I don't think that JD has ever once predicted the imminent demise of the club, but has only raised concern about the direction the club is going in, which is he continuing to do in this thread. I don't think that anyone can argue that the club is going forward, and I find it strange that people get so angsty when anyone raises concerns about that. When YF was first formed, JD (amongst others) made it clear that the organisation had to be clear about its objectives, which were first and foremost being vocal about what was in the best interests of the club. It is not acceptable to just take what the club feeds us, be it in terms of announcements about what the club is trying to do or performances on the pitch, and accept it. We have to challenge it, and that is in the form of trying to meet with Terry and find out what is actually happening financially, and looking to engage other money people in the country if Terry does not have any plans beyond this dodgy loan - that is what is best for the club.
Frankie - I thought I'd reply to your post here, where it seems more relevant, rather than in the Greenacre thread.
You raise some good questions above, including "what is Yellow Fever, and what is it for?".
It seems to me that YF now consists of at least two fundamental parts, both of which are completely dependent on each other. There's the core "internal" group who actually run this website, moderate it and are the public face of YF. Then there's the wider "external" group who contribute their thoughts and opinions to the forum, stand in the fever zone (although not exclusively) and generally give YF some critical mass. The external group need the internal group to give them a focal point, keep the website running, organise events etc. But the internal group need the external group just as much. Without them they are basically just a bunch of mates talking football. It's the external group who give the internal group a public profile.
While it might have been possible when YF was first formed to talk about "organisational objectives" surely YF has now gone way past that point? Despite some lazy journalist's occasional attempts to present it that way, is there ever really a single, agreed YF point of view?
On the subject of whether Terry should should remain as "owner" of the Phoenix and, if so, whether he should be more open about the inner workings of the club I don't think there is anything even close to an agreed view, within either the internal or external YF groups. So is there actually a mandate to ask Terry for a meeting under the YF banner?