| FAO Some Trust Person 14:12 - Nov 26 with 26283 views | Darran |
How many co-oppers have applied for co-option and when will we find out who’s been co-opted? |  |
| |  |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:22 - Nov 26 with 1124 views | 3swan |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:15 - Nov 26 by Phil_S |
I’m not taking it at all personally that these people didn’t want to get involved in my watch 😂 |
Subliminal message |  | | |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:23 - Nov 26 with 1122 views | NeathJack |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 17:54 - Nov 26 by Uxbridge |
Yes |
I assume then that a price increase is on the way? |  | | |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:26 - Nov 26 with 1096 views | barry_island |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:23 - Nov 26 by NeathJack |
I assume then that a price increase is on the way? |
More likely a price cut so everyone can be quietened down whilst "things" are tidied up in the background. Everybody'll be happy then. | |
| Swansea City, THE Austerity Club. |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:27 - Nov 26 with 1089 views | londonlisa2001 |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:23 - Nov 26 by NeathJack |
I assume then that a price increase is on the way? |
I'd actually laugh if they do that. | | | |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:29 - Nov 26 with 1079 views | Nookiejack |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 18:28 - Nov 26 by Uxbridge |
Oh on the clarity of the rule I agree, although I suspect we disagree on the application of the remedy, or at least the timing. FWIW, advice from SD was clear that people should remain in situ until the AGM.
It's hardly ideal of course, although the circumstances are far from clear cut. Newer version of the rules were passed in an earlier AGM which exclude the rule. True there were issues with the adoption (partly the Trust's responsibility but also at Supporters Direct... I'll happily tell you why that is offline, but it wouldn't be right to post it here, or you can judge if it is, up to you) but they were legitimately adopted if not filed.
As for what happens next, well that'll be interesting. AGM plan was always to adopt the latest model rules. Whether there should be a clause in there regarding term limits is a fair one, and I tend to agree, but to reiterate an old point, it's only recently that any bugger has shown any inclination to stand. That shouldn't be forgotten IMO. We're not here because a couple of people (it may only be 1, there's some argument on that, I think it's 2) have decided to stay on at the expense of others. If they're not passed then I suspect we're in a very different position entirely. |
Its a very dangerous precedent though.
The Trust Board didn't have a Quorum to recommend the deal. What happens in the future? Does the Trust Board then make decisions and without a Quorum then say we will wait until the next AGM?
Whats the legal process for a member to challenge this? Can a member challenge the SD's advice with the FCA/PRA?
The Trust Board stated it conducted a full review of this at the last AGM? | | | |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:31 - Nov 26 with 1068 views | Neath_Jack |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 17:23 - Nov 26 by Uxbridge |
I'm going to go with "take the advice of Supporters Direct's and the Trust’s legal counsel's ideas of due process, rather than the more militant interpretations which may be somewhat biased in their own regard" if it's alright with you  AGMs soon enough anyway, the members will ultimately decide then.
Not that there's any real major decisions to be taken in the immediate week or two, apart from who's next to drink from the poisoned chalice of course.
If any posters from here applied and are hiding behind aliases then I'd be interested to know who they are. Not that I'll be basing my own decision on their posting history, that'll be largely on what their statements say they'll bring to the role and what they aim to do in the role (I've not seen them yet so currently blind on that), but it'd give me some insight. I know who Eilian is anyway, we had a very interesting chat earlier in the week. |
Militant and biased?
Did you keep a straight face when you typed that? |  |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:37 - Nov 26 with 1048 views | exiledclaseboy |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:15 - Nov 26 by Phil_S |
I’m not taking it at all personally that these people didn’t want to get involved in my watch 😂 |
Some did but got blackballed. 😱 |  |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:59 - Nov 26 with 1011 views | Uxbridge |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:29 - Nov 26 by Nookiejack |
Its a very dangerous precedent though.
The Trust Board didn't have a Quorum to recommend the deal. What happens in the future? Does the Trust Board then make decisions and without a Quorum then say we will wait until the next AGM?
