| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback 11:59 - Dec 11 with 11819 views | union_jack |
I have already posted briefly about this on the 'Jenkins Petition' thread but I'd like to encourage others to be aware of what the group' s fundamental aims are and hopefully get more people involved.
Four of us attended at The Landore Club before the WBA game just to get a feel for what we should be doing. It was clear from the start that there is a need for a group and that the attendees (Vetchfielder, ATFV, myself and Phil) were all enthusiastic to see it happen.
We agreed early on that this should group should not be seen as a discrete group going off on its own without involving other similar minded groups. This of course meant The Trust in the main but also amongst others The Union. This will give us a collective strength and will not work if there is in-fighting. I have read on the aforementioned thread today that The Union's aim of ousting 'the regime' regardless of our league position is in complete harmony with ours. And that is the first and most fundamental raison d'être of the ISG (I'll call it that for now but touch on it later).
The Trust are undoubtedly hamstrung in what they can say publically. Whether we agree with that or not is a matter of debate but if we take that as a given then it gives the ISG the opportunity to go public and voice fans' opinions legitimately. For that to be successful we will need to use every available communication source available to us. Nigel is committed to using ATFV as one vessel and there are other similar publications but we also need to get the press and media to listen.
With regards to the latter, there is very much a 'hunting with the foxes, running with the hares' approach from the local press / media which means the real problems at SCFC are not being aired publically. We talked about how many in the ground on Saturday are aware of the goings on both past and present. If I took a punt at 40% of the crowd, that may be optimistic I reckon. Only by making people aware can we open their eyes and in turn create a mass large enough to make the present sell-out members of the board so uncomfortable they will contemplate their own futures. The message must come out loud and clear and to be more successful we mustn't restrict ourselves to local media. We need to get out to a wider audience via national TV and newspapers who have no axe to grind.
For this to happen the ISG will need to be respected and have gravitas. That can only be achieved with a well known respected head of the group and that will be Phil Sumbler. Phil has an unrivalled working knowledge of The Trust, the club itself and connections with the media.
Now, the name of the group is something we need to get sorted asap because then we can get a website up and running and do whatever we need to do with social media.
I am sure Phil will give free, lifetime membership to Planet Swans (unless you are banned or the site ceases to exist, T&Cs apply) for anyone coming up with a catchy title that isn't coarse or uncouth!!! My creative juices have run dry.
I know there were others planning to come on the day but for a number of reasons were unable to attend. However, if anyone is enthusiastic enough to want to attend and get involved just pm Phil and he'll put you on the email list. Alternatively, put your suggestions, ideas or views on here so we can all discuss.
Just to conclude, although the primary aim is to cleanse the club of its core problems, it will have a number of other objectives as time goes on. These could include ticket pricing, disabled parking, Vice Presidents seating and / or any other issues that fans may see as ruining their match day experience.
I hope we all get behind it.
Tim
|  |
| |  |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 15:58 - Dec 11 with 1809 views | union_jack |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 15:37 - Dec 11 by Neath_Jack |
"but one of the conditions set by the group on Saturday was that there needs to be a working relationship with the Trust "
So the 3 or 4 self appointed faces of this new organisation have already decided that after one brief meeting?
Sounds like a New Trust (Lite) already. The bloke who presided over the past 18 months of shambles has already been shoehorned into a "top of the tree" position in the new organisation.
Not a good start in my opinion. Good luck to you all though. |
Not self appointed. I and the others who turned up did so because we expressed an interest and desire to be involved. Anybody can come along as I said in the OP. Saturday was nothing more than a get together to put things on the table.
To have maximum effect it needs Phil at the helm. I'm sure after his many years on the Trust and all the effort he put in, he'd be happy to say 'get on with it without me'. But he's not done that. He has offered to take this forward for the good of the club and the good of the fans. What has happened previously has happened. It's time to look forward.
The views expressed by us on Saturday is that we work in concert with the Trust, not be a part of it, but to vocalise issues where we can but they can't.
