Why is the Supporters Trust Silent?

[John William]

It's not even close. The Trust have taken over.

The 3,000 plus voting members of the Trust own a controlling share of the limited company Exeter City AFC Limited and have done for over 15 years. How is that "taking over"?

 

[ex_user1234]

That's alright Ed, no worries, I know nothing about the politics. I do hold the view rightly or wrongly that Tagg has steered the ship for a long time especially in terms of the youth set up eventually paying off, so have always assumed he was the kingpin up there

That's alright, no worries. Yes, Julian Tagg used to be the kingpin, but he has been swept aside by the Trust. Nick Hawker is now the Sun King. City's fate lies in his hands.

 

[John William]

I never said they want a voice. I merely stated that 95% of City fans do not vote in Trust elections.

All of them could if they wanted to. They just need to join the Trust to do that. It's be wonderful if they did.

How can it be any other way?

Straw man argument.

 

[ex_user1234]

The 3,000 plus voting members of the Trust own a controlling share of the limited company Exeter City AFC Limited and have done for over 15 years. How is that "taking over"?

Because in the past the Trust board took a back seat on many issues at the club. That is no longer the case. It reminds me of the novel Animal Farm.

 

[fred binneys head]

Because in the past the Trust board took a back seat on many issues at the club.

And were criticised for it.

 

[ex_user1234]

All of them could if they wanted to. They just need to join the Trust to do that. It's be wonderful if they did.

How can it be any other way?

Straw man argument.

You're not understanding my point. But then I guess you don't want to. If a political party was voted into government by only 5% of the voting population then their mandate to govern would be limited. At the very minimum, they would need to explain their decisions regularly and clearly to the population in order to stay in power.

 

[RedPaul]

I never said they want a voice. I merely stated that 95% of City fans do not vote in Trust elections.

The context of your 5% was post #12 on this thread when you stated that the Trust has "been elected by the fans (well about 5% of them in reality), so that gives them inalienable right to rule as kings and control the flow of information...it's a jaw droppingly arrogant position particularly as we fans own the club"

The clear implication is that the Trust isn't speaking for or acting on behalf of 95% of the fans and 95% of fans have no say.

The "fans that own the Club" are the members of the Trust. 3,500 of them. If only 28% of them vote to elect the Trust board, that doesn't mean that the Trust board doesn't speak for or represent the other 72%. Many of the 72% may be quite content. If they weren't no doubt they would resign their membership in their hundreds. But they don't.

Fans that are not members of the Trust do not "own the club". Many thousands of them are no doubt very valuable supporters to the Club and contribute in a myriad of different ways to the Club. The Trust Board can't represent these fans directly if they choose not to be part of the organisation that elects them. That's not the fault of the Trust Board.

 

[i8cornwall]

The context of your 5% was post #12 on this thread when you stated that the Trust has "been elected by the fans (well about 5% of them in reality), so that gives them inalienable right to rule as kings and control the flow of information...it's a jaw droppingly arrogant position particularly as we fans own the club"

The clear implication is that the Trust isn't speaking for or acting on behalf of 95% of the fans and 95% of fans have no say.

The "fans that own the Club" are the members of the Trust. 3,500 of them. If only 28% of them vote to elect the Trust board, that doesn't mean that the Trust board doesn't speak for or represent the other 72%. Many of the 72% may be quite content. If they weren't no doubt they would resign their membership in their hundreds. But they don't.

Fans that are not members of the Trust do not "own the club". Many thousands of them are no doubt very valuable supporters to the Club and contribute in a myriad of different ways to the Club. The Trust Board can't represent these fans directly if they choose not to be part of the organisation that elects them. That's not the fault of the Trust Board.

Pretty much spot on the only two things I’d say are:

1) people wouldn’t resign there trust subs as they would lose there gold membership and I still believe a vast amount of people are in the trust purely for that.


2) is that from the outside looking in so to speak the trust would gain a lot more members if it did actively ask all fans especially non members there thoughts on things, some people won’t make the effort and you need to go to them so to speak.

 

[ex_user1234]

The context of your 5% was post #12 on this thread when you stated that the Trust has "been elected by the fans (well about 5% of them in reality), so that gives them inalienable right to rule as kings and control the flow of information...it's a jaw droppingly arrogant position particularly as we fans own the club"

The clear implication is that the Trust isn't speaking for or acting on behalf of 95% of the fans and 95% of fans have no say.

The "fans that own the Club" are the members of the Trust. 3,500 of them. If only 28% of them vote to elect the Trust board, that doesn't mean that the Trust board doesn't speak for or represent the other 72%. Many of the 72% may be quite content. If they weren't no doubt they would resign their membership in their hundreds. But they don't.

Fans that are not members of the Trust do not "own the club". Many thousands of them are no doubt very valuable supporters to the Club and contribute in a myriad of different ways to the Club. The Trust Board can't represent these fans directly if they choose not to be part of the organisation that elects them. That's not the fault of the Trust Board.

This is all fine apart from the fact that the Trust run Exeter City Football Club these days, not just the Supporters Trust. There was supposed to be a separation of powers between the Trust and the Club, but that has long since disappeared. Hence Animal Farm.

 

[RedPaul]

This is all fine apart from the fact that the Trust run Exeter City Football Club these days, not just the Supporters Trust. There was supposed to be a separation of powers between the Trust and the Club, but that has long since disappeared. Hence Animal Farm.

The Trust is the majority shareholder. Why shouldn't it be 'in charge'?

At least Nick Hawker is elected (ok, as a Trustee not as Chair) by a membership. Anyone can be part of that membership - you don't even have to be a fan of ECFC - for a very modest annual outlay. Neither Julian Tagg or Matt Taylor is elected.

Fans of most football clubs, from Liverpool to Boreham Wood, would be delighted to have the same power and direct influence that you can as a Trust member at ECFC

And yes agree with I8, plenty of scope to expand the membership base and work out why more of the 15,000, 20,000, 23,000 aren't members.