Indeed, but it's done now and it's release is not far off. And when I said rumours, I meant Burnsy being told what's being amended.
Either way I can see why the Trust would wait before an 'official' position, but I don't see why the views and feelings of supporters who were previously told might be affected should be gathered and passed onto the club. Nor why those views couldn't be shared publicly at an early stage, long before a position is taken whether to fight against it or not
Plenty of people have let the club know what they thought of the initial plans, so have plenty of groups and the Trust have already stated their position (it is that they will wait to see the finished version, but hope it's been amended significantly from what was initially announced and they'll be canvassing all fans as soon as the details are known).
I would be interested in whether those attending were given an agenda and an heads-up on the subject the NDA was protecting. Personally, I think the whole nature of the membership scheme they had devised, in particular the loss of concessions and the blatant exploitation in increasing the charges for children, whose desire to attend is moral blackmail of their parents, is nothing less than a total bloody disgrace. The use of an NDA to hide it was both divisive and incredibly foolish if they really wanted it to be secret - that group was just way too diverse and involved, socially and financially. It fully deserved a whistleblower and I applaud them. Bollocks to building bridges with arsehole.
What would you do, can you offer a timetable of how, from reading their website, to now, you would have achieved it? Can you add how you would amend your actions subject to any revisions, which have been postponed, as would your plans. Who would you have in mind to attend and run the event, what is their availability? Let's deal with some realities and not some hypothetical 'would-have-dones'.
National Dyslexia Association? There's a possibility the club knew full well that some couldn't contain themselves if they'd been given a secret, and expected it to be leaked. Sadly, if that excited individual wasn't part of a formal group, their actions will have given an excuse for the club to trim back what talks there have been with formal groups, even if it's only initially. If they were part of a group, it should limit the fall out primarily to that one group, dependant on what they do about it, and if it was an independent action. The action may or may not have been done with a view that it benefits all, but there's a fair possibility the fall out can cause set backs.
Predictive bollocks!! That possibility is exactly what I think; they have used it to their own ends. There are always set-backs with the Allams, it is what they do.
This has an impact on their membership, they attended the FWG and shared the 3 hour presentation, they signed that NDA and their Communications Director has thrown a Bluey on here about it, so I do not see any harm in asking them what, if anything they have or will be doing in their capacity as an official supporters group.
I watched Ehab last Saturday and noted he did not join in and support the team vocally; was he waiting for something to excite him?
I wasn't particularly asking it of the Trust even (although I accept it does look like that as the conversation developed) If you look back at the start of my points I was simply saying that I disagreed with OLMs view that "there's absolutely no point in the South Stand or West Upper pass holders getting together until they know if they'll have to move or not." I'm of the view that if I was one of them I would want to get together with people in a similar position before the club announce the final position and use that get together to get a feeling for people's views and what they were happy to do about it, if anything. That is based on my experience of the ludicrous timescales when they announced the East Stand evictions. As it happens if I was one of those then, as a member of both the Trust and the OSC then yes I would ask both for assistance with facilitating that "getting together" either virtually or in person somewhere But I'm not. Because I don't have a season ticket now due to being evicted in such a short timescale that we never got properly sorted and there was never the 'attachment' to the new seats or surrounding people I'm not picking a fight...I'm entirely comfortable that people disagree with me..,I just hope that other pass holders aren't dealt with the way we were, because it was ****
I think I've answered some of this before I saw this post (It is a rubbish quiz though!) As I said after reading the website I would have asked both the Trust and OSC whether they were planning on doing anything about it before the revisions I would have been told no (I realise there are things being done, but you know what I mean) I would probably have asked if a message could be passed round other expected evictees to see whether there were enough people wanting to get together to express their concerns. I wouldn't need to revise anything because I would be expressing my views about the info on the website. When the revisions are published I'd probably revise my view If that couldn't have been done then I would have probably looked for like minded souls on here or other sites If there were enough people interested I would have suggested getting together or at least getting a shared view of concerns. Whether that would be virtually or in person would depend on numbers At the same time I would have expressed my personal views to the club. I just think that a group of people who might be affected could also have put a strong point to the club too. Ideally publicly. If the announcement, whatever it is, gives people enough time to plan / protest then it might have been wasted effort However the only similar thing the club did before was done in haste and if replicated would mean it would be virtually impossible for any arguments / expression of views after the event.
