Re: Through the past darkly : Sat Oct 28, 2017 1:03 am  

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote:

We don't have any reasons or any numbers, in fact we don't have anything written down by the Council, 88M or Yorkcourt. The only thing the Council have seemingly written down is their press statement, which they released without giving either the Trust or the Club usual courtesy of issuing directly to us.

That is it!

If nothing was indicated to the club why did we walk away before the deadline date of the 31/10/2017.

Re: Through the past darkly : Sat Oct 28, 2017 1:08 am  

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

If nothing was indicated to the club why did we walk away before the deadline date of the 31/10/2017.

Going on what IA above and has said before, they haven't walked away from any negotiating. The Council have just been underhand like they have been throughout this whole process and waited till MC was out of the Country on holiday and made us out to be the bad guys. I mean seriously what kind of way is that to do business and keep any kind of trust between the parties going, apart from to try to manipulate the masses. Which it seems to have done, just look at the supposed more hardcore RL fans opinon on VT of the situation. The fact is everyone of them, if they were in our place atm and had been through all the crap we've been through the years, they'd all change their tune.

And just to reiterate what IA has previously said-

What deal 'they are' offering? The only pieces of paper that have been produced, have been produced by the club and the trust. The club and the trust have not seen one scrap of paper from WMDC, Mackie or 88M, not even a single sentence. They don't even take any meeting minutes!!! They got sent a copy of our proposed HoT and then ran to the press, without the usual and common courtesy of sending it to us first, and said that the club had broken off negotiation!

Re: Through the past darkly : Sat Oct 28, 2017 8:03 am  

little wayne69 wrote:

Your post does not make sense now vastman has retracted his contentious post.

Wasn't contentious it was the truth about said poster. Unfortunately I wish to stay in the debate so posting the truth might have cost me that right.

[PopTart]

Re: Through the past darkly : Sat Oct 28, 2017 8:30 am  

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote:

We don't have any reasons or any numbers, in fact we don't have anything written down by the Council, 88M or Yorkcourt. The only thing the Council have seemingly written down is their press statement, which they released without giving either the Trust or the Club usual courtesy of issuing directly to us.

That is it!

That's my point as well.

I'll back Carter all the way but at the moment there isn't enough information in the public domain to be able to say for certain what has happened. Only that we are not continuing as we thought we would.
It's very clear the council are being underhand, but many posters are saying things that they clearly do not actually know to be true. They are just sounding off. Which is understandable, but won't help anyone resolve the issue.

I understand Carter has to seek legal advice but in the end, but if it were me, once I'd protected myself legally, I'd go public and out the people causing the problem......then the public could get behind something.

Re: Through the past darkly : Sat Oct 28, 2017 10:52 am  

vastman wrote:

Wasn't contentious it was the truth about said poster. Unfortunately I wish to stay in the debate so posting the truth might have cost me that right.

That's fair comment, although your name was only used in the context of the fev fan's post and was not aimed at you.

[Wildthing]

Re: Through the past darkly : Sat Oct 28, 2017 11:15 am  

little wayne69 wrote:

That's fair comment, although your name was only used in the context of the fev fan's post and was not aimed at you.

I don't think roverman is actually a Fev fan?

Re: Through the past darkly : Sat Oct 28, 2017 1:08 pm  

Wildthing wrote:

I don't think roverman is actually a Fev fan?

My apologies then, I thought he was maybe trying to inflame things a little from an outside point of view.

Re: Through the past darkly : Sat Oct 28, 2017 1:12 pm  

I was aware that previous meetings under RW hadn’t been minuted. But I would have assumed that all meetings since he left the trust would have been?
If this hasn’t been the case it’s naive to the point of negligence by the club and trust given the history of this project. It’s just shocking business practice not to keep a record of meetings.

Re: Through the past darkly : Sat Oct 28, 2017 1:40 pm  

4foxsake wrote:

I was aware that previous meetings under RW hadn’t been minuted. But I would have assumed that all meetings since he left the trust would have been?
If this hasn’t been the case it’s naive to the point of negligence by the club and trust given the history of this project. It’s just shocking business practice not to keep a record of meetings.

Please do not forget the council or Yorkcourt bearing in mind these were providing the resource funding the club would be a Tennant the Trust I agree if meetings were not minutes as I have pointed out before it's rediculous considering the funding streams and profits involved. There must be scrutiny and transparency.

Re: Through the past darkly : Sun Oct 29, 2017 8:34 pm  

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

If nothing was indicated to the club why did we walk away before the deadline date of the 31/10/2017.

Worth waiting for the response... but I don't believe the club have walked away... I believe the council have issued a press statement, timed to coincide with MC departure from the country...which is based on the HOT document. I would be VERY suprised if there has been any face to face meetings o the past two or three weeks.

I think this is all about manoevering the opinion of people that the failure of a plan (which was never designed too be implemented) is the club's fault and not the councils failure. And so far it seems too he working!