Vote no

[RHYLRED]

Originally Posted by Alan Attack

You could argue those supporters who are not members of the Trust are part of the problem too. If you were staunch anti-Trust ownership, you’d be a member so you have the opportunity to vote them out when the situation arises.

Otherwise, you’re sitting on the sidelines hoping and praying others will make a decision for you. If you say you’re not giving them a penny of your money then fair enough but I’m afraid you too are part of the problem and do not completely understand the process and mechanism for removing the Trust.

If this comes off, those 75%+ supporters who voted to sell should be thanked by supporters who’ve chosen not to be Trust members and want change. Will never happen!

Not thought of it that way, good point.

[dixienormous]

Originally Posted by Alan Attack

You could argue those supporters who are not members of the Trust are part of the problem too. If you were staunch anti-Trust ownership, you’d be a member so you have the opportunity to vote them out when the situation arises.

Otherwise, you’re sitting on the sidelines hoping and praying others will make a decision for you. If you say you’re not giving them a penny of your money then fair enough but I’m afraid you too are part of the problem and do not completely understand the process and mechanism for removing the Trust.

If this comes off, those 75%+ supporters who voted to sell should be thanked by supporters who’ve chosen not to be Trust members and want change. Will never happen!

That's the problem though isn't it? Most fans don't understand the process and why should they? Most are just supporters of a football club who want to see their club do well on a Saturday. Fans don't want to be involved in meetings, committees and politics, only a small minority did and they controlled the club for years, taking us through the worst time in our history.

Usually fans hold protests and vent their displeasure during games or outside homes. This ultimately ends up with the owner selling up and moving on. This couldn't really happen due to the volunteer side of things and the people running the show being 'fans' themselves, even though it was clear as day for a long time the club was falling apart.

The problem is the system, a system our new owners don't want anywhere near the deal. It's a system that stiffles decision making when football is all about making them and making them quickly at times.

[DaveOMac]

I have a feeling there will be more "against" votes than maybe people expect, there's a fair few comments on the WAFC Proposed Takeover Forum that the WST set up post the presentation.

Before I get abuse, I've personally voted "for" all three resolutions, just not sure it's going to be unanimous.

[Ooh aah Paskin]

Originally Posted by DaveOMac

I have a feeling there will be more "against" votes than maybe people expect, there's a fair few comments on the WAFC Proposed Takeover Forum that the WST set up post the presentation.

Before I get abuse, I've personally voted "for" all three resolutions, just not sure it's going to be unanimous.

Yeah, I kind of get that impression.
Wouldn't be surprised to see the resolutions passed with a majority of around 85% or less.

I would hope it gets the necessary 75% at least!

[Alan Attack]

Originally Posted by dixienormous

That's the problem though isn't it? Most fans don't understand the process and why should they? Most are just supporters of a football club who want to see their club do well on a Saturday. Fans don't want to be involved in meetings, committees and politics, only a small minority did and they controlled the club for years, taking us through the worst time in our history.

Usually fans hold protests and vent their displeasure during games or outside homes. This ultimately ends up with the owner selling up and moving on. This couldn't really happen due to the volunteer side of things and the people running the show being 'fans' themselves, even though it was clear as day for a long time the club was falling apart.

The problem is the system, a system our new owners don't want anywhere near the deal. It's a system that stiffles decision making when football is all about making them and making them quickly at times.

It’s hard to disagree with much of your post.

I suppose though it’s in response to those who are anti-Trust and not those who don’t really care who owns the club as long as it’s successful.

If this doesn’t happen, I won’t be blaming those who’ve voted no as they are entitled to have their say. I’m blaming those who would have voted yes if they were members.

[joe]

Originally Posted by dixienormous

That's the problem though isn't it? Most fans don't understand the process and why should they? Most are just supporters of a football club who want to see their club do well on a Saturday. Fans don't want to be involved in meetings, committees and politics, only a small minority did and they controlled the club for years, taking us through the worst time in our history.

Usually fans hold protests and vent their displeasure during games or outside homes. This ultimately ends up with the owner selling up and moving on. This couldn't really happen due to the volunteer side of things and the people running the show being 'fans' themselves, even though it was clear as day for a long time the club was falling apart.

The problem is the system, a system our new owners don't want anywhere near the deal. It's a system that stiffles decision making when football is all about making them and making them quickly at times.

Great post Dixie. Those who want to carry on as we are should form their own club that puts politics before results on the FOOTBALL pitch (the point of a FOOTBALL club) and leave us to get our club back and enjoy the success.

[Dai83]

Have I voted Yes,? of cours I have. I am a WST member, but I I have been very forthright in my wanting of the club to go into private ownership for the past 3 years.

Now I think this opportunity is beyond the realms of fantasy, but I still hold an air of cynicism. A little bit of me does think this could be all about a TV show, but even with that little doubt, I'd rather take the chance to improve all aspects of the club with these 2 for a couple of years ( worst case scenario), compared to the WST ownership, where we are sleep walking into obscurity through the most ridiculous decisions imaginable.

If the WST and Keates & co were to remain here for the next 8 months, I genuinely think we would go down and that would be the end. That's how serious a threat I think the current regime hold to the future of the Football club.

I bow down to our Northern American Overlords, for however long that is.

[DaveOMac]

Originally Posted by Dai83

A little bit of me does think this could be all about a TV show, but even with that little doubt, I'd rather take the chance to improve all aspects of the club with these 2 for a couple of years

This, I actually came off the presentation zoom call with the same niggling feeling that maybe all that they wanted was a cheap platform to make a TV show. However, on reflection, as you've put I still think they offer the club a greater chance of success, and I'm going into that with my eyes open that it might mean short term (single digit years). I still would take that and then see where we are.

[dixienormous]

Originally Posted by Alan Attack

It’s hard to disagree with much of your post.

I suppose though it’s in response to those who are anti-Trust and not those who don’t really care who owns the club as long as it’s successful.

If this doesn’t happen, I won’t be blaming those who’ve voted no as they are entitled to have their say. I’m blaming those who would have voted yes if they were members.

That's the thing, it's difficult to join something you're so passionately against isn't it?

Anyway, it's good to see you back.