Why is the Supporters Trust Silent?

[IndoMike]

Did these people demand a reply? Did they chase it up why they didn't get a reply? I know I would have chased it up to the point where if it became obvious I was blatantly being ignored then i'd give up. It's worth remembering that there could be many reasons why someone doesn't reply to something and I have been guilty in the past of coming down on someone like a ton of bricks labelling them ignorant arses because they have failed to reply to a letter / email or whatever when it actually transpired that there were genuine reasons why a reply wasn't given. Just that I had not accounted for these and not given them the benefit of the doubt in the first instance.

It helps to not assume that just because you have offered up ideas or contacted somebody about something and not got a reply that it doesn't mean to say the people contacted aren't interested in you or what you have got to say / offer.

As a trust member if I did contact them about anything then I would expect a reply eventually after a few attempts at trying to obtain one, otherwise i would come to the same conclusion as you which would be fair enough IMO.

I disagree, Lego. I assume the Trust was not overrun with mails proposing ideas so they should have had the time at least to send a "Thank you for your mail" mail. It's just common decency and politeness, that is assuming such mails were sent to them
Regarding the other issues, I have no reason to assume the Trust isn't doing its job properly unless proven otherwise.

 

[Andy Holloway]

Did these people demand a reply? Did they chase it up why they didn't get a reply? I know I would have chased it up to the point where if it became obvious I was blatantly being ignored then i'd give up. It's worth remembering that there could be many reasons why someone doesn't reply to something and I have been guilty in the past of coming down on someone like a ton of bricks labelling them ignorant arses because they have failed to reply to a letter / email or whatever when it actually transpired that there were genuine reasons why a reply wasn't given. Just that I had not accounted for these and not given them the benefit of the doubt in the first instance.

It helps to not assume that just because you have offered up ideas or contacted somebody about something and not got a reply that it doesn't mean to say the people contacted aren't interested in you or what you have got to say / offer.

As a trust member if I did contact them about anything then I would expect a reply eventually after a few attempts at trying to obtain one, otherwise i would come to the same conclusion as you which would be fair enough IMO.

Or 'you' [that's the group 'you' not you personally Lego] could just turn up at a game and ASK one of the Trust people manning the Trust Stall at SJP, or approach one of the elected members walking around Red Square before any game. There are numerous different ways to get an answer to your offer/question whatever, rather than waiting for an email reply or a personal phone call.

 

[ex_user1234]

You should really get into a debate with Dale Vance, at Forest Green Rovers, I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that !

Ha! Difference is he owns FGR, so not much point to a debate. Whereas at City we fans supposedly own the club, but have no say on the Trust forcing us to live by their non mainstream, frankly odd personal views. If the Trust want a public debate on their decision to ban all forms of betting advertising at the club, game on!

 

[DB9]

Or 'you' [that's the group 'you' not you personally Lego] could just turn up at a game and ASK one of the Trust people manning the Trust Stall at SJP, or approach one of the elected members walking around Red Square before any game. There are numerous different ways to get an answer to your offer/question whatever, rather than waiting for an email reply or a personal phone call.

I'd imagine Andy if someone has ideas regarding the club/trust and how to raise funds probably the last place they'd want to discuss it was on matchday when you guys on the stall are busy and with a lot milling around, Would those at the time able to talk in detail while manning the stall? Just my thinking.

 

[ex_user1234]

Just because you disagree with a policy does not make it ridiculous. The decision to not accept sponsorship from betting companies has been both publicly discussed and clearly stated. If there was a groundswell of opinion against the decision then I’m sure it could be looked at it again. In fact, if anything, the opposite appears to be true and there might well have been pressure to implement a ban if there wasn’t one already in place.

My opinion is it's ridiculous. Your opinion is it's not. We are both entitled to our opinions.

Where and when was the decision to not accept sponsorship from betting companies publicly discussed? I asked the Trust to put the matters to the fans of Exeter City, which they did not.

