Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?

[MCHammer]

So to summarise, the trust want:

The East stand finished to a "good" standard.  An Increased capacity.  Conference centre, hotel etc.  An expansion to the South and North Stands.  An improved playing budget contributing to a side that is capable of maintaining league one football eventually pushing for the Championship.  Add in a better youth setup where the first team is built mainly on good young prospects.    

Oh and we want to own our own training ground with much better facilities than we have currently.

In addition we don't like private ownership, in particular you Kelvin and David.  Oh and we don't like land deals unless you build a velodrome, swimming pool....but we are happy to break this principled stance if you are willing to commit to funding all of the above requirements from it.  You can make a small profit evetually if there is anything left over but don't make it too big and if you could pay for everything up front that would be great.  Oh to add, In the meantime we want no club debt, irrespective if you have to sack a manager, sign dud players, have a global pandemic and we want the club run on a break even basis....don't forget to get us promoted.  We would also like you to write off all £6 Million + of the loans you have made to the club as gifts.

Can we also be given a seat on the board so we can tell you how badly you run the club face to face at board meetings rather than via monthly statements on our website.  Eventually you can sell the club to us for the £1 you bought it for and we will take it from there.

I should warn you that while all this is ongoing we will continue to publicly insinuate you are unfit owners and call you out at every opportunity suggesting many ways in which you are failing as a club without offering any alternatives that will actually work without the whole English footballing structure being torn down and rebuilt from scratch.  Also known as the Bundesliga 50+1 method.

Good luck, let us know when you have done all that we have the £1 ready and waiting.  In fact thinking about it you still owe us £10k from when we paid the staff so you can pay us £9999 to take it off your hands.

.....you'd like to think I was joking here wouldn't you?

I said the above two months ago.........

[guest3355]

Why even read this thread then?

It's actually the opposite, now is where they MAY be an opportunity to secure a better future, where you can watch football without the worry of being dependant on one investor. What would happen is something happened to DB? As the 80% plus shareholder and sole investor ?

To check if there is any concrete news.

Stop pushing your opinion on me. I don't care either way. Mot an attack on the Trust. Calm down.

[guest168]

To check if there is any concrete news.

Stop pushing your opinion on me. I don't care either way. Mot an attack on the Trust. Calm down.

I am not pushing my opinion on you at all. so you really read this thread expecting some new and action from KT ?

You were the stated your were bored by it all, which is fine by me, no problems mate

[guest168]

Hi CW, we actually agree 

The only thing i would change is no 1.  I feel their land deals does not benefit NTFC enough thats all.

No 2 - Do you mean they make £7m profit so they then walk away from the debt on the books? Bearing in mind they have already received £6.68m for the club so have just about made a profit already

Would you prefer a £3m poorly finished, basic East Stand or that £3m to be part of a bond, then raise more funds to give us better options for Sixfields

The problem the owners have is that WNC have to be seen to be doing the right by NTFC, (and Northampton) not the owners. Given KT's history with the council it is difficult to see them trusting him to do such a deal. The way out of this IMHO, is that the land deal and the ownership of NTFC is tied together. KT has made it clear he is here to make a profit and move on, so do a deal that CLEARLY benefits all parties, seeing KT retire off in the Florida sunset, if he wants. If he wants to stay in football then he would be able to. The alternative of no deal means he is stuck with a football club he  and deffo DB doesn't want. What will they do then?  wash their hands and walk away?  won't be good for their reputations !

So do the land deal which splits the profits 3 ways KT/NTFC/WNC and KT walks away a hero having handing the club to an investment based community setup.

If that meant the club started with £5m what could we achieve, like you say with your bond idea.

[guest168]

I wish someone would tell me what this opportunity is. I still havent seen it.

er, A land deal to create £m's, the space around Sixfields to create a better stadium, the largest town in the country (so potential fanbase) and the smallest stadium capacity of any long-established league club. 

Infrastructure is the base of EVERY successful club that wants medium term growth. Look at Rotherham - Championship now, wasn't that long ago they were homeless and bankrupt twice, and they have 2 larger Sheffield Clubs on their doorstep

[Melbourne Cobbler]

er, A land deal to create £m's, the space around Sixfields to create a better stadium, the largest town in the country (so potential fanbase) and the smallest stadium capacity of any long-established league club. 

Infrastructure is the base of EVERY successful club that wants medium term growth. Look at Rotherham - Championship now, wasn't that long ago they were homeless and bankrupt twice, and they have 2 larger Sheffield Clubs on their doorstep

Sorry Random, sufficient finance is the base of every successful club that wants growth. It’s possible that a business plan that incorporates an expansion of infrastructure without adequately addressing the issue of finance may drive a club into oblivion. Be nice to see a plan that everyone is happy with that mitigates this risk? I’ve heard plenty of theory, but is anything tangible likely to materialise at any point in our future.

