Poll
Question: How have you voted?
Yes - 9 (7.9%)
No - 64 (56.1%)
I am a trust member but still undecided - 2 (1.8%)
I am not a trust member, so cannot vote - 39 (34.2%)
Total Voters: 114

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Redevelopment vote  (Read 7439 times)
Ƭ̵̬̊: The Artist Formerly Known as CWIG
TOLD YOU SO

Offline Offline

Posts: 8439





Ignore
« Reply #30 on: Monday, June 9, 2025, 11:00:36 »

How many trust members are there out of interest on the potential echo chamber point?
Logged
Berniman
Sits in front of JFW

Offline Offline

Posts: 11348


Miserable cnut (AKA Happy Clapper)




Ignore
« Reply #31 on: Monday, June 9, 2025, 11:04:35 »

Just shy of 1300 eligible to vote I think i remember
Logged

“Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.” ― Marcus Aurelius

When somebody shouts STOP! I never know if it's in the name of love, if it's HAMMER TIME, or if I should collaborate and listen...
Nemo
Shit Bacon

Online Online

Posts: 23544





Ignore
« Reply #32 on: Monday, June 9, 2025, 11:15:57 »

1,260 from the original email unless Bennett's added any more in last minute.

Would mean turnout needs to be at least 630 and 315 is enough to block anything.
Logged
Ƭ̵̬̊: The Artist Formerly Known as CWIG
TOLD YOU SO

Offline Offline

Posts: 8439





Ignore
« Reply #33 on: Monday, June 9, 2025, 11:23:54 »

So those votes there represent about 5% then to put that in to perspective.
Logged
reeves4england

Offline Offline

Posts: 16118


We'll never die!




Ignore
« Reply #34 on: Tuesday, June 10, 2025, 06:16:21 »

Finally submitted my vote. Same as most on here by the looks of things. No problem with the plans, but need safeguards regarding build quality, ethical procurement and value for money for the club before I can have any confidence in the project.

Have amended my poll vote to 'No' to reflect this.
Logged
Power to people

Offline Offline

Posts: 6579





Ignore
« Reply #35 on: Tuesday, June 10, 2025, 18:00:41 »

I voted No, there wasn't any way I could have votes yes, I just could not trust the current lot to get it right and not cause long term damage to the club, I did add in various comments as well around why I voted No as I felt I need to give reasons.

I presume the Trust will print a selection of comments should the vote be a No to backup why it has been voted that way.
Logged
McGurk's Missus
Has An Unhealthy Obsession With Bleach

Offline Offline

Posts: 10666


Has A Hardon For McGurk


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #36 on: Tuesday, June 10, 2025, 18:08:11 »


I presume the Trust will print a selection of comments should the vote be a No to backup why it has been voted that way.


It would seem sensible if consensus say ''No''. It would {in an ideal world} make the current ownership more aware of their unpopularity. Alas, I doubt it would change their mindset  Roll Eyes
Logged


'Incessant Nonsense'

______________________________________________________________

'I'm gonna tell you the secret.
There's a threat, you end it and you don't feel ashamed about enjoying it.
You smell the gunpowder and you see the blood, you know what that means?
It means you're alive. You've won.
You take the heads so that you don't ever forget.'
No Longer Posh Red
Not Posh any more!

Online Online

Posts: 8125





Ignore
« Reply #37 on: Tuesday, June 10, 2025, 18:10:57 »

I presume the Trust will print a selection of comments should the vote be a No to backup why it has been voted that way.

Based on the comments here & elsewhere I think most have voted no due to the people in charge of the club & therefore the development.

It does mean that the only hope Clem has of getting a Yes from the Trust members is to sell up to someone else.

The problem is, if he does sell up would we trust the new owners without any track record, or will it just be another Clem/Power/Jed clone
Logged

STFC 4 Arsenal 3, the best birthday present ever
Ƭ̵̬̊: The Artist Formerly Known as CWIG
TOLD YOU SO

Offline Offline

Posts: 8439





Ignore
« Reply #38 on: Wednesday, June 11, 2025, 15:57:41 »

roughly 15% yes/85% no, but only represents roughly 5% of those eligible to vote.

Now to see how the other 95% voted.
Logged
tans
You spin me right round baby right round

Online Online

Posts: 26725





Ignore
« Reply #39 on: Wednesday, June 11, 2025, 16:22:08 »

Results on friday
Logged
Batch
Not a Batch

Offline Offline

Posts: 57721





Ignore
« Reply #40 on: Wednesday, June 11, 2025, 17:46:50 »

Just hope it was a high turnout with a strong result.
Logged
No Longer Posh Red
Not Posh any more!

Online Online

Posts: 8125





Ignore
« Reply #41 on: Wednesday, June 11, 2025, 17:57:37 »

Just hope it was a high turnout with a strong result.

I hope it’s a big No vote, and that the reasons given are lack of trust that the owners can deliver it
Logged

STFC 4 Arsenal 3, the best birthday present ever
RobertT

Offline Offline

Posts: 12305




Ignore
« Reply #42 on: Wednesday, June 11, 2025, 18:05:55 »

I see that the Chelsea group that owns the ground and name of Chelsea have proven to be obstinate bastards to their club at times as well (in a good way I think).
Logged
ron dodgers

Offline Offline

Posts: 2740


shaddap your face




Ignore
« Reply #43 on: Wednesday, June 11, 2025, 18:51:38 »

 was tha the The Chelsea Pitch Owners Rob?
Logged
RobertT

Offline Offline

Posts: 12305




Ignore
« Reply #44 on: Wednesday, June 11, 2025, 20:08:58 »

Yes, they have blocked moves away from Stamford Bridge in the past, once with a vote that had more than 50% in favour.  They similarly have a 75%+ level to reach to agree proposals.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7   Go Up
Print
Jump to: