Search results

Sorry, I don't know what you mean! It is a public poll no? All I am saying is that the fact your username appears against your selection might put a few people off voting. It might, it might not. The votes could well be an accurate reflection, I'm just saying I don't think it's particularly...

Agree. I can see this lasting one season before they come back to the Ricoh. If they don't, then a Phoenix club will probably be formed in time for the 2014/15 season, and then the prospect of a return becomes more unlikely. It'll be one season if that.

Not really. People just don't like the idea of seeing their name under the 'yes' vote for fear they'll be called scabs or something else equally hysterical, so they abstain from these sort of polls. 2000-3000 is my guess, but that's all it is. I'm not planning to go to Northampton as it...

It really is lose-lose for you! I'm a bit numb really. Never expected it to come to this. What I do know is that I will find it very hard not to go. It's what I do. Perhaps the club might consider producing a new range of balaclavas so that those people who travel get to do so anonymously...

I am not sure those figures are entirely correct. They have our highest number of away fans as 4009 - when we took a handful short of 5000 to MK Dons (as announced by MK Dons themselves). Our unofficial average and the end of the season according to those who take the time to follow these...

It beggars belief that people persist with this rubbish. That deal was done long before the council had any involvement in the stadium itself. The club did all the leg work - secured a price to buy the land and had a buyer lined up, and all the council did was leverage it and their involvement...

Absolute rubbish. The funding sources for the stadium are clearly defined. Even if we take your extremely simplistic take on how that deal panned out, you admit that the profits from the deal were used, and therefore the net contribution from the council (public funds) was 0. It is widely...

ACL. They effectively sold the future profits from revenues generated by one if its tenants to a third party. Why the club allowed that to happen I've no idea. It isn't unusual for catering rights to be sold in this way, but clearly this should have involved the club as it was its customers...

If he going to come out with that sort of stuff then he is wasting his breath. The council didn't even own the land that was sold to Tesco. The purchase and sale was all wrapped up in the same deal effectively and the profits were used to help fiance the building of the stadium, so effectively...

That isn't what is being said, by 'doing well out it', this refers to the fact that have an asset they own which is worth a lot of money. We all know that no dividends have yet been paid. The entitlement comes from the fact that the stadium would not exist at all without the club and was...

I accept your last point, but the problem is people use that fact to defend and justify the stance that the council/ACL took during the rent dispute.

I believe I answered that point earlier. Plans were already in place to buy back HR in that eventuality. GR didn't want administration as he stood to lose too much, hence why years later when the club was in an even worse situation financially he was still trying to cling on and avoid that...

A good chunk of it came from Tesco, a deal that was brokered by the football club via BR. There were other funding sources too, like naming rights. Ricoh were paying to have their name stuck to the wall of a football stadium, unless you think they would have parted with millions to name a two...

No I'm not, on the contrary. I'm talking about the fact they managed to wrestle control of a £130 million project for next to nothing. Do you dispute that this commercial arrangement was not of benefit to them?

Built the stadium in the sense that they financed it. Which they didn't. So yes, they 'built' it using other people's money and then took ownership of it. What a result that was for them.

Give then credit for a commercial arrangement that was to their benefit, while at the same time detrimental to the football club? If you want.

Someone with no affiliation to or emotional investment in the football club might say exactly that. What we should not do is perpetuate these myths that they 'bailed us out', 'built the stadium' and more importantly they are somehow hard done by.

Indeed I think Higgs was instrumental in that. Actually, I feel a lot more gratitude and loyalty to them then I do the council. Ultimately, the council spent almost nothing and came out of it with total ownership of the freehold of a £130 million facility and a 50% stake in the management...

That's a perfectly reasonable position. We may disagree on the details and history of it, but clearly there needs to be a deal done. Both sides need to talk, and that was my original point. The suggestion ACL should 'not let this drop' and pursue the legal avenues open to them is possibly the...

What, even though it is all complete fantasy?