| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change 12:23 - May 16 with 11559 views | TheResurrection |
The month of June is an important time for the Trust. It's the time they hold their elections but guess what, and it's the same every year there's virtually no mention of them.
This is the only real strategy they've ever had. One where the mechanism of the organisation doesn't get the chance to evolve or even breathe.
If the Trust had the best intentions of the Football Club and its fans at heart they'd be shouting from the rooftops that elections are due soon and doing their best to blood younger, more hungry and determined volunteers to sweep up their mess and inability to ever get things done.
They're confused, they're silent, they don't know which way to turn, what's up or down or wrong or right.
The set up we have currently with Mute Stu and Alan Lewis has been nothing short of a farce, yet they continue to hide away hoping that June will come and go so they can go back into hiding once more.
Time for Change??
Yeah. But years ago
|  |
| |  |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 13:59 - May 16 with 1479 views | swan65split |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 13:05 - May 16 by pencoedjack |
Although I agree that someone ballsy like Chris is needed on the trust, his pro Jenkins view mean I could never vote for him. |
Not being a member of the Trust , I deliberated for a bit whether I should make a comment , but here it is, from an outsider, as above,
He comes across as being not anti HJ, and now saying unity , dont rock the boat. and people saying he changed his stance after meeting an ex director ,somehow I think it would be like a turkey at Xmas...it doesnt add up.
stands back , awaits the knock down.
edit; being not [Post edited 16 May 2018 14:34]
|  | | |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:01 - May 16 with 1471 views | Darran |
Don’t vote for Viv Williams. Just don’t. |  |
| |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:01 - May 16 with 1475 views | jacksfullaces |
along with the board and the set of vultures the silence is deafening.
the Trust could use this void to bring the fans voice back to the fore.
getting everyone involved in the conversation for change would be a great way to use this time of mourning.
and yet, all behind closed doors, no input, and no communication.
you'd have some sympathy if this was the way the club operated but we have had a degree of success from it. 3 years of glib remarks/platitudes from the board and 1-2 sternish statements from the trust do not cut it.
we could do with Res on the board, but would need to know what exactly he would be pushing for, there is making lots of noise, but it needs to have a purpose.
still, think I would prefer any noise than the current silence. |  | | |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:03 - May 16 with 1468 views | Nookiejack |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 13:56 - May 16 by MattG |
Presumably - members certainly had no say on the last choice of co-optees. |
MattG,
So at the point of the vote - each member will then vote for 4 people to be appointed to the Board - out of all the nominations? | | | |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:06 - May 16 with 1452 views | Private_Partz |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 13:59 - May 16 by swan65split |
Not being a member of the Trust , I deliberated for a bit whether I should make a comment , but here it is, from an outsider, as above,
He comes across as being not anti HJ, and now saying unity , dont rock the boat. and people saying he changed his stance after meeting an ex director ,somehow I think it would be like a turkey at Xmas...it doesnt add up.
stands back , awaits the knock down.
edit; being not [Post edited 16 May 2018 14:34]
|
Don't worry. I will be first in line when he finishes his lunch ;-) |  |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:11 - May 16 with 1436 views | moonie |
Now is,or should be ,an excellent starting point to rebuild.
Sadly, we re not doing it ,again,no doubt prevaricating or simply looking after vested interests .
Now is the time to sweep the shite from under the carpets ,hoover up the pain and front up for the new season.
It would have been some,I city itself to have said bye bye to CC and to have a new manager in place ,right now, able and willing to source new players to replace our dross.
I cannot believe what I'm reading or not | | | |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:14 - May 16 with 1419 views | Badlands |
As a matter of information.
If the 68% shareholders decide to borrow or input £100 million (as an easy number for an example).
Would thrust be expected to provide £22 million.
How does it work? |  |
| |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:18 - May 16 with 1411 views | Nookiejack |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:03 - May 16 by Nookiejack |
MattG,
So at the point of the vote - each member will then vote for 4 people to be appointed to the Board - out of all the nominations? |
MattG,
Do you have any idea what number of votes would be needed for each of the 4 people from the new Group to be elected?
All 4 members will need to be elected.
You then have to hope Uxbridge will the vote with the new Group - for the new Group to have a majority - as It looks like he is not standing again until next year - from that link you posted. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:30 - May 16 with 1384 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
Hopefully many people share the comments made by a certain board member about the tail wagging the dog up until the voting begins. That board member should have resigned long ago. Hopefully he/she is one of them up for re election. |  |
| |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:32 - May 16 with 1379 views | Nookiejack |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:14 - May 16 by Badlands |
As a matter of information.
If the 68% shareholders decide to borrow or input £100 million (as an easy number for an example).
Would thrust be expected to provide £22 million.
How does it work? |
That's why the strategy was wrong to keep holding the shares - bar say 5% for a set on the Board- as soon as they knew the Selling shareholders were going to sell?
