3 New Directors Appointed Today

[Grecian in Guzz]

If only people would read the information that's provided...

Come off it, what would people have to moan about then?
[/QUOTE]
But when the info provided is 180 degrees different to what happens it is difficult what to believe eg Matt Taylor has promised “‘two to four marquee signings’" (https://www.devonlive.com/sport/football/football-news/patience-call-exeter-city-boss-5515019)
but we still end up with a weaker team than last season.
Spend the Ollie Money now before it's too late !

 

[iscalad]

Come off it, what would people have to moan about then?

But when the info provided is 180 degrees different to what happens it is difficult what to believe eg Matt Taylor has promised “‘two to four marquee signings’" (https://www.devonlive.com/sport/football/football-news/patience-call-exeter-city-boss-5515019)
but we still end up with a weaker team than last season.
Spend the Ollie Money now before it's too late !
[/QUOTE]
It will be a while before we get all the Ollie money

 

[Edward]

But they don't all have voting rights.

Ask a Trust member on Saturday.

That may be so but there does now appear to be more club appointed directors (who don't have voting rights) than permitted by the Governance Manual.

And I might argue there is plenty of ambiguity as the articles don't mention non-voting directors at all and suggest that decisions are reached from a simple majority of those present.

It would also appear that other articles are being ignored. That might not be significant at all but a lot of effort presumably went into the drafting of these documents and it seems odd that they are being ignored within the first year.

My own view is that an excessive number of non-executive directors (with or without voting rights) is silly. The business is pretty straightforward. The key is to have a strong enough executive team so you don't need half a dozen folk providing oversight.

 

[Pete Martin (CTID)]

That may be so but there does now appear to be more club appointed directors (who don't have voting rights) than permitted by the Governance Manual.

And I might argue there is plenty of ambiguity as the articles don't mention non-voting directors at all and suggest that decisions are reached from a simple majority of those present.

It would also appear that other articles are being ignored. That might not be significant at all but a lot of effort presumably went into the drafting of these documents and it seems odd that they are being ignored within the first year.

My own view is that an excessive number of non-executive directors (with or without voting rights) is silly. The business is pretty straightforward. The key is to have a strong enough executive team so you don't need half a dozen folk providing oversight.

I am at a loss to know why, if the new people are at the club in an advisory capacity as suggested and are non-voting, why they need to be on the board at all. It rather smacks of, as has already been suggested, another string to their bows in LinkedIn.

 

[Egg]

But when the info provided is 180 degrees different to what happens it is difficult what to believe eg Matt Taylor has promised “‘two to four marquee signings’" (https://www.devonlive.com/sport/football/football-news/patience-call-exeter-city-boss-5515019)
but we still end up with a weaker team than last season.
Spend the Ollie Money now before it's too late !

Appreciate the link. Please point me to where, exactly, Matt Taylor promises anything.

Rather, he makes it abundantly clear that signing the calibre of player he is looking for will present a challenge and, if it happens at all, the likelihood is that it won’t occur until late in the day.

 

[ExmouthMart]

I am at a loss to know why, if the new people are at the club in an advisory capacity as suggested and are non-voting, why they need to be on the board at all. It rather smacks of, as has already been suggested, another string to their bows in LinkedIn.

I am still not sure why we need these ‘experts’ and who suggested we need them. Obviously they are going to suggest radical new ideas for growth and development but what happens when it comes to paying for it?! We run a tight ship at the moment and recently parted with a substantial sum for the new screen which may or may not pay for itself and is a gamble. All these new appointments don’t seem to be initiated by The Trust. Growing the brand is fair enough but let’s invest in the product first and not just sell the assets. I expect the Randall money is in instalments over a number of years and will be for a certain budget thats being planned for as we speak. Taylor said it was on our terms, so what does that mean?! Hopefully money upfront for team building now but I doubt it…….

 

[Alistair20000]

I am at a loss to know why, if the new people are at the club in an advisory capacity as suggested and are non-voting, why they need to be on the board at all. It rather smacks of, as has already been suggested, another string to their bows in LinkedIn.

Agreed. Those skills can be delivered without a presence on the Board.

 

[Egg]

Agreed. Those skills can be delivered without a presence on the Board.

Possibly. But a supporter-owned football club isn't your bog-standard business. With that in mind, I can see why it might be expedient to make these people non-executive directors. If the intention is for them to affect positive change then I'd imagine you heighten the likelihood of that happening if you make it as easy as possible for them to engage with those from club and Trust at board level.

Is it absolutely necessary for them to sit on the board? Possibly not. Will their ability to make a positive contribution to the club be heightened by a place on the board? Almost certainly IMO.

 

[Martin Lawrence]

I am at a loss to know why, if the new people are at the club in an advisory capacity as suggested and are non-voting, why they need to be on the board at all. It rather smacks of, as has already been suggested, another string to their bows in LinkedIn.

My understanding is that the club board are looking to establish a non-executive arm that can act as as "Strategic Advisory Board". These types of arrangements are fairly common in large organisations. I don't think it matters that much whether they are within the Board or outside in terms of their functioning. I guess some of those new non-execs might be wanting to bolster their LinkedIn profiles, but in honesty, if they are helping ECFC to improve as a business, then I am not that bothered by it. They are all unpaid directors, and lets face it, none of them are going to "get rich" off of ECFC.

 

[Billy The Fish]

Appoint another couple of thousand directors and that's Project 6000 sorted.

Boom !