You're right we're not arguing, but i think that you saying Sisu's current plan of moving us to Northampton is sustainable and part of a good plan is wrong. I don't think it does because if they had just taken the opportunity to negotiate a better deal when they had the chance , all this Sixfields bollocks and the further divisions it has created within our already depleted fanbase is not making us sustainable now or for the future.
No, I'm saying these is indeed an argument to be made that by doing so, they've managed to shift goalposts that previously weren't shiftable. The evidence is there that that happens, the subpolot is we see ACL as a business (quite rightly) acting for its business's interests... but that isn't necessarily the club's interests either. The movement in positions from ACL shows this after all, as the lower the rent for the club the better, naturally!
The problem always has been, and this is the problem with SISU full-stop, it becomes wilful smoke and mirrors, the introduction of doubt in order to play the game... but the problem has always been that there's a relatively neutral and appropriate financial argument to be made that you take a short term hit for the long term gain. If the club came back with a valid deal that allows them to be sustainable going forward, and the club grows as a result, then it's a valid tactic.
The problem has always been that at the end of the day we're owned by a group who want profit for their investors, not for the football club. The tactic I just mentioned there is a long term tactic, and that doesn't tally with what SISU are, or their initial strategy for that matter. So then, because it doesn't tally, and because they don't communicate things beyond the superficial, it introduces doubt as to whether it's a benevolant looking after the club motivation or not. The same as, really, signing Fix, Dann, Eastwood wasn't looking after the club, as looking after the club would have been spending those transfer fees on the infrastructure, letting the league position slide if need be, but making sure the club was solid...
And that's the problem, and yes it should indeed be checked ve-ry carefully if they *are* looking after the club or not. The initial plan, after all, would have helped us had it worked and we fluked a promotion, but the pay-off was always likely to be a world of pain for us down the line if it didn't, as it was never likely to be the 'traditional' football approach of sell on to the next mug with a small amount of cash to spunk, who gets fans onside for a couple of years until they run out of money...
It's not the moving as such that creates divisions, it's the wilful smoke and mirrors behind the moving that creates divisions. Whether that's because SISU just aren't good at PR (their statements on the club website certainly say that!!) or because it's part of a deliberate strategy to create divisions, is open to debate.
You're right, the emotional wrench of going to Sixfields is the best argument not to do it, regardless. As things stood, with Mutton saying he was chanting SISU Out with the rest of them, the level of antagonism on both sides certainly looked like a power struggle, and it's certainly wrong, IMHO, to say the club solely moved. IMNSHO the club were *pushed* to move as much as they moved themselves.
Now that's a different argument to the present however. Ann Lucas has been far more savvy in her style, doing far more what I've always thought CCC should do, and offer flexibility and extend the olive branch. Ultimately, if a deal is on offer for the time to build a stadium, there is little reason for SISU not to move back... unless it exposes said position as nothing but a negotiating hand for a higher goal. The moving on to 'freehold or nothing' is an interesting paradigm shift too. Now there is the benign reason that SISU can't work with the council, and the council can't work with them - all fair enough. You'd have to ask what ultimate difference in operations and working relationships a peppercorn rent with a long term lease actually has, however...
So, personally I hope Ann Lucas keeps going on with her current tack, an offer to help SISU find some land for their new stadium would be good too, make them either follow through on that tactic in a place we'd be happy with, or mean they have to shift their own negotiations elsewhere. After all, what has worked best for painting SISU into a corner so far? I'd say Ann Lucas's 'I'll talk to you about anything' has meant SISU's negotiating positions look increasingly absurd, while the Trust's more reasonable perception recently sees them threatened with a legal letter.
The 'reasonable' position from both paints SISU into a corner far better than trying to butt heads with them.