Ehab Speaks

Actually, what I keep forgetting is that it supposedly DOES have to be the Trust. The Premier League accepted the recommendations of the Government Expert Working Group which made consulting with supporters, including a Trust where on me exists, an obligation.

Problem yet again seems to be the enforcement of that obligation. I don't think they actually wrote it into any rules

 

So when do you stop making your point?

 

I offered my services the other day as a non-Trust voice. There's a clutch of people on here, enough to possibly form their own Trust, to try to engage with the owners in the ways that they think WILL work. I was told they'd still like it to be the existing Trust...

Doesn't work for me. I think if there's a real opportunity for dialogue here, and the Trust aren't capable of it taking it, then it falls rather urgently to those that can. I'd like to help galvanise that, but everyone suddenly became rather meek when I put that out.

Are we going to take this opportunity or not? We can't have it both ways.

PM me the details. Explain where this opportunity lies, and let's move forward.

 

I think it must be the Trust, but that doesn't stop the Trust nominating a person who hasn't previously been so vocally anti Allams and let that person 'listen' to Ehab on the Trust's behalf (trick will be in writing the questions that we want to listen to Ehab's answers about)

All of which is a moot point because he won't want to meet anyway, certainly not without NDAs in which case it's pointless

However I still think someone should be nominated and an open letter sent saying the Trust would like to listen to what he has to say (all that is needed is to ask him questions, he'll shoot himself in the foot with his answers, no need to offer an opinion) and listing a series of dates and times when they could meet...chuck it back at him...he'll refuse anyway but at least he'll have been called out on it

 

I'm afraid I have to agree with you. Of course I understand why people want to stay away but unfortunately I do think it makes us less attractive to potential new owners and therefore less likely to achieve the thing which the stay away is actually designed to achieve. I think that's called irony.

 

I made the same comment after the Final and people got very upset, but it's true.

 

As positive as it is to see people offering to meet with Ehab, if you think he really will meet with anyone (Trust or otherwise) then you've not been paying attention. This is the man who won't even talk to the local media, he's not remotely interested in meeting with fans no matter what bullshit he spouts in the Yorkshire Post.

 

Exactly
So call him out on it...professionally, politely and publicly

 

If it is an olive branch I think any contact should be private. If a bridge is going to be built it will take a bit of give and take on all sides. If he's not interested it'll soon become apparent to the vast majority of supporters. After all the major issues are the failure of the club to use our name and the lack of concessions.

 

Yep. He couldn't have made this any clearer.

 

I hear he spends a lot of his time in Leeds, as I am sure if he hung around these parts he would get dogs abuse, quiet rightly IMO.

 

I don't agree with it, and think similar.to Obadiah and others but if the Trust board have decided amongst themselves that a request for talks is pointless, shouldn't their focus be on building an image that would be attractive to new owners?

 

Another angle might be for the Trust to write a short letter to Ehab every week or so. Just to ask for dialogue and how the Trust could help to sell the club.
Keep it nice and polite (don't let PLT draft it ).

Put a copy of each letter on their website and then a note later to say if there had been a response.

 

I think the fact that previous prospective new owners have contacted the Trust & shown a willing to communicate & work with the Trust shows the Trust are already attractive to new owners.

 

If he wants to talk to supporters he's more likely to respond to a private request then a public one. If he doesn't want to talk we have lost nothing by sending a private request.

 

Then send him a private request. You'll see...

 

So you believe each potential bidder, not just those that approached the club contacted the Trust. I seem to recall the Trust having some indirect information on one bidder.

In any event, it doesn't change my opinion on what could be beneficial for the future.

 

Maybe, but it still doesn't change the point that the board of the Trust has an opportunity to counter at least one of the claims in Ehab's interview and build a positive relationship for the future with new owners as well as the wider City fan base.