Does Sisu need to attract new investors to build a stadium? (1 Viewer)

Sky Blue Pete said:

Much like moving there temporarily noggin

Click to expand...

There is no financial reasons for going there temporarily unless it's part of breaking acl/something to do with the JR.

In terms of moving there permanently there is just no reason period.

Grendel said:

A new stadium makes no commercial sense. Its not happening.

Click to expand...

So why do the FL believe it is?

I agree with you.

Which is why publicity does help our cause

Noggin said:

There doesn't seem to be any logical reason I can see for moving to Northampton on a permanent basis. I see zero chance of that.

Click to expand...

I agree there is no logic to it, totally agree with that but there is also no logic in being there temporarily either.

If we agree that they wont build a new stadium and we see no realistic option for a Ricoh return, what option does that leave? Staying in Northampton? Ground sharing somewhere else? You would say liquidation is the most sensible option from SISU's point of view but they could have done that ages ago and saved themselves a lot of grief and expense so seemingly they have no appetite for it.

Whichever way you swing it we wont be able to move to a new home within the original 3 year time frame and the longer we stay at Sixfields the harder it will be to leave.

And Grendel i agree that my statement is unfounded, i have no proof, its just an opinion, i acknowledge that but it is no more far fetched than the SISU stadium or ground sharing with Hinckley

dongonzalos said:

So why do the FL believe it is?

I agree with you.

Click to expand...

We don't really know what the FL believe, they've been pretty silent on the matter.
In yesterdays parliamentary debate the MPs said that some owners used the threat of litigation to get their way with the FL/FA. :thinking about:

dongonzalos said:

So why do the FL believe it is?

I agree with you.

Click to expand...

We don't really know what the FL believe, they've been pretty silent on the matter.
In yesterdays parliamentary debate the MPs said that some owners used the threat of litigation to get their way with the FL/FA. :thinking about:

Jack Griffin said:

We don't really know what the FL believe, they've been pretty silent on the matter.
In yesterdays parliamentary debate the MPs said that some owners used the threat of litigation to get their way with the FL/FA. :thinking about:

Click to expand...

The reality is that the discretion in FA / FL rules allow for doubt and with doubt comes litigation!

fernandopartridge said:

The reality is that the discretion in FA / FL rules allow for doubt and with doubt comes litigation!

Click to expand...

This. The FL made a rod for their back by using discretion at all. Should just give rules and stick to them.