|
Post by Croc on Jun 27, 2017 14:16:22 GMT
www.worcestercityfc.org/news/club-and-trust-join-statement-1852089.htmlTwo parties held meeting - 26-06-2017 The Board of Directors from WCFC and representatives from the WCFCST held a meeting last night to appraise the initial outcome of the Planning Meeting. It was agreed that we will collectively wait for the July Planning Committee (27th July), at which we expect a decision on the application to be taken. In the meantime the Club have agreed that a Community based ownership model is the only way forward for the Club and this will be pursued as a priority Anthony Hampson (WCFC Chairman) and Dave Wood (WCFCST Chairman)
|
|
|
Post by Woodenose on Jun 27, 2017 14:51:51 GMT
www.worcestercityfc.org/news/club-and-trust-join-statement-1852089.htmlTwo parties held meeting - 26-06-2017 The Board of Directors from WCFC and representatives from the WCFCST held a meeting last night to appraise the initial outcome of the Planning Meeting. It was agreed that we will collectively wait for the July Planning Committee (27th July), at which we expect a decision on the application to be taken. In the meantime the Club have agreed that a Community based ownership model is the only way forward for the Club and this will be pursued as a priority Anthony Hampson (WCFC Chairman) and Dave Wood (WCFCST Chairman) Better late than never, but this should have been announced before the application went before the council to send a strong signal that we are together on this
|
|
|
Post by Brooksiders Return!! on Jun 27, 2017 16:00:44 GMT
Sorry but this is complete and utter bullshit, and I'm very disappointed that the Supporters Trust have fallen for the old "joint statement" again.
Words are cheap, without commitment, and there is no commitment whatsoever from the football club.
Consider this.
If the football club Board genuinely believed that a community ownership model was the way forward, why have they never proposed one? Why have they rejected every call for a community owned club to date? Why did they recommend rejection of the proposals for change of constitution at the EGM which would have created a community owned club?
The Chairman completely dismissed the arguments of shareholders for this change of constitution as damaging to shareholders value.
The club were supposed to be engaging the services of a solicitor to provide a report on community ownership options. They have since rejected the report as worthless and will not be pursuing that route. The club have disregarded any calls to ever understand what community ownership is all about, at a Fans Forum Hampson said that community ownership as a CBS would only be suitable for a corner shop!
The football have done nothing to promote community ownership, ever. The football club have done nothing to promote a community amenity stadium at Perdiswell. In fact, whilst the Supporters Trust were busting guts to develop a planning appication for a community stadium at Perdiswell, the football club were (and still are) involved in secret conversations with the city council to place a small privately owned football ground at Parsonage Way - no community benefit, no CBS, no constitution change, just WCFC Ltd. building a ground for themselves at Parsonage Way.
This Board is so anti community ownership, that a few weeks prior to the application, the Chairman and certain city councillors met with the Supporters Trust and asked them to withdraw the planning application for a community stadium at Perdiswell. They even had a prepared "joint statement" to release saying that we'd all agreed to this. The Board of the club, who keep saying that they want to be working with the Trust had never involved the Trust in any discussions regarding Parsonage Way, partnership?? what partnership?
Questions have been asked about how much the Board are supporting the Perdiswell bid. The answer is that they're not. They did pay a small amount towards some surveys that needed doing some time ago, but have overall donated less than 10% to the costs of the planning application. Recently some invoices which should have been shared 50/50 were returned by the club to the Trust saying that they would not pay them. These were invoices for necessary services from third parties, the Trust paid the invoices in full. This is a Board that paid a five figure sum to a solicitors office to manage the last AGM! a needless spend, yet won't pay towards the costs of a planning application that say are saying that they support. This is a Board that says that they support Perdiswell, but not one member of the Board felt that it was worthwhile to attend the planning application for Perdiswell did they? They were there for the Nunnery Way hearing, and if somehow they were able to put together a planning application for Parsonage Way, they'd be there too. Partnership ? what partnership?
This must be the tenth "joint statement" issued saying that we are all working together, if thats the case, then why is only one partner doing all the work? And why is the other partner rejecting the work thats done?
