I am puzzled by the comments of the likes of Animal and Yule Brynner.
These are guys who took the time to attend the public meeting, listened to all that was said, and then ran back home to type on an internet forum about how terrible it all is.
Yet they said nothing at the meeting. There was NO dissent shown other than by Michelle Evans who simply could not understand the concept being explained to her.
When Reg Brealey addressed the AGM all those years ago he spoke incredibly well and had everyone present eating out the palm of his hand with his exciting tales of massive investment and a return to European Football.
Yet at the back of that audience came some dissenting voices in the shape of Stewart Gilmour, Charlie Palmer et al.
They had done their homework, they knew of the threat that was unfolding and began to pick apart the plan with consumate ease as it happened.
Why do the dissenters to the CIC plan not do their homework ? Why not spend the time investigating in detail what is happening, go and speak to Richard on a 1:1 basis if that helps, then persuade the supporters WHY this is a bad plan that is putting the club at risk. And have the balls to stand up and say that at the public meeting.
Don't sit behind your computer screen and label eveyone else a f**kwit - do something constructive with your argument and you might get more backing.