|
|
 MuddyWaters |
| February 27, 2012, 10:54am |
|
Barley Wine Drinker  Posts: 14,127
Posts Per Day: 2.59
Reputation: 68.15%
Rep Score: +48 / -24
Approval: +32,291
Gold Stars: 236
|
Derailed????? surely a touch on the glass-half-empty side Codger?
If you like, but legally this news effectively changes the landscape of what Trust members were voting on. Those that voted prior to this news may well have voted differently had they had this information to hand, therefore the ballot should be voided with immediate effect. |
|
 Logged |
|
|
|
|
| pontoonlew |
| February 27, 2012, 10:59am |
|
Vodka Drinker  Posts: 5,602
Posts Per Day: 1.00
Reputation: 72.45%
Rep Score: +37 / -15
Approval: +9,109
Gold Stars: 181
|
What a complete and utter farce.
Firstly - great news the Trust will get a place on the Board. Complete common sense.
But how on Earth can the current ballot go ahead now this has happened? I've voted a certain way based on what I thought should have happened. That has now happened and may well have changed my vote. You just cannot change things in the middle of a vote! Incredible. Adds even more weight as to why this should have waited until the end of the season and not taken place now. Surely the result of this is now open to legal challenge?
To be fair mate you've been against this from the start have you not? It's no suprise your looking for a downside, the trust having a place on the board is brilliant and the original idea of the board, if as an added bonus Fenty gives us 200k to its a bigger bonus. The trust will never ever run this club so today's news is the pinical for the trust. |
|
|
|
|
|
| MuddyWaters |
| February 27, 2012, 11:02am |
|
Barley Wine Drinker Posts: 14,127
Posts Per Day: 2.59
Reputation: 68.15%
Rep Score: +48 / -24
Approval: +32,291
Gold Stars: 236
|
To be fair mate you've been against this from the start have you not? It's no suprise your looking for a downside, the trust having a place on the board is brilliant and the original idea of the board, if as an added bonus Fenty gives us 200k to its a bigger bonus. The trust will never ever run this club so today's news is the pinical for the trust.
Is that a new 200k or the 200k that was committed to as part of the 500k to match Mike Parker's 500k? |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
|
| Denby |
| February 27, 2012, 11:03am |
|
 Table Wine Drinker  Posts: 931
Posts Per Day: 0.15
Reputation: 83.37%
Rep Score: +12 / -2
|
If anything, I would imagine that this news would sway more people towards a 'Yes' rather than a 'No' vote.
but now that control of the club could now be within the boardroom without any transferral of shares this is a fundamentally different situation and could mean people are more inclined to vote no? |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
|
| Trawler |
| February 27, 2012, 11:03am |
|
Fine Wine Drinker  Posts: 1,312
Posts Per Day: 0.22
Reputation: 87.32%
Rep Score: +33 / -4
Approval: +915
Gold Stars: 6
|
If you like, but legally this news effectively changes the landscape of what Trust members were voting on. Those that voted prior to this news may well have voted differently had they had this information to hand, therefore the ballot should be voided with immediate effect.
Yes, fair enough. It does mean that those who have already voted may see things in a different light. Perhaps a ballot recall is in order - but unless it is a concrete offer of a seat on the board my vote would still be NO. The plot thickens. |
| "Pound for pound, and class for class, the best football team I have seen in England since the war. In the league they were in they played football nobody else could play. Everything was measured, planned and perfected and you could not wish to see more entertaining football." Bill Shankly, Manager GTFC 1951-54 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Denby |
| February 27, 2012, 11:05am |
|
Table Wine Drinker Posts: 931
Posts Per Day: 0.15
Reputation: 83.37%
Rep Score: +12 / -2
|
Is that a new 200k or the 200k that was committed to as part of the 500k to match Mike Parker's 500k?
you'd be better off asking for the meaning of life |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
|
| Chris |
| February 27, 2012, 11:07am |
|
Table Wine Drinker Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
|
I understand your concern and agree re: the timing (far from ideal), but I would have thought that this would depend on the outcome of the ballot. If anything, I would imagine that this news would sway more people towards a 'Yes' rather than a 'No' vote. If the outcome of the current ballot is 'Yes', then it could be argued that the outcome wouldn't have been affected by this news.
That being the case (swaying people to vote yes), then this seat on the board should be more than just "agreed in principle" should it not, if it going to sway voters (which it will and indeed has -see above)? |
|
|
|
|
|
| MuddyWaters |
| February 27, 2012, 11:08am |
|
Barley Wine Drinker Posts: 14,127
Posts Per Day: 2.59
Reputation: 68.15%
Rep Score: +48 / -24
Approval: +32,291
Gold Stars: 236
|
Yes, fair enough. It does mean that those who have already voted may see things in a different light.
Perhaps a ballot recall is in order - but unless it is a concrete offer of a seat on the board my vote would still be NO.
The plot thickens.
Which leads you to the next question..what is the benefit of a seat on the board if you don't have the shareholding & financial clout to go with it? You could argue that any chance to put forward the view of the fans is a good one but if you look at the vast range of opinions of people on here as a barometer, you could end up trying to please everybody and end up pleasing nobody. |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
|
| Wrawby_Mariner |
| February 27, 2012, 11:13am |
|
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 9,696
Posts Per Day: 1.71
Reputation: 79.42%
Rep Score: +50 / -13
Location: Wrawby
Approval: +862
Gold Stars: 6
|
That being the case (swaying people to vote yes), then this seat on the board should be more than just "agreed in principle" should it not, if it going to sway voters (which it will and indeed has -see above)?
I'm inclined to agree and things have to be clarified from the Club as soon as possible |
|
|
|
|
|
| pontoonlew |
| February 27, 2012, 11:16am |
|
Vodka Drinker Posts: 5,602
Posts Per Day: 1.00
Reputation: 72.45%
Rep Score: +37 / -15
Approval: +9,109
Gold Stars: 181
|
Is that a new 200k or the 200k that was committed to as part of the 500k to match Mike Parker's 500k?
Who knows? I think the people who are against this are the people who are against Fenty as a whole. Think it's time people put aside their thoughts on Fenty and saw the bigger picture, because it's hampering people's views on it. If this was Parker I am sure a lot of you would have a different opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site Home
News
Football
Season
Database
Club
POM
Contact
Home
Calendar
Search
Register
Login
MuddyWaters
Logged