Does anyone still believe this bullshit?
Anyway, lets see how this partnership pans out now. Anyone who doubts that we are all working together (including me) can check it out at the meeting on Thursday evening. After all, with everything that is going on, it would be inconceivable now that both the Chairman of the Supporters Trust and the Chairman of WCFC won't be sat next to each other sharing the same platform on Thursday. Wouldn't it? We are after all working in partnership, all in together?
|
|
|
Post by Noboddy aka Lord Ealing on Jun 27, 2017 16:54:59 GMT
As soon as I saw Hampson's name on it I flinched. But has Dave Wood really got involved? Are they trying to split the Trust? Did the board really meeting with the Trust earlier in the week?
WCFC won't be safe until Hampson and all of Hallmark's cronies are long gone. The trouble is there won't be a WCFC by then.
I think Jimbo's question re a New City becomes more and more relevant.
|
|
dragon
First Teamer
Posts: 355
|
Post by dragon on Jun 27, 2017 17:12:34 GMT
I smiled when I saw the heading to this thread. `Trust & Board` ? Now there`s an oxymoron for you !
|
|
|
Post by alwaysnextyear on Jun 27, 2017 20:27:24 GMT
Hampson would only turn to the Supporters Trust if he felt he was right in the s***, and feeling very vulnerable. He's trying to avoid calling an AGM at all costs, and trying a desperate last ditch attempt to save face. After dismissing any community based option in favour of his much vaunted share sales ( joke ) what's now changed his mind ? Joe Murphy was the only one on the Board with any football savvy, and now he's gone. Hampson is clueless, his silent sidekick Layland fetches his tea at half time, and Wilcox should know better. I don't believe anything Hampson ever says.
|
|
|
Post by jupu on Jun 28, 2017 12:14:14 GMT
Just to clarify, the next Planning Committee date is 20 July, not 27 July.
|
|
|
Post by Noboddy aka Lord Ealing on Jun 28, 2017 13:42:34 GMT
The joint statement throws up a couple of questions that might be asked on Thursday. Did Hampson meet with the Trust? If so then was the meeting minuted? If they didn't then who issued this statement?
Frankly I don't think it's possible to have dialogue with Hampson. Even if he issued proposals on stone tablets they shouldn't be believed.
Sadly I can't make this week's meeting due to some minor health issues but power to the faithful.
|
|
|
Post by Brooksiders Return!! on Jun 28, 2017 15:29:29 GMT
They did meet yes. The meeting was requested by the Supporters Trust, which was to give the Board an update (as they didn't bother attending the planning hearing) Same old bullshit at the meeting from all accounts. There are still utterly stupid comments being made by directors along the lines of " I'll only agree to community ownership if you can GUARANTEE that it will work!" Like the present plan is working? Three step demotion and financial ruin is what your plan has delivered Mr Layland, that is if you can call "Do nothing" a plan at all! So if Community Ownership is a priority now, the football club must have reasons to base that on, so hat work have they done? What is THEIR plan for community ownership? Don't we deserve to know? So, Thursday evening, let hear it directly from Mr Hampson, he owes it to fans to share his vision of community ownership. It can't be a priority if no-one knows about it
|
|
|
Post by Noboddy aka Lord Ealing on Jun 28, 2017 15:45:10 GMT
There's more chance of Elvis being there than Hampson.
Thanks for the update.
