With the extraordinary decision to give away trust membership for ST holders i doubt we'll get a 50% turnout if we do the n 75% yes vote is a very high hurdle to overcome.

I think your summary of things is exactly why the club needs to accept financial failure to rid it of the people involved in the ongoing running of things who, it could be argued, seem to have alternative motivations than making this a successful football club on an ongoing basis.

The trouble is yes or no, whatever is delivered has the whiff of no confidence in the people to deliver upon it. Sadly they have proven themselves as a collective ( not all individuals btw) to see a shit show happening and not read the room. Apart from those that stood down/ sought re-election or decided that they'd recluse themselves from the ballot when there was clear misguided meddling of the election, in spirit and with dubious advice and misplaced loyalties to members of the ESG, nobody comes out looking good. In meetings, those public faces, there are a few standout performers that can take an audience with them, yet for the reasons above, they lack the moral compass to demand that the election was stopped and fair play was seen to be done. I hate with a passion being a critic of volunteers, absolutely hate it. That however doesn't excuse the stance they've taken or abuse of power they yield.

Almost everyone I spoke to about it are not voting unless it goes to the second vote.

I don't love it, let's be clear.

Trig - I don't want the club to go under or out of the league. I didn't vote on it a year ago because I thought the prospectus was dishonest. I think the new one is more realistic. I have fundamental problems with the approach of the board, but over the last 18 months, various efforts have been made to address this which have all come to nothing. We are stewards of the club and have to be pragmatic.

17th June 2027 will be 50 years since were elected into the Football League. I wonder if the club will do something to mark the anniversary.

That is a quite disappointing attitude nicander.

tbh all, I am likely to hold my nose and vote in favour, simply because we are out of time and have no other options that the board will present. I think we have a basic responsibility as owners of the club not to take it under, and I think (all noise aside) that is the likely outcome otherwise. Will it help long-term? Possibly not. Do I trust the board? No. Do I find they go out of their way to play games and look shifty? Bafflingly so. But we cannot change them and here we are.

Karen their values appear to be pretty poor values to have as well.

That’s not good reading, Mr L

I am sitting in the non-voting camp having previously been a yes voter. Too many emails, tells me things need a closer look. The Independent Football Regulator and introducing compulsory Know Your Customer check has contributed to that decision, since The response on discord has confirmed the board didn't know the impact.

That seems to be the best option Slough. And I think they can see that they’re not going to reach the threshold hence pieces like that.

Starting to think not voting at all is better than voting No to 50.1

OI - maybe only a bit unique? ;o)

Voting no, have absolutely no faith in the judgement of both boards. And wouldn’t trust them to inform us of all offers not just those that align to their views/values.

I thought doobs had been told we could vote after the meeting so we could decide after listening to the discussion. I guess I'll vote Saturday but more reasons for resignations to be necessary. Including them writing "so unique" instead of "unique" ;)

Vote No, let's get our situation sorted now rather than 2 seasons time when we will be back to square 1 and no equity to sell..

Maybe now they've enfranchised 3500+ ST holders it's time to ask if we're willing to sell the whole kit & kaboodle

(And that’s not an attack on you Timmy you’re more than entitled to your opinion and vote)

Getting desperate [Link] Timmy’s post sums up the reason to NOT vote - the current boards have shown by their ongoing poor behaviour that they are not to be trusted and lack the capability to make good decisions about what comes next and especially after minority investment money inevitably runs out.

Stu- gives the club, Angus et al more runway to sort us out by voting yes. The important vote will be on who the minority investors are

I voted FOR to throw them a lifeline. What they do with that is up to them ...

That’s a very good point WJ. The lack of attention to detail is consistent across much of the Trust’s actions.

One of the many problems with the voting form is that if you wish to vote on the constitution, but not on 50%+1 or vice versa you end up having to abstain therefore adding to the turnout