The Share Issue statement from the OS last Friday

Quoted from 1600

With regards the proposal, what very difficult position have they found themselves in ?

From the outside looking in (and that's all I can do), it looks like (rightly or wrongly) they've pro-actively set about finding a "solution" to a potential problem situation, and come up with a proposal the consequences of which (should the vote not carry to eliminate the "problem") still aren't clear !

It also begs the question, were they right to engage and find themselves in this "difficult position" in the first place or leave it to JF himself to make his own decisions ?

to quote The Old Codger from a different thread:

"[David Burns] asked why the share issue vote needed to happen so soon and why it couldn't have waited till the end of the season - answer was that Fenty asked for it to be resolved before he would put more money in and that was also before news of the Bennett transfer - point being that Burns basically got the bloke to admit that Fenty had forced/coerced the issue."

I think that may have put them in quite a difficult position.

i don't understand how the trust can ballot it's members when negotiations are still taking place (re the seat on the board comments above)

The seat on the board comments maybe are a little premature

If the bloke on the radio is a Trust board member, I am seriously concerned about how the Trust feel they can have any serious influence on the football club going forward. There was a shortage of fact and knowledge and the Trust seem in danger of just becoming yet another yes man for Fenty.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

If the bloke on the radio is a Trust board member, I am seriously concerned about how the Trust feel they can have any serious influence on the football club going forward. There was a shortage of fact and knowledge and the Trust seem in danger of just becoming yet another yes man for Fenty.

Maybe the interviewee just wasnt in a position to answer the question?

Quoted from MuddyWaters

If the bloke on the radio is a Trust board member, I am seriously concerned about how the Trust feel they can have any serious influence on the football club going forward. There was a shortage of fact and knowledge and the Trust seem in danger of just becoming yet another yes man for Fenty.

While I am on the Trust board we will never be a "yes man" for anyone.

Just seems to me that The Trust will always be negotiating from a position of weakness and all today's interviewee did was to confirm that.

Quoted from Chris

While I am on the Trust board we will never be a "yes man" for anyone.

Unless and until you have some financial clout then you have no negotiating strength, no money, no clout - fundamental business principle.

Not quite Old Codger. It does have clout - 1/2 million shares worth which is precisely what John Fenty was he was worried about ("control outside the boardroom"). This is a lever.  Until March 5.

Quoted from 1600

Must admit I'm suprised to see the balance swing back as much as it has but that's only on the fishy.
Can you seriously see it not passing ?

I take what you mean about not voting out of principle but still tempted to vote yes for the reasons I've given.

No-one can give me a satisfactory answer to what happens if things stay the same and we're floating around hoping things stay good on the pitch, if only because we fear Fenty getting itchy feet. (well most of us !)

If the vote passes we all know where we stand short-term.

What concerns me more is the following scenario....

- Vote passes
- We don't get promoted this season
- Fans are asked do you want big competitive budget (guess that'll put us in more financial trouble) or small uncompetitive one ?
- Worry if members decide big budget they get blame if we miss out on promotion, club goes bust etc.
- Equally small budget, we rot in the BSP, lose money, maybe go bust anyway.

Could be a lose-lose situation.

But at the end of the day, maybe that's what JF is facing himself ?!

Is he running out of money fast or just getting sick of all the stick ?

I fear it will be passed going by the comments expressed on the Fishy (obv subject to the usual comments about how many people on here are actually eligible to vote, and whether the Fishyites are representative). But until March 5 I'll still try!

I understand your point about ending the uncertainty and wanting to end the uncertainty. But if you set that aside how do you think the pros and cons weigh up?

"when faced with uncertainty or a problem, particularly an ambiguous problem we prefer to do something, in fact we are happier doing anything, even if it counterproductive, rather than doing nothing, even if doing nothing is the best course of action"
http://ambiguityadvantage.blogspot.com/2008/02/action-bias-in-decision-making-problem.html

Whether you vote yes, nor or abstain, there's still going to be uncertainty and risk. Track record of the last few years would suggest that things could quite easily get worse.  The debt has got bigger and bigger yet we've got nothing to show for it in terms of league position.

Uncertainty puts a lot of pressure on people and this can be used (I'm not saying it is here) deliberately. In the past I've been in situations where I was told my job was at risk. I was actually relieved once I knew I was going.

Some of the uncertainty could be dispelled by the staement of a few facts. Like when and in what instalment will the Ryan Bennett money be paid? That might cover this season's shortage at the time it's needed.  if it is, why this proposal now? If the Trust doesn't know the answer it should ask the question.