|
|
Fred
Reserve Teamer
Posts: 129
|
Post by Fred on Jun 28, 2017 19:19:08 GMT
Sorry but this is complete and utter bullshit, and I'm very disappointed that the Supporters Trust have fallen for the old "joint statement" again. Words are cheap, without commitment, and there is no commitment whatsoever from the football club. Consider this. If the football club Board genuinely believed that a community ownership model was the way forward, why have they never proposed one? Why have they rejected every call for a community owned club to date? Why did they recommend rejection of the proposals for change of constitution at the EGM which would have created a community owned club? The Chairman completely dismissed the arguments of shareholders for this change of constitution as damaging to shareholders value. The club were supposed to be engaging the services of a solicitor to provide a report on community ownership options. They have since rejected the report as worthless and will not be pursuing that route. The club have disregarded any calls to ever understand what community ownership is all about, at a Fans Forum Hampson said that community ownership as a CBS would only be suitable for a corner shop! The football have done nothing to promote community ownership, ever. The football club have done nothing to promote a community amenity stadium at Perdiswell. In fact, whilst the Supporters Trust were busting guts to develop a planning appication for a community stadium at Perdiswell, the football club were (and still are) involved in secret conversations with the city council to place a small privately owned football ground at Parsonage Way - no community benefit, no CBS, no constitution change, just WCFC Ltd. building a ground for themselves at Parsonage Way. This Board is so anti community ownership, that a few weeks prior to the application, the Chairman and certain city councillors met with the Supporters Trust and asked them to withdraw the planning application for a community stadium at Perdiswell. They even had a prepared "joint statement" to release saying that we'd all agreed to this. The Board of the club, who keep saying that they want to be working with the Trust had never involved the Trust in any discussions regarding Parsonage Way, partnership?? what partnership? Questions have been asked about how much the Board are supporting the Perdiswell bid. The answer is that they're not. They did pay a small amount towards some surveys that needed doing some time ago, but have overall donated less than 10% to the costs of the planning application. Recently some invoices which should have been shared 50/50 were returned by the club to the Trust saying that they would not pay them. These were invoices for necessary services from third parties, the Trust paid the invoices in full. This is a Board that paid a five figure sum to a solicitors office to manage the last AGM! a needless spend, yet won't pay towards the costs of a planning application that say are saying that they support. This is a Board that says that they support Perdiswell, but not one member of the Board felt that it was worthwhile to attend the planning application for Perdiswell did they? They were there for the Nunnery Way hearing, and if somehow they were able to put together a planning application for Parsonage Way, they'd be there too. Partnership ? what partnership? This must be the tenth "joint statement" issued saying that we are all working together, if thats the case, then why is only one partner doing all the work? And why is the other partner rejecting the work thats done? Does anyone still believe this bullshit? Anyway, lets see how this partnership pans out now. Anyone who doubts that we are all working together (including me) can check it out at the meeting on Thursday evening. After all, with everything that is going on, it would be inconceivable now that both the Chairman of the Supporters Trust and the Chairman of WCFC won't be sat next to each other sharing the same platform on Thursday. Wouldn't it? We are after all working in partnership, all in together? Are you not still part of the ST ?
|
|
|
Post by downthelane on Jun 28, 2017 20:40:24 GMT
Looks like there is a divide within the Trust if the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing
|
|
|
Post by rushwickdon on Jun 28, 2017 21:00:34 GMT
Looks like there is a divide within the Board if the left hand doesn't know what another left hand is doing...
|
|
niels
City Legend
Posts: 1,741
|
Post by niels on Jun 28, 2017 21:11:36 GMT
Looks like there is a divide within the Trust if the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing It is allowed to have differing opinions within an organisation. In fact it's healthy. Shame we don't have the same on the club board, instead of a bunch of nodding dogs, and one (now left) who was only there cause it allowed him to sit on the conference board, who blindly follow our esteemed leader as he takes our beloved club down the pan.
|
|
|
Post by Noboddy aka Lord Ealing on Jun 29, 2017 11:23:16 GMT
Looks like there is a divide within the Trust if the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing What sort of comment is that? Members of the Trust discuss matters openly - unlike the board. The trust communicates with supporters - unlike the board. Supporters have their voices heard (as tonight's meeting shows) - unlike the board. Perhaps some of the Trust's plans won't work, that's up for debate, but at least they have plans - unlike the board. Hampson, Boddy, Hallmark and co. have taken a once respected club and destroyed it. They have no desire to save it - unlike he Trust. If you have any love for WCFC let's hear your ideas. But you haven't got any have you? You're pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by Croc on Jun 29, 2017 11:38:50 GMT
Looks like there is a divide within the Trust if the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing What sort of comment is that? Members of the Trust discuss matters openly - unlike the board. The trust communicates with supporters - unlike the board. Supporters have their voices heard (as tonight's meeting shows) - unlike the board. Perhaps some of the Trust's plans won't work, that's up for debate, but at least they have plans - unlike the board. Hampson, Boddy, Hallmark and co. have taken a once respected club and destroyed it. They have no desire to save it - unlike he Trust. If you have any love for WCFC let's hear your ideas. But you haven't got any have you? You're pathetic. Don't waste your time on it m'Lordship. We all know that it is only here to troll, and when called out on things or asked why it doesn't want to get involved / talk to interested parties etc. it goes off and has a tantrum.
