|
Post by jimbo on Nov 4, 2008 19:03:00 GMT
INTERESTING THAT YOU SAY WE............... Will you be co-opted onto the board immediately Richard ?
|
|
|
Post by prestonwcfc on Nov 4, 2008 19:24:18 GMT
Just a short question. Are those standing doing so independantly or as members of SAG. It's just that I thought I saw elsewhere that Rich had said SAG no longer existed thus the removal of their website ?
|
|
wh
Youth Teamer
Posts: 44
|
Post by wh on Nov 4, 2008 19:33:38 GMT
Williams didn't wreck the website though. That was all Wayne's fault. At least that's what the board think. The website is still alive and well and available for lease. They are correct, IDIFF didn't wreck the website it is always someone else's fault.
|
|
|
Post by suv on Nov 4, 2008 19:37:51 GMT
Williams didn't wreck the website though. That was all Wayne's fault. At least that's what the board think. The website is still alive and well and available for lease. If the website is available for lease, would it consider being the Guest Speaker at a Sportsman's dinner?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2008 20:39:56 GMT
INTERESTING THAT YOU SAY WE............... Will you be co-opted onto the board immediately Richard ? I think WE stretches further than the Boardroom, for the club to prosper there needs to be between 30-50 people involved in aspects of the club, they are the WE, plus of course additional volunteers from within the supporter groups, they are the WE, and outside of football matters, many others involved in generating a cummunity facility also make up the WE. My vision for this club involves inclusivity, there is no way a small board of directors can run the business, regardless of whether they are the present encumbents, members of the shareholder groups, or outside investors.
|
|
|
Post by richwidd on Nov 5, 2008 8:25:48 GMT
INTERESTING THAT YOU SAY WE............... Will you be co-opted onto the board immediately Richard ? No I won't be. I have no intention of going on the Board. What this Club needs is people with a proven business track record over many years and/or relevant experience. I am part of the "WE" meaning those shareholders who are prepared to not accept what is going on at the moment. I will do what I am good at, which I've done for a long time and that is to raise money for the club. If there is a change on the Board I will be more than happy to go on the fundraising group as I did several years ago when I brought in a two year £25,000 sponsorship deal in a few short weeks, but was then excluded from the fundraising meetings by our Company Secretary. I will go on the group whether it is me as an individual or as part of the Trust, if put forward (we haven't got that far yet). Since most volunteers have stopped helping the Club, all of the Club fundraising events have dried up. There are hardly any sponsors, so its no wonder the Club has made record losses. My intentions are the same as they have been for many years. To turn the Social Club into a profitable business - as a volunteer and part of a team as happened with the Harry Knowles Lounge, which has now been run into the Ground in a short space of time. The Social Club is a disgrace and has been a disgrace for a long time. If there is a change on the Board, I'm going to change it!! If the Shareholders don't want change, then I won't! simple as that!
|
|
|
Post by richwidd on Nov 5, 2008 8:28:17 GMT
Just a short question. Are those standing doing so independantly or as members of SAG. It's just that I thought I saw elsewhere that Rich had said SAG no longer existed thus the removal of their website ? There is no membership of SAG or SHAG. The proposal makes no reference to any group or Company which includes the Trust.
|
|
si1268
Reserve Teamer
Posts: 147
|
Post by si1268 on Nov 5, 2008 13:59:48 GMT
I fail to understand the questioning. Surely it's an open and shut case. If Gobby's Cairn Terrier were standing alone against the current board I'd advocate shareholders voting for it. I mean, could it actually do a worse job?
|
|
|
Post by prestonwcfc on Nov 6, 2008 12:32:59 GMT
Just a short question. Are those standing doing so independantly or as members of SAG. It's just that I thought I saw elsewhere that Rich had said SAG no longer existed thus the removal of their website ? There is no membership of SAG or SHAG. The proposal makes no reference to any group or Company which includes the Trust. So to clarify does SAG still exist or not ? From your post it would suggest all are standing independantly, so does this mean all will have independant long term objectives or is a joint business plan being produced, and if so surely this has a collective banner ?
|
|
cogg
Squad Member
Posts: 208
|
Post by cogg on Nov 6, 2008 13:14:28 GMT
Jem,I apologise for sounding a bit 'off'......I just was questioning what your plans were as there have been lots of words but nothing really to say which direction the new Board would take. I have to agree that when I posted I did not expect you to post on here yopur plans just at the moment !
And I also have to agree with Rich that yes, ther never was a olan B published !
