|
MCHammer
|
Good news. Buy the land for £3m, flip it for £20m as it's worth circa £1m an acre according to the Trust. Then invest the WHOLE profit in to the infrastructure of the football club. What's not to like? No greedy land grabbers, no land developers who have no interest in the football club. No Stand, No Land can be reinserted and an agreement reached with the council where the development land is only released after the completion of the East Stand. Heck we probably get a better East Stand. All being delivered in a completely open and trasparent way that is purely about what's best for the football club and it's supporters. Can someone tell me the downsides as I don't see any? |
|
|
|
|
|
guest3481
|
Good news. Buy the land for £3m, flip it for £20m as it's worth circa £1m an acre according to the Trust. Then invest the WHOLE profit in to the infrastructure of the football club. What's not to like? No greedy land grabbers, no land developers who have no interest in the football club.
No Stand, No Land can be reinserted and an agreement reached with the council where the development land is only released after the completion of the East Stand. Heck we probably get a better East Stand. All being delivered in a completely open and trasparent way that is purely about what's best for the football club and it's supporters.
Can someone tell me the downsides as I don't see any?
I can only see one problem with this... the land isn't worth £20m! If it was there would be a whole host of people trying to get it for £2-3m |
|
|
|
|
|
BackOfTheNet
|
Good news. Buy the land for £3m, flip it for £20m as it's worth circa £1m an acre according to the Trust. Then invest the WHOLE profit in to the infrastructure of the football club. What's not to like? No greedy land grabbers, no land developers who have no interest in the football club.
No Stand, No Land can be reinserted and an agreement reached with the council where the development land is only released after the completion of the East Stand. Heck we probably get a better East Stand. All being delivered in a completely open and trasparent way that is purely about what's best for the football club and it's supporters.
Can someone tell me the downsides as I don't see any?
Well, for a start I'd say where are they getting the capital from and what do they want in return? Are we reliant on developing the land for funding the stand, in which case how many years away is that? Most importantly, what are they going to do about the current leaseholder? I can't see those two playing nicely together so we'll have a stalemate. Now Thomas has given assurances they will complete the stand as part of the deal, is any of this really necessary anyway? |
The Hotelend Grand National* Sweepstake Champion 2020
|
|
|
|
JollyCobbler
|
Good news. Buy the land for £3m, flip it for £20m as it's worth circa £1m an acre according to the Trust. Then invest the WHOLE profit in to the infrastructure of the football club. What's not to like? No greedy land grabbers, no land developers who have no interest in the football club.
No Stand, No Land can be reinserted and an agreement reached with the council where the development land is only released after the completion of the East Stand. Heck we probably get a better East Stand. All being delivered in a completely open and trasparent way that is purely about what's best for the football club and it's supporters.
Can someone tell me the downsides as I don't see any?
Sounds great in principle. I'd still like to know where the 3 million is coming from? |
|
|
|
|
|
JollyCobbler
|
Well, for a start I'd say where are they getting the capital from and what do they want in return? Are we reliant on developing the land for funding the stand, in which case how many years away is that?
Most importantly, what are they going to do about the current leaseholder? I can't see those two playing nicely together so we'll have a stalemate.
Now Thomas has given assurances they will complete the stand as part of the deal, is any of this really necessary anyway?
Well, there is completing the stand and completing the stand. Until we know what is on offer it's difficult to answer your question. |
|
|
|
|
|
Battery Man
|
Sounds great in principle. I'd still like to know where the 3 million is coming from?
Beds & Random both put a bet on when this was at page 50 to say it would reach over 1750 pages and it has come off to the tune of 3 mill  |
|
|
|
|
|
MCHammer
|
Yet, still it's members whom it's suppose to represent, know sweet fa!
One thing for sure (like we didn't know already) is that any relationship between the club/trust has now officially gone forever
What right do the members have to know anything? The Trust Board have created this environment and the members have allowed it to happen. Either the members don't care, are content with the situation or have done sweet fa themselves to change it! Rather than resigning, cancelling memberships or splitting and forming seperate organisations poeple should start challenging from within. Maybe it's time for the disaffected wider support base to come together and actually join the Trust with the intention of removing and replacing the current board? You would probably only need 200/300 like mind individuals which would easily swamp the existing active membership? As for the relationship with the owners well that was dead years ago and both sides contributed to that in equal measure. |
|
|
|
|
|
MCHammer
|
I can only see one problem with this... the land isn't worth £20m!
If it was there would be a whole host of people trying to get it for £2-3m
The Trust Board have at hand experts with years of experience with land such as this and have commissioned their own surveys. Thye also state remediation costs have been grossly exaggerated. |
|
|
|
|
|
dyl
|
Good news. Buy the land for £3m, flip it for £20m as it's worth circa £1m an acre according to the Trust. Then invest the WHOLE profit in to the infrastructure of the football club. What's not to like? No greedy land grabbers, no land developers who have no interest in the football club.
No Stand, No Land can be reinserted and an agreement reached with the council where the development land is only released after the completion of the East Stand. Heck we probably get a better East Stand. All being delivered in a completely open and trasparent way that is purely about what's best for the football club and it's supporters.
Can someone tell me the downsides as I don't see any?
Here's a potential downside, using the Trust's own arguments against KT (not based on a belief it would happen). Buy the land for £3m, flip it for £20m and the Trust Board members each walk away with a tidy sum. What's to stop that happening? If you believe KT might do it, you have to believe it is a possibility with the Trust. What is to stop it? |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 28, 2022, 10:54:48 am by dyl »
|
Report Spam
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MCHammer
|
Well, for a start I'd say where are they getting the capital from and what do they want in return? Are we reliant on developing the land for funding the stand, in which case how many years away is that?
