Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?

[Ragdoll Cobbler]

I honestly feel that if Cilldara get the land then the town loses it's football club.

Totally agree, there would be a fire sale of all our decent players in the Summer, with no further investment in the playing staff...

The out of contract players we want to keep will be off, probably without even being offered new contracts, due to lack of budget...

Coaching staff will be culled/walk, with Adam Moreton the only one left and the new gaffa!

If we start next season, we might not finish it...

Don't get why KT/DB are continually painted as the evil villains in this whole mess...

They took over a complete sh1t show from DC/NBC and painstakingly rectified the various leases that were not initially in the clubs favour.

Have the players/staff ever had their wages paid late during their tenure? No

Remember the staff even put out an open letter praising KT, and I'd certainly take their word, over any outsiders with possible grudges!

KT/DB are not perfect but if they make a few quid from all the sh1t they've had to deal with then fair play as long as that bloody stand is finished!

They have no affinity with NTFC, so where are all these investers who do, who can do a better job???

Such a shame all the great work JB & co have done this season could all be in vein...

[Melbourne Cobbler]

Further to my reply I am going to attempt to clarify this once again. The board of the Trust have taken the decision to become involved in the decision making process regarding the negotiations over the sale of the land. This has included various meetings and applications regarding its engagement with the council in an attempt to influence proceedings.
The motive for this is to ensure the best deal possible for the club. As custodians of the club this is within their remit and fair enough. However, the risk with this engagement is that the current owners become frustrated and run out of money and/or patience and motivation to continue to finance the club.
Everyone will no doubt recall that when the previous owners left we were days away from losing the club. As a result there are members of the Trust and the wider support base that have genuine concerns about the future of the club should the stalemate regarding the negotiations continue.
Whilst I understand the motives of the board of the Trust, I feel if they are going to involve themselves to the extent they have, they should have realistic contingency plans in place should events unfold as described. This was a concern I raised directly with members of the board personally some time ago. It was reiterated to me that this was a consideration and there were certain conversations in the background taking place that may mitigate that risk moving forward.
This is obviously a necessity as in my mind it would be unthinkable that the board would involve themselves to the extent they have and in doing so contribute to the demise of the club.
To repeat, whilst I understand that the board of the Trust are acting out of concern for the club, what they also must acknowledge is that there are Trust members and other supporters of the club that have very real fears and concerns over the clubs future. I think it is both unreasonable and unfair that when those people raise concerns they come under attack and are accused of being in the owners pocket, Trust haters and all the other well worn defence mechanisms continually applied on here.
At this point in time I am not aware of any contingencies or plans in place to mitigate the various risks that are possible as a result of recent events. What reassurances are being offered by the Trust, if any, that there are reasonable plans in place to support the club should undesirable eventualities unfold.
To repeat it was implied to me personally this was a consideration that was actively being pursued and I think at this point in time given the circumstances I feel it’s appropriate the question is asked again.

[Risdene]

28th February can not come quick enough so we can have more simplicity to our future!!!

[BackOfTheNet]

Let's hope this isn't a case of a tenant focusing so much attention on denying access to a benevolent landlord at the front door that they've failed to notice the burglar sneaking in the back door.

It does make me wonder if yesterday's revelations were the basis of the "wrong side of history" comments that got people so riled up a while ago...

[guest3338]

Further to my reply I am going to attempt to clarify this once again. The board of the Trust have taken the decision to become involved in the decision making process regarding the negotiations over the sale of the land. This has included various meetings and applications regarding its engagement with the council in an attempt to influence proceedings.
The motive for this is to ensure the best deal possible for the club. As custodians of the club this is within their remit and fair enough. However, the risk with this engagement is that the current owners become frustrated and run out of money and/or patience and motivation to continue to finance the club.
Everyone will no doubt recall that when the previous owners left we were days away from losing the club. As a result there are members of the Trust and the wider support base that have genuine concerns about the future of the club should the stalemate regarding the negotiations continue.
Whilst I understand the motives of the board of the Trust, I feel if they are going to involve themselves to the extent they have, they should have realistic contingency plans in place should events unfold as described. This was a concern I raised directly with members of the board personally some time ago. It was reiterated to me that this was a consideration and there were certain conversations in the background taking place that may mitigate that risk moving forward.
This is obviously a necessity as in my mind it would be unthinkable that the board would involve themselves to the extent they have and in doing so contribute to the demise of the club.
To repeat, whilst I understand that the board of the Trust are acting out of concern for the club, what they also must acknowledge is that there are Trust members and other supporters of the club that have very real fears and concerns over the clubs future. I think it is both unreasonable and unfair that when those people raise concerns they come under attack and are accused of being in the owners pocket, Trust haters and all the other well worn defence mechanisms continually applied on here.
At this point in time I am not aware of any contingencies or plans in place to mitigate the various risks that are possible as a result of recent events. What reassurances are being offered by the Trust, if any, that there are reasonable plans in place to support the club should undesirable eventualities unfold.
To repeat it was implied to me personally this was a consideration that was actively being pursued and I think at this point in time given the circumstances I feel it’s appropriate the question is asked again.

