Should Exeter City remain a fan-owned club?

[Steve H]

Simple answer to a simple question....
Should Exeter City remain a fan owned club? - Yes

 

[Spoonz Red E]

It's not my opinion that Nick Hawker is in charge. It's a fact.

Revisionism.
Your 'truth' has covered a much wider compass than Nick Hawker's role.

It's not my opinion that Nick Hawker is in charge. It's a fact. Why is that so controversial? He's the Chairman of the Trust and the Trust own the Club.

And yet you seem to be the chief propogator of the seeming 'controversy' that the Trust 'tells the Club what to do'.

I've read and considered all your posts and really do appreciate the debate and the challenge to orthodoxy.
That's the method I try to apply to most threads on here and conversations elsewhere entertaining different points of view.

Could you be the entrepreneurial spark that plants us firmly into the Championship keeping us ethical and sustainable?
Perhaps.
Personally, I'm not convinced.
The 'truth as I see it'.

You are confident in promoting your own business acumen and you have a going concern with FuneralZone.
I can see that you've done well to get the funding capital although you haven't yet turned a profit as far as I know.
That in itself is no sleight as you and others see the potential that could be realised and are prepared to use risk investment to unlock it.

Funeralzone may well corner the market and become the go to brand for funeral advice and spending as is your wish and the aspiration of those who fund you. You may make a fortune. It's not a radically new format but one shown to work well in other fields. With phenomenal success if you can grab the market. 'CompareTheCasket.com' as it were.
Now, whether you have a Facebook or a Myspace on your hands in a few years remains to be seen.

You say you would go for an organic model for Exeter City rather than using venture capital as seed.
The 'truth as I see it' over this thread is that I'm not sure how good you would be at that model as my take from your lines of attack and defence is that you are too quick by half to belittle other people's experience and skills. More 'takeover' than organic growth methinks.

Hyperbole such as 'Village fete', 'Cult', 'Marxists' and 'All animals are equal but some are more equal than others' thrown lazily into the mix do not fit well with ethical, sustainable aspirations or organic growth in my book.

You are welcome to disagree with all of this and continue to solicit support for your alternatives.
I wouldn't have it any other way.

 

[ex_user1234]

Revisionism.
Your 'truth' has covered a much wider compass than Nick Hawker's role.



And yet you seem to be the chief propogator of the seeming 'controversy' that the Trust 'tells the Club what to do'.

I've read and considered all your posts and really do appreciate the debate and the challenge to orthodoxy.
That's the method I try to apply to most threads on here and conversations elsewhere entertaining different points of view.

Could you be the entrepreneurial spark that plants us firmly into the Championship keeping us ethical and sustainable?
Perhaps.
Personally, I'm not convinced.
The 'truth as I see it'.

You are confident in promoting your own business acumen and you have a going concern with FuneralZone.
I can see that you've done well to get the funding capital although you haven't yet turned a profit as far as I know.
That in itself is no sleight as you and others see the potential that could be realised and are prepared to use risk investment to unlock it.

Funeralzone may well corner the market and become the go to brand for funeral advice as is your wish and the aspiration of those who fund you and you may make a fortune. It's not a radically new format but one shown to work well in other fields. With phenomenal success if you can grab the market. 'CompareTheCasket.com' as it were.
Now, whether you have a Facebook or a Myspace on your hands in a few years remains to be seen.

You say you would go for an organic model for Exeter City rather than using venture capital as seed.
The 'truth as I see it' over this thread is that I'm not sure how good you would be at that model as my take from your lines of attack and defence is that you are too quick by half to belittle other people's experience and skills. More 'takeover' than organic growth methinks.

Hyperbole such as 'Village fete', 'Cult', 'Marxists' and 'All animals are equal but some are more equal than others' thrown lazily into the mix do not fit well with ethical, sustainable aspirations or organic growth in my book.

You are welcome to disagree with all of this and continue to solicit support for your alternatives.
I wouldn't have it any other way.

That's fair enough. I'm not claiming I'm the finished article. Let's face it - I've walked into the lion's den by questioning the ability and worldview of the Trust, and it's brought out my combative side. This place is teeming with diehard Trust members and former Trustees who will almost do anything to shoot me down. As IndoMike pointed out correctly some time ago, I could do with some PR training. Because that's what it mostly comes down to. My views are exactly the same as many others I've spoken to at the Club (and, surprisingly, a couple of people at the Trust) - the difference being that I'm prepared to take a public beating on Exeweb as I don't have anything to lose, whereas they do.