I want a new start. I helped, as you know, set up the initial Trust and would still be very keen to help in the future, but I won't help those incumbent now
I look forward to a new start and would love to start helping again in any way possible.
I have to draw the line at Gobby's terrier though ;-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2008 14:28:11 GMT
There is no membership of SAG or SHAG. The proposal makes no reference to any group or Company which includes the Trust. So to clarify does SAG still exist or not ? From your post it would suggest all are standing independantly, so does this mean all will have independant long term objectives or is a joint business plan being produced, and if so surely this has a collective banner ? SAG has never existed! Apart from in the minds of the media and people who termed the phrase. Its just a bunch of shareholders, who are working together to force the only constitutionally acceptable challenge to the present Board. It can't be done by individuals, and it can't be done by a consortium (not under present company articles) In the same way, the Board is not a seperate member group, both the present Board and the opposing shareholders have provided names for election, but they are severed - for instance, just because on of the Directors up for re-election gets elected, it doesn't mean that another Director up for election is automatically elected. In fact, it could be a very useful little spoiling tactic to tactically ensure 1 of the existing members up for re-election is not elected. There is in fact only one constitutionally formed group, and that is of all shareholders of the company, whether part of an action group, on the Board of Directors, or has never been involved in the club but won 50 shares in the Supergold!! Thats the only members club involved. In future there will be another members club involved, called the Supporters Trust who, if given the opportunity, will have a major role to play in the stability and future progress of the club.......If given the opportunity!
|
|
|
Post by prestonwcfc on Nov 6, 2008 15:51:09 GMT
Jem
Thanks for the explanation, which I now understand, however I would argue that 99% of City supporters/shareholders would say SAG do exist. This may be as a result of the press but also through until recently a website for the body existing, as well as numerous press releases etc.
I understand that those standing are not necessarily affiliated to SAG however am unsure if they are standing individually or collectively with regards to future aims/business plans etc.
|
|
wh
Youth Teamer
Posts: 44
|
Post by wh on Nov 6, 2008 17:17:32 GMT
I think you will find the answer you are looking for is "collectively"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2008 18:19:57 GMT
I would hazard a guess that they have a collective aim, are looking to work to a collective business plan, so yes, collectively. I think the chances of so many shareholders all having a similar idea, and standing for election on the same mandate individually is somewhat remote!
|
|
si1268
Reserve Teamer
Posts: 147
|
Post by si1268 on Nov 6, 2008 21:04:32 GMT
You wouldn't have thought this issue would need clarification, but apparantly it does.
|
|
BDS
Squad Member
Posts: 201
|
Post by BDS on Nov 7, 2008 22:15:59 GMT
INTERESTING THAT YOU SAY WE............... Will you be co-opted onto the board immediately Richard ? No I won't be. I have no intention of going on the Board. What this Club needs is people with a proven business track record over many years and/or relevant experience. I am part of the "WE" meaning those shareholders who are prepared to not accept what is going on at the moment. I will do what I am good at, which I've done for a long time and that is to raise money for the club. If there is a change on the Board I will be more than happy to go on the fundraising group as I did several years ago when I brought in a two year £25,000 sponsorship deal in a few short weeks, but was then excluded from the fundraising meetings by our Company Secretary. I will go on the group whether it is me as an individual or as part of the Trust, if put forward (we haven't got that far yet). Since most volunteers have stopped helping the Club, all of the Club fundraising events have dried up. There are hardly any sponsors, so its no wonder the Club has made record losses. My intentions are the same as they have been for many years. To turn the Social Club into a profitable business - as a volunteer and part of a team as happened with the Harry Knowles Lounge, which has now been run into the Ground in a short space of time. The Social Club is a disgrace and has been a disgrace for a long time. If there is a change on the Board, I'm going to change it!! If the Shareholders don't want change, then I won't! simple as that! And some of us recognise your unselfish and sterling efforts over the years. Where would the Club be if your dynamism had been given its head? The Conference? You are exactly the sort of person who should be on the Board. Your experience is more valid and relevant than most and someone who can turn a profit is a very very valuable commodity.
|
|
BDS
Squad Member
Posts: 201
|
Post by BDS on Nov 7, 2008 22:18:10 GMT
I fail to understand the questioning. Surely it's an open and shut case. If Gobby's Cairn Terrier were standing alone against the current board I'd advocate shareholders voting for it. I mean, could it actually do a worse job? It could foul the Social Club. On reflection no harm done though. There would be no-one there to notice. Lest face it with so many candidates put up by the current board one more wouldnt make a lot of difference. Woofy has my vote!
|
|