Mr Sumner used to post on the gasroom, and appears the outstanding candidate. He seems to have vibrancy,enthusiasm and honesty which the Trust desperately need.
I would like to see young Dale get on board as well, we need young blood who see the situation from perhaps a different perspective than the old guard. He appears to have a wise head on young shoulders.
@DJWYC14 said:
peterparrotface evening. I will be standing for election.
Great stuff and good luck to you.
While we're here - a stupid question that hopefully someone can answer, why are the Football club and the Trust boards separate? Why is there a need for them to be separate if the Trust own the club?
I'm sure this is an obvious question and I'm having a slow five minutes/years.
I was rather impressed by the quality of the candidates , on paper at least.
Like PPF above I am a little unclear on what exactly the Trust Board now does (with exception of having responsibility to consider any full or partial takeover bids that may arise). It may be helpful for the Trust chairman to spell this out at the meeting or preferably before and also what skill gaps the Trust board perceive they have in fulfilling those duties.
To my knowledge I have never met any of the candidates, so I can only judge them on paper. Clearly their enthusiasm and personality will be important so obviously good that they will be able to speak at meeting to begin to judge this. Based on paper, this is my take.
As far as I understand it, there is a skills gap for a finance expertise to replace the outgoing "FD", so assuming he is not a complete idiot, the accountant candidate should be in.
Similarly it would seem a no-brainer to elect Derben, based on his experience on the football board and inside knowledge of the club, unless again there are personality issues.
Clearly the young lad offers the least experience and knowledge of the world, but I can see the benefits of having at least one younger person on the board to stop the Trust appearing to a large proportion of the supporter base to be a bunch of grey old farts (like me). Again unless he is a bit of a prat, he would have my vote.
So that leaves one place between the two sales/marketing types and the two business consultants. No strong feeling here, so i think that would come down to impression of enthusiasm, energy and teamworking skills.
I will not be at the meeting , so denied opportuntiy to hear from the candidates, i will probably not vote. Were i at the meeting I think a key question for me would be candidates attidue to any takeover/investment proposal, are they ideologically opposed or more pragmatically minded to assess proposal on its merits. Clearly voters will differ in this respect, perhaps sensible to vote for someone who shares your view on this issue?
I think, one way or another, this AGM will go a long way to determining at least the medium term wellbeing of Wycombe Wanderers, probably far more than most of us realise.
It really behooves every member to be involved in the process, and use their vote wisely.
@floyd said:
I think, one way or another, this AGM will go a long way to determining at least the medium term wellbeing of Wycombe Wanderers, probably far more than most of us realise.
It really behooves every member to be involved in the process, and use their vote wisely.
Do you know how the Football Club board is appointed to or elected? I can't seem to find anything on-line
Appointment of football club directors will have to be agreed by the shareholder, in this case the trust. This will be a trust Board responsibility. May i ask how this would influence your vote?
I'm not sure there's an easy answer or a definitive list explaining the duties and roles of the Trust board. I agree clarification on this would be welcome.
There has been the odd quote from players, manager etc about the Chairman being the Owner (e.g. Ephraim in BFP this week, Ainsworth on a TV interview a while back). Perhaps it is an honest, accidental slip/ misuse of words, maybe this can be clarified at the AGM so the Trust's position is clear for all to see.
However, since the Trust owns the club but is seemingly not actively involved in running it (our Chairman appears to do this), it should still play an important part in raising funds where it can, protecting the heritage of the club and security of Adams Park. For this reason I agree with you that financial expertise would be welcome on the board.
As for your final question, I am absolutely open to proposed investment if it were to be in the interests of WWFC and if it was not made by people with ulterior motives or interests.
It's a shame you don't feel strongly enough that you should exercise your vote via a proxy?
I am not sure I take too much notice of what is written in the press, a) BFP may well have misquoted b) not sure players will take too much interest in the detail of ownership. I guess exact situation will become clearer at the meeting.
It is fairly normal and proper that shareholders (in this case the Trust) appoint a chairman/MD and then it is that chairman/MD job to run the company while still accountable to shareholders. I don tper se have a problem with that.
Re proposed investment, agreed in principle but difficult in practice to determine what best interests of the club are and whether investors have ulterior motives or indeed whether those ulterior motives matter (e.g. Plymouth owner saved that club with assistance from the council for the apparent ulterior motive of gaining influence on and securing development contracts elsewhere in the city from the council. From the football club point of view, I wouldnt have a problem with those ulterior motives).
Finally should I vote by proxy? It's not that I don't feel strongly enough, its that I don't think i have enough information. As noted above, I think an important part of judgement of who to vote for is character, enthusiasm and working style of the proposed Director as i feel it is essential that board memebrs work together well as a team. As I do not know the people, the only way to assess that is by the presentations at the AGM. As i will not be able to be there, I don't think it would be fair for my vote, based on limited information, to be equal to another's vote, based on full information. i wish you luck though and would be delighted to hear that you were elected.
@DevC said:
Appointment of football club directors will have to be agreed by the shareholder, in this case the trust. This will be a trust Board responsibility. May i ask how this would influence your vote?
