Ironically, the independent company was called Beyond Dispute. Mooney promised to provide a copy of their report to Amber Nectar, but it never happened.
My hope is that Ehab doesn't mind which way it goes. He didn't have to allow the ballot to happen at all (unlike with the name change one which only happened because the FA insisted as part of the process, after Allams had preevented the OSC from holding one when they'd been asked to do so by the FA). On the other hand, a source has told Geoff that Ehab is hoping supporters will vote against concessions. I'm not sure I believe that source but we'll see. When challenged on the possibility to the ballot being another sham, Vicky Beercock seemed a bit offended by the suggestion. She perhaps didn't understand exactly what has gone on before, or that these suspicions aren't aimed at her. We'll find out soon enough. There's no way the new proposal will be voted down in a fair ballot. If there's no foul play, it'll be a landslide for implementing it.
I don't think there's a need for this ballot to be rigged. They obviously needed a "yes to Hull Tigers with the Allams in charge" win to support the name change. Whereas I'm sure with the 'concessions' they've worked it out in such a way that they'll make at least as much money if the proposals are adopted, probably more. I don't think there'll be a landslide. I'd predict it will be no more than 60/40 either way. Not that my predictions mean much, just look at the prediction league for proof.
Later on yes. Originally they'd been asked to do one, I think it was meant to be a physical vote on the day of a home game against Chelsea if I remember right. It was all set to happen but Assem suddenly, the night before, told them that they had to cancel it or they would no longer be the 'official' supporters club. I was an OSC director at the time.
PLT, lots of the things said and done by the OSC around that time were not right. Did the FA actually ask the OSC to ballot it’s members? I thought they had at the time, but not so sure now.
It didn't mean a great deal, it simply served to warn folk of their duplicitous nature, a warning some should have heeded better...
To be fair he’s already answered you He said they did, and then confirmed he hadn’t made it up What else can he add?