| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? 11:28 - Oct 26 with 11014 views | CopaMundial |
Just wondering. |  | | |  |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:18 - Oct 26 with 1313 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 17:34 - Oct 26 by CopaMundial |
So....the fact that the fans elected representative on the board arranged for Bradley to come and speak to a disabled fans group suddenly alerted you to the fact that something wasn't quite right,that's one hell of a leap
I also read the Trusts statement in full and where I agree there are a number of areas that raise concern about the legality of it all I'm struggling to see a connection to HC apart from questioning how much he may or may not have known about the takeover.
Maybe you're just the suspicious type,lucky I'm not married to you,if you ever found lipstick on my collar I doubt very much that you'd buy the old bumped into the make up girl in Boots story.
Anyway it doesn't really matter,you asked the question and now we have the answer,as unpalatable as it may be for everyone at least now it's out there. |
No - as I stated quite clearly, there were two events that reminded me that the question that had been asked a fair number of times had never been answered. The bit about the meeting with the disabled supporters association was on its own just a little thing that made me think about the amount of work that HC did within the club but Bob Bradley himself referred to 'meeting with the supporters trust' after it which linked into the new owners also saying they had 'met with the supporters trust' and various journos after Thursday's trust meeting being questioned and also saying the new owners had told them they had 'met with the Trust'. It made me think what 'meeting with the Trust' actually meant that was all.
And when the question of legal action was raised so explicitly, I don't think it's that much of a leap to sit and think about the timelines involved, and who was involved with what decision and when. You said it just now - you questioned how much was known about the takeover. And that's why I asked the question - to see if there was any possibility that HC as a Board member could have known about it. It's been made obvious since that he did not. Phil and others have said they also asked him explicitly and he said no, and that had been confirmed by HJ. I'm satisfied with that answer.
By the way - no woman believes the 'bumped into the makeup girl in Boots' story. Some just don't much care ;-) | | | |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:31 - Oct 26 with 1274 views | TheResurrection |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 14:52 - Oct 26 by londonlisa2001 |
I've also just read the other thread about what has happened, and I couldn't agree more with what's been said by Monmouth, longlost and A Fan's Dad amongst others.
This whole situation is a sideshow - important, yes, should have been avoided, yes, naive, yes. But get it sorted (the new Trust guidelines will have done that), work out the best way forward (perhaps HC should stay doing all the supporters' liaison stuff with a salary from the club and someone new should take over the very defined role of Supporters' Director, ONLY responsible for representing the Trust at a Board level), and let's concentrate on TOGETHER building a supporters trust that is as strong and vibrant as possible, and make every possible effort to have that Trust work with the new owners to build a club that genuinely listens to supporters' concerns, starts listening to the Supporters' Director, involves them fully in every decision made and can still say with at least some conviction, 'we are the only premier league team part owned and run by its fans'.
If the American owners have ANY sense about them, they will realise that working with a vibrant Trust will actually help them. On the field, and (most importantly for them), off the field as well. |
Absolute rubbish.
Dear God woman, get a life away from this site if it helps remove the cach from your eyes.
How can you possibly believe anything written in that statement? Believe me there is a lot more to come out so park up your pathetic apologies until you find out.
I can't take anymore of your bleating sycophantic nonsense. |  |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:32 - Oct 26 with 1267 views | Legend83 |
Who the hell is this guy? | | | |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:36 - Oct 26 with 1249 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:31 - Oct 26 by TheResurrection |
Absolute rubbish.
Dear God woman, get a life away from this site if it helps remove the cach from your eyes.
How can you possibly believe anything written in that statement? Believe me there is a lot more to come out so park up your pathetic apologies until you find out.
I can't take anymore of your bleating sycophantic nonsense. |
Do you fundamentallly believe in the concept of fan ownership or partial ownership?
Because that is all I have said. I do believe in it, so want a strong and vibrant Trust going forward.
If you don't, that's obviously fair enough and your choice. Not sure why me agreeing with fan involvement makes me a sycophant. | | | |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:37 - Oct 26 with 1249 views | PozuelosSideys |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:31 - Oct 26 by TheResurrection |
Absolute rubbish.
Dear God woman, get a life away from this site if it helps remove the cach from your eyes.
How can you possibly believe anything written in that statement? Believe me there is a lot more to come out so park up your pathetic apologies until you find out.
