But all that is good surely, making the club live within its means rather than spunk cash on big name/big waged players it can't afford? (thus making a loss before it does that, in fact, without need to dump debt onto the club).
Common sense does also make you move from the Ricoh. If the club is unviable as is, breaking the monopoly of supply and introducing some competition is not a bad move in common sense terms. it might not be a move you or I like, but it *is* rational. High risk, but rational.
And if the club should be dead anyway, we're onto the highest risk strategies of a high risk organisation.
Because the previous boards sold all the family silverware leaving it with nothing.
And yes, I am for real. No offer has yet to be made to the club for such a deal that was able for them to be accepted. The only reason there has been movement up to this point has been because the stadium supply monopoly has been broken. Just because you don't like their strategy (I don't either) doesn't mean it isn't rooted in a good financial sense for what they are, and what they're trying to do.
It doesn't make SISU loveable and cuddly to say that. It does however go back to the fact that somehow in a culture of blame, a simple message that two sides should really sit down and talk (I'll buy them a coffee in Costa in Waterstone's myself if they like) is getting totally lost.
Morning - as usual we partly agree and partly disagree
Completely agree about the need for the club to live within its means, though (going over old ground) I thought that the way KD attempted to acieve this was brainless at best - let's cut the wage bill to such an extent that relegation is virtually inevitable, meaning that the revenue loss is a multiple of the cost savings :facepalm:
In a totally theoretical world, I can see sense in moving away / threatening to move from the Ricoh, in order to get a better deal. In the practical world, this is one of the best ever examples of cutting off your nose to spite your face. Moving to a 7,000 capacity stadium (soon I believe to have its capacity reduced for a year or so for building work), 35 miles away from your customer base is a move that makes one look back wistfully at the days when good old KD ran the club......
In the short term the move brings about serious financial pain (with or without NOPM), in the medium term there is a huge danger, as Otis frequently points out, that if/when the club returns to Coventry, its erstwhile customer base will have metaphorically moved on.
As for the ACL related issue - in my view, ACL made a (belatedly) significant move in cutting the rent by two thirds to £400k. If we are to believe the comments posted here by someone who claimed to have spoken to TF at half time on Saturday, the rent at Northampton is £170k. So £170k for a 7,000 capacity stadium (soon to be reduced to 5,500?), as against £400k for a 32,000 capacity stadium. Doesn't sound too ridiculous to me. ACL have also indicated willingness to agree to lower figures with the reported "£150k while in the third division offer".
Should this have been made direct to SISU? Yes in my opinion.
Should TF be picking up the phone to ACL and asking if that offer is available to him? Yes in my opinion.
In a logical world there must be sufficient common interest for a deal to be done.
My concern is that in a logical world we would never have moved to Sixfields - so who knows what will happen!
