|
|
Post by thesecondjack on Mar 31, 2016 16:19:13 GMT
In the build up to the FC United game, ST officials praised what has gone on at FC United, being fan owned, being a democracy, and that it's a club we should want to be like. When I went onto 'The Soul Is One', a supporter forum for FC United fans much like the banter board, the upset among their fans was clear to see. They have a 'kit out the cabin' fundraiser, which some openly said they would not support due to who was running the fundraiser, they complained about individuals being (re)hired by the club, a code of conduct for fans which made fans feel as if they were back in school, and many other niggling moans which really do seem to have upset their fans. Today I spotted this article www.theguardian.com/football/2016/mar/31/fc-united-manchester-broadhurst-park?CMP=share_btn_twI'm not much of a fan of the press, only really using it to check football news, but their issues to be getting national media coverage cannot be a good thing for their club. For me, the Supporters Trust currently lives up to the name. I am a supporter, and I trust that they have the best interests of WCFC and the fans. I am all for WCFC becoming fan owned, hopefully sooner rather than later, but I do have my reservations, especially having seen that in a year where FCUoM should be all cheers, but instead seems to be full of disenchanted fans, and a supporter elected board, which the supporters have little faith in. I suppose what I want to ask in my ramble is this: Should WCFCST take over the running of WCFC as I believe is planned (at some point), how would the Supporters Trust avoid such upset like that running through the fans of FC United? |
|
|
|
Post by creaner on Mar 31, 2016 17:00:27 GMT
The answer to the last part of your post would be it's up to you. Being a fan owned club is exactly that, you make of it what you, the fans, want. The trust has a one member, one vote constitution. There is a trust board, which any trust member can join, which is directly responsible to it's members. FCUM will have done some things that would be good for us and not others. In the past we've "borrowed" ideas from AFC Wimbledon, Telford etc.
From a purely practical point of view fan/community ownership gives us the best chance to achieve our main target of getting to Perdiswell. With fans making the decisions on how we progress in the future then everyone has a say and in structure that has transparency at the heart of all.
Any specific questions put them up and I'll try to answer what I can.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brooksiders Return!! on Mar 31, 2016 17:55:11 GMT
There is no plan now or ever for a take over of the club by the Supporters Trust. I'm losing count of the times that we have to keep explaining this to people. We have always believed that the business is better served as a CBS, the Supporters Trust is formed as a CBS, it is therefore logical and convenient to convert the existing shareholding and move unallocated shares to the CBS vehicle. At 50+1% shareholding the Supporters Trust would be the majority shareholder, but WCFC Ltd. would still exist and operate as it does today with the same corporate structure. If the Supporters Trust held 75% of the shares, then the two entities would become one, but it would not be a takeover, it would simply be the reallocation of Ltd shares to the new CBS, which would be Worcester City FC. As Rob says the fundamental difference would be that regardless of your shareholding , you'd have one member one vote, therefore every fan who became a member of the CBS would have an equal say in how they wanted the club to be run.
Of course there will be fall out, there will be differences of opinion, that's human nature , that business. If you want harmony, don't get involved in business. But please don't ask "What will the Supporters Trust do for me?" be part of the Supporters Trust and tell all of us what you want. I'll tell you now though, there's been far more upset at WCFC in the last 10 years, with the disposal of all of the assets, followed by the loss of the majority of the money from the disposal, than a bit of bickering and handbags at FCUM. And strangely enough, not too many fans seemed to be too concerned by any of that!
|
|
althom
Squad Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by althom on Mar 31, 2016 18:02:52 GMT
Surely the change to a trust run community club should be taking place NOW, to show the council that the club as a whole mean business in it's quest to get planning permission for Perdiswell! Worcester City FC Ltd need to be extinguished and the new regime installed as soon as possible in my view. That from a shareholder owning worthless shares!
|
|
|
|
Post by thesecondjack on Mar 31, 2016 19:27:58 GMT
Jem, many fans don't have the knowledge of what a CBS is, or how it works. I do, but that's only because I'm involved in the voluntary sector. Having asked my dad ''do you know what a CBS is?'' the answer was a simple ''nope''. Although it may have been said on here or at meetings in the past, it's still the case that many don't exactly know what the future of the club is in the eyes of the ST. Belief that the ST would like the club to be fan owned is one that runs through a lot of supporters, that belief does seem to have led people to believe that if we were to become fan owned, then the board would comprise of those from the Supporters Trust. Maybe people have put two and two together to make five, but that's the way it is.
On a side note, I've not asked ''What will the Supporters Trust do for me'', and I am a member, so not sure where that has come from.