If you or others don't agree with this then you are genuinely welcome to your opinion. We can discuss it on here and see if we can come to an agreement that suits us all.
Edit to add, we all want the same thing but our priorities may be in a different order. Let's get together and work out a way forward. [Post edited 11 Dec 2017 16:02]
| |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:01 - Dec 11 with 1800 views | Neath_Jack |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 15:58 - Dec 11 by Vetchfielder |
Very well summarised in the original post Tim.
Regarding the other point made by a few regarding halting the share sale, I also think this is valid and I made a similar comment in my original message to Phil.
However, this is a difficult one to resolve. On the one hand it would be advantageous to have a good working relationship between the new group and the Trust - I think co-operation could help both parties immensely. On the other hand there may be circumstances where I would want it to voice fans' feelings if the Trust was felt not to be adequately representing our feelings and even being critical of the Trust if appropriate, and accepting in that case that the Trust might not be happy.
Unfortunately I can't really think of the solution to reconciling these two conflicting demands.
Unless the relationship that can be developed is SO good that the Trust just take it in good spirit and not get too sensitive around any constructive criticism? I don't know. |
That little statement reads like something from the Trust regarding building bridges with the Americans, working relationships etc.
For the Americans, read The Trust, and for the Trust read ISG.
If that's the way it's going to go, then Phil should have stayed where he was in a place to really affect some change. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:02 - Dec 11 with 1794 views | IAN05 |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 15:58 - Dec 11 by Neath_Jack |
"they are the only ones who could make it on Saturday".
They are the only ones out of who? Where was the meeting advertised for "others" to attend? They've already placed their flag in the sand with regards to an important decision on must have to work with the trust, so if that's not by self appointed people, then what?
Genuine questions, as i'd like to buy into it, but it doesn't look very good at the moment to me. |
There is a mailing list in relation to this, Phil asked for those interested to PM him with their email address. Only 4 of those on there could make it.
I've read the update and I didn't see it as 'have to work.with Trust' if I'm honest mate. The update Phil sent group was that they would need to have knowledge of what each other were working on. |  | | |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:04 - Dec 11 with 1790 views | Neath_Jack |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 15:58 - Dec 11 by union_jack |
Not self appointed. I and the others who turned up did so because we expressed an interest and desire to be involved. Anybody can come along as I said in the OP. Saturday was nothing more than a get together to put things on the table.
To have maximum effect it needs Phil at the helm. I'm sure after his many years on the Trust and all the effort he put in, he'd be happy to say 'get on with it without me'. But he's not done that. He has offered to take this forward for the good of the club and the good of the fans. What has happened previously has happened. It's time to look forward.
The views expressed by us on Saturday is that we work in concert with the Trust, not be a part of it, but to vocalise issues where we can but they can't.
If you or others don't agree with this then you are genuinely welcome to your opinion. We can discuss it on here and see if we can come to an agreement that suits us all.
Edit to add, we all want the same thing but our priorities may be in a different order. Let's get together and work out a way forward. [Post edited 11 Dec 2017 16:02]
|
I'll keep out of the thread for now, i don't want to be seen as putting a dampner on it, but i can't get my head around it at the moment.
Hopefully you can develop it into something worthwhile though, because we've all got the good of the club at heart at the end of the day. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:06 - Dec 11 with 1784 views | IAN05 |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:01 - Dec 11 by Neath_Jack |
That little statement reads like something from the Trust regarding building bridges with the Americans, working relationships etc.
For the Americans, read The Trust, and for the Trust read ISG.
If that's the way it's going to go, then Phil should have stayed where he was in a place to really affect some change. |
On your second paragraph - I've put something similar on the mailing group as we can't be hampered by being afraid to rock the Trust boat like the Trust is with the club. | | | |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:15 - Dec 11 with 1751 views | union_jack |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:02 - Dec 11 by IAN05 |
There is a mailing list in relation to this, Phil asked for those interested to PM him with their email address. Only 4 of those on there could make it.
