Could you share some examples of construction deals made with contracts that watertight?
Sounds like a lawyers' paradise to me. Anything goes wrong and it goes to court, Messrs Sue, Grabbit and Runne of Cheapside would be rubbing their hands with joy.
And what would there be to there to stop the company in question doing Lord knows what once it had fulfilled the contract?
No one would commit the amount of money required to build a new ground if they didn't want to make it a success, especially if those involved were reputable across the world of cricket.
For the VAST majority of big investors, success = making large amounts of money. It there was more money to be made by staging baseball or rock concerts, or purely staging T20 or - god help us - T10 cricket ......
Nothing wrong with concerts. Lancashire have managed to balance concerts and cricket for years. It also allows them to take county cricket to Southport and Blackpool. In fact over half the county grounds seem to host concerts across the cricket season these days. Baseball wouldn't be going anyway that doesn't have a minimum capacity of 50k, so you can rule that out.
A new ground would hopefully mean us being awarded a T20/16.4 franchise and all the money that comes with it, which may well in turn lead to the return of out-ground cricket that the majority of members clamour for. I'm sure they'd have no issue funding games at Colchester and Ilford for Essex whilst the Sky Sports mob have their hit and giggle fun at the new place.
By the time your theoretical ground is finished, would 16.4 still be around? Who knows?
The concerts/baseball examples are just .. examples. The point is that new owners will, in all probability, be looking to maximise profits, and if something else other than cricket could make more money, they'd certainly be considering it.
And I still wait for you to share some examples of construction deals made with contracts as watertight as you require.
I'm not a lawyer, why would I have any examples? It's a theory.
And yes the 16.4 will still be around in some shape or form. It's here until 2028 for certain and the competition/teams will have been sold off to private investors long before that deal becomes even close to expiring, which it never will as Sky will simply renew it as they did earlier this year.
I'd go as far as to say Essex's future as a full-time professional cricket club is far less secure than that of the 16.4. Yep, hard to hear but that's the reality at present.
As for Lancashire, they made a £3m profit last year and that will probably rise again this year following an Ashes summer. The reason a few members are pissed off is because they haven't won anything in a few years, mainly due to their awful coach (Chapple) and cricket staff. Yet, they finished runners-ups in three different competitions in 2022. Bet those members wouldn't have been moaning had they won the treble!
They should be grateful that whatever happens, they'll definitely have a full-time county club to support in years to come. Plus as Andy said, that lot could start an argument in an empty room...
