| Genuine question - from a Trust Member 19:19 - Nov 5 with 52013 views | marchamjack |
Were The Trust any part of the discussion process to keep Clement?
Thanks in advance. |  |
| Oh,..Dave, what's occuring? |
| |  |
| Genuine question - from a Trust Member on 19:29 - Nov 14 with 1974 views | Uxbridge |
| Genuine question - from a Trust Member on 19:10 - Nov 14 by NeathJack |
Question:
If there is to be a re-vote as the Yanks/Jenkins have moved the goalposts from the original deal voted upon, who will be eligible to vote?
Just those who renewed, or those who were members when the original vote was made? |
Current members. It couldn't be anything else. |  |
| |
| Genuine question - from a Trust Member on 19:30 - Nov 14 with 1970 views | NeathJack |
| Genuine question - from a Trust Member on 19:29 - Nov 14 by Uxbridge |
Current members. It couldn't be anything else. |
If there is to be a re-vote by NeathJack 14 Nov 2017 19:23After the ballot date is announced there should be a window of opportunity for anyone who is not currently a member to sign up (for free imho) and be included in the vote, and for every member on their database to receive a mailshot with an encouragement to rejoin and be a part of the vote.
It should not be a closed shop to just those who renewed say, before today as this will skew he results even further in the favour of accepting the deal due to the number of fans who did not renew as a result of the last vote.
If the Trust really want to be representative of the fanbase then the vote needs to be opened up to as many fans as possible.
|  | | |
| Genuine question - from a Trust Member on 19:37 - Nov 14 with 1940 views | marchamjack |
| Genuine question - from a Trust Member on 19:29 - Nov 14 by Uxbridge |
Current members. It couldn't be anything else. |
As I presumed in fairness.
This time tjough (and this is no dig, just calling it as I saw it and how it looked to many) I wonder what slant, if any, the new incumbents would place on the Trust view preceding any future vote. Honestly, if it arises, I hope the new Trust actively state their position and push for legal action. The Trust will never now get a better opportunity to push for numbers and look to secure a better position in the fray that I hope yet ensues. | |
| Oh,..Dave, what's occuring? |
| |
| Genuine question - from a Trust Member on 21:11 - Nov 14 with 1850 views | Swanzay |
| Genuine question - from a Trust Member on 19:37 - Nov 14 by marchamjack |
As I presumed in fairness.
This time tjough (and this is no dig, just calling it as I saw it and how it looked to many) I wonder what slant, if any, the new incumbents would place on the Trust view preceding any future vote. Honestly, if it arises, I hope the new Trust actively state their position and push for legal action. The Trust will never now get a better opportunity to push for numbers and look to secure a better position in the fray that I hope yet ensues. |
Indeed, the original vote was heavily bias and I quote Phil " It led to the Trust recommending a deal back in the summer to sell some of our shares and move forward with a working relationship."
The new vote needs to be totally impartial!
Bit of an irony, that many who were members who were so frustrated by the direction that the Trust was heading decided not to renew membership this year. On principle and I still stand by that! I truly hope the outcome is not the same and for once in recent history the Trust show some backbone. As a non member I appreciate my view will not mean jack shite!
Ux has stated that there are NDAs in place and that is a real cause for concern and again raises more questions.
It is clear now that the Trust are in a mess and sadly this only plays into the hands on the Yanks as others have said.
Now is the time for openness, communication and transparency on all fronts, sadly I cant see it happening. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