I can't take anymore of your bleating sycophantic nonsense. |
If you had a bit more tact, a lot more would listen to you. |  |
| "Michu, Britton and Williams could have won 3-0 on their own. They wouldn't have required a keeper." | | Poll: | Hattricks |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:38 - Oct 26 with 1241 views | OptimisticJack |
Out of order Resurection [Post edited 26 Oct 2016 18:39]
| |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:38 - Oct 26 with 1241 views | CopaMundial |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:37 - Oct 26 by PozuelosSideys |
If you had a bit more tact, a lot more would listen to you. |
Well he did say cach to be fair | | | |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:47 - Oct 26 with 1191 views | TheResurrection |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:36 - Oct 26 by londonlisa2001 |
Do you fundamentallly believe in the concept of fan ownership or partial ownership?
Because that is all I have said. I do believe in it, so want a strong and vibrant Trust going forward.
If you don't, that's obviously fair enough and your choice. Not sure why me agreeing with fan involvement makes me a sycophant. |
I believed in fan ownership so strongly and was a passive activist for it on these sites for so long..... Right up til the point where the Trust ignored countless warnings and had the rug pulled from beneath the whole of us.
Let me ask you a hypothetical question in terms of any potential legal case we may have.
Could the fact it has now been established Huw Cooze held a dual identity, both working for the Club and the Trust, have a detrimental impact on that?
So let's say he knew more than he's let on, importantly, before the sale of shares took place? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:51 - Oct 26 with 1162 views | blueytheblue |
How can you be a passive activist?
It's like saying you're partly pregnant... | |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:56 - Oct 26 with 1129 views | Darran |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:51 - Oct 26 by blueytheblue |
How can you be a passive activist?
It's like saying you're partly pregnant... |
It's the technical term for mouthy c*nt.  |  |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:01 - Oct 26 with 1108 views | Wingstandwood |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:36 - Oct 26 by londonlisa2001 |
Do you fundamentallly believe in the concept of fan ownership or partial ownership?
Because that is all I have said. I do believe in it, so want a strong and vibrant Trust going forward.
If you don't, that's obviously fair enough and your choice. Not sure why me agreeing with fan involvement makes me a sycophant. |
Quote : "Do you fundamentally believe in the concept of fan ownership or partial ownership?".
Absolutely! But as things stand now i.e. having a supporters-director with conflicts of interest so utterly ridiculous, utterly offensive and intelligence insulting to any SCFC supporter with an ounce of reality/common sense? No thanks....... as things stand SCST looks more like HJ's, Dineens, Morgans and others little fluffy pet that they all have on a very tight leash and do with it what they f#cking well please. |  |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:07 - Oct 26 with 1062 views | E20Jack |
And still people are justifying a 40k annual salary for a Trust director. Staggering. |  |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:11 - Oct 26 with 1026 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:47 - Oct 26 by TheResurrection |
I believed in fan ownership so strongly and was a passive activist for it on these sites for so long..... Right up til the point where the Trust ignored countless warnings and had the rug pulled from beneath the whole of us.
Let me ask you a hypothetical question in terms of any potential legal case we may have.
Could the fact it has now been established Huw Cooze held a dual identity, both working for the Club and the Trust, have a detrimental impact on that?
So let's say he knew more than he's let on, importantly, before the sale of shares took place? |
I thought you were, which is why I asked.
So, my position, which is let's sort out the issues within the Trust and move forward with a strong fans' voice, can't possibly be against your position can it? And yet you berate me for that position?
In answer to your specific question. As I've said before, it is very commonplace that a shareholders' representative on a Board, receives a board fee. So that doesn't have any impact on anything. The issue here, as I see it (and it's only my position, I don't expect anyone else to agree) is that the fee received should have been very clearly and publicly disclosed and it should also have been paid to the Trust, who would have then made a decision about how much, if anything, was passed on.
I have also said that going forward, I believe that the roles of supporters' liaison and Supporters' Director on the board are different, and should be split. The first should be a club position, paid for by the club, and the second should be a Trust position, and not (in my opinion) done in conjunction with anything else to do with the club.
I suspect you think the same.
HC has denied knowing anything before the sale, and Phil and others (including HJ) have said the same. I am able to believe that, and will do unless there is a single shred of evidence that says otherwise. If there is, then that is obviously a different matter.
So although there is undoubtedly a problem with governance, it appears to me, that this is being addressed, has been taken on board, and will not happen again. In my mind, it shouldn't detract from the issue of the sale and the influence of the Trust going forward. | | | |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:14 - Oct 26 with 998 views | E20Jack |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:11 - Oct 26 by londonlisa2001 |
I thought you were, which is why I asked.
So, my position, which is let's sort out the issues within the Trust and move forward with a strong fans' voice, can't possibly be against your position can it? And yet you berate me for that position?
