Why is the Supporters Trust Silent?

[Matt Phillips]

The deal was significant enough for the commercial team to be excited by it because I spoke to them directly about it. There was clearly no alternative waiting in the wings because it took another 6 months to find a replacement, which I presume was for a lesser amount but don't know for sure. The reason football clubs work with betting companies is they pay very well. Best case scenario we missed out on 6 months of sponsorship revenue.

But as Edward said, they shouldn't have been excited, or pursue the opportunity in the first place, given the well known stance from the Trust. It's been this way for years, well in advance of you attending meetings, as it's something which I raised at least two years before when approached by a community betting company who were interested in supporting the Trust, rather than the club, and the answer was still no. The whole commercial team will have been well aware of the policy but flaunted it. What did they expect? If anyone comes out of your story badly, it's them. I'd be asking serious questions about how much time they wasted pursuing this deal, when they could have been working on something which could have been approved, and who approved them to pursue it

You say that the Trust are this body who aren't representing the fans, or who the fans can't influence, but that's so far wide of the mark. If fans care and want change, they vote. If you want this policy to be removed, submit a resolution at the AGM. It's not difficult. Posting that it's a crap policy on here might start to generate some support to remove it, but ultimately if you want change, you need to follow through.

 

[ex_user1234]

But as Edward said, they shouldn't have been excited, or pursue the opportunity in the first place, given the well known stance from the Trust. It's been this way for years, well in advance of you attending meetings, as it's something which I raised at least two years before when approached by a community betting company who were interested in supporting the Trust, rather than the club, and the answer was still no. The whole commercial team will have been well aware of the policy but flaunted it. What did they expect? If anyone comes out of your story badly, it's them. I'd be asking serious questions about how much time they wasted pursuing this deal, when they could have been working on something which could have been approved, and who approved them to pursue it

You say that the Trust are this body who aren't representing the fans, or who the fans can't influence, but that's so far wide of the mark. If fans care and want change, they vote. If you want this policy to be removed, submit a resolution at the AGM. It's not difficult. Posting that it's a crap policy on here might start to generate some support to remove it, but ultimately if you want change, you need to follow through.

Why would I ask 5% of the City fanbase? Or the handful of people who turn up to the AGM? Exeter City is supposed to be owned by the fans. The question should be put to the fans. Or are you going to argue that only Trust members are fans?

 

[ex_user1234]

But as Edward said, they shouldn't have been excited, or pursue the opportunity in the first place, given the well known stance from the Trust. It's been this way for years, well in advance of you attending meetings, as it's something which I raised at least two years before when approached by a community betting company who were interested in supporting the Trust, rather than the club, and the answer was still no. The whole commercial team will have been well aware of the policy but flaunted it. What did they expect? If anyone comes out of your story badly, it's them. I'd be asking serious questions about how much time they wasted pursuing this deal, when they could have been working on something which could have been approved, and who approved them to pursue it

You say that the Trust are this body who aren't representing the fans, or who the fans can't influence, but that's so far wide of the mark. If fans care and want change, they vote. If you want this policy to be removed, submit a resolution at the AGM. It's not difficult. Posting that it's a crap policy on here might start to generate some support to remove it, but ultimately if you want change, you need to follow through.

How you can think the commercial team come out of this badly is bizarre. They were simply doing their job and getting the best deal possible for the club. There is supposed to be a separation of powers between the Club and the Trust. What this demonstrates is there is not. The Trust once again push their undemocratic Marxist views onto the Club to the detriment of us supporters who just want City to do well.

 

[Andy Holloway]

Why would I ask 5% of the City fanbase? Or the handful of people who turn up to the AGM? Exeter City is supposed to be owned by the fans. The question should be put to the fans. Or are you going to argue that only Trust members are fans?

Only TRUST members are the majority owners of ECFC by nature of their subscriptions, the give away is in the use of the word TRUST! I buy petrol from Tescos, but that doesn't make me an 'owner' of Tesco, as you seem to think FANS of ECFC are by the nature that they turn up and pay to watch ECFC.
In short, ECFC is only, majority, owned by those fans who belong to the Trust and not by ALL fans of ECFC.

 

[Colesman Ballz]

If you can point me to the thread in question that would be appreciated. Thanks. Of course, collating a few opinions on Exeweb is hardly the same as a full and open poll of all Exeter City fans.

You have just told Dommers to go and find out an answer himself by ringing the head of commercial dept, yet you are now asking Indo to "spoonfeed" you by going through the list of past threads which you are perfectly able to do yourself. Try being consistent for once.

On a similar note with relation to my comment- on Forest Quorn Rovers, you respond that Dale Vance can do what he likes as he owns the club, yet chastise the Trust, who are similarly the legal majority share owners of City. Get your effing facts straight, the wider fan base do not own Exeter City, it is the Trust which does !

 

[Matt Phillips]

How you can think the commercial team come out of this badly is bizarre. They were simply doing their job and getting the best deal possible for the club.

The commercial team acted against a policy which is well known within the club. The fact is, they were doing something which was clearly not in the remit of their job.

There is supposed to be a separation of powers between the Club and the Trust. What this demonstrates is there is not.

The Trust are the owners and set the mandate of the Club. This situation shows that there is a seperation, because it wasn't until the commercial arrangement was to get ratified until the Trust pulled them up on it.

The Trust once again push their undemocratic Marxist views onto the Club to the detriment of us supporters who just want City to do well.

The Trust is by it's definition democratic, as people vote to elect the board.

Having a policy to not work with betting companies is not Marxist, it's an ethical decision. The ethics might be different, but it's a similar premise to many countries refusing to have trade deals with countries run by dictators. It's not in their economic interests, but something they believe is the right thing to do.

 

[iscalad]

Why would I ask 5% of the City fanbase? Or the handful of people who turn up to the AGM? Exeter City is supposed to be owned by the fans. The question should be put to the fans. Or are you going to argue that only Trust members are fans?

Can't copy and paste, but there was a discussion about betting sponsorship on the Flybe struggling thread.

 

[i8cornwall]

Only TRUST members are the majority owners of ECFC by nature of their subscriptions, the give away is in the use of the word TRUST! I buy petrol from Tescos, but that doesn't make me an 'owner' of Tesco, as you seem to think FANS of ECFC are by the nature that they turn up and pay to watch ECFC.
In short, ECFC is only, majority, owned by those fans who belong to the Trust and not by ALL fans of ECFC.

so do you believe Trust fans are more important then non trust members?

you didn’t say this I’ll admit but just interested.

 

[Rosencrantz]

Is this the relevant post everyone is looking for...

https://www.exeweb.com/forums/threads/virgin-connect.61517/post-1822648

So a policy already in place but the club could run a case past the trust for approval.

 

[Anonymous]

so do you believe Trust fans are more important then non trust members?

you didn’t say this I’ll admit but just interested.

Trust members put their money into the club in addition to paying to watch games/buying merchandise etc knowing that they get nothing material back from their trust membership (and/or donations.) That inherently makes them more important to the club than people who don't do that, since they contribute more to the health of the club.