Most importantly, what are they going to do about the current leaseholder? I can't see those two playing nicely together so we'll have a stalemate.
Now Thomas has given assurances they will complete the stand as part of the deal, is any of this really necessary anyway?
Thanks for the questions. To put your mind at rest surely you simply need to look back at everything the Trust Board have said over the last 7 years. They have always stated they would only work with local individuals or organisations that have the interest of the football club first. That would immediately rule out people like Cilldara for instance or other development companies simply interested in the land or a significant portion of it. No Stand, No Land as has been insisted upon will mean the development land only gets released when the stand is completed. As has been stated many times there is nothing preventing the stand from being completed. I would expect the timescales to be within a year or two as 5 years was always claimed to be way too long and unnecesary. The funding can come from the same place as the £3m and be returned when the development land is released. The lease can be broken in 2014. Cilldara seem pretty confident they can break it and agreed to cover the costs of legal action for the council. The Trust will just do the same. While this legal action is taking place work on the East Stand can take place so that the conclusion of the legal action and release of the dev land coincide meaning no time is wasted. If it's a better deal all round for the club and gets rid of the current owners as th Trust have wanted for some time then they will see it as needed. They don't believe a word the owners say so there is nothing at all KT and DB can do to change that. |
|
|
|
|
|
guest3529
|
Here's a potential downside, using the Trust's own arguments against KT (not based on a belief it would happen).
Buy the land for £3m, flip it for £20m and the Trust Board members each walk away with a tidy sum.
What's to stop that happening? If you believe KT might do it, you have to believe it is a possibility with the Trust.
What is to stop it?
Bang on I would say. Anything that KT can do, can be replicated by others with the same tool box. Didn't Cilldara also offer to take on the responsibility of breaking the problematic leases, indemnifying the council? Strikes me this is now a completely open market in all but name, the idea of which I would guess KT will loathe. I haven't listened to the recent podcast but it might also go someway to explaining his apparent overt displeasure with things. |
|
|
|
|
|
MCHammer
|
Well, there is completing the stand and completing the stand. Until we know what is on offer it's difficult to answer your question.
EXACTLY. Imagine what the Trust can deliver with all that money from the land. They can finally deliver the East Stand they believe should have been built and supporters shouldn't accept anything else. In fact they are probably working on the plans so they can show them as soon as possible. RE your comment re where the money is coming from...ask them directly not on a forum. |
|
|
|
|
|
MCHammer
|
Here's a potential downside, using the Trust's own arguments against KT (not based on a belief it would happen).
Buy the land for £3m, flip it for £20m and the Trust Board members each walk away with a tidy sum.
What's to stop that happening? If you believe KT might do it, you have to believe it is a possibility with the Trust.
What is to stop it?
Well to start it's No Stand, No Land so you don't get the dev land till you complete the East Stand. The directors will also be legally bound by personal gurantees that all financial benefit is solely for the football club and it's infrastructure. This will be included in writing in both the Heads of Terms and the legally binding contract. |
|
|
|
|
|
guest3481
|
The Trust Board have at hand experts with years of experience with land such as this and have commissioned their own surveys. Thye also state remediation costs have been grossly exaggerated.
I can no longer tell on here when people are being serious or not. |
|
|
|
|
|
MCHammer
|
Bang on I would say.
Anything that KT can do, can be replicated by others with the same tool box.
Didn't Cilldara also offer to take on the responsibility of breaking the problematic leases, indemnifying the council?
Strikes me this is now a completely open market in all but name, the idea of which I would guess KT will loathe. I haven't listened to the recent podcast but it might also go someway to explaining his apparent overt displeasure with things.
I would suggest you listen to the podcast. It adds a lot of additional context around the written material and makes it even more striking that nobody with an opposing view bothered to attend and challenge him. It's been an open market essentially since Cilldara bid and the publicity surrounding that. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tabasco Kid
|
What right do the members have to know anything?
I am a life member, and also a share holder of the Trust. So, in your eyes, shareholders have no rights? |
Were in the pipe 5 by 5.
|
|
|
|
guest3481
|
They have always stated they would only work with local individuals or organisations that have the interest of the football club first.
The lease can be broken in 2014. Cilldara seem pretty confident they can break it and agreed to cover the costs of legal action for the council.
https://www.ntfc.co.uk/news/2022/september/open_forum_report/He also explained that one of the complications for the club with the existing leases is a remediation clause meaning remediation on the wider land has to be in place by 2024. Therefore, to protect the club and simplify matters, he further explained that the club had instructed local planning consultant firm CC Town Planning alongside national planning consultants and environmental impact experts Lichfields to advise on all aspects of planning, but especially the remediation strategy and work that is essential to protect the land as a club asset. The club fully expects remediation will be dealt with satisfactorily as required by the lease. |
|
|
|
|
|
MCHammer
|
I can no longer tell on here when people are being serious or not.
I promise you 100% everything I say is true to the best of my knowledge and is sourced from elsewhere. I haven't made a single thing up. Any hypothesis is based 100% around what the Trust expect of our current owners. |
|
|
|
|
|
guest3481
|
I promise you 100% everything I say is true to the best of my knowledge and is sourced from elsewhere. I haven't made a single thing up. Any hypothesis is based 100% around what the Trust expect of our current owners.
Thanks for the clarity  |
|
|
|
|
|
MCHammer
|
I am a life member, and also a share holder of the Trust. So, in your eyes, shareholders have no rights?
I made the context for that point in the rest of the first paragraph that you didn't quote. The Trust is what it's members want it to be. I can only assume THIS current version is what the members want either thriugh disinterest or silent approval. If this is what you want them to be...congratulations. If it's not how have you and others used your rights to change it? |
|
|
|
|
|