How did the Trust expect to meet their share of the additional funding? Or were thy prepared for the 21% share to be diluted away anyway? If they were prepared for dilution should have sold in the first place and banked a rainy day fund - just in case we go through a Leyton Orient scenario in the future. Also the fund could have also maintained the 5% stake in the club going forward. if the yanks had then invited £100m then the Trust could have contributed £5m from the rainy day fund.
it is all water under the bridge now - but it just evidences that the current Trust Board got the strategy wrong and in my view should not be in charge of future strategy. | | | |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 17:07 - May 16 with 1283 views | TheResurrection |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 13:11 - May 16 by Private_Partz |
Fair point. But surely they are of the same mind?
He wants us to support Jenkins and the Trust currently are aiding this with their relative silence? |
Incorrect, I don't want you to necessarily support Jenkins. Not if he's not the right man for the job. Whether he is or not is up for debate. I know he's been sly and his reputation is ruined but on the other hand I'm not going to dismiss the work he's done overall
I'm a supporter of the club and what's best for it. I would also hope that supporters rally behind the decisions that are about to be made, whatever they are,what be that with or without Jenkins.
Also, this isn't me canvassing for votes to join the Trust. I'm merely illustrating the snidey way they allow these elections to just come and go with so little interest being stoked | |
| |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 17:09 - May 16 with 1280 views | TheResurrection |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 13:46 - May 16 by 34dfgdf54 |
Same with me.
Appreciate it that Chris never sits on the fence and says how he feels at all times, but his support of Jenkins means I couldn't put a vote in for him.
I can understand his calls for the club to unite in these times, but I honestly don't know how that is possible with Jenkins at the forefront. [Post edited 16 May 2018 13:47]
|
I'm not asking for your vote or fack all from you | |
| |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 17:10 - May 16 with 1275 views | 34dfgdf54 |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 17:09 - May 16 by TheResurrection |
I'm not asking for your vote or fack all from you |
Good because you wont facking get it |  | | |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 17:25 - May 16 with 1252 views | TheResurrection |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 17:10 - May 16 by 34dfgdf54 |
Good because you wont facking get it |
Right, so can we get back to discussing the Trust without raking me up again then? | |
| |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 18:32 - May 16 with 1206 views | BillyChong |
The five people tasked with ‘communication’ must have their hands full | | | |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 18:35 - May 16 with 1204 views | Yossarian |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 12:49 - May 16 by Private_Partz |
I supported his original bid.
Now I just feel we would have someone at the Trust telling us everything is fine and support the club.
If we don't we are thick and can eff off.
In short the Trust would change from quietly passive to aggressively passive.
On the plus side they would be making some noise I suppose..... |
Agreed. I supported him initially but his abuse of people who didn’t agree with him was outrageous and all that Box Office posturing should be put back in the toy box. The bloke is a child. |  |
| "Yossarian- the very sight of the name made him shudder.There were so many esses in it. It just had to be subversive" (Catch 22) |
| |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 18:36 - May 16 with 1204 views | JACKMANANDBOY |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 13:56 - May 16 by TheResurrection |
I support Swansea City and I'm not so blind as to dig myself in a trench of one view without weighing up all consequence or eventualities. |
There is a consequence to doing nothing, which the Trust seem to prefer. |  |
| |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 18:37 - May 16 with 1204 views | BillyChong |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:32 - May 16 by Nookiejack |
That's why the strategy was wrong to keep holding the shares - bar say 5% for a set on the Board- as soon as they knew the Selling shareholders were going to sell?
How did the Trust expect to meet their share of the additional funding? Or were thy prepared for the 21% share to be diluted away anyway? If they were prepared for dilution should have sold in the first place and banked a rainy day fund - just in case we go through a Leyton Orient scenario in the future. Also the fund could have also maintained the 5% stake in the club going forward. if the yanks had then invited £100m then the Trust could have contributed £5m from the rainy day fund.
it is all water under the bridge now - but it just evidences that the current Trust Board got the strategy wrong and in my view should not be in charge of future strategy. |
I’ll never understand why they persuaded members to vote against legal action. Along with many fans some of them seem to have seen sense now albeit too late. | | | |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 18:46 - May 16 with 1179 views | costalotta |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 13:22 - May 16 by Nookiejack |
I came to the conclusion a few months ago - when they changed the 12 year rule for maximum service and tried to dress it up that Supporters Direct were driving the changes - when in fact it was their decision - that the only way for change is for another group to get organised which can stand for election and take control of the Trust Board.
This would be akin to a political party standing for election.
That 'party' should have a clear manifesto of what it stands for.
That Group would need to understand how many people it would need to get elected to the Trust Board and how many votes each person would need to obtain to achieve this.
In my view unless something like this happens - all the continuing OPs/posts are just hot air and really a waste of time. Nothing will change. Going back to my earlier point they even changed the 12 year rule for maximum service on the Board.
The Trust Board I think have had the best intentions but they have got the strategy totally wrong. Goodness knows what the Trust's £20m at stake is now worth. Rainy day fund for a long term professional club in Swansea?