I've read the update and I didn't see it as 'have to work.with Trust' if I'm honest mate. The update Phil sent group was that they would need to have knowledge of what each other were working on. |
Yes Ian, I think that might be more accurate. Apologies if that misled anyone.
I know that Phil doesn't want the group to be seen as going off and doing its own thing. Far more can be achieved by having knowledge of what eachother are doing and 'singing from the same hymn sheet'. That of course may not always be possible but we'd need to cross that bridge when we get to it. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:26 - Dec 11 with 1736 views | Vetchfielder |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:06 - Dec 11 by IAN05 |
On your second paragraph - I've put something similar on the mailing group as we can't be hampered by being afraid to rock the Trust boat like the Trust is with the club. |
Yes, agreed, |  |
| Proud to have been one of the 231 |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:41 - Dec 11 with 1703 views | MoscowJack |
I understand the sentiment and reasoning behind the ISG but I believe it's masking over the real problems which are (1) the current shambles we're in (off and on the pitch) as a club and (2) how to make the Trust less toothless and stuffy.
I genuinely believe that people like the 'three fresh faces' who've put themselves up for the Trust Board from here will, just by their presence, force the Trust Board to take notice of the things that people far more intelligent than I have penned on this forum. We need to ensure that they are co-opted or, if not, the people who are have the same desire, passion, tenacity and willingness to ask the most awkward of questions as they do. It's not just people on the Trust Board that should be screening potential Board members but also the Trust Members should be questioning why certain people are brought in or kept in too.
As someone else pointed out, the ISG has no money, no identity (yet!) and no real target to hit (as far as I can see). That makes it hard to know where to start.
At least the Trust has 21% (for now!!!) and quite a lot of money in the bank (relatively) so I'd far rather see the Trust taken-over by fresh blood than something new started from scratch.
Also, there might only be 4 seats up for grabs now, but who's to say that some won't walk when the likes of Chris, Lisa etc get going? I would actually hope that some of them do as it will allow for more fresh blood to join. The Trust needs certain people to stay (or return even!) to allow for solid continuity in SOME areas, but a good shake up and re-direction could actually save the Trust from the abyss that I see them heading very quickly towards.
Just my opinion, of course..... | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:51 - Dec 11 with 1677 views | Thornburyswan |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:41 - Dec 11 by MoscowJack |
I understand the sentiment and reasoning behind the ISG but I believe it's masking over the real problems which are (1) the current shambles we're in (off and on the pitch) as a club and (2) how to make the Trust less toothless and stuffy.
I genuinely believe that people like the 'three fresh faces' who've put themselves up for the Trust Board from here will, just by their presence, force the Trust Board to take notice of the things that people far more intelligent than I have penned on this forum. We need to ensure that they are co-opted or, if not, the people who are have the same desire, passion, tenacity and willingness to ask the most awkward of questions as they do. It's not just people on the Trust Board that should be screening potential Board members but also the Trust Members should be questioning why certain people are brought in or kept in too.
As someone else pointed out, the ISG has no money, no identity (yet!) and no real target to hit (as far as I can see). That makes it hard to know where to start.
At least the Trust has 21% (for now!!!) and quite a lot of money in the bank (relatively) so I'd far rather see the Trust taken-over by fresh blood than something new started from scratch.
Also, there might only be 4 seats up for grabs now, but who's to say that some won't walk when the likes of Chris, Lisa etc get going? I would actually hope that some of them do as it will allow for more fresh blood to join. The Trust needs certain people to stay (or return even!) to allow for solid continuity in SOME areas, but a good shake up and re-direction could actually save the Trust from the abyss that I see them heading very quickly towards.
Just my opinion, of course..... |
This sums up my thoughts very neatly - nice job MoscowJ - first stage would be getting the Trust to see the light & noting recent Trust board changes & indicated deal offer changes from the Yanks/HJ re-run the vote, giving some time for education & people to join to vote for a different outcome I.e. No sale of any shares. | | | |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:52 - Dec 11 with 1674 views | STID2017 |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 15:37 - Dec 11 by Neath_Jack |
"but one of the conditions set by the group on Saturday was that there needs to be a working relationship with the Trust "
So the 3 or 4 self appointed faces of this new organisation have already decided that after one brief meeting?