In answer to your specific question. As I've said before, it is very commonplace that a shareholders' representative on a Board, receives a board fee. So that doesn't have any impact on anything. The issue here, as I see it (and it's only my position, I don't expect anyone else to agree) is that the fee received should have been very clearly and publicly disclosed and it should also have been paid to the Trust, who would have then made a decision about how much, if anything, was passed on.
I have also said that going forward, I believe that the roles of supporters' liaison and Supporters' Director on the board are different, and should be split. The first should be a club position, paid for by the club, and the second should be a Trust position, and not (in my opinion) done in conjunction with anything else to do with the club.
I suspect you think the same.
HC has denied knowing anything before the sale, and Phil and others (including HJ) have said the same. I am able to believe that, and will do unless there is a single shred of evidence that says otherwise. If there is, then that is obviously a different matter.
So although there is undoubtedly a problem with governance, it appears to me, that this is being addressed, has been taken on board, and will not happen again. In my mind, it shouldn't detract from the issue of the sale and the influence of the Trust going forward. |
So do you believe our SD "volunteer" should have been trousering a quarter of a million since we have been in the Premier League then? Regardless of the notion of it being disclosed, let's treat that as a separate issue. [Post edited 26 Oct 2016 19:16]
| |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:17 - Oct 26 with 977 views | TheResurrection |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:11 - Oct 26 by londonlisa2001 |
I thought you were, which is why I asked.
So, my position, which is let's sort out the issues within the Trust and move forward with a strong fans' voice, can't possibly be against your position can it? And yet you berate me for that position?
In answer to your specific question. As I've said before, it is very commonplace that a shareholders' representative on a Board, receives a board fee. So that doesn't have any impact on anything. The issue here, as I see it (and it's only my position, I don't expect anyone else to agree) is that the fee received should have been very clearly and publicly disclosed and it should also have been paid to the Trust, who would have then made a decision about how much, if anything, was passed on.
I have also said that going forward, I believe that the roles of supporters' liaison and Supporters' Director on the board are different, and should be split. The first should be a club position, paid for by the club, and the second should be a Trust position, and not (in my opinion) done in conjunction with anything else to do with the club.
I suspect you think the same.
HC has denied knowing anything before the sale, and Phil and others (including HJ) have said the same. I am able to believe that, and will do unless there is a single shred of evidence that says otherwise. If there is, then that is obviously a different matter.
So although there is undoubtedly a problem with governance, it appears to me, that this is being addressed, has been taken on board, and will not happen again. In my mind, it shouldn't detract from the issue of the sale and the influence of the Trust going forward. |
You haven't answered my question.
Let's say he was aware and did meet with the Americans on a formal basis.
What then and please, no waffle, just stick to the point. | |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:18 - Oct 26 with 964 views | cockneyswan |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 18:18 - Oct 26 by jack247 |
Agree on that, though I can't see how the trust can pay them, especially if it's the kind of wage we are talking about. Am I missing some slush fund they have somewhere? Serious question. |
The salary Cozy has been taking should be paid to the trust, any dividends are paid to the trust, all expenses incurred by trust directors must be paid by club to the trust. I believe there would be plenty of cash to pay a good salary to an impartial trust director. |  | | |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:22 - Oct 26 with 937 views | waynekerr55 |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:17 - Oct 26 by TheResurrection |
You haven't answered my question.
Let's say he was aware and did meet with the Americans on a formal basis.
What then and please, no waffle, just stick to the point. |
Hypothetical question:
Is this in any way linked to the quote on Twitter by Dineen along the lines of "Ask Huw about the truth"? |  |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:23 - Oct 26 with 920 views | TheResurrection |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:22 - Oct 26 by waynekerr55 |
Hypothetical question:
Is this in any way linked to the quote on Twitter by Dineen along the lines of "Ask Huw about the truth"? |
It maybe but I haven't seen that. Dineen blocked me long ago. | |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:24 - Oct 26 with 915 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:14 - Oct 26 by E20Jack |
So do you believe our SD "volunteer" should have been trousering a quarter of a million since we have been in the Premier League then? Regardless of the notion of it being disclosed, let's treat that as a separate issue. [Post edited 26 Oct 2016 19:16]
|
I don't believe that he should have been paid for his role as supporters' director, no, other than a reimbursement of expenses from the Trust itself, or a very modest fee (£100 a meeting type stuff). Even though a lot of shareholders' directors DO get paid for their Board membership, the fact that the Trust is a charity, should preclude it.
I believe that he should have been paid for the work he has done for the club in the supporters' liaison role as every other person involved in the club has been. However, I don't believe that the two roles (which are distinct in my mind) should have been performed by the same person, so a choice should have been made and he should have only kept one role.
Going forward, I don't believe that the same person should perform both roles.