So do you think the Trusts actions have, in any way, influenced a third party into making a bid for the land?
I don't know any of the personalities involved but if I was a director of said third party nothing any football trust said to me would influence my decision into making a land purchase. That would be based only around cold hard economics. I believe you have many times in the past used that same principle to explain why no one in their right mind should purchase a lower league football club, so why should it not apply in this situation?
If a third party thinks that a profit can still be turned in offering a million quid more than our owners and the council take that offer seriously, then unfortunately, using your own best business practices the club must increase its own offer.
I agree absolutely that there is even more need now for the Trust to start planning for worst case scenarios but not with any suggestion that they have been instrumental in that requirement.

[GrangeParkCobbler]

I think Melly is running away with himself somewhat!

The Trust position over the past few months is that we believed the land deal would go through eventually, once the legal formalities had been sorted out and once the correct processes (red book valuation for example) were followed.
The Trust asked questions of the deal, the use of the land and the Trust still hopes that the ACV land is not sold off as part of any deal. That said, the CDNL deal seemed to have the backing of the majority Tory councillors on the Council as well as the minority Labour group.

You go on about contingencies Melly, but there was nothing to make us think that the club (CDNL) would not get their hands on the land.

However, now.....despite the club claiming this has been a transparent process we now find there is another land bidder willing to pay more than double the CDNL bid. No indication of this had been given, either by the club or the council. At least the reason for the delay is clear now. Bid, counter bid, counter bid etc.

Don't you think that if the Trust had known in October or November, whenever it was that Cilldare appeared, that there was now the possibility that someone else may end up with the land, that The Trust could have worked on those contingencies you are talking about?

As it is now, time is short, and there is the possibility that in just two weeks a different path will be followed......and nobody knows where that leads, neither the Club, The Trust of the fans.

[Ragdoll Cobbler]

So what was discussed during the planned zoom meeting between the council and the trust last night?

Is a further trust statement imminent off the back of this, if not an official statement, then an email to all trust members?

After the zoom meeting can the trust officially confirm if they are now backing the clubs bid or backing the third party?

If the latter, who do you expect to finish the east stand and fund our football club, as it won't be KT/DB or the third party developers?

[BackOfTheNet]

I agree absolutely that there is even more need now for the Trust to start planning for worst case scenarios but not with any suggestion that they have been instrumental in that requirement.

I'm afraid I can't agree with that last part, CJ.

The Trust have been difficult, obstructive and noisy for the last few years because whatever plans the club have put forward have failed to meet the Trust's lofty ideals. They have been instrumental in the various delays that have seen us reach this point.

If the council go against the recommendations and opt to sell to a third party then I firmly believe this will endanger the very existence of our club.

If that comes to pass, will it be down to the Trust? No, of course not. That would be both ridiculous and unfair to suggest. Would they be partly responsible though?  Absolutely.

[guest2608]

I'm afraid I can't agree with that last part, CJ.

The Trust have been difficult, obstructive and noisy for the last few years because whatever plans the club have put forward have failed to meet the Trust's lofty ideals. They have been instrumental in the various delays that have seen us reach this point.

If the council go against the recommendations and opt to sell to a third party then I firmly believe this will endanger the very existence of our club.

If that comes to pass, will it be down to the Trust? No, of course not. That would be both ridiculous and unfair to suggest. Would they be partly responsible though?  Absolutely.

+1

[guest49]

Although the land can be seen as a separate entity, I’m sure the council can build in caveats around the completion of the stand. Pretty much how they have with the club. Even if it’s a financial amount red ringed for these owners or the next ones. Politically and ethically (economically even financially) it wouldn’t be the best move to purely sell to the highest bidder if puts the existence of the club under immediate doubt. All talk of the land so far has revolved around the completion of the stand. It would have a significant impact on a large number of people (employees), plus the surrounding businesses were the club to fold, so it’s not just about one number on an offer. Every land purchase has knock on impacts to the surrounding area which would always be considered. My firm bought a massive plot of land 30 years ago. We were never allowed to build the intended factory on it but fast forward there are houses all around.  
It’s another twist in the long running saga and despite the doom and gloom spun from yesterdays news, to me it reads as though they are in favour of the club. For those who already have us shut down, I wouldn’t waste too much energy and stress on something you can’t change. Maybe buckets outside the West stand if you’re that concerned.
IF things don’t go in the favour of the club, I’m sure it’ll get ugly all round, for the owners, the council, the fans and NTFC staff. I can see why people would try to use this latest news to try and point any fingers at the Trust?? For anyone going down that road (who want to do some finger pointing) how about starting with the people who haven’t done what they said they were going to, all those years ago. #powerpoint. You could almost say they acquired the club under false pretences…although none of that gets us anywhere.

