The problem is that I think the trust are pretty powerless to hold them to account once the yes vote is made. At least in the proposal in its current form.

I get there is a tendency to treat everything coming from the club as bull, and that risks throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

In this case, and I can only speak for me, the vote came down to the risk of them cocking it up and leaving things worse than not starting in the first place. I based that on what I've seen them deliver and the struggle to do the basics right. And also the half truths they they've provided over four years.

In reality we financially probably wouldn't see a benefit for a decade, but we can't do nothing either.

Why oh why couldn't Clem have been the clean break fresh start I thought he was.
-------------
On another note, I voted in the understanding houses were not part of the consent vote.

I've seen some comment online from some that thought it was.

What's going on there.

Agreed, and this relates back to my original comment. IMO we (the fans) have veered wildly from believing everything Clem says (including the old Trust leadership, who I acknowledge aren’t in place now) to kicking out proposals largely due to emotional reasons. I am not a Trust member so couldn’t vote, but if I was I would have voted yes and backed the Trust to hold the owners to account to deliver them.

Airlines taking bookings and money when they know that they are going under.

The due diligence at the time was a sham as it was done by James Spencer and co and they believed everything Morfuni said. They completely ignored his failing U.K. business and other red flags.

Back on point, Oxford are another good example. They’ve now got wealthy owners despite the ground being owned by Kassam who is almost impossible to deal with. Yes they’ve given up on the Kassam now but it didn’t stop them buying the club to begin with.

Trouble is, I can’t cancel until the Government advises citizens not to travel.

Well, I can but I’d lose a shed load.

I think the difference is that the council would have a fairly objective process to consider and validate a proposal, whereas what’s happened here seems to be “we like the plans but don’t trust the owner to deliver them”.

I remember a lot of talk about the Trust doing “due diligence” into Clem when he took over from Lee Power.  Did that due diligence stretch to his expertise in property development?

I think whilst in the air you would be constantly be looking out of the window!

But so could the council or any other owner of the ground, it’s no different to that.

I think my trip to Dubai in November could be a no-no.

I mean, technically it could restrict a competent owner carrying out a legitimate redevelopment - if the voting went against it…