I don't know. All I am saying is that you are presenting with a degree of certainty that we would not have kept our ground. I'm saying it is far less definite. AFC Wimbledon don't have their own stadium but neither did Wimbledon FC. Darlington 1883 don't but neither did Darlington FC. In Scotland Rangers and Airdireonians have kept their grounds so it is entirely possible.
If I gave the impression it was a certainty that we would have lost our ground, then I am sorry. Nevertheless, we had to have some cash to buy it back from the administrator, because by the terms of his appointment, he cannot just give it away. I am not sure where else that cash was coming from.
Maybe it comes down to the value of the land and if it can be sold to a developer or if it makes more sense to keep it as a going concern as a football ground.
That is very true, but even if it was to be kept as a football ground, the administrator needed to be paid by somebody. My guess is that he would have had a valuation done and he would have found that everything north or the north stand was green belt with no building value. That still leaves a lot of land with a potential building value. Many developers would not touch it because of adverse local reaction, but there is always someone who thinks they can turn a profit. Even being aware of these things at the time did not convince me that my club was safe. I was mightily relieved when Patrick Cryne stepped in, hence the depth of my gratitude.
Lady Kaht (SWMBO) says that had we achieved the full value for players (especially John Stones) then the economics of the Academy might have looked somewhat different.