| Independent Supporters Group 16:42 - Dec 3 with 47858 views | Phil_S |
OK been some discussion on this but who thinks this is the way to go
Details are really on this thread
|  | | |  |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:40 - Dec 6 with 4931 views | Jackfath |
Could I ask (once again) that those who are successful, and indeed those who are already there, make sure that the profiles they have on the Trust website contain a photographic image of the person who represents us. That way at least we will all know who they are should we come across them during events or match day. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:49 - Dec 6 with 4907 views | Garyjack |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:36 - Dec 6 by londonlisa2001 |
I don't have one scheduled at the moment. |
Well good luck when it comes. I'm hoping that the three of you can make it through to the Q finals!  |  | | |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:51 - Dec 6 with 4895 views | Neath_Jack |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:49 - Dec 6 by Garyjack |
Well good luck when it comes. I'm hoping that the three of you can make it through to the Q finals! |
Are you still running the book or have you closed now?
I was going to have a few more quid on Lisa, as no interview says to me that she's a shoe-in. Only the trouble maker types are having them i reckon. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:53 - Dec 6 with 4893 views | Vetchfielder |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:40 - Dec 6 by Jackfath |
Could I ask (once again) that those who are successful, and indeed those who are already there, make sure that the profiles they have on the Trust website contain a photographic image of the person who represents us. That way at least we will all know who they are should we come across them during events or match day. |
Yes, I agree with this  |  |
| Proud to have been one of the 231 |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:56 - Dec 6 with 4885 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:51 - Dec 6 by Neath_Jack |
Are you still running the book or have you closed now?
I was going to have a few more quid on Lisa, as no interview says to me that she's a shoe-in. Only the trouble maker types are having them i reckon. |
Lisa’s far more of a trouble maker that I am mun. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:03 - Dec 6 with 4856 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:56 - Dec 6 by exiledclaseboy |
Lisa’s far more of a trouble maker that I am mun. |
Power to the people ! |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:47 - Dec 6 with 4687 views | Jackfath |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:46 - Dec 6 by Joe_bradshaw |
Jackfath is anticipating coming across Trust board members.
 |
Eh? | |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:49 - Dec 6 with 4678 views | Joe_bradshaw |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:40 - Dec 6 by Jackfath |
Could I ask (once again) that those who are successful, and indeed those who are already there, make sure that the profiles they have on the Trust website contain a photographic image of the person who represents us. That way at least we will all know who they are should we come across them during events or match day. |
Yeah. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:50 - Dec 6 with 4668 views | Jackfath |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:49 - Dec 6 by Joe_bradshaw |
Yeah. |
Oh I see. Hilarious. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 22:45 - Dec 6 with 4530 views | max936 |
| Independent Supporters Group on 10:54 - Dec 6 by Uxbridge |
Your puppetmaster theory is quite amusing in fairness. Especially implying Cath. She's lovely, and does a load of good work with the DSA.
Anyway, Uxbridge doesn't know who joined when as Uxbridge joined the board in mid 2014. I've asked our secretary the same question and there'll be something put together. Saying that, if you want to find these things out I'd suggest a) looking through the AGM and meeting documents online yourself or b) sending a request for information directly to the Trust. They're not short of contact options.
As you're a bit of a rubbish sleuth (joke! I do hope that's allowed, although having an opinion doesn't seem to be), I did my own analysis based on https://www.swanstrust.co.uk/trust-board-and-agm-minutes/ . Based on said publicly available documents, it looks like one board member may have been affected based on more than 12 continuous years of service prior to this summer, and potentially two at this exact moment in time (it may just be one, unclear from the docs online when the other joined).
If you're looking for a lack of a quorum for the ballot this past summer, I suspect you're going to come up short. Not that a quorum was needed anyway, if we're being pedantic.
Oh, and as I'm here, just to correct Max's comments on that, the only reason I mentioned there didn't have to be a ballot was to dispel the myth that seems to be perpetuated that the Trust board was somehow anti-democratic. If that was in any way accurate, there simply wouldn't have been a ballot. I rather resent the implication that comment was twisted to imply that I think some sort of gratitude should be shown for there being a ballot at all. I've said countless times on here, the board could never have made that decision without one IMO. |
Excuse me I never twisted one word of what you wrote, you wrote that the Trust were told by whoever that they didn't have to take the decision to have a members vote, I said and stick by that whoever said that is and was wrong, how can something as crucial as selling the Trust shares not go to vote to its paying members, there's no myth about them being Anti Democratic they are!!
I never once implied that you didn't think a vote was right, you had said numerous times that a vote had to be taken, so no need to resent any implications because there aren't any put forward from me and I don't twist anybodys words, I say what I feel, right or wrong and I stand by that as well. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 22:49 - Dec 6 with 4522 views | Bobby_Fischer |
| Independent Supporters Group on 22:45 - Dec 6 by max936 |
Excuse me I never twisted one word of what you wrote, you wrote that the Trust were told by whoever that they didn't have to take the decision to have a members vote, I said and stick by that whoever said that is and was wrong, how can something as crucial as selling the Trust shares not go to vote to its paying members, there's no myth about them being Anti Democratic they are!!
I never once implied that you didn't think a vote was right, you had said numerous times that a vote had to be taken, so no need to resent any implications because there aren't any put forward from me and I don't twist anybodys words, I say what I feel, right or wrong and I stand by that as well. |
Easy Max, the guy is an eel - everyone can see that. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 23:06 - Dec 6 with 4491 views | monmouth |
| Independent Supporters Group on 22:45 - Dec 6 by max936 |
Excuse me I never twisted one word of what you wrote, you wrote that the Trust were told by whoever that they didn't have to take the decision to have a members vote, I said and stick by that whoever said that is and was wrong, how can something as crucial as selling the Trust shares not go to vote to its paying members, there's no myth about them being Anti Democratic they are!!