Hi DevC, good to see you on here.
No it wouldn't influence my vote. I just want to understand the concept of the two boards - there must be a reason why there is a need for the Trust board to need to appoint a Football Club board but I'm not sure what that is.
I am no corporate lawyer but I believe each legal entity would have to have its own Board, although nothing to say they cant be the same people. i think its reasonably logical to have different people. Running the Trust and running the football club may require different skills and time commitments for example. A good candidate for one Board may not have the time or skills to be a good candidate for the other. I dont see anything necessarily sinister in this. Of course you would expect the shareholder (trust in this case) to have ultimate power to influence and in worst case fire the directors of the owned company (football club). If this is not the case with WWFC then whatever share certificates may say, control and hence de facto ownership will have passed.
@peterparrotface said:
Do you know how the Football Club board is appointed to or elected? I can't seem to find anything on-line
I honestly don't know, but it's probably fair to say that while the Trust owns the club, it's the football club board who run it. There's not necessarily anything sinister in this, different expertise required, different time commitments, different decisions etc. An excellent question to ask at the AGM.
you would expect the shareholder (trust in this case) to have ultimate power to influence and in worst case fire the directors of the owned company (football club). If this is not the case with WWFC then whatever share certificates may say, control and hence de facto ownership will have passed.
Surely control and de facto ownership can't possibly pass to someone else without 75% approval of the Trust membership?
@floyd said: Isn't that exactly what 'de facto' means?
Well yes, but how can ultimate power (de facto or otherwise) be handed to any third party without a mandate from us, the owners.
If, for example, the people currently running the club fancied becoming the owners, they would surely have to submit a proposal like anyone else, and unless 75% voted in favour, the ultimate power would remain with the Trust.
I guess the point I was trying to make was that IF the Trust board has handed full control to the football club board with no power to change the football club board or stop them doing exactly and anything what they want, then the Trust may still formally own the shares but that ownership is essentially meaningless. I personally dont think this is likely to have happened but I have seen it suggested on this board or its predecessor. This thread is intended to be about who should be elected to the Trust Board but has rather drifted. Perhaps time to pull it back on track?
Dev and Floyd - cheers for your responses. For clarity, I didn't mean to suggest anything sinister but was just generally wondering how the setup worked and why there's a need for both.
I can't attend the AGM due to work so I'm in a similar boat to DC.
Comments
Mr Sumner used to post on the gasroom, and appears the outstanding candidate. He seems to have vibrancy,enthusiasm and honesty which the Trust desperately need.
I would like to see young Dale get on board as well, we need young blood who see the situation from perhaps a different perspective than the old guard. He appears to have a wise head on young shoulders.
@peterparrotface evening. I will be standing for election.
That's very good news. Good luck.
@micra @ChasHarps thank you gents.
Aye, good luck @DJWYC14
Good on you DJ. I think that's great news
@DJWYC14 All the best
Great stuff and good luck to you.
While we're here - a stupid question that hopefully someone can answer, why are the Football club and the Trust boards separate? Why is there a need for them to be separate if the Trust own the club?
I'm sure this is an obvious question and I'm having a slow five minutes/years.
Interesting new forum. I hope it works well.
I was rather impressed by the quality of the candidates , on paper at least.
Like PPF above I am a little unclear on what exactly the Trust Board now does (with exception of having responsibility to consider any full or partial takeover bids that may arise). It may be helpful for the Trust chairman to spell this out at the meeting or preferably before and also what skill gaps the Trust board perceive they have in fulfilling those duties.
To my knowledge I have never met any of the candidates, so I can only judge them on paper. Clearly their enthusiasm and personality will be important so obviously good that they will be able to speak at meeting to begin to judge this. Based on paper, this is my take.
As far as I understand it, there is a skills gap for a finance expertise to replace the outgoing "FD", so assuming he is not a complete idiot, the accountant candidate should be in.
Similarly it would seem a no-brainer to elect Derben, based on his experience on the football board and inside knowledge of the club, unless again there are personality issues.
Clearly the young lad offers the least experience and knowledge of the world, but I can see the benefits of having at least one younger person on the board to stop the Trust appearing to a large proportion of the supporter base to be a bunch of grey old farts (like me). Again unless he is a bit of a prat, he would have my vote.
So that leaves one place between the two sales/marketing types and the two business consultants. No strong feeling here, so i think that would come down to impression of enthusiasm, energy and teamworking skills.
I will not be at the meeting , so denied opportuntiy to hear from the candidates, i will probably not vote. Were i at the meeting I think a key question for me would be candidates attidue to any takeover/investment proposal, are they ideologically opposed or more pragmatically minded to assess proposal on its merits. Clearly voters will differ in this respect, perhaps sensible to vote for someone who shares your view on this issue?
I think, one way or another, this AGM will go a long way to determining at least the medium term wellbeing of Wycombe Wanderers, probably far more than most of us realise.
It really behooves every member to be involved in the process, and use their vote wisely.
Do you know how the Football Club board is appointed to or elected? I can't seem to find anything on-line
Appointment of football club directors will have to be agreed by the shareholder, in this case the trust. This will be a trust Board responsibility. May i ask how this would influence your vote?
