Delighted to read on here that the super RA is now formally dead in the water. I don't understand how the number of total votes from the first to the second vote decreased by two-thirds but I don't care. I also don't understand that over 70% of those voting actually voted in favour. There was no leave it to the chairman to decide proxy vote so these are individuals who thought this was in our interests. I am convinced in time we will see what a massive bullet we dodged. At least all the time this has wasted is over.

I know F1 is a bit marmite [YUK] in these parts, but if you want to see what being a bit different looks like, watch Brawn - The impossible formula 1 story on BBC iPlayer, 4 episodes.

We are indeed Russ. And due to a battle with Sky I just got the full Sports package for no extra cost indefinitely 👍

I think challenge can occur at any level, big business, small business or within a business. It also depends of course on what you call big business. Is Asos really a big business? I suspect Nick Robertosn might be more useful because I'd call it at most medium sized. How about Cherry Red Records? We should challenge but people also have to learn to accept challenge even when they are an expert on a subject. I accidentally watched the start of the October SGM and there was some wonderful body language from someone not good at dealing with challenge.

A lot of business owners have been elected to the board in the past from what I remember. But unless it’s a big business then they possibly won’t be used to stringent challenge or strong governance. A competent mix would be good.

scotty - surely Michele originally stood for election to the DT Board and was elected by the membership. After that, it would be the DT Board that would vote to appoint her to any given role - which they have obviously done - and to keep her there for as long as they felt happy with the job she was doing (or that they felt there was no-one better to replace her).

Mandy is great. I'm going for a 1-2 win tonight because we basically need it.

My take on the Erik questions were that they a message to the membership, to ask difficult question and call people to account. It was directed at the DTB, knowing that ML could, and probably would have had a handle on the issue and conversed them back. No this was clearly about the top-table and their lack of nous and running a business of this magnitude. It was a smoke bomb designed to flush out the lack of important knowledge base across the whole board. I suspect had Grahame Price been there, he'd have answered, but is that his gig?

Don't think DT members have voted Michele into any of her current roles. I've said before, my issue is NOT with Michele but the fact she is covering so many roles and others should be limiting that. Had Michele answered the question, we would have got a lot of info. And in fairness she would have been on the DTB when those budget talks took place. But the point of the question raised was what the DTB members on the table understood. Her position is DT Trasurer isn't helping the Board in my opinion. They tend to defer to her. The 400K issue yesterday. Ivor questioning Graeme's comment last AGM. Watch the body language on the table at these SGM's. It is why an important criteria in my Election choices are people I think will be strong enough to debate. That means utilising Michele's skill and knowledge but not simply defering.

I’m saying Little has invested relative peanuts while having several fingers in club pies - she arguably runs the show. Our model allows people to become (almost) as powerful as club owners for EFL pennies.

KD - she is in her position because DT members and the DT board have voted her there. Nowt to do with how many shares or bonds she may or may not hold. Unless you are suggesting DT members, then DTB members elected her because she is a bond holder? Not a great primary criterion for such a choice!

Timmy has a point. Taking any position of responsibility in the club or, more particulalry, the DT means that you will get slagged off here and on other social media with very little thanks unless your name is Mandy.

Self managing your investment in semi retirement by getting involved in the company you've invested in. Nowt wrong there.

Bargain. She gets to play EFL chair (kinda) for a relative peanuts upfront investment that's repayable with interest.

Good for her! I am sure those that could buy bonds bought them, to the level they felt comfortable with.

£152,000 I think.

What's Little's investment, about 100K? For the amount of influence she has, that's very cheap for an EFL club. And she makes a profit.

Maybe do something identifiably good and receive some praise.

If Michelle wasn’t there, she’d get criticised, if she didn’t have a big bond investment she’d be criticised for lack of alignment. Whatever she does, she’s criticised, she can’t win, I’m surprised she doesn’t say sod this !

She is DT Treasurer so I don't object to her being there, I do object that she is expected to bail out the likes of Angus when he is floundering badly. As was pointed out by the questioner, the question was not addressed to her.

Fair enough Scotty - she needs to pick a role and let someone else do the other(s).

And having trawled the prospects interviews, the only vaguely sensible response to the question of 'what's your idea to deal with the annual losses of roughly £1.5m' was that's the PLC/senior employees gig.

Typo on my behalf Trigger. Meant to say DT Treasurer. Although of course neither the Treasurer nor Secretary have a place on the Board. The question from the floor was looking to get a view on the Boards understanding of their role in oversighting the Budgets which is arguably one of their key tasks.

57 old farts.

Good grief is it any wonder anyone under 30 doesn't want to engage. What a god awful meeting in delivery, vibe, response and being high jacked by former DTB'ers.