Where was the pressure to implement a ban coming from? Yes, there has been talk in the media about betting companies overreaching their influence in the world of football, but zillions of clubs still work closely with betting companies. We are putting ourselves at a competitive disadvantage by ruling out the possibility of even working with betting firms. Again, based on the personal belief of the Trust that betting is bad, but booze and eating junk food isn't etc etc.

 

[ex_user1234]

Leaving aside the rights or wrongs of bookmakers as sponsors, the real issue is why a member of the commercial department spent time developing a deal which was always going to be rejected if the position of the Trust was this clear. One hopes it was this episode which prompted the Trust to reach its position rather than the club not understanding what was a previously established Trust policy.

As an aside, it is perfectly reasonable for the Trust to hold the power of veto on certain matters as that is a common requirement for significant shareholders and might already form part of their governance of the club (if I recall correctly).

You are presuming that the Club and Trust communicate well, Edward. This is part of the problem with the current set-up. Way too many separate power bases, all wanting different things. It's a huge waste of time and energy and stops Exeter City from moving forward with a single purpose.

 

[Andy Holloway]

I'd imagine Andy if someone has ideas regarding the club/trust and how to raise funds probably the last place they'd want to discuss it was on matchday when you guys on the stall are busy and with a lot milling around, Would those at the time able to talk in detail while manning the stall? Just my thinking.

Firstly i'm nothing to do with The Trust or have any Trust input on match days, apart from spending my odd groats supporting it.
The people who do man the stall would, i'm sure, be more than happy to find time to at least initiate a chat about an idea. I'm not saying that they would want to go into every minute detail of an idea, but a brief outline and establish a line of communication for more detailed discussion at a later, more convenient time to both parties.

If an idea is that good then i'm sure it's also worth putting yourself out to bring it to someone's attention.

Failing all else, Spoonz might be able to help you find another way to bring your idea to Trust attention.

 

[ex_user1234]

It does seem bizarre and totally over the top.

"Good news, we have a new sponsor!"

"Great. Who is it"

"A betting company"

"NO, that cannot be allowed. Go away and get someone else"

"But why, they are paying bare money"

"Betting is Evil "

"But..."

"Betting is EVIL ...dismissed"

It IS bizarre and totally over the top. But that's the way the Trust board think. It's exactly why I'm posting on Exeweb. To show regular fans of Exeter City that their club is being run by people who have odd views. It really matters as the Trust are putting their own personal views ahead of the success of our football club. It is the height of arrogance.

 

[DB9]

Firstly i'm nothing to do with The Trust or have any Trust input on match days, apart from spending my odd groats supporting it.
The people who do man the stall would, i'm sure, be more than happy to find time to at least initiate a chat about an idea. I'm not saying that they would want to go into every minute detail of an idea, but a brief outline and establish a line of communication for more detailed discussion at a later, more convenient time to both parties.

If an idea is that good then i'm sure it's also worth putting yourself out to bring it to someone's attention.

Failing all else, Spoonz might be able to help you find another way to bring your idea to Trust attention.

Sorry for implying you have some sort of Trust involvement (I honestly thought you were, My Bad) Just thought with hundreds milling around to try and talk to someone face to face might be difficult, But if the person has sent in their ideas by email (I have no idea if they had or not) and not had some sort of reply then I'd be concerned if that was the case.

 

[IndoMike]

My opinion is it's ridiculous. Your opinion is it's not. We are both entitled to our opinions.

Where and when was the decision to not accept sponsorship from betting companies publicly discussed? I asked the Trust to put the matters to the fans of Exeter City, which they did not.

Where was the pressure to implement a ban coming from? Yes, there has been talk in the media about betting companies overreaching their influence in the world of football, but zillions of clubs still work closely with betting companies. We are putting ourselves at a competitive disadvantage by ruling out the possibility of even working with betting firms. Again, based on the personal belief of the Trust that betting is bad, but booze and eating junk food isn't etc etc.

If I'm not mistaken there was a thread on Exeweb a couple of years ago asking for opinions about City associating with betting firms. That's not official of course - just an opinion poll.