[Another Pedj]

er, A land deal to create £m's, the space around Sixfields to create a better stadium, the largest town in the country (so potential fanbase) and the smallest stadium capacity of any long-established league club. 

Infrastructure is the base of EVERY successful club that wants medium term growth. Look at Rotherham - Championship now, wasn't that long ago they were homeless and bankrupt twice, and they have 2 larger Sheffield Clubs on their doorstep

Thats a wish,nothing wrong with that,but not an opportunity.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

er, A land deal to create £m's, the space around Sixfields to create a better stadium, the largest town in the country (so potential fanbase) and the smallest stadium capacity of any long-established league club. 

Infrastructure is the base of EVERY successful club that wants medium term growth. Look at Rotherham - Championship now, wasn't that long ago they were homeless and bankrupt twice, and they have 2 larger Sheffield Clubs on their doorstep

Took your advice and just looked at Rotherham Random. Apparently Tony Stewart has put in around 30 million plus and the losses are consistently considerable. Don’t deliberately want to be a kill joy but someone has to say it, how is this realistic for us at this point.

[BackOfTheNet]

Took your advice and just looked at Rotherham Random. Apparently Tony Stewart has put in around 30 million plus and the losses are consistently considerable. Don’t deliberately want to be a kill joy but someone has to say it, how is this realistic for us at this point.

FFS Melly, it's always facts, facts, facts with you, isn't it...?

[singcobb]

Took your advice and just looked at Rotherham Random. Apparently Tony Stewart has put in around 30 million plus and the losses are consistently considerable. Don’t deliberately want to be a kill joy but someone has to say it, how is this realistic for us at this point.

If I've told you once I've told you a thousand times not to exagerate.

[Manwork04]

Thats a wish,nothing wrong with that,but not an opportunity.

The opportunity is the money tied up in the land, how it’s split is the million dollar question.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

Having read the Trust presentation I am struggling to understand the position. I’ve lost count of the amount of times this has been said but there is no real offering to get past the current status quo. The owners are being what they are which is investors. That means their priority is to make a profit. The long term future of the club is, was and always will be of secondary importance. Most of the issues raised are down to the original Sixfields construction. To change that footprint takes finance and there isn’t a sustainable plan to address this at the moment and build a convincing case for a return. For example, the board of the Trust put forward MK Dons as a model, but my understanding is that this was financed in no insignificant part by Asda and IKEA to circumvent planning issues. Again finance for profit being the underlying message. This makes this part of the presentation somewhat ironic. I won’t go through each case but you don’t have to dig too deep to find flaws in the examples that make applying them to NTFC irrelevant.

If you have investor owners then you have to accept that their priority is profit. What is the realistic alternative at this time, the 50+1 model is a fine ambition but unless it applies to the entire EFL it is fraught with danger. The most likely outcome is a prince and pauper scenario with some clubs living the dream as a billionaires toy whilst the morally admirable clubs struggle at the bottom. Pointing out the flaws with the current NTFC model is one thing, but where’s the plan and long term strategy to push the club forward, there is absolutely no substance to anything that I can see. At the moment the most appropriate analogy I can come up with is that its like reading The Emperor’s New Clothes and likewise someone could end up embarrassingly exposed.

The other difficulty with the Trust boards approach is that once again it could be argued that this was a presentation by 4 Trust members representing the view of 9 Trust members. There may be other Trust members that share this view but thats difficult to ascertain at this point. If I were one of the owners that would be the message I would convey to West Northants Council. At the moment it could be suggested that the Trust board are terrified of canvassing their own membership as it may affect the agenda of the 9 individuals on the board that represent the Trust. They attack the investors but the accusation remains that they are afraid of canvassing and representing their own membership. Right or wrong you see how this compromises the position of the board of the Trust. They continually neuter themselves and are exposed to this kind of attack. IMO this renders them insignificant and to some extent much like the Emperor horribly exposed. Unfortunately without the proven majority endorsement of their membership and the wider support base The Trust Board are significantly reducing their effectiveness. Shoot the messenger if you like but it won’t change the bleeding obvious. I’ve said it before, get the endorsement of the membership and the support base chaps, then people will fear you. Although in the event this happens it’s still unclear what the alternative future holds at this point. On we go into the unknown.

[Deepcut Cobbler]

"From the little information we have, it appears that..."

If you are starting a 'first impression' meeting with a new organisation with that preamble, your credibility has already gone.
WNC must have been stifling their giggles at the naive and amateur organisation sat before them.

