As the most used BWFC fan site, we'd like to gauge opinion

To be fair to him, he's got a fuckload of experience running failing companies.

If you disagree with something do you just let the perpetrator carry on doing the thing that pisses you off or do you say something loud enough to be noticed?

Shouting loud on here does not change a jot, join up and make your point heard, loads of ST members will have same viewpoint as you, these fans deserve to be heard the trust is a vehicle for every view point and if enough folk then agree then ultimately that'll decide policy and the way forward.

The trust emailed members to say that it was free to renew and to cancel DD many folk me including me chose to pay the tenner. Quick question folk who are anti the trust is there any way that it might be possible to be pro trust? What would they need to do? Or has that horse bolted forever. If it's the latter why not just let those who feel a trust is required get on with supporting it.

 

Yes, free to RENEW but it STILL costs a fee to JOIN!

 

You said above that it was free to JOIN.

 

It isn't.

 

 

 

The Trust is there to represent the 'voice of the fans'.

 

The poll above clearly show that they don't.

 

That needs to change.

 

The Board have clearly failed the ST's reason for being and should now do the honourable thing and resign and those who are independent of them should be appointed in place instead.

 

Until then the ST has no credibility with anyone and thus is clearly unfit for purpose.

the thing is if your not in it you cant influence it , if you are in it (like me) then your a gullible sucker with twenty quid less in your pocket

 

according to the ww narrative.

 

the trust leadership is crap even if the idea of a trust is sound (on the basis that its the vehicle of last resort)

 

agree if it was impossible to reform then it would be a complete waste of space .

 

maybe us ST members should demand a meeting & force the leadership to wind its neck in.

I do not understand how if so few people support it they can claim to be a Supporters Trust ? BWSA has more right to take over surely if shit hits the fan.

 

I do not think people are anti a ST as such but the people running it are not doing a good enough job. I personally have never understood what the ST would do before the shit hits. Then once it does hit again not sure these individuals are any use.

 

Sluffy has highlighted the business background of one of the members, did he declare this background when stood ? If he had would other members of ST board have accepted him on the Board ? He is a suitable person to have on the Board of BWFC ?

 

KA was met by a general feeling of unease when he appeared yet I would imagine a massive % of fans would think for all his faults he is better option than ST.

 

What have the ST done to the benefit of the club since formed ? Our financial position is a million miles off rosey but why would it be better if the bloke from the ST with the failed businesses was involved ?

The BWSA not legally set up to run a club the trust is, that can't change and the reason folk with BWFC at heart should use this vehicle to get their voice heard, I have lots of issues with the current set up but I'll voice them directly to the trust board members and that's how it works. Ultimately while I disagree with some thinks theyve done it's a safety net should the worst ever happen.

Edited May 15, 20179 yr by Mounts Kipper

Yes, free to RENEW but it STILL costs a fee to JOIN!

 

You said above that it was free to JOIN.

 

It isn't.

 

 

 

The Trust is there to represent the 'voice of the fans'.

 

The poll above clearly show that they don't.

 

That needs to change.

 

The Board have clearly failed the ST's reason for being and should now do the honourable thing and resign and those who are independent of them should be appointed in place instead.

 

Until then the ST has no credibility with anyone and thus is clearly unfit for purpose.

It's a one off tenner get it paid and argue your case from within instead of bleating on here, it's a vehicle for every fan to use to get your opinion heard (I'll even pay your tenner if you'll get involved) Perhaps you'd stand for the board? Or are you just a serial moaner who's nowt better to do?

 it's a safety net should the worst ever happen.

 

This is the bit that I don't understand - how does it work?

 

Say that next week KA says, we're losing too much money and decides to call in the administrators. How does having the ST save us, unless they've got sufficient monies stashed away to keep us going as a viable business (which we know they've not, at present)

 

I'm not being funny, I genuinely don't understand 

Edited May 15, 20179 yr by Sweep

BWFCST like to make noises but have nothing to back it up.

This is the bit that I don't understand - how does it work?

 

Say that next week KA says, we're losing too much money and decides to call in the administrators. How does having the ST save us, unless they've got sufficient monies stashed away to keep us going as a viable business (which we know they've not, at present)

 

I'm not being funny, I genuinely don't understand

This might help you understand.

 

http://www.supporters-direct.org

The BWSA not legally set up to run a club the trust is, that can't change and the reason folk with BWFC at heart should use this vehicle to get their voice heard, I have lots of issues with the current set up but I'll voice them directly to the trust board members and that's how it works. Ultimately while I disagree with some thinks theyve done it's a safety net should the worst ever happen.

Totally missing my point mate.

 

What legal right does this disjointed unrepresentative tiny group of people led by a failed businessman have to takeover the club ?

 

What is to stop someone else setting up another ST ?

 

If they are there as a safeguard if the club goes bust why do they want to stick their nose in now ?

 

If they are only there for a bad day in the future why are they trying to get a seat on the Board now ?

My issue with the trust is that I don't trust them and they don't trust Ken.

 

Should be renamed the Lack of Trust

BWFCST like to make noises but have nothing to back it up.

