@LX1 said: @Username Yes. I thought it was Legacy members only but a lot of posters said they don't have a vote so maybe it was open to all Trust members
I'm not a Legacy member but am a Trust member and was given a vote online so i voted yes to accept.
Yes. It was. Sad and very rude.
To try to rationalise it I am wondering if people don't want to hear anything that might burst their positive vote yes bubble as I would hope most people would have some doubts.
The attitude and tone of the questions didn't help
The first question the woman asked was sensible and the reception was fine.
Surely you are @robin . Maybe you're thinking you needed to physically do something to become one, when in reality it was automatic on being a trust member and being a 4 year season ticket holder.
Makes me think going forward. 4 years + membership of Trust automatically makes one a Legacy member, but should it? To take up such a responsible position perhaps one ought to actively join up and accept that responsibility?
It wasn't clear to me how many legacy members were engaged with the meeting.
At one point they said that around 160 people were viewing online in addition to the 300 odd in the room, and suggested all of them would be able to vote. I was watching online and I cannot vote, and based on the comments it seemed like there were many others like me.
Does anyone know why only legacy members could attend the meeting in person, but non legacy members could view it online? Was it down to space restrictions in the venue?
Based off numbers in the room & online, I'd guess about 50% of legacy members were there. I do wonder how many of the remainder are engaged with this process at all if they don't read emails / social media. It might not be apathy that decides this but simply a lack of awareness.
I also watched online and i'm not a legacy member.
I have a question. Since RC would not own AP, and would pay FALL rent to play at AP, is there anything in the proposal to stop RC moving the club from AP at some point in the future?
Knowing that franchising of sports teams in the US is the norm, he might decide to ground share with MK Dons or build a new stadium 80 miles away.
@Stewie63 said:
I also watched online and i'm not a legacy member.
I have a question. Since RC would not own AP, and would pay FALL rent to play at AP, is there anything in the proposal to stop RC moving the club from AP at some point in the future?
Knowing that franchising of sports teams in the US is the norm, he might decide to ground share with MK Dons or build a new stadium 80 miles away.
It was mentioned that the club cannot be moved more than 5 miles away from Adams Park.
Adam Cecil tried to ask that question and was basically brushed aside by David Smith, that since Rob was committed to paying rent to FALL for the use of AP, Rob would have to continue letting WWFC play there. Not sure if he could continue to pay the rent, but then move the club to a different ground somewhere else or not.
@Swiss_Exile said:
It wasn't clear to me how many legacy members were engaged with the meeting.
At one point they said that around 160 people were viewing online in addition to the 300 odd in the room, and suggested all of them would be able to vote. I was watching online and I cannot vote, and based on the comments it seemed like there were many others like me.
Does anyone know why only legacy members could attend the meeting in person, but non legacy members could view it online? Was it down to space restrictions in the venue?
Based off numbers in the room & online, I'd guess about 50% of legacy members were there. I do wonder how many of the remainder are engaged with this process at all if they don't read emails / social media. It might not be apathy that decides this but simply a lack of awareness.
It could happen that people are oblivious and unaware of their vote.
However, for someone committed enough to have bought season tickets for 4 years in a row and physically sign up to the trust, it'd be quite a stretch for that many people to have...
1) not bothered reading any emails
2) not seen anything on social media
3)not read anything in the paper
4)not talked to anyone they know about it all.
5)not heard anyone talk about it near them at games
Not sure if the club also send stuff in the post...add that as a number 6 if they do.
If someone really insists in living in that level of bubble,
1) it's amazing they ever managed to qualify in the first place
2) there really is nothing more you can do bar phone them up, and almost force them to vote.
As of 10am this morning, 49% of all eligible members had submitted their vote online, and we urge all members to make sure they vote before the deadline of midnight on Tuesday 29th October.
most 4 season ticket holders and trust members will be there on Saturday for the Sunderland game including the 40 odd that are not on email...perhaps and announcement can be made before the kick off and at half time. If they haven't seen any of the commentary nline or attended previous meeting with Rob and Pete etc though it is worrying they may be making a less informed choice. I suspect Midweek evening and being online just when putting kids to bed etc may have stopped some attending etc
hope my question wasnt too daft by the way...the eagle eyed will now see I am outed...asked about how the rent value and sale value were reached and while not completely happy with answers ...essentially we made educated guess was the Board response ...I do appreciate that these values are only what someone will pay..its no good us feeling the club is worth 10 million when someone will only pay 2.2!
@Right_in_the_Middle said: @NiceCarrots is the modern day version of flying over WW2 Germany dropping propoganda leaflets. No way of knowing if it's true and not rsvp address.