 

[RedPaul]

No, he hasn't got commercial nous. That's part of the problem. He thinks money is uncouth. What he does have is political nous. He knows how to hide his Marxist views in a right-wing, uber-capitalist organisation like the Daily Mail. To be honest I don't have a problem with Nick being a shrewd operator. Each to their own. What I do have a problem with is his Marxist world view and how a football club should be run. I never signed up to that as an Exeter City fan and neither did thousands of others.

Ok, your view. Fine.

But I ask again, where is the evidence that Nick Hawker has forced his apparent Marxist views on the City fan base? Turning down a sponsorship from a betting company is not forcing Marxist views on the fan base.

In your reply to Spoonz, you say people disagree with Nick, even from within the Trust. Surely that is a good thing? The Trust shouldn't be a collective with no differing opinions.

Yet you have repeatedly referred to the Trust as a cult. Again this is an inconsistent argument. Either there are different opinions, or the brainwashing and collective group think means there is no room for dissent from the overall. It can't be both.

 

[Matt Phillips]

I'm not claiming I'm the finished article.

That's a relief...

Whilst there are a number of people on here who haven't had the access or interaction with characters in the club that you have, there are also a decent number who have had significantly more experience. I was on the Trust Board during a changing of the guard as it was, with Lawrence Overand passing to Martin Weiler in my first meeting, with Nick then elected a year after. Each brought their own strengths, indeed, strengths which were required at the time, but Nick definitely brought a greater focus on Governance, Professionalism and Commercialism when we desperately needed it.

It would be fair to say that the Trust has made some big interventions into the running of the club over the past few years, especially with some of the revised governance arrangements, but to say that this has resulted in making Nick more powerful than Julian Tagg is complete and utter nonsense. I would imagine some of the pressure on Tagg has been alleviated with Justin Quick being given the COO position, as well as the reshuffling of the board roles, but that certainly hasn't been done to elevate the Trust's, and Nicks, position above that of the Club.

We've all been waiting with baited breath for your plan, but anyone thinking that you might have something substantial should maybe go back and read your election manifesto. Every year I get the packs, I go through and cross out content which I think is meaningless and gives no indication about your goals or aims. There was alot of crossing out on yours. If anyone should have been frustrated about not being elected thinking they had so much to give, it was Julen Beer, who in my view wrote the best manifesto I've seen in years.

As I've said before, I think you have at times raised some sensible points, but you didn't put them where and when it mattered - in the manifesto you wrote - and this prolonged campaign isn't going to achieve anything, other than probably blow any chances you had of influence in the future, by antagonising a wide range of people within and around the club.

 

[ex_user1234]

Ok, your view. Fine.

But I ask again, where is the evidence that Nick Hawker has forced his apparent Marxist views on the City fan base? Turning down a sponsorship from a betting company is not forcing Marxist views on the fan base.

In your reply to Spoonz, you say people disagree with Nick, even from within the Trust. Surely that is a good thing? The Trust shouldn't be a collective with no differing opinions.

Yet you have repeatedly referred to the Trust as a cult. Again this is an inconsistent argument. Either there are different opinions, or the brainwashing and collective group think means there is no room for dissent from the overall. It can't be both.

A very small minority disagree in private. They do not publicise their views as they would get shot down and marked as untrustworthy to the cause. The rest of the Trust have drunk the Kool Aid I'm afraid. The Marxist vibe at the Trust is very real. Why do you think we didn't get our act together quickly with the furloughing? It's like everything is run as a community project, rather than a business that turns over £4m a year.

 

[ex_user1234]

That's a relief...

Whilst there are a number of people on here who haven't had the access or interaction with characters in the club that you have, there are also a decent number who have had significantly more experience. I was on the Trust Board during a changing of the guard as it was, with Lawrence Overand passing to Martin Weiler in my first meeting, with Nick then elected a year after. Each brought their own strengths, indeed, strengths which were required at the time, but Nick definitely brought a greater focus on Governance, Professionalism and Commercialism when we desperately needed it.

