City and Chiefs same owner.

[Lucky Jim]

Although I disagree profoundly with the sentiments expressed by Danny in his OP, I don't disagree with his sentiment that along the way in the Trust ownership period there have been 'incompetents'. No, I am not going to name names, but you only have to study the events of 2014 to know that the statement has more than a scintilla of truth. It would be foolish to say that the move from private to Trust ownership has been a seamless progress, in fact it's been anything but. Where the strength of the Trust ownership lies is in the corporate decision making being subject to checks and balances. The downside of this, and it's something that has been levelled at the Trust model since its inception, is that changing direction is somewhat akin to the change of direction of a supertanker. I don't imagine that the Exeter Trust model as it stands is the finished product ( I hope not anyway) as there are several areas where it is unresponsive and sometimes too slow to respond. However, given the choice between an outside investor and the Trust model as it stands I'll willingly settle for the latter.

David. As someone who might fall within your list of 2014 'incompetents' I feel the need to at least offer some alternative perspective. At that time, the club had a truly hand-to-mouth existence, operating under the clear mandate of all decisions needing to be taken 'at no risk to the Club'. Budgeting was carried out in a fairly rudimentary but prudent manner. But quite simply, cashflow was unable to cope with ill-timed postponements and lower than expected advance season ticket sales. No commercial bridging debt was available without personal guarantees from the Board (and I for one was not prepared to do that as i was acting on a purely voluntary basis out of my passion for the Club). Remember this was a time before the sales of the likes of Matt Grimes and others, which we have all now come accustomed to and which has given the Club its current financial stability and allows us all to think about promotion and possible survival in a higher division (Northampton game aside) while many other clubs genuinely face financial oblivion. Success (and dare I say competence) is measured in different ways and had we not managed to get through these really tricky times, we wouldn't now be having debates about our relationship with the Chiefs and how we might spend any Watkins windfall. It's not a question of whether things should have been done differently but whether they could have been done differently.

 

[David Treharne]

It's not a question of whether things should have been done differently but whether they could have been done differently.

Add in "did the will exist for things to happen differently?" and then the question of whether the issues were dealt with well, badly or even mishandled, and the debate could be carried forward. What it does illustrate well is how the Trust model was capable of adjusting to deal with the ongoing situation. Not in the short term, but in the longer term I would suggest that shift in power balance that was one of the outcomes that has subsequently benefitted the Club and the Trust. I don't actually have a list of 'incompetents', but it's as well to acknowledge that mistakes were made and that the Trust model at Exeter has, so far managed to adapt and survive, and along the way, mistakes have been made. My caveat about how the Trust fails to respond adequately, and/or very slowly to events remains. I don't subscribe to the "Acclaim for the victors" and "denigration for the failures" school of project management, but I do think it's important for those who are yet to run the Trust and the Club to know that along the way there have been failures as well as successes, and that we're by no means at a finite point as far as managerial development is concerned.

 

[Grecianpasty]

To be fair, it isn't actually a word.

 

[John William]

To be fair, it isn't actually a word.

It is if you're Dutch (or maybe a road-runner in a cartoon?)

Or Memphis Bleek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memphis_Bleek

 

[Grecian2K]

To be fair, it isn't actually a word.

It is, you know! (Even if it is all a bit "double dutch" to me)

bleek - Wiktionary

en.wiktionary.org

 

[Grecianpasty]

It is if you're Dutch (or maybe a road-runner in a cartoon?)

Or Memphis Bleek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memphis_Bleek

I think you'll find it isn't A road runner. It's THE road runner.

 

[John William]

I think you'll find it isn't A road runner. It's THE road runner.

Consider my wrist slapped.

 

[Hants_red]

It's a pity that such discussions about the Trust always turns in to a bashing exercise. I'd hoped that we could have celebrated 20 years of the Trust this past week, but I knew that was a waste of time on here, so didn't start a thread.

 

[DB9]

It's a pity that such discussions about the Trust always turns in to a bashing exercise. I'd hoped that we could have celebrated 20 years of the Trust this past week, but I knew that was a waste of time on here, so didn't start a thread.

I don't think many have "Bashed" the Trust, In fact as it is it's 20th Anniversary it's good to hear people's views on here good or bad.

 

[malcolms]

I don't think many have "Bashed" the Trust, In fact as it is it's 20th Anniversary it's good to hear people's views on here good or bad.

I agree..The point is that any mode of ownership is up for discussion/criticism and one of the weaknesses of the Trust in my opinion, has been its paranoia when presented with 'mostly' harmless questioning.