I still believe that the Trust represents our best interests as fans, and should be supported going forward despite this, as we have bigger battles in my opinion. | | | |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:28 - Oct 26 with 885 views | waynekerr55 |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:23 - Oct 26 by TheResurrection |
It maybe but I haven't seen that. Dineen blocked me long ago. |
Even after he shared canapes with you discussing his performance at the club  | |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:33 - Oct 26 with 852 views | TheResurrection |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:24 - Oct 26 by londonlisa2001 |
I don't believe that he should have been paid for his role as supporters' director, no, other than a reimbursement of expenses from the Trust itself, or a very modest fee (£100 a meeting type stuff). Even though a lot of shareholders' directors DO get paid for their Board membership, the fact that the Trust is a charity, should preclude it.
I believe that he should have been paid for the work he has done for the club in the supporters' liaison role as every other person involved in the club has been. However, I don't believe that the two roles (which are distinct in my mind) should have been performed by the same person, so a choice should have been made and he should have only kept one role.
Going forward, I don't believe that the same person should perform both roles.
I still believe that the Trust represents our best interests as fans, and should be supported going forward despite this, as we have bigger battles in my opinion. |
STILL haven't answered my question!!!! | |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:41 - Oct 26 with 802 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:33 - Oct 26 by TheResurrection |
STILL haven't answered my question!!!! |
I was bloody typing the previous answer when you asked it mun, so hadn't seen it.
In answer to your hypothetical question.
If Huw Cooze knew about the takeover and had met with the Americans formally, and didn't disclose it to the Trust, I believe he should be removed from his Trust position as supporters director with immediate effect, and also believe that the Trust should then review its agreements with him to see if legal action was possible for complete dereliction of duty.
But I haven't seen any indication whatsoever that this is even partially true, so it's a bit moot isn't it? It's a heck of an accusation to make. [Post edited 26 Oct 2016 19:43]
| | | |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:43 - Oct 26 with 782 views | harryhpalmer |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:11 - Oct 26 by londonlisa2001 |
I thought you were, which is why I asked.
So, my position, which is let's sort out the issues within the Trust and move forward with a strong fans' voice, can't possibly be against your position can it? And yet you berate me for that position?
In answer to your specific question. As I've said before, it is very commonplace that a shareholders' representative on a Board, receives a board fee. So that doesn't have any impact on anything. The issue here, as I see it (and it's only my position, I don't expect anyone else to agree) is that the fee received should have been very clearly and publicly disclosed and it should also have been paid to the Trust, who would have then made a decision about how much, if anything, was passed on.
I have also said that going forward, I believe that the roles of supporters' liaison and Supporters' Director on the board are different, and should be split. The first should be a club position, paid for by the club, and the second should be a Trust position, and not (in my opinion) done in conjunction with anything else to do with the club.
I suspect you think the same.
HC has denied knowing anything before the sale, and Phil and others (including HJ) have said the same. I am able to believe that, and will do unless there is a single shred of evidence that says otherwise. If there is, then that is obviously a different matter.
So although there is undoubtedly a problem with governance, it appears to me, that this is being addressed, has been taken on board, and will not happen again. In my mind, it shouldn't detract from the issue of the sale and the influence of the Trust going forward. |
was it not stated yesterday by either uxbridge, Phil or Jim that the remuneration was paid to the Trust and then a sum transferred to HC. | |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:50 - Oct 26 with 726 views | E20Jack |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:43 - Oct 26 by harryhpalmer |
was it not stated yesterday by either uxbridge, Phil or Jim that the remuneration was paid to the Trust and then a sum transferred to HC. |
I'd bloody hope not! The club get given the equivalent of 4000 annual membership funds and they hand it over to HC to trouser! That would almost make it far worse in my opinion because of course that would also mean they knew and hid it. | |
| |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 20:08 - Oct 26 with 661 views | TheResurrection |
| Lisa Who Tipped You Off ? on 19:41 - Oct 26 by londonlisa2001 |
I was bloody typing the previous answer when you asked it mun, so hadn't seen it.
In answer to your hypothetical question.
If Huw Cooze knew about the takeover and had met with the Americans formally, and didn't disclose it to the Trust, I believe he should be removed from his Trust position as supporters director with immediate effect, and also believe that the Trust should then review its agreements with him to see if legal action was possible for complete dereliction of duty.
But I haven't seen any indication whatsoever that this is even partially true, so it's a bit moot isn't it? It's a heck of an accusation to make. [Post edited 26 Oct 2016 19:43]
|
It's a hypothetical question, remember. No accusations are being made.
It's just this information is out there. People will know exactly what happened and if/when we go to Court, we'd need to be squeaky clean - which isn't something you can say at this moment in time. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