Whats the legal process for a member to challenge this? Can a member challenge the SD's advice with the FCA/PRA?
The Trust Board stated it conducted a full review of this at the last AGM? |
I'm curious who you think was over the 12 Year limit last summer. Plus, it was only a recommendation, it was unanimous as I recall, and the vote was taken by the members. I know you're looking for any crowbar to get past that, but those grounds seem rather spurious.
I'd suggest contacting Supporters direct on the third paragraph. I don't know and one of us would have to ask someone to find out, so it may as well be you!
For me, the AGM would be the logical place for the model rules and the board structure to get addressed. If it wasn't so close them an EGM would have been appropriate IMO, but it is. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:06 - Nov 26 with 981 views | 3swan |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:59 - Nov 26 by Uxbridge |
I'm curious who you think was over the 12 Year limit last summer. Plus, it was only a recommendation, it was unanimous as I recall, and the vote was taken by the members. I know you're looking for any crowbar to get past that, but those grounds seem rather spurious.
I'd suggest contacting Supporters direct on the third paragraph. I don't know and one of us would have to ask someone to find out, so it may as well be you!
For me, the AGM would be the logical place for the model rules and the board structure to get addressed. If it wasn't so close them an EGM would have been appropriate IMO, but it is. |
"To complete the governance review from last year it is planned to propose the adoption of the latest SD Model Rules at the forthcoming Swans Trust AGM, to be held in January. SD has confirmed that any Trust board members affected should remain in place until then. "
If it's planned to adopt the latest SD Model Rules then I would assume that they have already been vetted and discussed. Why not say if there is a 12 year or any time limit within those rules? | | | |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:10 - Nov 26 with 962 views | whoflungdung |
Some wondrously eloquent posting here but I'm not sure it has any effect or impact on our team and if it stays in PL, which is key
Maybe, we should be more concerned about matters on the field | |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:14 - Nov 26 with 949 views | Uxbridge |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:23 - Nov 26 by NeathJack |
I assume then that a price increase is on the way? |
Couldn't even keep it straight for two posts eh. Ah, never mind.
They'll be announced in due course. Not going to preempt any announcements. I know our SD has been fully involved in the discussions though and such things are tangible elements of the influence he has. Or not of course. | |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:16 - Nov 26 with 928 views | Uxbridge |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:06 - Nov 26 by 3swan |
"To complete the governance review from last year it is planned to propose the adoption of the latest SD Model Rules at the forthcoming Swans Trust AGM, to be held in January. SD has confirmed that any Trust board members affected should remain in place until then. "
If it's planned to adopt the latest SD Model Rules then I would assume that they have already been vetted and discussed. Why not say if there is a 12 year or any time limit within those rules? |
There isn't. Hasn't been for some considerable time. Supporters direct website has the Base model rules there.
These can be varied however it's wished, as the Trust does with the election frequency (more frequent than model rules). | |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:18 - Nov 26 with 917 views | 3swan |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:16 - Nov 26 by Uxbridge |
There isn't. Hasn't been for some considerable time. Supporters direct website has the Base model rules there.
These can be varied however it's wished, as the Trust does with the election frequency (more frequent than model rules). |
Thanks.
The confusion due to the statement that anyone affected should stay till the AGM.
If no rule then nobody would be affected? | | | |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:18 - Nov 26 with 914 views | NeathJack |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:14 - Nov 26 by Uxbridge |
Couldn't even keep it straight for two posts eh. Ah, never mind.
They'll be announced in due course. Not going to preempt any announcements. I know our SD has been fully involved in the discussions though and such things are tangible elements of the influence he has. Or not of course. |
Eh? Keep what straight? 
My post was simply a reference to the fact that if there was the need for discussions and consultation, as you confirmed, then the proposal of a price change is more likely than not. I can't imagine the need for any discussions of substance if the price was proposed to remain the same. | | | |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:20 - Nov 26 with 894 views | NeathJack |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:16 - Nov 26 by Uxbridge |
There isn't. Hasn't been for some considerable time. Supporters direct website has the Base model rules there.
