
I can assure you, like with the Chinese money. All of my questions are for one reason and one reason only. It’s time to just shut up or produce evidence. The Trust is suffering. The club is suffering, and certainly the support is not being served by any of this epitome of “smoke and mirrors”. Just fcuking grow up all of you 🙄🙄🙄
Love the opening and closing statements you sound like Kevin and Perry go large. I don’t believe I have ever heard you criticise KT, conversely does this mean he has done everything to your liking?
|
|
« Last Edit: July 18, 2021, 09:30:14 am by Manwork04 »
|
Report Spam
Logged
|
Rule Britannia
|
|
|
Risdene
|
Love the opening and closing statements you sound like Kevin and Perry go large. I don’t believe I have ever heard you criticise KT, conversely does this mean he has done everything to your liking?
I don't believe I have ever heard you 'praise' KT, does this mean he has done 'nothing' to your liking?
|
|
|
|
Melbourne Cobbler
|
I don't believe I have ever heard you 'praise' KT, does this mean he has done 'nothing' to your liking?
My caption under the photo Manny posted was trying to make the not too subtle point that people will only see what they want to see. To an extent once an opinion has been formed, I think most of us are a bit guilty of that.
|
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).
|
|
|
Terryfenwickatemyhamster
|
Love the opening and closing statements you sound like Kevin and Perry go large. I don’t believe I have ever heard you criticise KT, conversely does this mean he has done everything to your liking?
I have certainly criticised KT. Equally you like most won’t find any evidence of me supporting him or the Trust. You GPC and Random are lost to any reasoning or alternative to your opinion.
|
|
|
|
Zen Master
|
Glad to see another thread degenerate yet although I don’t think we’ve got to Godwin’s yet. I’ll be glad when the real football starts so we can moan about that as well as ownership/trust issues
|
I think someone should just take this city of Peterborough and just... just flush it down the f***in' toilet
The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2022
|
|
|
Manwork04
|
I don't believe I have ever heard you 'praise' KT, does this mean he has done 'nothing' to your liking?
Wrong, I’ve praised him when he does something good, like when he refunded season tickets.
|
Rule Britannia
|
|
|
Manwork04
|
I have certainly criticised KT. Equally you like most won’t find any evidence of me supporting him or the Trust.
You GPC and Random are lost to any reasoning or alternative to your opinion.
You speak like you are very important, am I correct?
|
Rule Britannia
|
|
|
Keith
|
I have certainly criticised KT. Equally you like most won’t find any evidence of me supporting him or the Trust.
You GPC and Random are lost to any reasoning or alternative to your opinion.
but you've not met Queen,so you can't comment
|
|
« Last Edit: July 18, 2021, 19:58:35 pm by Keith »
|
Report Spam
Logged
|
|
|
|
Terryfenwickatemyhamster
|
You speak like you are very important, am I correct?
I have no idea what you’re on about lately.
|
|
|
|
MCHammer
|
I don't know if people are still interested but I finally received a response yesterday evening to the questions I put to the Supporters Trust a couple of weeks ago.
I'll post them below in seperate posts rather than one massive message for ease of reading. I'm posting them completely as I asked them and they were answered. I do obviously have some thoughts on the answers but in the interest of balance I'll write them seperately later. The trust were made aware at the time I asked the questions that I planned on sharing the answers.
I realise it's a lot of info and if you are not interested simply move on to something else. I think it's important we all ask questions of ALL parties involved in this debate and hopefully the answers will be useful in some way.
I think it's fair for me to say that I will be replying to the Trust to seek further info on a couple of questions that I feel haven't been answered or have been answered in a way that is not clear.
|
|
|
|
MCHammer
|
What changed specifically in the plans for the build from September 2020 to June this year? I ask because the Trust and Club released a joint statement backing the plans in September. Have they changed significantly from what you were told the plans were going to be? You repeatedly state the deal on the table to the council has not changed since many years ago so I assume the trust were aware this was the deal last September when they publicly backed the plans?
One of the roles of the Trust is to safeguard the future of professional football in Northampton. We identified several risk factors that are material to this.
Firstly, the level of debt owed by the club to the owners has escalated to nearly £6.8 million and will increase to nearly £10 million if loan capital is used to complete the East Stand.
Secondly, the club is entirely reliant on funding from one individual, without whose support the club would be in deep financial trouble. This is confirmed in most reports by the auditors in NTFC’s accounts in recent years, including the most recent set of statements.
Thirdly, we work on a realistic assumption that those who lend will wish to be repaid at some stage in the future. The owners cannot recoup their investment from core operations of the club, as it is loss making, so they must therefore rely on a land deal in respect of the leasehold plots to the east of the stadium.
In turn, this is reliant on an agreement with West Northamptonshire Council, which is by no means guaranteed, given the level of hostility of local council taxpayers to the club following the misfeasance that followed the £10 million loan to the club.
To address these risks, and to seek further information, the Trust produced a list of questions and sought written formal responses. NTFC chairman Kelvin Thomas had invited questions. The Trust did so, in pursuit of reassurances but also in its capacity as a minority shareholder in the club. Any shareholder is entitled to ask questions of those directing and controlling a company on their behalf.
The club has not been prepared to answer these questions in writing, offering a Zoom call instead. We do not consider Zoom is the right forum to answer detailed questions. The Trust board decided that it can no longer support the club’s plans based on incomplete information.
Our basic premise is that we expect NTFC to receive significant investment benefit (as opposed to loan debt) as this is a land deal being sought in the name of the football club.
With many questions remaining unanswered, we fear that a deal will leave the club with a basic East Stand, no cash in the bank, no additional assets and no land value to fall back on.
Also, the statement released by the trust backing the deal was not conditional or we (the fans/members) certainly were not told it was at the time it was made.
The original support for the plans were made in the spirit of ongoing cooperation, but the Trust can only support initiatives in which it has confidence. Although support was not ‘conditional’, it cannot be assumed to be ‘unconditional’ if changing circumstances dictate that we no longer have reasonable assurance that the club’s best interests will be served.
|
|
|
|
MCHammer
|
What does the Trust view as an acceptable completion of the East Stand if the current plans do not meet that? What are the specific expectations for an acceptable completion? Have you shared this vision with the club and what was their response?
Like all supporters, the Trust would obviously like to see the East Stand completed to an acceptable standard. Unfortunately, there is very limited information available and none has been volunteered other than what was on show recently which is little different from what has been selectively seen previously. For example, we are told that the estimated cost of the works needed to complete the stand is £3 million but we have seen no analysis for that amount, there is no independent verification that what is proposed represents value for money. The Trust has never seen or heard reference to any alternative proposals. We doubt that there has been any consideration of alternatives. The Trust does not know the budgets, timing of cash flows, the extent to which the club may be tied into contracts with Buckingham Group and so on.
The most recent statement by the club issued on its open day states that the owners will complete the stand from their own resources, so it is assumed this is their intention. However, it should be noted that the same statement was made six years ago. If any up-front investment is made by the owners the Trust believes the club will be loaded with an equivalent level of debt of say £3m pushing total debt up from £6m to £9m plus further cash flow finance required and so taking total indebtedness to in the region of £10m. Further, whilst our owners are quick to comment that the construction costs will be met by them this will only happen if their proposal, which includes the reimbursement to the club (and so the owners) of the £3 million construction costs from the top slice of land sales, is agreed by WNC. This is a matter for WNC to decide but in the light of the history of this matter it is likely to be the subject of significant debate within the council and outside of it. We see no quick decision being made.
|
|
|
|
|