The Trust board did respond to our email, we've updated the email chain here:
https://www.notmytrust.com/email-trust-november-14We've gone back again and asked for answers to the questions rather than the opinions on issues that we got in the response, our email is also included on that page.
Like others I really appreciate the level of transparency by publishing in full the communications which makes it difficult for your more vocal critics to vent their spleens. I also appreciate the mutual politeness and whilst there is of course a slightly different undertone, seeing adults communicate in this manner is a refreshing change from some internet chatter we see.
Of course it's conjecture but failure to exclude the involvement of Cilldara in the Trust's bid will leave most readers making their own conclusions.
Whilst any other bid is somewhat irrelevant until the outcome of the judicial review is concluded I do have concerns with the Trust even stating they are making a bid - of course by some it will be interpreted as such but this is not an antitrust statement - the simple fact for me is that the trust have a clear charter on being a democratic organisation and rightly have a transparent financial situation - the latter clearly showing they are not in a position to make a 3 million pound bid which shows they must have a backer who obviously hold a dominant position in the relationship - therefore I don't understand how a democratic organisation supposedly representing all supporters and 700 plus members can adopt this strategy,
without specifically sharing how this relationship and bid benefits the club more than the existing one from CDNL - I believe there are implicit serious risks and they are operating outside of their remit.