Trust AGM

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
31,520
Location
Hunkered down
Time for the "magnificent seven" to saddle up ride in and change the make up and mindset of the BOS as a Body.
No guarantee that the MS will unseat any current TB members who are standing again or their own preferred candidates. The excellent John Kanefsky was beaten the first time he stood by a TB placeman.

Do not underestimate the scale of the task.
 
Last edited:

Sexton Blake

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
4,747
No guarantee that the MS will unseat any current TB members who are standing again or their own preferred candidates. The excellent John Kanefsky was beaten the first time he stood by a TB placeman.

Do not underestimate the scale of the task.
Alistair I know from personal experience just how hard the task is but a like minded group would have a sporting chance of bringing about the necessary and essential change of mindset.

The first thing that needs to happen is for them to put themselves forward as a united group with a united aim and then it is surely up to the rank and file to support and elect them. Frankly if trust members cannot be bothered to do so then whilst I would be very disappointed they will only have themselves to blame and will be getting the BOS they deserve. Furthermore they will have no grounds to question or moan about the performance of the BOS when they have failed to take the one real and possibly one off opportunity that has been presented to them to force a change.
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
31,520
Location
Hunkered down
Alistair I know from personal experience just how hard the task is but a like minded group would have a sporting chance of bringing about the necessary and essential change of mindset.

The first thing that needs to happen is for them to put themselves forward as a united group with a united aim and then it is surely up to the rank and file to support and elect them. Frankly if trust members cannot be bothered to do so then whilst I would be very disappointed they will only have themselves to blame and will be getting the BOS they deserve. Furthermore they will have no grounds to question or moan about the performance of the BOS when they have failed to take the one real and possibly one off opportunity that has been presented to them to force a change.
Don't get me wrong as the aims and objectives are laudable. However, organising a united group will be difficult in itself and then there is the apathy of the Trust membership at large. Only a very tiny number bother to vote and the Trust Board will generally be able to muster enough votes from friends and associates to get their own preferred candidates elected and to defeat AGM Motions that are seen as a challenge to the status quo.
 

Sexton Blake

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
4,747
Don't get me wrong as the aims and objectives are laudable. However, organising a united group will be difficult in itself and then there is the apathy of the Trust membership at large. Only a very tiny number bother to vote and the Trust Board will generally be able to muster enough votes from friends and associates to get their own preferred candidates elected and to defeat AGM Motions that are seen as a challenge to the status quo.
Alistair I cannot disagree with anything you have said but surely with all the complaints about the BOS being like a vicar's tea party and having no teeth. Something has to be tried even if it ultimately proves to be a failed attempt.
 

paperclip

Active member
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
1,560
Is it at the Trust AGM that the club chairman is invited to address the audience? I recall Chorlton was invited a couple of times to do this but chose not to attend.

If it is, and assuming Tagg will be attending, would this be a good time for some well-phrased questions to be addressed directly to him on the present state of the club?
 

Avening Posse

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Messages
8,758
Location
Sydney
Not sure why people are surprised at the apathy of the Trust membership ?. Don't most people see the Trust as a surrogate for a controlling owner ?. It is a slender majority shareholder who puts in about 120K a year. Not sure that sets a great example for the other shareholders who own about 46%. Maybe between them they think they only need to rustle up 100K as well, if anything ?......not sure how this model actually works as a surrogate owner ?, can only see it doing what Mr Moxey describes it as with that level of cash injection. I suspect most people see that by having the Trust, it totally shuts the door forever for a rich benefactor to have a go, after all why would you put in big money if you don't have control.......so in my view it comes back to if we think the Trust is the way forward it has to put a LOT more money in, if it doesn't how is anything supposed to change when the door is shut to others ?....just saying like
 

Pete Martin (CTID)

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
10,108
Location
King's Landing
Not sure why people are surprised at the apathy of the Trust membership ?. Don't most people see the Trust as a surrogate for a controlling owner ?
Do they?

Well, the reality is (although a number of people don't seem to get it) that, from day one of the Trust being the majority owner, the power has always been in the hands of the members. The Trust Board is elected to pursue the will of the electorate. If sufficient members want any reasonable and legal action taken, the opportunity has always been there, through the AGM, or an EGM, to propose motions to direct the Trust Board to undertake whatever action is desired and provided there are sufficient members supporting the motion, then it has to be pursued. It's quite simple really but either folks don't understand the process or there are insufficient people prepared to take it forward, despite all the constant protestations on social media.

.....so in my view it comes back to if we think the Trust is the way forward it has to put a LOT more money in, if it doesn't how is anything supposed to change when the door is shut to others ?....just saying like
Remember that, as one example, Wimbledon have been Trust owned since they were formed. Remember who they beat at Wembley in May to get promotion to League One for the first time in their history. It's not all about money. Success is also forged by having the right people with the right skills, ideas, energy and drive in all the right positions.
 
Last edited:

Avening Posse

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Messages
8,758
Location
Sydney
Do they?

Well, the reality is (although a number of people don't seem to get it) that, from day one of the Trust being the majority owner, the power has always been in the hands of the members. The Trust Board is elected to pursue the will of the electorate. If sufficient members want any reasonable and legal action taken, the opportunity has always been there, through the AGM, or an EGM, to propose motions to direct the Trust Board to undertake whatever action is desired and provided there are sufficient members supporting the motion, then it has to be pursued. It's quite simple really but either folks don't understand the process or there are insufficient people prepared to take it forward, despite all the constant protestations on social media.



Remember that, as one example, Wimbledon have been Trust owned since they were formed. Remember who they beat at Wembley in May to get promotion to League One for the first time in their history. It's not all about money. Success is also forged by having the right people with the right skills, ideas, energy and drive in all the right positions.
I don't disagree with any of your points Pete, I am member. And I know it has the ability to make some decisions. it is a shareholder though, shareholders don't run business's, they have influence in terms of the people who run the business for them, but its not their role to run the business, thats for the employees. I'm not going to get into the whole debate about whether Tagg does a good job for Exeter City FC for the money he is paid, as I will just attract a myriad of people telling me that 45K (or whatever he earns) is top money and we could easily attract someone much better for the same money to do what he does, if it is indeed around 45k I think attracting someone else to do what he does is pie in the sky, but I suspect you probably agree with me on that point.
I strongly believe that having the Trust stops others from investing, and nothing that anybody says will change my view on that, but as I say I am a member, and want to see us progress, and deep down I believe we will not progress if no money goes in, regardless if Wimbledon has a good season. £!0 a month anybody ?....£2 a month can't even buy you a cup a coffee in town. And I admire your drive and passion etc, but without money we are going nowhere, we might have the odd good season, but I repeat without money we are going nowhere....just my view mind
 

Pete Martin (CTID)

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
10,108
Location
King's Landing
.....shareholders don't run business's, they have influence in terms of the people who run the business for them, but its not their role to run the business, thats for the employees.
With respect AV, I think you've countered your own argument there.

No, shareholders don't run businesses but "We own our football club" and, unless you're called Sir Phillip Green, you don't stand by and watch your businesses progressively failing without attempting to do something about it. That's simply irresponsible.

Have you not noticed that, generally, owners of football clubs with the traditional ownership model tend to take drastic action when results become consistently poor, attendances reduce and income drops significantly? Sometimes they do so far too frequently admittedly, but five years of disappointing results and performances would simply never be tolerated in the real world.
 
Top