It's quite hard to know if he's just plain arrogant, or genuinely can't work out how the forum works.
Any point he’s trying to make is lost in my annoyance that he ignores every question anyone on here puts to him.
it trust able to retain 25% (if) again I read it that the Trust would benefit if in three seasons time they sell onto a Russiam oligarch who wants to take us into the Premiership...so we are currently along for the ride too and if they improve the facilities and value of the club the supporters Trust also benefits...likewise taking rough with smooth as a continued shareholder ...if the losses continue the Trust feels the pain too...but we can't have our vegan burger and eat it...if we want out of any responsibility then we as a collective vote sell our share
Wondered if the club had a Will donating package like every donkey sanctuary in the country. Frank Adam's did so perhaps we could all chip in with donations in coming years to keep the Trust's 25% as it will probably be the stress of watching Wycombe winning 4 -3 in the 96th minute that kills us all
@Stewie63 said:
I also watched online and i'm not a legacy member.
I have a question. Since RC would not own AP, and would pay FALL rent to play at AP, is there anything in the proposal to stop RC moving the club from AP at some point in the future?
Knowing that franchising of sports teams in the US is the norm, he might decide to ground share with MK Dons or build a new stadium 80 miles away.
It was mentioned that the club cannot be moved more than 5 miles away from Adams Park.
I didn't catch the bit during the live feed (which cut out a few times for me) where it was explicitly stated that the enshrined right to keep WWFC within 5 miles of AP was retained, but it was pointedly missing in the summary that was sent out to legacy members on Monday evening. I won't be able to go to AP until Saturday to view the full text, so I won't be able to see for myself to make a judgement on that.
@Right_in_the_Middle said: @NiceCarrots is the modern day version of flying over WW2 Germany dropping propoganda leaflets. No way of knowing if it's true and not rsvp address.
It's quite hard to know if he's just plain arrogant, or genuinely can't work out how the forum works.
Any point he’s trying to make is lost in my annoyance that he ignores every question anyone on here puts to him.
It's because he's not here to debate with anyone, or have a discussion.
Marlow chair sang from a similar hymn sheet, but at least engaged.
@Stewie63 said:
I also watched online and i'm not a legacy member.
I have a question. Since RC would not own AP, and would pay FALL rent to play at AP, is there anything in the proposal to stop RC moving the club from AP at some point in the future?
Knowing that franchising of sports teams in the US is the norm, he might decide to ground share with MK Dons or build a new stadium 80 miles away.
It was mentioned that the club cannot be moved more than 5 miles away from Adams Park.
I didn't catch the bit during the live feed (which cut out a few times for me) where it was explicitly stated that the enshrined right to keep WWFC within 5 miles of AP was retained, but it was pointedly missing in the summary that was sent out to legacy members on Monday evening. I won't be able to go to AP until Saturday to view the full text, so I won't be able to see for myself to make a judgement on that.
I think we have to accept that once 75% of the club is in private hands all bets are off.
@Fit2drop said:
l. It was disappointing that over 80% of the audience were very mature (a polite way of putting it). Hopefully the younger fans have watched on line.
I mean this sincerely - has the club verified that all legacy members eligible to vote are actually alive?
I did raise this very point with Trevor after a close friend died recently. The Trust sent out an email asking for replies to verify the email address.
@floyd said:
I think we have to accept that once 75% of the club is in private hands all bets are off.
According to the summary of the deal the proverbial bets would be off if WWT had less than 12.5% shares (at which point the enshrined rights are no longer 'enshrined' or 'rights'), though I take your point that once the vote is concluded (one presumes with a very large majority in favour) the horse will have long bolted out of sight and the accountability for unpopular decisions may potentially be less than the current setup.
Comments
Thanks, now to remember when it was asked!
@Right_in_the_Middle I was looking for 'leave' and 'remain' but neither option was there. So now I don't know what to do.
I'm not a Legacy member but am a Trust member and was given a vote online so i voted yes to accept.
How long have you had a season ticket?
Bit concerning if people other than Trust members are able to vote! Are you sure you’re not a Legacy Member @robin ?
The first question the woman asked was sensible and the reception was fine.
The second one was daft.
Surely you are @robin . Maybe you're thinking you needed to physically do something to become one, when in reality it was automatic on being a trust member and being a 4 year season ticket holder.
Makes me think going forward. 4 years + membership of Trust automatically makes one a Legacy member, but should it? To take up such a responsible position perhaps one ought to actively join up and accept that responsibility?
I smell a rat!!
It wasn't clear to me how many legacy members were engaged with the meeting.