These can be varied however it's wished, as the Trust does with the election frequency (more frequent than model rules). |
It would be useful if a list could be provided of exactly how long each board member has served. | | | |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:21 - Nov 26 with 894 views | Uxbridge |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:18 - Nov 26 by 3swan |
Thanks.
The confusion due to the statement that anyone affected should stay till the AGM.
If no rule then nobody would be affected? |
I would suggest so.
Questions for me though are a) whether there should be a term limit, and b) if any of the current incumbents are affected, should they go immediately or see out their elected term | |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:22 - Nov 26 with 881 views | exiledclaseboy |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:18 - Nov 26 by 3swan |
Thanks.
The confusion due to the statement that anyone affected should stay till the AGM.
If no rule then nobody would be affected? |
There’s no 12 year limit in the new rules but the Trust is still currently governed by the old ones, in which there is a clear and unequivocal 12 year term limit. From what Uxy’s said they’ve been advised to ignore the current rules until such time as the new ones can be adopted so the whole issue goes away. I’m not sure how that works when at such a crucial time for the Trust, decisions are being taken by some board members who simply shouldn’t be so. | |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:22 - Nov 26 with 879 views | Phil_S |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 19:22 - Nov 26 by 3swan |
Subliminal message |
😂😂 |  | | |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:23 - Nov 26 with 876 views | 3swan |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:21 - Nov 26 by Uxbridge |
I would suggest so.
Questions for me though are a) whether there should be a term limit, and b) if any of the current incumbents are affected, should they go immediately or see out their elected term |
If the latest SD Model rules are to be accepted then don't you already have the answers to A and B | | | |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:24 - Nov 26 with 864 views | exiledclaseboy |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:23 - Nov 26 by 3swan |
If the latest SD Model rules are to be accepted then don't you already have the answers to A and B |
No, because the latest rules don’t apply yet. | |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:25 - Nov 26 with 862 views | Uxbridge |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:18 - Nov 26 by NeathJack |
Eh? Keep what straight?
My post was simply a reference to the fact that if there was the need for discussions and consultation, as you confirmed, then the proposal of a price change is more likely than not. I can't imagine the need for any discussions of substance if the price was proposed to remain the same. |
It read as an assumption at lack of influence. If not, then fair enough.
There are discussions every year on ST prices. There's going to be, it's historically the second biggest income stream and the biggest the club controls. Trust view is generally the cheaper the better, and we've had significant success in that regard with the lack of any increase in years. | |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:25 - Nov 26 with 861 views | 3swan |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:22 - Nov 26 by exiledclaseboy |
There’s no 12 year limit in the new rules but the Trust is still currently governed by the old ones, in which there is a clear and unequivocal 12 year term limit. From what Uxy’s said they’ve been advised to ignore the current rules until such time as the new ones can be adopted so the whole issue goes away. I’m not sure how that works when at such a crucial time for the Trust, decisions are being taken by some board members who simply shouldn’t be so. |
"There’s no 12 year limit in the new rules"
Thanks is that a FACT or an assumption? | | | |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:26 - Nov 26 with 850 views | exiledclaseboy |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:25 - Nov 26 by 3swan |
"There’s no 12 year limit in the new rules"
Thanks is that a FACT or an assumption? |
According to Ux it’s a fact. And I’ve no reason to doubt him, he’s pretty straight even if he is being unusually evasive on this thread.  | |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:26 - Nov 26 with 850 views | Uxbridge |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:23 - Nov 26 by 3swan |
If the latest SD Model rules are to be accepted then don't you already have the answers to A and B |
Assuming the rules are applied without amendment, yes. If not, no. I'd argue for an amendment, although I'm not yet convinced on the merits of making it retrospective. | |
| |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:27 - Nov 26 with 844 views | 3swan |
| FAO Some Trust Person on 20:24 - Nov 26 by exiledclaseboy |
No, because the latest rules don’t apply yet. |
Maybe I'm not making myself clear.
The answers should be there if they have sight of the new rules. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