I live too far away from Swansea to get involved - I would if I lived in Swansea. A Group needs to get organised and stand for elections - they need to have enough votes from members in the bag to do this.
I will vote for this Group. |
Top post and I said exactly this on another thread a few months ago.
It would take organising but can definitely be done. |  | | |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 18:48 - May 16 with 1176 views | exiledclaseboy |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 14:03 - May 16 by Nookiejack |
MattG,
So at the point of the vote - each member will then vote for 4 people to be appointed to the Board - out of all the nominations? |
Co-opted board positions are decided by the Trust board, elected board positions are decided by the members. |  |
| |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 19:35 - May 16 with 1110 views | Private_Partz |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 17:07 - May 16 by TheResurrection |
Incorrect, I don't want you to necessarily support Jenkins. Not if he's not the right man for the job. Whether he is or not is up for debate. I know he's been sly and his reputation is ruined but on the other hand I'm not going to dismiss the work he's done overall
I'm a supporter of the club and what's best for it. I would also hope that supporters rally behind the decisions that are about to be made, whatever they are,what be that with or without Jenkins.
Also, this isn't me canvassing for votes to join the Trust. I'm merely illustrating the snidey way they allow these elections to just come and go with so little interest being stoked |
Wow that was painless ;-)
Agree with a lot of that although I can't agree with rally round whatever decisions are made and I really want Jenkins out of recruitment.
If the decisions are bad for the club then both the Trust and supporters in general should be protesting against them.
It isn't a great start for me. Confusion on whether Carlos is till here or not and HJ carrying on his merry way of signing U23 players regardless of who the manager is and whatever style we will be playing.
I appreciate you are not canvassing for yourself.
I admire your passion but I can't help feeling your role at the Trust would be telling the punters to shut the eff up and support the management.
This would have exactly the same effect as the Trust keeping silent.Nothing would change and it really does need to.
I don't thinks anyone denies the good work HJ has done in the past although there are a lot of people who helped him. Many were unsung heroes.
Very few would criticise him for cashing in. Unfortunately the very least people would have expected was due dillegence without any alleged skullduggery. | |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 19:42 - May 16 with 1101 views | Phil_S |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 13:22 - May 16 by Nookiejack |
I came to the conclusion a few months ago - when they changed the 12 year rule for maximum service and tried to dress it up that Supporters Direct were driving the changes - when in fact it was their decision - that the only way for change is for another group to get organised which can stand for election and take control of the Trust Board.
This would be akin to a political party standing for election.
That 'party' should have a clear manifesto of what it stands for.
That Group would need to understand how many people it would need to get elected to the Trust Board and how many votes each person would need to obtain to achieve this.
In my view unless something like this happens - all the continuing OPs/posts are just hot air and really a waste of time. Nothing will change. Going back to my earlier point they even changed the 12 year rule for maximum service on the Board.
The Trust Board I think have had the best intentions but they have got the strategy totally wrong. Goodness knows what the Trust's £20m at stake is now worth. Rainy day fund for a long term professional club in Swansea?
I live too far away from Swansea to get involved - I would if I lived in Swansea. A Group needs to get organised and stand for elections - they need to have enough votes from members in the bag to do this.
I will vote for this Group. |
I don't see location as a stumbling block to be honest
At least three of the board currently live in London - whilst I was on there we had people from deepest West Wales, Somerset and I think people from Gloucester also stood.
Board meetings are monthly and you could dial in, they could set up Skype and much discussion can be done via email.
Location is not a valid excuse for any member that has the skill/vision/expertise to be able to facilitate the change that you clearly believe in.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  | | |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 19:45 - May 16 with 1079 views | NeathJack |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 18:48 - May 16 by exiledclaseboy |
Co-opted board positions are decided by the Trust board, elected board positions are decided by the members. |
Are the co-opted positions decided by the whole of the Trust board, or a select few? |  | | |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 19:58 - May 16 with 1012 views | exiledclaseboy |
| The Trust have no plan or strategy. Time for Change on 19:45 - May 16 by NeathJack |
Are the co-opted positions decided by the whole of the Trust board, or a select few? |
My understanding is that only elected board members can vote on the co-opted positions. So (for example) I wouldn’t be able to vote on who should be a co-opted member as one myself. But as far as I know all elected members get a vote. | |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 20:01 - May 16 with 997 views | exiledclaseboy |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 19:42 - May 16 by Phil_S |
I don't see location as a stumbling block to be honest
At least three of the board currently live in London - whilst I was on there we had people from deepest West Wales, Somerset and I think people from Gloucester also stood.
Board meetings are monthly and you could dial in, they could set up Skype and much discussion can be done via email.
Location is not a valid excuse for any member that has the skill/vision/expertise to be able to facilitate the change that you clearly believe in.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
I agree wth that, There’s at least one I’ve yet to meet in person but they’ve been fully involved in all the meetings and email discussions. It makes it more difficult sometime but location isn’t a barrier to involvement. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
