I’ll answer that one. Sixfields was initially too conservative and no one has come up with the cash to do anything about it. Forget the ground Random, as I said recently football can’t fund itself through cash on the gate no matter how fancy the boxes or comfy the seats. Even the Prem clubs can’t do that and rely on TV. If football is to survive and flourish at this level it has to be innovative and evolve beyond the current strategies, especially at this level. Establish revenue streams outside of football and once that’s achieved then develop. If there is money to be had then be creative otherwise it will be yet another wasted opportunity, and I don’t know how many more we have. Please forget the ground, it’s a red herring at this point in time.
I think I mentioned way back the stadium should never have been run by the football club, its utterly ridiculous for a "football team" to be running a "venue" at this level, the two skills sets are not co-existent. Sixfields should be owned and run independently with a management team dedicated to utilising the facility to its maximum potential, future development and making it a profitable venture. To support an entertainment venue let alone financing its future through the proceeds of a fourth division football cub is essentially nuts, as you clearly describe.
The "football club" are obviously unable to create a winning product, so why they should be running this facility? The football club really only needs a suitable venue on occasions whilst having some permanent administration accommodation. If an outside company decided to improve the stadium, the surroundings and create commercial and corporate matchday entertainment facilities, the football club would benefit through access to these but without the initial outlay, just as many companies rent office space in a building they could never afford to own or service.
It certainly does not inhibit the earning potential of the "football club" by having almost fixed costs, in fact the opposite by virtue of having these potentially better facilities, the burden of the ground separated from the football team would actually allow the club to be innovative and evolve as you mention. It does not inhibit them from accessing sponsorship, creating retail opportunities, community initiatives and so on.
There was much chin scratching from the council over the whole Sixfields area and possibly why IKEA were pushed away. When restaurants and cinemas popped up it suggested they were going with leisure, but then with DC we nearly got a housing estate and now a warehouse? Excuse me for one second. Fu
cking what? Unless its the new UK HQ of Amazon, Fed-Ex or the like, its just another sticking plaster over another unsightly Northampton fu
ck up.
Unfortunately a huge opportunity with Sixfields, the stadium and the surroundings seems to be rapidly turning into the usual Northampton dogs dinner. If they wanted warehouses why didn't they have one big one 20 odd years ago with IKEA on the side? Does Mike Ashley want the whole area for Sports Direct? Give him a call, we may as well go with chav track suit bottoms for the town, wouldn't want to spoil it.
You mentioned about the huge potential of waterside developments, Sixfields is almost afloat there is so much water around. This town and council couldn't run the ice cream van in Stoke Bruerne on a Sunday afternoon and sadly this impacts on the football club and all the suffering residents.
