Redevelopment vote

[horlock07]

The club won't win over SO69, but don't need to. With enough safeguards in place (let's start with proof of funds, appointing an independent project manager and committing to a second vote before shovels hit the ground) then I think they get to 75%.

On the first issue, working in the sector, I'm not sure what people expect them to provide in terms of proof of funds, unless they are planning to self fund, which would (rightly) set all manner of red flags off and hares running until it gets planning permission and they go out to the lending market they will have literally no clue exactly who is funding and under what terms?

Secondly no idea how an Independent Project Manager would work, they will always be acting in the interest of whoever is paying them (or they bloody well should be!) so its going to be hardly independent.

Second vote will have to happen whatever happens so that would be a start.

Stubborn ownership meets lost fan base, so basically rock and hard place.  

[tans]

Not listened yet, am going to when i go for my walk in a bit

[Pericardinho]

A 50/50 split is no victory. I am alarmed it was that close.

The fan base is so split, and it absolutely shouldn’t be.

I look back at the likes of Blackpool and most recently Reading. How they were all in it together and their communities have grown stronger as a result.

I fear we’ll never achieve this.

[Frigby Daser]

The result is another reminder that we live in an echo chamber.

That's 50% of Trust members, who (on the whole) are more engaged, informed and anti-Morfuni than the wider fanbase at large. Unless Adam Hart and Zav Austin contributed 300 of those votes, it suggests that the "NO" vote is, taking the wider fanbase, in a minority.

[Matchworn Shirts]

Enough people have been convinced that he 'saved the club' and that if he left, there would be nobody interested in buying the club. A large number of these people refuse to listen to any views or valid, provable evidence that does not align with their mindset

[Peter Venkman]

Enough people have been convinced that he 'saved the club' and that if he left, there would be nobody interested in buying the club. A large number of these people refuse to listen to any views or valid, provable evidence that does not align with their mindset

This.

[horlock07]

There will be a plethora of reasons why people voted yes (or no in fact), apologies, but a huge part of the problem with the split in the fanbase is being, I suspect, driven by the condescending and provocative language used by parties on both sides of the argument just making the potential for a conciliation between all sides nigh impossible.

[Bob's Orange]

Pray for Dick Mattick's garage.

[Pericardinho]

Enough people have been convinced that he 'saved the club' and that if he left, there would be nobody interested in buying the club. A large number of these people refuse to listen to any views or valid, provable evidence that does not align with their mindset

Whilst I 100% agree there's a lot of fans like this, I just didn't think they would represent roughly 50% of voting trust members. I had perhaps hoped, that the majority of the people you described were of the older demographic, with less access to the goings on behind the scenes and who may not have even been trust members.

[BenTheRed]

I can imagine the club will be surprised they received as many yes votes as they did. You would expect them to have a statement already line up, giviing their reaction to the vote. The tone will be interesting..

I have no idea what the next steps are - prooving source of funds and apointing an independant project manager is a bit ridiculaous imo and will make things harder for the club progress - Like, I bet no other ownwers have to work under these conditions. But also, I can't see the required swing from No to Yes in another vote - regardless of what Clem says or who pens an open letter, unless Clem leaves?  and someone else is given a clean slate..

I also think the development could be derisked by starting on the stratton bank and I could switch my vote - they don't get the ROI, but less chance of ruining the one good stand.. what could go wrong...

[4D]

You have to think there's probably a lot of, dare I say it, older trust members who don't see all the online stuff.

Was there a large uptake of trust membership this last year? 

[Frigby Daser]

I am sure the well-oiled PR machine is in full swing.

If they provided a conciliatory tone, they don't lose any votes and may swing a few their way.

But my bet is that the tone will be aggressive, loosely refer to unhelpful fans groups, talk about saving the club, and entrench existing views.

[Oaksey Moonraker]

On the first issue, working in the sector, I'm not sure what people expect them to provide in terms of proof of funds, unless they are planning to self fund, which would (rightly) set all manner of red flags off and hares running until it gets planning permission and they go out to the lending market they will have literally no clue exactly who is funding and under what terms?

Secondly no idea how an Independent Project Manager would work, they will always be acting in the interest of whoever is paying them (or they bloody well should be!) so its going to be hardly independent.

Second vote will have to happen whatever happens so that would be a start.

Stubborn ownership meets lost fan base, so basically rock and hard place.  

Is there not an option where the funding when work commenced is held in 3rd party bank account and money drawn down to pay contractors. The JV could have visibility of that account to give transparency.

To me the club just need to work a bit harder to convince more of the Supporter base. The business plan and Q&A Responses were at the last minute.

Do that work up front, be clear on the message and a business plan covering all scenarios not pie in the sky Championship football.

[cambs _red]

This is an echo chamber, with burgeoning conspiracy theories.

Reminds me of another vote that didn't go the way some people on here wanted - it's old people, it's ill informed people, it's a fix.  Give it five minutes and it'll be Russian interference.

I suspect that a number of people who voted yes, just wanted to see some much needed development and positivity on the ground.  They probably had a load of concerns, but ultimately the vote was on the development and it's needed.  It doesn't mean they are uber Clem fans, far from it.

It's firmly back in the hands of the club.  How they react will be interesting and informative.  Hope they respond positively, but their natural response in the past has been to lash out.

[Ardiles]

This is an echo chamber, with burgeoning conspiracy theories.

If you're right, there will be a push to flood the Trust with new members who are less likely to have a dim view of the owners' associations & their perceived competence to deliver something like this.