Sounds like a New Trust (Lite) already. The bloke who presided over the past 18 months of shambles has already been shoehorned into a "top of the tree" position in the new organisation.
Not a good start in my opinion. Good luck to you all though. |
Like any organisation, after initial meetings and signing up of members, an election will have to held and the aims of the ISG would need to be established and agreed then I would imagine.
Let's start off by supporting their aims. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:06 - Dec 11 with 1644 views | Neath_Jack |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:52 - Dec 11 by STID2017 |
Like any organisation, after initial meetings and signing up of members, an election will have to held and the aims of the ISG would need to be established and agreed then I would imagine.
Let's start off by supporting their aims. |
You're misunderstanding butty.
Union quite clearly stated that it was agreed that there must be a working relationship with the Trust maintained. How can a couple of people decide that after a brief meeting? It is a very important factor, for me anyway.
Who's not supporting their aims? Which they haven't published yet? You're just making a noise for the sake of getting involved in the thread, leave that shite up to Darran .
It is ok to question things, remember that. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:08 - Dec 11 with 1637 views | Darran |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:06 - Dec 11 by Neath_Jack |
You're misunderstanding butty.
Union quite clearly stated that it was agreed that there must be a working relationship with the Trust maintained. How can a couple of people decide that after a brief meeting? It is a very important factor, for me anyway.
Who's not supporting their aims? Which they haven't published yet? You're just making a noise for the sake of getting involved in the thread, leave that shite up to Darran .
It is ok to question things, remember that. |
Fuçk off.  |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:12 - Dec 11 with 1625 views | STID2017 |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:06 - Dec 11 by Neath_Jack |
You're misunderstanding butty.
Union quite clearly stated that it was agreed that there must be a working relationship with the Trust maintained. How can a couple of people decide that after a brief meeting? It is a very important factor, for me anyway.
Who's not supporting their aims? Which they haven't published yet? You're just making a noise for the sake of getting involved in the thread, leave that shite up to Darran .
It is ok to question things, remember that. |
To quote you "I'll keep out of the thread for now, i don't want to be seen as putting a dampner on it, but i can't get my head around it at the moment.
Hopefully you can develop it into something worthwhile though, because we've all got the good of the club at heart at the end of the day."
Not exactly a ringing endorsement that, is it "Butty" ?
I think if you read Union's later post he says that all he feels was meant was that the trust and any new organisation should have a working knowledge of each other. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:14 - Dec 11 with 1622 views | union_jack |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:06 - Dec 11 by Neath_Jack |
You're misunderstanding butty.
Union quite clearly stated that it was agreed that there must be a working relationship with the Trust maintained. How can a couple of people decide that after a brief meeting? It is a very important factor, for me anyway.
Who's not supporting their aims? Which they haven't published yet? You're just making a noise for the sake of getting involved in the thread, leave that shite up to Darran .
It is ok to question things, remember that. |
It was clarified above, and I apologised for the confusion, that the relationship between the Trust and the ISG would be one of knowing what eachother were doing. In the main, these should be the same but there may be times when there is a conflict and that would need to be dealt with in the appropriate manner.
Neath, don't think we've just gone ahead and firmed something up. That's not the case other than to have the most effective group, it will need to be done with the Trust knowing what we are doing and vice versa.
If it has no mileage at the end if the day then so be it. It is certainly not an ego trip for me nor would I suggest the others there on Saturday.
If you want to get involved, then pm Phil. You'd be very welcome as would anybody who cares about our club. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:20 - Dec 11 with 1609 views | treboethjack |
Surely in an ideal world we can have fresh input into the trust with a major shake up happening. On the other hand a less official independent ISG that can work alongside a refreshed trust can only be a good thing? An ISG can organise things that the trust are unable to.
