Re: AGM/EGM tonight : Tue Jan 04, 2011 11:11 pm
TRB wrote:
Plan B - which has been in discussion for around 12 months - is likely to be what most people imagine it to be, but may not be. In deference to the other parties involved, and their own requirements to advise their own supporters of the deal, it was agreed that any announcement would come at a later date.
Those present were asked their views, as shareholders of the club, as to the feelings towards GH, and towards other loactions. Despite a couple of comments re GH, most were dead set against the idea.
It was confirmed that it is possible that we could stay at BV in the event of us not recieving a licence - at least until NM is built.
NM is viable whether in SL or NL, but of course is ultimately based on SL.
There are other issues which were discussed and I would advise all existing Shareholders to ensure that they make sure the club have your correct details so that you can be mailed to.
Onwards and upwards!
Those present were asked their views, as shareholders of the club, as to the feelings towards GH, and towards other loactions. Despite a couple of comments re GH, most were dead set against the idea.
It was confirmed that it is possible that we could stay at BV in the event of us not recieving a licence - at least until NM is built.
NM is viable whether in SL or NL, but of course is ultimately based on SL.
There are other issues which were discussed and I would advise all existing Shareholders to ensure that they make sure the club have your correct details so that you can be mailed to.
Onwards and upwards!
Sorry TRB, but to even mention GH after publicly announcing we would not go there in the summer just makes Ted and the club look even dafter.
By the sounds of it, the stadium issue is not our most immediate problem - clearly if we are relying on outside investment and need it soon, but have no plan b that can be announced and no knowledge about the licence decision till July - we are totally screwed