I never once implied that you didn't think a vote was right, you had said numerous times that a vote had to be taken, so no need to resent any implications because there aren't any put forward from me and I don't twist anybodys words, I say what I feel, right or wrong and I stand by that as well. |
Legally and constitutionally there was no need for a vote Max. Morally and for their own sakes too there had to be one, and it had, as you say, been promised anyway, so there was never any practical possibility in reality of one not happening. Not sure why this point is ever raised to be honest, it’s a technicality. If they were to ever try and do that now with any element of the deal changed and it emerged - and it would - they would be finished, as individuals and an entity. They know that. So total red herring. Needs to be put back in the cupboard. It’s never was a realistic option and was never down to a show of openness. They would have been on the petty bus had they done that. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 12:46 - Dec 7 with 4253 views | E20Jack |
| Independent Supporters Group on 23:06 - Dec 6 by monmouth |
Legally and constitutionally there was no need for a vote Max. Morally and for their own sakes too there had to be one, and it had, as you say, been promised anyway, so there was never any practical possibility in reality of one not happening. Not sure why this point is ever raised to be honest, it’s a technicality. If they were to ever try and do that now with any element of the deal changed and it emerged - and it would - they would be finished, as individuals and an entity. They know that. So total red herring. Needs to be put back in the cupboard. It’s never was a realistic option and was never down to a show of openness. They would have been on the petty bus had they done that. |
They are finished whatever version of the deal they strike, let's be realistic here.
There are drag rights in place. Do we really think the Americans will be around in 18 months time? I doubt it.
Onc the deal is signed then the chances of us having any supporter shares in thr club within the next 2 years is minimal. And we would have a fraction of the amount in monitary terms for the shares than what they paid the other lot, a much smaller fraction indeed.
Well done all. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 13:09 - Dec 7 with 4214 views | monmouth |
| Independent Supporters Group on 12:46 - Dec 7 by E20Jack |
They are finished whatever version of the deal they strike, let's be realistic here.
There are drag rights in place. Do we really think the Americans will be around in 18 months time? I doubt it.
Onc the deal is signed then the chances of us having any supporter shares in thr club within the next 2 years is minimal. And we would have a fraction of the amount in monitary terms for the shares than what they paid the other lot, a much smaller fraction indeed.
Well done all. |
Can't disagree with that analysis. The drag rights will be exploited by some Delaware malarky too probably so that any sales price applying to them is peppercorn. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 21:03 - Dec 7 with 4030 views | max936 |
| Independent Supporters Group on 23:06 - Dec 6 by monmouth |
Legally and constitutionally there was no need for a vote Max. Morally and for their own sakes too there had to be one, and it had, as you say, been promised anyway, so there was never any practical possibility in reality of one not happening. Not sure why this point is ever raised to be honest, it’s a technicality. If they were to ever try and do that now with any element of the deal changed and it emerged - and it would - they would be finished, as individuals and an entity. They know that. So total red herring. Needs to be put back in the cupboard. It’s never was a realistic option and was never down to a show of openness. They would have been on the petty bus had they done that. |
Thanks for the explanation Mon, Top Man | |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 21:06 - Dec 7 with 4018 views | UplandsJack |
Any update on if the proposed ISG is getting off the ground and if so how do you get involved? [Post edited 7 Dec 2017 21:07]
|  | | |
| Independent Supporters Group on 21:10 - Dec 7 with 3999 views | max936 |
| Independent Supporters Group on 12:46 - Dec 7 by E20Jack |
They are finished whatever version of the deal they strike, let's be realistic here.
There are drag rights in place. Do we really think the Americans will be around in 18 months time? I doubt it.
Onc the deal is signed then the chances of us having any supporter shares in thr club within the next 2 years is minimal. And we would have a fraction of the amount in monitary terms for the shares than what they paid the other lot, a much smaller fraction indeed.
Well done all. |
Its goes to show what the Trust is about when it asks to interview people to go on the Trust what fing right have they got to do that, they should get out now each and everyone of them not fit for purpose get people in there prepared to get the Job done 21% shareholding we're talking about here ffs and they seem to be pandering to the whims of venture capitalists. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 21:29 - Dec 7 with 3962 views | pencoedjack |
| Independent Supporters Group on 21:06 - Dec 7 by UplandsJack |
Any update on if the proposed ISG is getting off the ground and if so how do you get involved? [Post edited 7 Dec 2017 21:07]
|
Ditto .... |  | | |
| Independent Supporters Group on 21:29 - Dec 7 with 3962 views | NeathJack |
| Independent Supporters Group on 12:46 - Dec 7 by E20Jack |
They are finished whatever version of the deal they strike, let's be realistic here.
There are drag rights in place. Do we really think the Americans will be around in 18 months time? I doubt it.
Onc the deal is signed then the chances of us having any supporter shares in thr club within the next 2 years is minimal. And we would have a fraction of the amount in monitary terms for the shares than what they paid the other lot, a much smaller fraction indeed.
Well done all. |
There are no drag rights in place at the moment. |  | | |
| Independent Supporters Group on 21:34 - Dec 7 with 3944 views | E20Jack |
| Independent Supporters Group on 21:29 - Dec 7 by NeathJack |
There are no drag rights in place at the moment. |
Exactly. We are signing a deal to put them in place. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 21:43 - Dec 7 with 3926 views | IAN05 |
| Independent Supporters Group on 21:29 - Dec 7 by pencoedjack |
Ditto .... |
PM Phil S and give him your email address | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