Hope this makes some sort of sense, for me personally this would be an ideal outcome but I just want whats best for my club, however it can be achieved. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:21 - Dec 11 with 1605 views | swanforthemoney |
The way to do it would be to form a group with aims etc. as above. Then, through mutual support and organisation: agree who is to stand and put candidates forward for the next Trust elections.
Presumably there will be six elected places up for grabs in the summer as some of the current members are only elected to serve until July 2018 - see link.
Call yourselves Momentum.
https://www.swanstrust.co.uk/meet-the-trust-board/ |  |
| I stand in the North Stand
|
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:22 - Dec 11 with 1604 views | Neath_Jack |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:14 - Dec 11 by union_jack |
It was clarified above, and I apologised for the confusion, that the relationship between the Trust and the ISG would be one of knowing what eachother were doing. In the main, these should be the same but there may be times when there is a conflict and that would need to be dealt with in the appropriate manner.
Neath, don't think we've just gone ahead and firmed something up. That's not the case other than to have the most effective group, it will need to be done with the Trust knowing what we are doing and vice versa.
If it has no mileage at the end if the day then so be it. It is certainly not an ego trip for me nor would I suggest the others there on Saturday.
If you want to get involved, then pm Phil. You'd be very welcome as would anybody who cares about our club. |
I know that mate, i was just replying to STD as he directly quoted me. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:30 - Dec 11 with 1585 views | monmouth |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:21 - Dec 11 by swanforthemoney |
The way to do it would be to form a group with aims etc. as above. Then, through mutual support and organisation: agree who is to stand and put candidates forward for the next Trust elections.
Presumably there will be six elected places up for grabs in the summer as some of the current members are only elected to serve until July 2018 - see link.
Call yourselves Momentum.
https://www.swanstrust.co.uk/meet-the-trust-board/ |
Yes, in my eyes the six up for re-election next simply have to be replaced. There is no longer any excuse for people to cling on if others want to take part. In fact they should simply stand down, not stand for re-election if they have been there, say, over 5 years, and that includes Mr Mute. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:46 - Dec 11 with 1556 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
The best thing this new group can do is to identify and select future Trust board members so that when the next elections are up, we have strong candidates who are ready to put themselves forward, perhaps even with a little bit of money behind them to help ensure they get voted on to the board and the people who have clung on for far too long, and are in many peoples opinion continuing to bring the organisation down, can be removed.
A new supporters group is utterly irrelevant without the stake in the club. By all means create one as a temporary organisation until we have seized back control of The Trust, but once we have it, that should be the end of it and we can continue with the new blood in place on The Trust board. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 18:06 - Dec 11 with 1526 views | ATFV |
Thanks for summing things up with a thoughtful OP Tim.
I just want to plant my stake in the ground as one of the “four self appointed” people that were there Saturday. I’m happy to be an ally of the Trust but I won’t be part of anything that blindly supports it. I weighed up applying for a co-opted place on the Trust Board but ultimately decided against it as I’d rather continue to be an outspoken member at this particular time. The decision was made easier by the surprising volume of applications and I’m under no illusion that most if not all were more suitable than me anyway!
Doing the vocal stuff that the Trust can’t is one of the reasons I’ve shown interest in this idea - and that’s borne out of the utter contempt I have for those that sold us and put the long term future of our club at great risk.
Equally, I shall turn up at Thursday’s Trust Members Forum and make it abundantly clear that we should halt all negotiations over a share sale and have a new vote. This takes into consideration the repeat offending of the lack of good faith the Americans display when conducting their business and our less favourable terms as we look well vulnerable to a relegation.
The short version of all of that above is that I’m well up for having a go at anyone that damages the Swans... |  | | |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 18:22 - Dec 11 with 1490 views | Muteswan |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 17:30 - Dec 11 by monmouth |
Yes, in my eyes the six up for re-election next simply have to be replaced. There is no longer any excuse for people to cling on if others want to take part. In fact they should simply stand down, not stand for re-election if they have been there, say, over 5 years, and that includes Mr Mute. |
Can I please state that I am not or ever have been on the Trust board. 😉 |  | | |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 18:24 - Dec 11 with 1488 views | Phil_S |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 18:06 - Dec 11 by ATFV |
Thanks for summing things up with a thoughtful OP Tim.
