Why is the Supporters Trust Silent?

[i8cornwall]

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.

As much as you are correct in what you are saying in reality there are many pit falls in what you have said.

As has been said very few of trust members vote or attend AGM meaning that any resolution would be passed or rejected within that very fine margin of Members. I would argue that any major resolution of any sort of change would fail due to the fear of change by a large number of our fan base.

it is interesting that we could be facing money problems straight in the face very soon and money from any major sponsor could mean life or death for the club. Personally if any betting company wanted to hand over a huge cheque which could save the club I’d take it in a heart beat, would the trust though?

 

[DB9]

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.

Perhaps during this lockdown they could build different turnstiles for Trust and Non-trust members/Different facilities/better views of the pitch? Never heard of such arrogance, That because someone is a Trust member he or she is more important than someone who isn't! Perhaps you would like it when we open up to fans again it should be for Trust members only??

 

[ex_user1234]

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.

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

 

[Edward]

You are presuming that the Club and Trust communicate well, Edward. This is part of the problem with the current set-up. Way too many separate power bases, all wanting different things. It's a huge waste of time and energy and stops Exeter City from moving forward with a single purpose.

Believe me, that is the issue you go after and you don't waste time on the side issue regarding the morality of betting. There should be far more alignment between club and Trust given the composition of the board and everybody should know the 'direction of travel' and any specific requirements. It is unfortunate if that is not the case, more so if there is any deliberate attempt not to hold hands and play nicely together.

In my view, the Trustees have been elected to make decisions: every issue cannot be the subject of a member-wide referendum. If they make enough good decisions, they will remain on the Board (accepting that the whole voting process IS probably helpful to incumbents so a little frustrating for you). In that event, your efforts might be more sensibly progressed by aligning with any sympathetic Trustees. If there aren't any, you are probably screwed.

That all said, whatever the rights or wrongs of betting, I am not certain you can conclude that the club is at a commercial disadvantage by being obliged to respect the Trust position. There are only opportunities for so many kit sponsors. You only lose out if you can't find enough sponsors for the available spots or a betting company is willing to pay more than anyone else. Is that the case?

 

[RedPaul]

As has been said very few of trust members vote or attend AGM meaning that any resolution would be passed or rejected within that very fine margin of Members. I would argue that any major resolution of any sort of change would fail due to the fear of change by a large number of our fan base.

But any City fan is free to join the Trust and put their views across as they wish. If anyone wants to attend, vote, propose a resolution - they can.
I accept many Trust members themselves don't engage with Trust matters, elections, resolutions. But the point is they can if they want and it is not the fault of the Trust board that many don't.

I don't understand the constant refrain that the Trust doesn't speak for the fans. No they don't. They represent the Trust members.
The Trust owns the Club. Anyone can join the Trust and have a say. It is that simple.

It is not up to the Trust to go an canvas opinion from thousands of non-Trust members on Trust matters.

 

[John William]

it is interesting that we could be facing money problems straight in the face very soon and money from any major sponsor could mean life or death for the club. Personally if any betting company wanted to hand over a huge cheque which could save the club I’d take it in a heart beat, would the trust though?

Strawman argument, as it's not remotely likely that a betting company would want to put a large sum into ECFC, but if it happened the Trust policy would facilitate such a discussion and decision as it says:-

..."it was agreed that the default position of the Supporters’ Trust would be to oppose gambling sponsorship and advertising as a general rule, but that any specific matters which come before the Club Board should be brought to the Trust Board for consideration."

 

[ex_user1234]

RedPaul:

I don't understand the constant refrain that the Trust doesn't speak for the fans. No they don't. They represent the Trust members.
The Trust owns the Club.

I'm glad you cleared that up. I agree the Trust does not speak for the fans. Perhaps they should stop claiming they do then.

 

[DB9]

I don't understand the constant refrain that the Trust doesn't speak for the fans. No they don't. They represent the Trust members.

I always believe that when the Trust took over the running/ownership of the club they did that for the fans of ECFC not just Trust members because at the time of taking over there weren't as many Trust members as they have now. The Trust has to run the club for the fans, whether they are members or not, I'd imagine they'd like everyone to be members but accept for what ever reason people aren't but that doesn't mean those fans don't come into their thinking.

 

[i8cornwall]

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.

fair enough, I can’t fault your honest response, as much as I don’t fully agree with it.

As generating money for the club is the main purpose of the trust i would argue that it really doesn’t matter which supporter it comes from and by that I mean a ST holder, Trust member or a causal fan donating £20. I know the point of the trust is to govern the club but I can only do that because of the money it’s members pay in membership fees.

 

[RedPaul]

I always believe that when the Trust took over the running/ownership of the club they did that for the fans of ECFC not just Trust members because at the time of taking over there weren't as many Trust members as they have now. The Trust has to run the club for the fans, whether they are members or not, I'd imagine they'd like everyone to be members but accept for what ever reason people aren't but that doesn't mean those fans don't come into their thinking.

You would hope that the things were aligned.

It's the attitude of "I want a say / no-one listens to me" without willing to be a part of the organisation that would enable you do have that, that I don't get