Personally I think we’ll be fine but I’ll believe the stand is being completed when I see it and I’m sure we’re in for a few more delays and red tape.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

I'm afraid I can't agree with that last part, CJ.

The Trust have been difficult, obstructive and noisy for the last few years because whatever plans the club have put forward have failed to meet the Trust's lofty ideals. They have been instrumental in the various delays that have seen us reach this point.

If the council go against the recommendations and opt to sell to a third party then I firmly believe this will endanger the very existence of our club.

If that comes to pass, will it be down to the Trust? No, of course not. That would be both ridiculous and unfair to suggest. Would they be partly responsible though?  Absolutely.

I pretty much share that assessment BOTN and as unpalatable as it may be for some we are very far from being alone in sharing that opinion.

[guest49]

P.S. What’s Tom doing about this? 

[Manwork04]

P.S. What’s Tom doing about this? 

Cleaning Kelvins golf clubs 

[Manwork04]

I pretty much share that assessment BOTN and as unpalatable as it may be for some we are very far from being alone in sharing that opinion.

Pathetic dig at the Trust, another bid has absolutely nothing to do with them.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

Pathetic dig at the Trust, another bid has absolutely nothing to do with them.

Wrong, not another dig at the Trust, I’m a member so I am part of it. I am questioning the decision making of the members of the board who have put up barrier after barrier without seemingly too much thought for the potential consequences or pitfalls. When a deal goes south it’s often the unforeseen that causes it and the longer it sits on the table the more chance of the unforeseen occurring. They have been warned time and time again and have basically carried on regardless. If they have other interested parties lined up or a plan to support the club in the short term then fair enough. If they haven’t then in my opinion the members and supporters have a right to question their decision making. Attack me if you like but as stated I am far from alone in sharing that view. Ultimately their job is to act in the best interests of the club. When this is all over that is the standard they will be judged by.

[Zen Master]

Excuse my complete ignorance. I’ve read through the council details put on here but still a bit woolly.

So if CDNL KT/DB get the deal they pay £890k and finish the East Stand which is ultimately a council asset but if Cillbara get the deal they pay £2 million but don’t get the running track or finish the stand?

https://westnorthants.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s4782/Council%20Report%20-%20Land%20at%20Sixfields%20Disposal%20v1-8.pdf

[GrangeParkCobbler]

Excuse my complete ignorance. I’ve read through the council details put on here but still a bit woolly.

So if CDNL KT/DB get the deal they pay £890k and finish the East Stand which is ultimately a council asset but if Cillbara get the deal they pay £2 million but don’t get the running track or finish the stand?

https://westnorthants.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s4782/Council%20Report%20-%20Land%20at%20Sixfields%20Disposal%20v1-8.pdf

In a nutshell, yes.

[guest3338]

So while the council accept the Cilldara offer is the better one in isolation, they are concerned that legally it could be problematic breaking the main site lease and this would not happen in any event until 2024.
How idealistic is the average councillor these days?

[guest3338]

I'm afraid I can't agree with that last part, CJ.

The Trust have been difficult, obstructive and noisy for the last few years because whatever plans the club have put forward have failed to meet the Trust's lofty ideals. They have been instrumental in the various delays that have seen us reach this point.

If the council go against the recommendations and opt to sell to a third party then I firmly believe this will endanger the very existence of our club.

If that comes to pass, will it be down to the Trust? No, of course not. That would be both ridiculous and unfair to suggest. Would they be partly responsible though?  Absolutely.

Point taken, but to say that the Trust were instrumental rather than just an annoying background noise for those holding the cards I think stretches it somewhat.

[guest49]

Ever changing situation...

Northampton Town: Cobblers land deal beats off developer bid

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-60353977


The council's cabinet member for finance, Malcolm Longley said the authority could not be sure it could bring an end to a lease covering the land "without the agreement of CDNL, and there is a risk of expensive litigation if it tries to do so".
He said the authority needed to consider not just the money on offer but the risks involved in each case.
Mr Longley said "the recommendation of officers to accept the CDNL bid is, on balance, the most prudent option and therefore the intended route forward."

For life’s dolly downers.
Focus on the positives.