At one point they said that around 160 people were viewing online in addition to the 300 odd in the room, and suggested all of them would be able to vote. I was watching online and I cannot vote, and based on the comments it seemed like there were many others like me.
Does anyone know why only legacy members could attend the meeting in person, but non legacy members could view it online? Was it down to space restrictions in the venue?
Based off numbers in the room & online, I'd guess about 50% of legacy members were there. I do wonder how many of the remainder are engaged with this process at all if they don't read emails / social media. It might not be apathy that decides this but simply a lack of awareness.
I also watched online and i'm not a legacy member.
I have a question. Since RC would not own AP, and would pay FALL rent to play at AP, is there anything in the proposal to stop RC moving the club from AP at some point in the future?
Knowing that franchising of sports teams in the US is the norm, he might decide to ground share with MK Dons or build a new stadium 80 miles away.
It was mentioned that the club cannot be moved more than 5 miles away from Adams Park.
Adam Cecil tried to ask that question and was basically brushed aside by David Smith, that since Rob was committed to paying rent to FALL for the use of AP, Rob would have to continue letting WWFC play there. Not sure if he could continue to pay the rent, but then move the club to a different ground somewhere else or not.
It could happen that people are oblivious and unaware of their vote.
However, for someone committed enough to have bought season tickets for 4 years in a row and physically sign up to the trust, it'd be quite a stretch for that many people to have...
1) not bothered reading any emails
2) not seen anything on social media
3)not read anything in the paper
4)not talked to anyone they know about it all.
5)not heard anyone talk about it near them at games
Not sure if the club also send stuff in the post...add that as a number 6 if they do.
If someone really insists in living in that level of bubble,
1) it's amazing they ever managed to qualify in the first place
2) there really is nothing more you can do bar phone them up, and almost force them to vote.
Just received from the Trust:
most 4 season ticket holders and trust members will be there on Saturday for the Sunderland game including the 40 odd that are not on email...perhaps and announcement can be made before the kick off and at half time. If they haven't seen any of the commentary nline or attended previous meeting with Rob and Pete etc though it is worrying they may be making a less informed choice. I suspect Midweek evening and being online just when putting kids to bed etc may have stopped some attending etc
We’re already at 50% turnout. Brilliant stuff considering we’re less than 24 hours in.
hope my question wasnt too daft by the way...the eagle eyed will now see I am outed...asked about how the rent value and sale value were reached and while not completely happy with answers ...essentially we made educated guess was the Board response ...I do appreciate that these values are only what someone will pay..its no good us feeling the club is worth 10 million when someone will only pay 2.2!
49% percent of eligible legacy members have already voted according to a recent tweet.
Trust have confirmed via email that 49% have already voted which is remarkable.
Any point he’s trying to make is lost in my annoyance that he ignores every question anyone on here puts to him.
it trust able to retain 25% (if) again I read it that the Trust would benefit if in three seasons time they sell onto a Russiam oligarch who wants to take us into the Premiership...so we are currently along for the ride too and if they improve the facilities and value of the club the supporters Trust also benefits...likewise taking rough with smooth as a continued shareholder ...if the losses continue the Trust feels the pain too...but we can't have our vegan burger and eat it...if we want out of any responsibility then we as a collective vote sell our share
Wondered if the club had a Will donating package like every donkey sanctuary in the country. Frank Adam's did so perhaps we could all chip in with donations in coming years to keep the Trust's 25% as it will probably be the stress of watching Wycombe winning 4 -3 in the 96th minute that kills us all
I didn't catch the bit during the live feed (which cut out a few times for me) where it was explicitly stated that the enshrined right to keep WWFC within 5 miles of AP was retained, but it was pointedly missing in the summary that was sent out to legacy members on Monday evening. I won't be able to go to AP until Saturday to view the full text, so I won't be able to see for myself to make a judgement on that.
It's because he's not here to debate with anyone, or have a discussion.
Marlow chair sang from a similar hymn sheet, but at least engaged.
Really encouraging that half of Legacy Members have voted less than 24 hrs in, good news.
I think we have to accept that once 75% of the club is in private hands all bets are off.
I did raise this very point with Trevor after a close friend died recently. The Trust sent out an email asking for replies to verify the email address.
According to the summary of the deal the proverbial bets would be off if WWT had less than 12.5% shares (at which point the enshrined rights are no longer 'enshrined' or 'rights'), though I take your point that once the vote is concluded (one presumes with a very large majority in favour) the horse will have long bolted out of sight and the accountability for unpopular decisions may potentially be less than the current setup.
My understanding of the deal is rudimentary but it seems as tho we’ll reach the 12.5% point sooner rather than later.