Is it too late for the Trust to regain effective control of the Club?

[malcolms]

I fear that would lead to "Jobs for the Boys" and a lack of true business nous.

And you think there is a lot of "business nous" knocking around in the current setup?

 

[rightwing]

Yes, but for those already in directors roles it would ensure that they are on top of their 'game' in order to get re-elected.

Directors are already being re-elected every 3 years Mike. As I stated above, it was a very close run thing for 2 of them last time round. This time (particularly if they continue to hold information that was promised to be put into the public domain at the earliest opportunity) I would expect at least 2, possibly 3 not to be re-elected.

Perhaps we should employ the Governmental system at the Club?

Legislature...................the BOS
Executive....................the directors
Judiciary......................Exeweb???????

 

[Roy Hodgson]

With no enlightenment over night do we need to march the troops back down the hill? Or is this further confirmation that an EGM is needed?

Have we got the 250 votes?

 

[rightwing]

With no enlightenment over night do we need to march the troops back down the hill? Or is this further confirmation that an EGM is needed?

Have we got the 250 votes?

Simply turning up in force at the next BOS meeting might have the desired effect.


Or at least the threat of it if information is not given by then.

 

[crocks]

I'll make up some placards!!

 

[Thames Valley Red]

Perhaps a sensible way forward is to ask the BoS to arrange an urgent open meeting to discuss specific areas of concern, including regard to the present and on-going Club financial position.
Calling for an EGM is a further waste of money and should be only considered if an open meeting is denied.
However the success of the petition will show that there is sufficient genuine concern for an EGM if required.
Remember though that the BoS and the Directors are two separate bodies.

With 5 posts are you a multis? An EGM is not waste of money if it removes the lack of acocuntability and control that exists now. Should we reduce our subs as well?

UTC

TVR

 

[Mike Blackstone]

Directors are already being re-elected every 3 years Mike. QUOTE)

But it's the Bossers who re-elect the directors? Correct? Not the Trust membership? That (being elected by the membership) would happen if the Bossers were actually the 'directors.'

Anyhow, back to hibernation mode for a while!

 

[12345]

An EGM would require a mail out to all Trust members which costs a lot of money. An open meeting can be broadcast on the web, costs nothing, and a better outcome as more questions can be asked.
Heres one.
How much does the Club benefit from having paid Directors?
I ask because if they cost (£???) a year do they benefit the Club more than the same sum being spent on players?
The answer probably depends upon how much is £??? per year.
Oh and why are some paid and some are not?
Do the paid Directors care more or less for the Club?
Are they of greater value?
If not then move to the Trust running everything.
This is what we need to know and an open meeting would help to get answers.
.

 

[Max Payne 2]

No matter what the solution to anything, eventually egos and profit get in the way. A lack of transparency for a very, very long time has enabled this. And If I can see that from NSW Australia then it's that obvious. Fresh blood is needed and hard decisions have to be made. I suspect on ly the temptation of a salary would persuade people of the necessary calibre to step up. There lies the rub.

 

[Thames Valley Red]

An EGM would require a mail out to all Trust members which costs a lot of money. An open meeting can be broadcast on the web, costs nothing, and a better outcome as more questions can be asked.
Heres one.
How much does the Club benefit from having paid Directors?
I ask because if they cost (£???) a year do they benefit the Club more than the same sum being spent on players?
The answer probably depends upon how much is £??? per year.
Oh and why are some paid and some are not?
Do the paid Directors care more or less for the Club?
Are they of greater value?
If not then move to the Trust running everything.
This is what we need to know and an open meeting would help to get answers.
.

It is still value for money, I understand the process and its costs by the way. As I have been involved in running it. Also FACEBOOK, email and other portals would significantly reduce the costs. So lets not water down the issue. A Director that cares more about his parking spot at a busy match, is that good? It is time for the trust to grow some and start running the club and directing its affairs. We might get the share restructured, a new share issue and a new ground development. <tick tock tick tock>

Can you afford as a Trust to lose people's goodwill to pay subs?