Onto Robs offer of answering questions, I suspect many are easily answered, but perhaps good for worriers like myself to see.
So in a hypothetical world where [nondescript CBS entity] became the majority shareholder before the start of the 16/17 season, and the club transfers over to a 1 person 1 vote system, here would be a few questions I'd ask.
1. Would there be a new election of board members? Or would this wait until an AGM?
2. Would there be regular fan forums, where fans can direct their issues to board members?
3. If yes, how regular? Monthly, every other month, quarterly etc? I don't believe there's been one for a while now.
4. How transparent would the finances be? Will fans just know how much income/outcome there has been, would fans know what the playing/management budget is, or would fans know how much [insert player] earns a month?
5. How much involvement in pricing would fans have? I'm led to believe FCUoM allow all their members to vote on ticket prices for the season, would we be the same?
Sorry if I'm coming over as being awkward, I just feel like any interaction is good interaction, even if it might ruffle a few feathers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brooksiders Return!! on Mar 31, 2016 20:11:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by greenman on Apr 1, 2016 15:49:47 GMT
Surely the change to a trust run community club should be taking place NOW, to show the council that the club as a whole mean business in it's quest to get planning permission for Perdiswell! Worcester City FC Ltd need to be extinguished and the new regime installed as soon as possible in my view. That from a shareholder owning worthless shares! Absolutely right Althom, the meeting to change the constitution should have been progressed as a matter of urgency. Without change there will be no grants available for the new stadium and the Company ie WCFC cannot trade for much longer and will eventually be wound up to someones benefit? |
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Apr 1, 2016 20:47:52 GMT
thesecondjack has raised some good questions, some of which I & many others will know (I hope) the answers to.
Jem I'm sorry if I sound insulting to you or anyone asking the questions, but a direct answer than a referral to any current constitution or some other protocol, rather than a direct answer to the questions asked is not necessarily the right way.
I might not be right, so please correct me if not:
Any existing shareholder (no matter how many shares they hold) would have just one vote.
Any 'Trust' member would have one vote.
The 'new club' will be community owned, for the good of the community. Not just of 'the football club'.
The present WCFC board will become redundant, because WCFC Ltd will no longer exist.
The public voice WILL be heard, if they are trust members.
I hope this synopsis is a true reflection as it's the way forward & something I do agree with.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by richwidd on Apr 2, 2016 10:36:39 GMT
thesecondjack has raised some good questions, some of which I & many others will know (I hope) the answers to. Jem I'm sorry if I sound insulting to you or anyone asking the questions, but a direct answer than a referral to any current constitution or some other protocol, rather than a direct answer to the questions asked is not necessarily the right way. I might not be right, so please correct me if not: Any existing shareholder (no matter how many shares they hold) would have just one vote. Any 'Trust' member would have one vote. The 'new club' will be community owned, for the good of the community. Not just of 'the football club'. The present WCFC board will become redundant, because WCFC Ltd will no longer exist. The public voice WILL be heard, if they are trust members. I hope this synopsis is a true reflection as it's the way forward & something I do agree with. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Yes it would be a one member one vote. Yes it would be for the good of the whole community and anyone who is a shareholder would have an input. The WCFC Board would continue to run the Club during process of change from one form of ownership to another. The Club is already "Fan Owned" but it is individually fan owned, not collectively owned. The first hurdle would be to become community owned which is the Supporters Trust as an already established CBS taking a share of 50+1% of the shares. (In a nutshell) Further down the line and sooner rather than later as it takes more shares the Trust would be the one to disappear as the club would then be the Community Benefit Society. One of the big differences is that anyone who invests in Community Shares would (if there was money available) be able to withdraw their investment. Current Shareholders will soon be in a position to choose the path of the Club for the future. (Above is a very basic description). We as a Trust have strong proposition however there appear to be three alternatives 1. Is the Trust proposition of Community Ownership and 2. Do nothing at all 3. Liquidation (which the Club Chairman has pointed towards on several occasions). So shareholders of WCFC Ltd as it stands will have a clear choice of what they want to do & as we have always stated, prior to any WCFC Ltd meeting to vote on any change, we as a Trust would give a detailed presentation on the proposition - shareholders can then choose to attend that presentation and go into a club "EGM" (although it isn't called that anymore) fully armed with information OR they can chose to not go & make an uninformed decision on the future of the Club. |
|
|
|
Post by creaner on Apr 2, 2016 10:40:56 GMT
Lots of question to be answered on this one as it's the biggest change to happen to the club since 1928!. I've started a separate thread with a quick guide to why change must happen. |
|
|
|
Post by thatloudbloke on Apr 29, 2016 15:59:05 GMT
|
|