It would be fair to say that the Trust has made some big interventions into the running of the club over the past few years, especially with some of the revised governance arrangements, but to say that this has resulted in making Nick more powerful than Julian Tagg is complete and utter nonsense. I would imagine some of the pressure on Tagg has been alleviated with Justin Quick being given the COO position, as well as the reshuffling of the board roles, but that certainly hasn't been done to elevate the Trust's, and Nicks, position above that of the Club.

We've all been waiting with baited breath for your plan, but anyone thinking that you might have something substantial should maybe go back and read your election manifesto. Every year I get the packs, I go through and cross out content which I think is meaningless and gives no indication about your goals or aims. There was alot of crossing out on yours. If anyone should have been frustrated about not being elected thinking they had so much to give, it was Julen Beer, who in my view wrote the best manifesto I've seen in years.

As I've said before, I think you have at times raised some sensible points, but you didn't put them where and when it mattered - in the manifesto you wrote - and this prolonged campaign isn't going to achieve anything, other than probably blow any chances you had of influence in the future, by antagonising a wide range of people within and around the club.

Another one comes out of the woodwork. This is like some kind of Mafia cartel where one by one the old Dons reveal their true selves. Is there anyone on this thread who wasn't a Trust board member?

Reshuffling of the board roles? Er, no. The Trust increased the number of seats on the Club board to four. Or, put another way, 50% of the Club board. As for Nick Hawker not being more powerful than Julian Tagg, nice try. The Trust want people to think that. It doesn't fit their fluffy, community image to be associated with holding all the reins of power. But they do. And that's fine if that's what the fans want. At least be honest with them.

If I have antagonised people within and around the club, so be it. Let's see where Exeter City is within five years. At some point the fans will wake up to the reality that all is not right at City behind the scenes.

 

[Spoonz Red E]

A very small minority disagree in private. They do not publicise their views as they would get shot down and marked as untrustworthy to the cause. The rest of the Trust have drunk the Kool Aid I'm afraid. The Marxist vibe at the Trust is very real. Why do you think we didn't get our act together quickly with the furloughing? It's like everything is run as a community project, rather than a business that turns over £4m a year.

Because the Club knew it could be applied retrospectively in terms of the start date and there were legitimate and important discussions to be had first with the playing staff.
The Club got its act together from day one of the furloughing option but there was a process to undertake.
Furloughing staff is not a diktat - the employee has to give consent - and the Club is a considerate employer.
I know this to be so as a member of staff myself.
The idea that 'Marxists' would put a hold on accepting social-economic aid from a communal fund administered by the Government in a time of crisis does not compute.

 

[ex_user1234]

That's a relief...

Whilst there are a number of people on here who haven't had the access or interaction with characters in the club that you have, there are also a decent number who have had significantly more experience. I was on the Trust Board during a changing of the guard as it was, with Lawrence Overand passing to Martin Weiler in my first meeting, with Nick then elected a year after. Each brought their own strengths, indeed, strengths which were required at the time, but Nick definitely brought a greater focus on Governance, Professionalism and Commercialism when we desperately needed it.

It would be fair to say that the Trust has made some big interventions into the running of the club over the past few years, especially with some of the revised governance arrangements, but to say that this has resulted in making Nick more powerful than Julian Tagg is complete and utter nonsense. I would imagine some of the pressure on Tagg has been alleviated with Justin Quick being given the COO position, as well as the reshuffling of the board roles, but that certainly hasn't been done to elevate the Trust's, and Nicks, position above that of the Club.

We've all been waiting with baited breath for your plan, but anyone thinking that you might have something substantial should maybe go back and read your election manifesto. Every year I get the packs, I go through and cross out content which I think is meaningless and gives no indication about your goals or aims. There was alot of crossing out on yours. If anyone should have been frustrated about not being elected thinking they had so much to give, it was Julen Beer, who in my view wrote the best manifesto I've seen in years.

As I've said before, I think you have at times raised some sensible points, but you didn't put them where and when it mattered - in the manifesto you wrote - and this prolonged campaign isn't going to achieve anything, other than probably blow any chances you had of influence in the future, by antagonising a wide range of people within and around the club.

Lawrence Overand
Martin Weiler
Nick

Julian Tagg / Tagg
Justin Quick
Nick

Your language betrays your real feelings. Why do I get the feeling Nick Hawker is going to be the Trust Chairman for life?

 

[Spoonz Red E]

'Mafia cartel'.
There is a real danger of the sense of projectionism permeating your posts if you don't reel in this melodromatic phraseology.