• We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Read more here

Why is the Supporters Trust Silent?

DB9

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
24,501
Location
Hampshire. Heart's in N Devon
And if you asked Russel and Lewis "are you guilty of fraud?" they would have said "No m'lud, innocent as the day we was born."
What's R&L got to do with it? Football clubs are businesses and in business it is your job to be successful and make profit, If there was a caveat to say the primary role of a football club is to serve the community then we wouldn't have what we have now, Multi-Billion pound TV contracts, Multi- millionaire players, It would be a smaller concern run by well meaning people just surviving like many other community based projects .
 

SGF

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
380
If football clubs are meant to be posting a profit, then there are a lot at our level who are failing:

 

DB9

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
24,501
Location
Hampshire. Heart's in N Devon
If football clubs are meant to be posting a profit, then there are a lot at our level who are failing:

Never said they did but I'm just responding to Anon saying that football clubs are there for the community and not for profit. Football, Especially the top flight is a madness in itself and if it were just for the community, I don't know of any other "Community" based businesses that pay £millions to their workers, Land Multi- billion TV deals and don't give a fig about the same businesses lower down the food chain like football does. Plus i also said there are at least 20 Chairmen/Owners who see a profit in football (Mainly PL Chairmen/Owners)
 

Bittners a Legend

Active member
Joined
Mar 24, 2005
Messages
4,749
Pretty much. The legitimacy of the Trust, after all, is based on the number of Trust members. Completely self-serving, but from a realpolitik point of view it makes sense. If you're the Trust.
I find this utterly bizarre. The legitimacy of the Trust is based on its ability to successfully govern the football club and ensure its viability and survival for the the sake of the community and the next generation of fans. The number of members is utterly irrelevant other than that more members equates to more cash and more theoretical opportunity to influence the club at Board level. You don't necessarily need to be a Trust member to influence or effect change but clearly you have to be willing to work with them rather than mindlessly attacking the Trustees (or "The Trust").

I actually voted for you at the last election but your desire to hurt and smear the Trust for no apparent decent reason suggests I made a very poor decision.

It's great to see Edward posting on here - we all owe him a small debt of gratitude in my opinion. There is no doubt the club is in a much better place today than it was 5 years and I have no doubt that the role played by individuals such as Edward in scrutinising the business practices, or lack of, played a role in some of the reforms we have subsequently seen.
 

Anonymous

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Oct 22, 2008
Messages
6,019
Location
in yr internats
Never said they did but I'm just responding to Anon saying that football clubs are there for the community and not for profit. Football, Especially the top flight is a madness in itself and if it were just for the community, I don't know of any other "Community" based businesses that pay £millions to their workers, Land Multi- billion TV deals and don't give a fig about the same businesses lower down the food chain like football does. Plus i also said there are at least 20 Chairmen/Owners who see a profit in football (Mainly PL Chairmen/Owners)
Football clubs are not being run for the benefit of communities, they are being run for personal gain and revenue, but "football" as an actual game was not developed/played for that reason.

You are misunderstanding what I mean by the term football. I'm talking about how it should be run, not how it is commonly run today.
 

DB9

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
24,501
Location
Hampshire. Heart's in N Devon
Football clubs are not being run for the benefit of communities, they are being run for personal gain and revenue, but "football" as an actual game was not developed/played for that reason.

You are misunderstanding what I mean by the term football. I'm talking about how it should be run, not how it is commonly run today.
Reply
And you are talking about running football at a low, amateur level and before it became proffesional, Clubs at level five and up are businesses, that is why most have the word "LTD" at the end of them. You can't hark back to a time when that time hasn't exsisted for over 100+ years, To say that is how it should be run then you'll be very disappointed, No one has ever said lets return to a time when a game was run the way you want to, We have moved on from those days.

Most clubs are like i say run as a business not for the benefit of the community, They are run to try and be successful and in that rare thing turn a profit, Plus clubs are private run companies, That is why most would never see a fan in the boardroom, Unless they invest a shed load into that club.
 