|
|
|
Post by Noboddy aka Lord Ealing on Jun 29, 2017 12:04:36 GMT
Ok Croc
|
|
|
Post by downthelane on Jun 29, 2017 20:20:36 GMT
Ok Croc
|
|
|
Post by Brooksiders Return!! on Jun 29, 2017 21:10:13 GMT
So, how many of the club Board were at the meeting tonight?
|
|
|
Post by Noboddy aka Lord Ealing on Jun 29, 2017 21:34:09 GMT
And was Elvis there?
|
|
dragon
First Teamer
Posts: 355
|
Post by dragon on Jun 30, 2017 13:53:28 GMT
Well, what happened ?
|
|
|
Post by The Verner on Jun 30, 2017 15:13:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Noboddy aka Lord Ealing on Jun 30, 2017 16:48:45 GMT
Well I hope the meeting was useful, but notes like the management discussing whether they are playing 4-4-2 or not is disheartening.
The problem remains the same. Hallmark is driving the club off a cliff. What can we do about it?
|
|
dragon
First Teamer
Posts: 355
|
Post by dragon on Jun 30, 2017 17:00:47 GMT
I should address all future enquiries to the Evening News then ? From their write -up absolutely nothing was achieved and no one has either the foresight or the nous to do anything about it. WCFC is now no more than `an alehouse team` in an alehouse league- 4-2-4 or not. Well done all !
|
|
|
Post by downthelane on Jun 30, 2017 17:36:39 GMT
So what exactly were you expecting the Forum to achieve?
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jun 30, 2017 17:52:26 GMT
Do we take it that there was no representation from the WCFC Board ? That being the case, do we also take it that this new working together scenario is non existent already ??
|
|
|
Post by Woodenose on Jun 30, 2017 18:06:44 GMT
I should address all future enquiries to the Evening News then ? From their write -up absolutely nothing was achieved and no one has either the foresight or the nous to do anything about it. WCFC is now no more than `an alehouse team` in an alehouse league- 4-2-4 or not. Well done all ! I think you mean the Worcester News, or are you living in the past?
|
|
dragon
First Teamer
Posts: 355
|
Post by dragon on Jun 30, 2017 18:13:13 GMT
I was EXPECTING it to turn out exactly as it did (according to the WN report although it would have been good to have it straight from` the horse`s mouth` on here !). But I had HOPED the trust would have, at least, shown themselves to be more adept on the PR front than Hampson and Co. !
|
|
|
Post by manufan on Jun 30, 2017 18:34:42 GMT
So many negative postings on here. The ST meeting was well organised and informative. BTW, so good to see the Coventry highlights. Is there a DVD available?
|
|
|
Post by B*ue dragonstander on Jun 30, 2017 21:37:14 GMT
At least there is a plan from the Trust as to how to move forward. It is now up to the Ship of Fools to deliver on their commitment to make the the ClC a reality.
Once the planning decision finalises then the clock starts to tick on the need to implement it ( assuming the slippery snakes on the Council uphold the law as they are obliged to do). Once that happens there needs to be a time limit on how long the Board is given to organise the necessary constitutional changes. I would say that 90 days from planning approval is long enough for the company Board to organise the necessaries. Time is short and it needs to be made clear that any prevarication will result in a vote of confidence by the Trust.
The decline of City needs to be stopped and the time is coming where Hampson and co need to put on the spot and should they fail to deliver then they need to know that there is an alternative. Football clubs are hearts and souls not Boards and shares.
|
|