SGM PASSES 31 votes to 1223

[Prodigal Dragon]

Originally Posted by don1

Full adult members only permitted to vote.

Thanks!

[LlayDragon]

Originally Posted by Inside Left

I don't suppose you will see whether the 31 were wise cautious owls or 'club killers' until the episode has run its course - maybe in ten years time.

It's difficult to see the wisdom in not wishing to even vue the offer.

[Prodigal Dragon]

Originally Posted by Inside Left

I don't suppose you will see whether the 31 were wise cautious owls or 'club killers' until the episode has run its course - maybe in ten years time.

The ‘31’ are irrelevant at the moment.

It is now down to the validity of the buyers and their proposal.

If they are credible — the Board and WST are unlikely to be so positive if they weren’t — we must hope they had the foresight to anticipate the consequences of a second wave and be in this for the long-run.

If they meet all those criteria then we either vote in sufficient numbers to sell (75%) or we risk extinction.

Sooner we discover the details the better. The thought of missing this season is already grating. The thought of no future seasons is not worth thinking about.

[TWREX]

Originally Posted by Lods

Likely no abstaining because it was a one-question ballot. It's just easier to not vote than to say you're abstaining, rather than having a multi-question ballot and choosing to abstain on a question you have no strong opinion about.

The way the board counts an abstention needs to be looked into though, as the AGM proved an abstention is the equivalent to a no vote the way they do it.

Thought I heard last night only yes and the no votes would be counted in the future? Apologies if I was mistaken, think Paul Cox came out with it.

[AndyCobra]

More focus on the 31 no’s than being happy it got through with an overwhelming majority. As we approach the next phase, calling fellow fans club killers and further namecalling, will only make it harder to get a vote through not easier.

From a few comments ive read, one of the reasons a few people voted no was the fact that the initial bid is for 100%. As said n previous posts, I voted yes but im keen we explore in our negotiations, ownership models like Swansea and Wycombe where their Trusts own circa 20%. I think this type of arrangement would hopefully bring both camps to a similar place. This is assuming the bid is credible of course.

[Prodigal Dragon]

Originally Posted by AndyCobra

More focus on the 31 no’s than being happy it got through with an overwhelming majority. As we approach the next phase, calling fellow fans club killers and further namecalling, will only make it harder to get a vote through not easier.

From a few comments ive read, one of the reasons a few people voted no was the fact that the initial bid is for 100%. As said n previous posts, I voted yes but im keen we explore in our negotiations, ownership models like Swansea and Wycombe where their Trusts own circa 20%. I think this type of arrangement would hopefully bring both camps to a similar place. This is assuming the bid is credible of course.

Nothing wrong with having that as a proposal, but would you ‘die in a ditch’ to guarantee some WST involvement, whether that be 5% or 20%?

[Rob]

Originally Posted by AndyCobra

More focus on the 31 no’s than being happy it got through with an overwhelming majority. As we approach the next phase, calling fellow fans club killers and further namecalling, will only make it harder to get a vote through not easier.

From a few comments ive read, one of the reasons a few people voted no was the fact that the initial bid is for 100%. As said n previous posts, I voted yes but im keen we explore in our negotiations, ownership models like Swansea and Wycombe where their Trusts own circa 20%. I think this type of arrangement would hopefully bring both camps to a similar place. This is assuming the bid is credible of course.

Other clubs have shown minority shareholdings are important - and some have 'heritage committees' and the like, so could protect the name, location of where the ground is, badge etc. Such stuff does not mean always blocking, but does mean some element of influence. Obviously I would imagine WST members have this nailed off that they are comfortable with the red lines etc.

Imagine... USA buyer comes in and moves us to the North Wales Soccer Dragons with a ground half in Cheshire could be fun

[Cartman]

Originally Posted by Inside Left

I don't suppose you will see whether the 31 were wise cautious owls or 'club killers' until the episode has run its course - maybe in ten years time.

No that is irrelevant as we weren't selling the club last night. Anyone who doesn't even want to HEAR the offer deserves to take flack as they quite simply don't have the best interests of the club at heart.

"Maybe in ten years time" - yes but what's the alternative in one year's time if we don't sell?

[Prodigal Dragon]

Originally Posted by Rob

Other clubs have shown minority shareholdings are important - and some have 'heritage committees' and the like, so could protect the name, location of where the ground is, badge etc. Such stuff does not mean always blocking, but does mean some element of influence. Obviously I would imagine WST members have this nailed off that they are comfortable with the red lines etc.

Imagine... USA buyer comes in and moves us to the North Wales Soccer Dragons with a ground half in Cheshire could be fun

We could have the Dee as the half-way line!

Men in coracles to rescue the balls should the ‘hoof balls’ fall short!