@DevC Hi.
I'm not sure there's an easy answer or a definitive list explaining the duties and roles of the Trust board. I agree clarification on this would be welcome.
There has been the odd quote from players, manager etc about the Chairman being the Owner (e.g. Ephraim in BFP this week, Ainsworth on a TV interview a while back). Perhaps it is an honest, accidental slip/ misuse of words, maybe this can be clarified at the AGM so the Trust's position is clear for all to see.
However, since the Trust owns the club but is seemingly not actively involved in running it (our Chairman appears to do this), it should still play an important part in raising funds where it can, protecting the heritage of the club and security of Adams Park. For this reason I agree with you that financial expertise would be welcome on the board.
As for your final question, I am absolutely open to proposed investment if it were to be in the interests of WWFC and if it was not made by people with ulterior motives or interests.
It's a shame you don't feel strongly enough that you should exercise your vote via a proxy?
I am not sure I take too much notice of what is written in the press, a) BFP may well have misquoted b) not sure players will take too much interest in the detail of ownership. I guess exact situation will become clearer at the meeting.
It is fairly normal and proper that shareholders (in this case the Trust) appoint a chairman/MD and then it is that chairman/MD job to run the company while still accountable to shareholders. I don tper se have a problem with that.
Re proposed investment, agreed in principle but difficult in practice to determine what best interests of the club are and whether investors have ulterior motives or indeed whether those ulterior motives matter (e.g. Plymouth owner saved that club with assistance from the council for the apparent ulterior motive of gaining influence on and securing development contracts elsewhere in the city from the council. From the football club point of view, I wouldnt have a problem with those ulterior motives).
Finally should I vote by proxy? It's not that I don't feel strongly enough, its that I don't think i have enough information. As noted above, I think an important part of judgement of who to vote for is character, enthusiasm and working style of the proposed Director as i feel it is essential that board memebrs work together well as a team. As I do not know the people, the only way to assess that is by the presentations at the AGM. As i will not be able to be there, I don't think it would be fair for my vote, based on limited information, to be equal to another's vote, based on full information. i wish you luck though and would be delighted to hear that you were elected.
Hi DevC, good to see you on here.
No it wouldn't influence my vote. I just want to understand the concept of the two boards - there must be a reason why there is a need for the Trust board to need to appoint a Football Club board but I'm not sure what that is.
Am I missing something?
I am no corporate lawyer but I believe each legal entity would have to have its own Board, although nothing to say they cant be the same people. i think its reasonably logical to have different people. Running the Trust and running the football club may require different skills and time commitments for example. A good candidate for one Board may not have the time or skills to be a good candidate for the other. I dont see anything necessarily sinister in this. Of course you would expect the shareholder (trust in this case) to have ultimate power to influence and in worst case fire the directors of the owned company (football club). If this is not the case with WWFC then whatever share certificates may say, control and hence de facto ownership will have passed.
I honestly don't know, but it's probably fair to say that while the Trust owns the club, it's the football club board who run it. There's not necessarily anything sinister in this, different expertise required, different time commitments, different decisions etc. An excellent question to ask at the AGM.
you would expect the shareholder (trust in this case) to have ultimate power to influence and in worst case fire the directors of the owned company (football club). If this is not the case with WWFC then whatever share certificates may say, control and hence de facto ownership will have passed.
Surely control and de facto ownership can't possibly pass to someone else without 75% approval of the Trust membership?
Isn't that exactly what 'de facto' means?
Well yes, but how can ultimate power (de facto or otherwise) be handed to any third party without a mandate from us, the owners.
If, for example, the people currently running the club fancied becoming the owners, they would surely have to submit a proposal like anyone else, and unless 75% voted in favour, the ultimate power would remain with the Trust.
But ultimate power can not be de facto can it? If it's ultimate it ceases to be de facto. If it's 'merely' de facto, it's not ultimate.
I think we're splitting hairs here, i agree with the point you're making and the questions you're asking.
I'm trying to give up hair splitting.
And give up the internet!? Never!
Will you be at the AGM?
It would also help if I checked what name I'm signed in under.
Yes, barring accidents, I'll be there.
I guess the point I was trying to make was that IF the Trust board has handed full control to the football club board with no power to change the football club board or stop them doing exactly and anything what they want, then the Trust may still formally own the shares but that ownership is essentially meaningless. I personally dont think this is likely to have happened but I have seen it suggested on this board or its predecessor. This thread is intended to be about who should be elected to the Trust Board but has rather drifted. Perhaps time to pull it back on track?
This thread is intended to be about who should be elected to the Trust Board but has rather drifted. Perhaps time to pull it back on track?
Who are you voting for Dev?
See poats above at 11:52 and 1:51 above and you have your answer and rationale. You?
or even posts - one key out! Either these keys are getting thinner or my fingers fatter
Dev and Floyd - cheers for your responses. For clarity, I didn't mean to suggest anything sinister but was just generally wondering how the setup worked and why there's a need for both.
I can't attend the AGM due to work so I'm in a similar boat to DC.