[BackOfTheNet]

Having read the Trust presentation I am struggling to understand the position. I’ve lost count of the amount of times this has been said but there is no real offering to get past the current status quo. The owners are being what they are which is investors. That means their priority is to make a profit. The long term future of the club is, was and always will be of secondary importance. Most of the issues raised are down to the original Sixfields construction. To change that footprint takes finance and there isn’t a sustainable plan to address this at the moment and build a convincing case for a return. For example, the board of the Trust put forward MK Dons as a model, but my understanding is that this was financed in no insignificant part by Asda and IKEA to circumvent planning issues. Again finance for profit being the underlying message. This makes this part of the presentation somewhat ironic. I won’t go through each case but you don’t have to dig too deep to find flaws in the examples that make applying them to NTFC irrelevant.

If you have investor owners then you have to accept that their priority is profit. What is the realistic alternative at this time, the 50+1 model is a fine ambition but unless it applies to the entire EFL it is fraught with danger. The most likely outcome is a prince and pauper scenario with some clubs living the dream as a billionaires toy whilst the morally admirable clubs struggle at the bottom. Pointing out the flaws with the current NTFC model is one thing, but where’s the plan and long term strategy to push the club forward, there is absolutely no substance to anything that I can see. At the moment the most appropriate analogy I can come up with is that its like reading The Emperor’s New Clothes and likewise someone could end up embarrassingly exposed.

The other difficulty with the Trust boards approach is that once again it could be argued that this was a presentation by 4 Trust members representing the view of 9 Trust members. There may be other Trust members that share this view but thats difficult to ascertain at this point. If I were one of the owners that would be the message I would convey to West Northants Council. At the moment it could be suggested that the Trust board are terrified of canvassing their own membership as it may affect the agenda of the 9 individuals on the board that represent the Trust. They attack the investors but the accusation remains that they are afraid of canvassing and representing their own membership. Right or wrong you see how this compromises the position of the board of the Trust. They continually neuter themselves and are exposed to this kind of attack. IMO this renders them insignificant and to some extent much like the Emperor horribly exposed. Unfortunately without the proven majority endorsement of their membership and the wider support base The Trust Board are significantly reducing their effectiveness. Shoot the messenger if you like but it won’t change the bleeding obvious. I’ve said it before, get the endorsement of the membership and the support base chaps, then people will fear you. Although in the event this happens it’s still unclear what the alternative future holds at this point. On we go into the unknown.

A few people are going to be having an embolism over their cornflakes when they wake up and read this, Melly! Not that I disagree with one scintilla of it...

[guest1269]

Whatever the rights and wrongs or known and unknowns of the trusts arguments I take issue with their claim to be a democratic organisation when they do not canvas membership input to the stance they take.

[Manwork04]

Whatever the rights and wrongs or known and unknowns of the trusts arguments I take issue with their claim to be a democratic organisation when they do not canvas membership input to the stance they take.

They are an elected body, not sure how much more democratic you can get.
If you don’t like what they are doing join and voice your opinions.
Personally I think they are doing a great job, keep up the good work.

[guest168]

Took your advice and just looked at Rotherham Random. Apparently Tony Stewart has put in around 30 million plus and the losses are consistently considerable. Don’t deliberately want to be a kill joy but someone has to say it, how is this realistic for us at this point.

The point I am making is, how many fans would have thought on the news that the club was bankrupt that in a few years time, they would have been in a new fancy stadium heading towards the Championship? Pretty sure they would have said it was unrealistic. So whats the alternative Melly, we bump along on the whims of owners who solely want to make a profit out of land deals? 

[guest168]

So Melly, in a 35+ slide presentation you only take a bit about MK?  A slide that is showing what our local rivals have achieved, showing how they are developing and moving forward.

You also talk of no substance, what did you think to NTFC's East Stand & Development Overview?  In it they state, "a lot of people have worked very hard to this point" OK great, but where is the substance? The lack of information and clarity was staggering



 

[guest168]

"From the little information we have, it appears that..."

If you are starting a 'first impression' meeting with a new organisation with that preamble, your credibility has already gone.
WNC must have been stifling their giggles at the naive and amateur organisation sat before them.

Nice try Deep, thats not the impression I got !! 

What do you think WNC think of our owners and the way they have acted?

[guest3086]

The Trust is doing exactly what it should be doing and that is outlining the fears and concerns of folk who care about the football club. They are not professional 'trust' people because they are made up of bakers and candlestick makers. If anyone cares enough and can be bothered they are free to join and influence the efforts these people make without having digs from the outer reaches. They have shown everybody exactly what they presented to WNC which is a world apart from what the club have shown us,   nothing has been heard about the July meeting. The club is owned by a property developer, that is a fact. His aim is not to further a football team, it is to maximise his return. Once he has stripped the assets and scarpered where will NTFC be then?