I just want to plant my stake in the ground as one of the “four self appointed” people that were there Saturday. I’m happy to be an ally of the Trust but I won’t be part of anything that blindly supports it. I weighed up applying for a co-opted place on the Trust Board but ultimately decided against it as I’d rather continue to be an outspoken member at this particular time. The decision was made easier by the surprising volume of applications and I’m under no illusion that most if not all were more suitable than me anyway!
Doing the vocal stuff that the Trust can’t is one of the reasons I’ve shown interest in this idea - and that’s borne out of the utter contempt I have for those that sold us and put the long term future of our club at great risk.
Equally, I shall turn up at Thursday’s Trust Members Forum and make it abundantly clear that we should halt all negotiations over a share sale and have a new vote. This takes into consideration the repeat offending of the lack of good faith the Americans display when conducting their business and our less favourable terms as we look well vulnerable to a relegation.
The short version of all of that above is that I’m well up for having a go at anyone that damages the Swans... |
I think Nigel's post probably sums it up for me
I would also add that there is no closed shop in terms of the group and if anyone wants to be part of it then send me your email address and I will add you to any group
I actually disagreed that I needed to front it as I dont think that is the case but thats one for debate as it gathers momentum
For me getting the likes of Neath_Jack and the Res involved at its infancy would be a great addition to the group so would love to hear from them
The only reason this has started is there seemed to be a demand - if there isnt then it will die very quickly but I dont see it needs to
For the Union, I would add this is not a slight on anything that they have done and the two guys I spoke to Saturday (Gethin and Dai) have their hearts on their sleeves and are to be commended for doing something, its so easy not to |  | | |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 18:30 - Dec 11 with 1474 views | Phil_S |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 13:59 - Dec 11 by Oldjack |
Phil may wish to add his thoughts but I realise he is away for the majority of the week.
Whilst the internet still works ,theses days you're never away |
It does mate and tonight I am online - I will barely be online between now and Friday between a mixture of all day boreathons and then nights out!
The internet still works you are right, but there is also the real life ;-) | | | |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 18:32 - Dec 11 with 1470 views | Phil_S |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 15:37 - Dec 11 by Neath_Jack |
"but one of the conditions set by the group on Saturday was that there needs to be a working relationship with the Trust "
So the 3 or 4 self appointed faces of this new organisation have already decided that after one brief meeting?
Sounds like a New Trust (Lite) already. The bloke who presided over the past 18 months of shambles has already been shoehorned into a "top of the tree" position in the new organisation.
Not a good start in my opinion. Good luck to you all though. |
Nobody has been shoehorned anywhere - the more people involved the better, and if someone else wants to lead then I'm more than happy
There are those that have contributed here who already know that if there was a way for it not to be me then I would happily let it happen but equally happy to do it
The working relationship probably isnt the phrase I would have used - I see the two organisations working as separate entities
As said on anotehr post - would love to see someone like you involved in the discussions, good opinion, long term fan and understand what is needed
Same for CHris | | | |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 18:35 - Dec 11 with 1460 views | Phil_S |
| Independent Supporters' Group - Saturday's Meeting Feedback on 16:51 - Dec 11 by Thornburyswan |
This sums up my thoughts very neatly - nice job MoscowJ - first stage would be getting the Trust to see the light & noting recent Trust board changes & indicated deal offer changes from the Yanks/HJ re-run the vote, giving some time for education & people to join to vote for a different outcome I.e. No sale of any shares. |
Just on this one you have an interesting last statement as that is in contradiction to what Monny wants for example as he would go legal which could mean sale of all shares
I do think on the share sale right now then it would be an interesting split and I am not sure that an independent group could call it one way or another,
What the independent group could do is request the trust to return to the members for a vote before any deal is signed. But that would still be a board decision ultimately I guess (for them not the ISG) | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