 

You don't know that do you? Many clubs smaller than BWFC raised the capital to run their club, there is no doubt there are folk out there with plenty of high nett worth with BWFC at heart who in the right circumstances would get involved.

Its just a means of legally bringing in interested parties & saving the club from admin if the shite hits the fan , all the other stuff is just waffle . Football clubs are not democratic nor should they be as nothing would ever be agreed .Our lot are exceeding their role.

My issue with the trust is that I don't trust them and they don't trust Ken.

 

Should be renamed the Lack of Trust

There's a lot of work to do from all parties to gain the trust of each other but Rome wasn't built in a day so it is possible.

It's a one off tenner get it paid and argue your case from within instead of bleating on here, it's a vehicle for every fan to use to get your opinion heard (I'll even pay your tenner if you'll get involved) Perhaps you'd stand for the board? Or are you just a serial moaner who's nowt better to do?

 

Well considering that this is only my sixth post on here in the last FIVE YEARS I seemed to have certainly rattled your cage!

 

In simple terms an ST is a final backstop from saving a club when it is going under - agreed?

 

It has no power or influence over any existing club ownership unless those owners want to offer them some.

 

It is clear from Anderson's insight the other day that he has scant regard for the dealings of the ST's present board and I doubt his attitude will change anytime soon whilst they remain in charge.

 

It seems to me the Anderson has a firm grip on the club's financial position although I can understand why people may think the opposite.

 

If he has and he moves the club forwards, maybe even selling it on, then there is nothing the ST can really do about it.

 

If I'm wrong and it all comes tumbling down then the ST MAY come into play.

 

If we go into Administration it certainly isn't a given that the Administrator will accept the ST's offer to bring it out of it.  There may be better deals to be done with others.  The Administrators job is to obtain the best for the creditors of the club and not to simply hand it over to an ST.

 

Even if the ST was all that was left at the table, they still have to prove that they can take on the club as a going concern.

 

They obviously cannot do that themselves with their finances so they would have to attract external money.

 

If I was interested in financing the ST's takeover of the club I would first of all see who I would be getting into bed with - wouldn't you?

 

I don't see many doing that myself at the moment.

 

 

Thank you for offering to pay ST membership for me but I can pay it myself if I wanted to.

 

The current ST I believe isn't fit for purpose so I won't be investing in them.

 

I don't wish to be involved with them under their current leadership and I thus would not wish to stand against them on the board.

 

As for being a serial moaner, I try where I can to provide details and facts to back up what I say.

 

I've tried extremely hard to give the Board a platform on 'Nuts' to interact with ALL Wanderers fans and not just the 2,500 or so (WanderersWays have a 1,000 more members!) and have more or less been totally blanked by them.

 

I've given them plenty of chances to put doubters of them like myself, to set us straight.

 

They haven't.

 

I consider my view on them fair and reasonable comment, with links and quotes where I can.

 

Does that make me a serial moaner?

 

I guess it must do in your eyes.

Totally missing my point mate.

What legal right does this disjointed unrepresentative tiny group of people led by a failed businessman have to takeover the club ?

What is to stop someone else setting up another ST ?

If they are there as a safeguard if the club goes bust why do they want to stick their nose in now ?

If they are only there for a bad day in the future why are they trying to get a seat on the Board now ?

The legal right is the fact that they've gone thought the process of becoming a trust.

The rest is just opinion, whether we like it or not.

We can all moan, with good reason, but as is stated above people can change it from within by joining and putting their views across. Presumably, there will be some means by which an egm or a vote of no confidence can be tabled, but you'd have to be a member to do so.

As to whether another st can be set up, I don't know but I doubt it.

 

Personally I can't be arsed joining and going through the hassle, rightly or wrongly, so I'll just keep a distant view on it.

 

It would never please all come what may, but I would imagine that carrying on as they are, someone will eventually challenge the board or it will gradually fade away.

Be interesting to know how many on here are trust members willing to mount a collective attack on the ST board

 

I know the sarcastic shit storm coming my way but heyho its worth discussing.

Be interesting to know how many on here are trust members willing to mount a collective attack on the ST board

 

I know the sarcastic shit storm coming my way but heyho its worth discussing.

 

 

ill find out

Mike Smith and Ian Bridge should stand down after confirming they wouldnt be on the board, then ending up on the board.

 

Cant be trusted

 

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/14196824.display/?commentSort=score

I'd be up for seeing what answers you could get mounts. I think most agree it's the individuals rather than the idea of the trust.

As one of the few down here who question our lauded saviour for creating debt to loan the club to cover with failed shit stand plans , whilst separating club from pockets of its land and still ending up with £3.5m of shares plus loans paid back with interest, just be careful.

This thread reminds me of the Star Wars prequels

This thread reminds me of the Star Wars prequels

 

A load of tedious old shit?

A load of tedious old shit?

In (obi) one

The trust emailed members to say that it was free to renew and to cancel DD many folk me including me chose to pay the tenner. Quick question folk who are anti the trust is there any way that it might be possible to be pro trust? What would they need to do? Or has that horse bolted forever. If it's the latter why not just let those who feel a trust is required get on with supporting it.

All those running it or involved in setting it up to step down and leave the ST. At that point I would consider rejoining if proper elections took place.