trust agm
having read the Exeter article it would be great if our trust would be so blunt and give us true figures so we as members and supporters would then have realistic goals to relate to rather than wishing for something totally unrealistic that if it happened would be a bonus . I like tisdale as a manager and can now see clearer the constraints he has to work with . it would be good to see the targets that gazza has to try to surmount within his playing budget it may give us a better perpective on being a chairboy/girl
0
Comments
I think Ainsworth may have mentioned a few times that we have a small budget.
he always does but within the Exeter article actual figures have been quoted not just a passing comment of being small
@chris do you have a link. I may have missed that story. Or at least today's rendition
@Chris or @drcongo Please see my post just now under the uninspiring State of Nation heading.
@baxter Why do you need to see the actual figures? Is the fact that Ainsworth says it in every interview not enough for you to believe it?
@TheAndyGrahamFanClub - there is a link in the thread re State of Nation.
Actual figures would be more helpful than comments.
Why?
If you don't know get somebody to help you
I like AH and GA but I think largely speaking they are responsible for creating a hybrid Trust Owned Club.
GA deems that we are not allowed to know the state of player injuries as it gives the opposition an advantage. No merit in that in my opinion. The cost of pissing off fans v opposition advantage has to be weighed up I guess.
AH similarly likes to keep as much to his chest as possible. His strong attack on a fan who questioned the ownership of the training ground was a defining moment for me.
So the Trust Owned Club is one where we are expected to pay our money just don't ask any questions. We're all in this together - sort of.
@TheAndyGrahamFanClub yep, the club is supporter owned but not supporter run. An unelected executive chairman and an unelected director run the club and make all decisions. The Trust Board appoint unelected directors as they require. This setup is accepted by fans so I'm not criticising it.
@TheAndyGrahamFanClub spot on with that post. Pay your money and ask no questions sums it all up nicely.
@TheAndyGrahamFanClub. - Really pleased to read your comment regarding AH and his aggressive response to a question about the Training Ground. I was ready to hand over a sizeable lump sum for the share scheme but his totally rude response to that supporter immediately made me change my mind.
In any reputable organisation, if you are a shareholder you expect to be given information, consulted on major matters and made to feel a part owner.
bit like being a member of a political party where you pay and get no say in who runs the party
Not really. Trust members get a vote in the Trust elections, so if you want to change the status quo then elect someone who'll oppose it.
As an aside, I have no sympathy for the Labour bandwagon jumpers you're alluding to either. No different to people who try to join the RAC after the breakdown, or join a union the moment they need help.
was not saying Labour i meant any party in general
I have been at close quarters with AH on several occasions and have found his management style ex rather than inclusive. I am well qualified to help the club but know I could not work within the atmosphere he creates. Eventually he will get board and move on (they always do), then I might be able to help.
The reality is that it's a fan owned club not a fan run club or social enterprise. AH is a necessary 'evil' and has been for a while. However I would say that he has been dealt a fortunate hand under his tenure as opposed to the stinking shitstorm that Woodward inherited.
@AndyGrahamFanClub, think you are right. Have heard him described by a couple of people I know who works at the club as 'autocratic'. However, they also say he was very necessary for bringing the football club back from the very edge of disaster.
It is unfeasible to have a "fan run" club. However fans and particularly shareholders are entitled to be treated with respect, consulted on major decisions and regularly updated on player and financial matters.
@mooneyman I 100% agree, and I don't think the balance has been struck at the moment. There might have been a moment last week when this was considered and addressed as we suddenly got a glut of play injury updates and today we have seen three players in magic chamber. I sympathise a little on the money side as it would be silly to say to every greedy blood sucking agent that has their snouts in the trough that Wycombe just got £x,xxx,xxx from Liverpool. Just don't keep telling everyone we are on the verge of collapse if it is not true.
I don't really see the argument on the Ibe sell on. It was widely reported in the media that we were going to benefit financialy from the deal, so Agents etc would be aware of the situation. Wouldn't it have actually been better to publicise it emphasing that the vast majority of the windfall had to be passed on to a major creditor i.e. the loan shark?
so we where shafted then
@trevor evidence,please.
Following on from the Exeter City statement I think the Club have an opportunity to prove that they are in fact fully transparent and open when giving information to Fans.
How about cancelling the Accounts "forum" on December 8th and instead issuing copies of the Accounts prior to the AGM on November 30th.
This would allow those amongst us who are interested in the financial side of the Business the opportunity to review figures and ask relevant questions actually at the AGM.
Unfortunately the current arrangements give the impression that those running the Club would prefer much of our financial information to be kept away from Supporters.
Financial figures were shown on screen at last years AGM but they were so small that Dan Dare wearing a pair of X-Ray Specs would have struggled to read them.
So, WWFC Trust. More transparency or more of the same ??
Over to you.
I think you are getting the responsibilities of the Trust and the club and bit confused. I know we are basing this new call for more transparency on the Exeter statement (which I haven't had time to read yet) but how does their club management compare to ours? Are the Trust running the club or is it a third party?
The Trust and the club do need to communicate more but for me it's better communication rather than just more. My example is that Gareth Ainsworth needs to stop lying to the press about injuries and stop the poverty line right now.
Not sure how an open forum dedicated to explaining the finances to anyone who wishes to ask questions can be construed as "preferring much of our financial information to be kept away from supporters". Mr Cold Up North. it seems to me welcome transparency although arguably it would be better to swap the two meetings and do the finance one first.
While there are no doubt differences of detail, there are close parallels between the Exeter model and the WWFC model. The Exeter Supporters trust own a controlling interest (although not in their case 100%) of the club. They appoint managers/directors to run the club day to day on their behalf.
Do read the Exeter report if you have the time and the Exeter forum response if you have even more time. I have linked to both on the other thread and summarised my conclusions from both on that thread.