Anonymous

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Oct 22, 2008
Messages
6,019
Location
in yr internats
And is that what you want from your club? Because I sure as shit don't.
 

DB9

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
24,501
Location
Hampshire. Heart's in N Devon
And is that what you want from your club? Because I sure as **** don't.
Show me where I've said I wanted that please? All I'm doing is pointing out that football is a not ever going to how you'd like it Anon, They are simple facts. As we have a different ownership model than most it is in our interest to work within the community, To be seen to be involved, Most other clubs don't have to, accept from a PR point of view.
 

ex_user1234

Resigned
Joined
Oct 16, 2019
Messages
678
The legitimacy of the Trust is based on the work done by everyone involved in it, particularly those who were there to save the Club when we were going to fold. The number of members could fall to 500 and it would still be legitimate, there would just be less money flowing through.

What I still struggle to understand though is, when you stood for election, was your aim to bring the Trust down from inside, or did you really think you could reform it? You said you attended enough Trust Board meetings to know it wasn't a good fit, but the meetings you attended were before you stood, so why stand in the first place?

It's perfectly acceptable to criticise the Trust, no-one person or body can be immune from that - and they're will have definitely made mistakes - but all you're doing is trying to undermine it with cheap shots which, as much as you don't want it to come across that way, simply looks bitter.

Come up with a plan for how to do things differently, or how to reform the Trust, and people might start taking your posts more seriously.
1. Of course the legitimacy of the Trust is tied to the number of members. If there were only three members then the Trust could hardly claim to represent the wishes of the Exeter City fanbase. No one is arguing the Trust didn't save the club. It most certainly did. That was 20 years ago, however, and times change. In my opinion the Trust and Club need a lot of changes in order for City to unleash its full potential.

2. My aim was to help reform the Trust, in order to help Exeter City. I went to Trust meetings before and after the election. Without going into specific reasons, I have since come to the conclusion it is not a good fit for either party.

3. As stated previously, I am not posting on Exeweb for the benefit of the usual crowd of regular posters, who are often quick to shoot down any form of new thinking, but for the wider audience of City fans who are not members. They can make their own mind up from reading my posts. For example, you think I am bitter and make cheap shots against the Trust. I suspect others may find my take on what happens behind the scenes at City to be quite illuminating. I have shared on here about 5% of what I know. The skulduggery and political battles are real I'm afraid.

Ed
 

ex_user1234

Resigned
Joined
Oct 16, 2019
Messages
678
I find this utterly bizarre. The legitimacy of the Trust is based on its ability to successfully govern the football club and ensure its viability and survival for the the sake of the community and the next generation of fans. The number of members is utterly irrelevant other than that more members equates to more cash and more theoretical opportunity to influence the club at Board level. You don't necessarily need to be a Trust member to influence or effect change but clearly you have to be willing to work with them rather than mindlessly attacking the Trustees (or "The Trust").

I actually voted for you at the last election but your desire to hurt and smear the Trust for no apparent decent reason suggests I made a very poor decision.

It's great to see Edward posting on here - we all owe him a small debt of gratitude in my opinion. There is no doubt the club is in a much better place today than it was 5 years and I have no doubt that the role played by individuals such as Edward in scrutinising the business practices, or lack of, played a role in some of the reforms we have subsequently seen.
We live in a democracy and people are allowed to have opinions. My opinions are genuinely held and based on what I have seen first-hand. I am merely informing City fans that there are Marxist tendencies amongst the Trust board that mean City is unlikely to ever fulfil its potential. You can find that hurtful and claim it is a smear. It also happens to be true in my opinion. And the reason I am pointing it out is I think the fans have a right to know how the Trust thinks. It is their football club after all. If the Trust or anyone else disagrees with my views, I have no problem with that. As I said, we live in a democracy.
 
Top