WST Vice Chair

[evilelfed]

I am reminded of that song by Whitesnake - altogether now "here I go again...". This always seems to pipe up after a bad defeat.
It's like ghosts - a lot of people think these benevolent investors exist and believe they have seen them - yet most people have seen no evidence at all.
If you don't mind I will remain a sceptic until I see something concrete. Que abuse and accusations I am related to the board.

[Inside Left]

I believe that this 'investor' malarky is pie in the sky.

Putting my business hat on - there is no way I would put up 5K for due dil to anyone let alone a non league outfit being kept afloat by its fans.

PS - Leave the Vice Chair position alone. It is just a position on the board with no additional voting power unless the Chair is absent. Being V CH does not give an automatic place on the club board.

[Phils-an-alki]

Originally Posted by evilelfed

I am reminded of that song by Whitesnake - altogether now "here I go again...". This always seems to pipe up after a bad defeat.
It's like ghosts - a lot of people think these benevolent investors exist and believe they have seen them - yet most people have seen no evidence at all.
If you don't mind I will remain a sceptic until I see something concrete. Que abuse and accusations I am related to the board.

There have been enough red flags now for fans to see all is not what it seems.Whether you choose to take any notice of them is up to the individual.

Any other owners and these flags would have sparked a demand for answers. Not at this club anymore. Apathy rules.

[Quay Red]

Originally Posted by Phils-an-alki

This is also speculation on your part, as is the majority of your post. So whilst calling people out on here for posting what they have heard, rumours, speculating, you're now doing the same in an attempt to discredit the people that contacted Bryn Law.
Not attempting to discredit anyone. Just calling it as I see it. You may view it differently. (your choice)
I'm sure we all read that they didn't sign the NDA based on Lawyers advice which is what most sensible people would do.
This has been debated and still remains unresolved. Some would accept that an NDA is reasonable, others don't. The view of the membership is that it is an important part of the procedure to protect the club.
Saying they backed out because they couldn't follow simple rules is just not the case. Nice try though, although I'm little surprised you've resorted to stuff like this QR. I know you think the sun shines out of a WST glory hole but often there is no smoke without fire and some fans need to open their eyes, you're being taken for a ride to a certain extent and loyalty is being exploited.
Ouch. and unnecessary. The rules are there to be followed. This consortium didn't get to stage 1 and make an official approach. If they were serious then I would have expected them to reveal an interest publicly.
As to the rest, I would have hoped that even you would not try to judge me, I have my own opinions, don't trust anyone and make my own mind up.
If only the WST had the backbone to just come out and say they don't want any help from outside and won't consider any approach to invest or whatever then at least we all know for sure. They way they've done it is just cowardly, just my opinion. Bagger summed it up perfectly a while back on another thread.
If there was no appetite at all for additional funding then the membership wouldn't have approved the gateway process. As far as I'm aware there have only bee a couple of approaches from time wasters or chancers. I look forward to an approach from anyone with a real interest in helping us go forward but not at any cost.
The claim of them being transparent is now laughable too. Its takes some brass neck to still run with that one. The January fiasco and Manny Smith contract blows that out of the water straight away. So lets stop pedalling that myth which can no longer be backed up and has been well and truly exposed.

Personally not bothered about when contracts are signed as once offered and accepted they are legally binding. Odd that it wasn't announced.
As for January, it could and maybe should have been handled better but that was 7 months back. As long as the board have learned a lesson from it then they should be able to manage things better in future.

[Phils-an-alki]

Originally Posted by Quay Red

Personally not bothered about when contracts are signed as once offered and accepted they are legally binding. Odd that it wasn't announced.
As for January, it could and maybe should have been handled better but that was 7 months back. As long as the board have learned a lesson from it then they should be able to manage things better in future.

Missed the point. Its what it exposes them as being capable of i.e. withholding news and keeping secrets and using it as currency with fans to what is "buying" support and thus ensuring self preservation on the board(s).

Its still a far cry of the claims of transparency whichever way its spun, whether you care or not about not being told of a contract renewal is irrelevant.
Apathy is now rife and you've given the perfect example of this by saying its 7 months back (So what, it still happened and got swept under the carpet?) and then saying that as long as they've learned a lesson, (what lesson is that then, actually be transparent as per their own claims?) and they should be able to manage things better in the future is just in my view turning a blind eye to what should be a real eye opener. I'm not sure whats worse, the boards recent underhanded actions or fans turning a blind eye to it.

[The Bapster]

I thought this thread was about the WST Vice chair??????????

[short_gog]

Originally Posted by fluffysheepsupporter

Can't pretend to know all the detail about this as was not party to it . But if it was the case that Pete as chairman has the casting vote in this ( as is normal practice) he is entitled to vote as he alone sees fit. You are entitled to have your own point of view on it but he alone has the final decision

A casting vote normally goes towards the status quo - i.e. if the votes are tied then the voters haven't decided for change therefore the status quo remains - seems that is what has been done here

[Birdy]

Originally Posted by fluffysheepsupporter

As far as I am aware no one on the Board or Trust is dismissing investors out of hand .

Thats the point, you would never know.

[dagg]

Originally Posted by The Bapster

I thought this thread was about the WST Vice chair??????????

It is, but on RP you are allowed to go off topic for a few pages.