TRUST AGM - TONIGHT 6.30pm. - GW PUB

[Fred Elliot]

Again, I never claimed it's a secret society, just my perception.

Having Wray turn up and have everyone sign a nda to keep his comments private doesn't help. Again, not saying there is anything going on but it doesn't look good. Though I'm struggling to see any positive reason for Wray attending especially given the comments from Black and the sale of the club in general.

Jonny

I am with you 100% on this one

[Posh Red]

The moral of the story is if you want to hear whats discussed and care go to the meetings and make your own mind up,don't sit and wait on the internet for a distilled version of things..be proactive.

Would love to, however it's a bit of a trek from Peterborough to get to a 6:30 meeting on a working day. The very reason (despite being a season ticket holder) that I don't make it to that many midweek home games.

[Fred Elliot]

Saturday morning / lunchtime meetings should be reintroduced

[Simon Pieman]

I don't think the Trust has enough clout even with 1000 members. Too many internal politics in my opinion.

[Fred Elliot]

I don't think the Trust has enough clout even with 1000 members. Too many internal politics in my opinion.

Sadly, that appears to be the case

[leftside]

Sadly, that appears to be the case

This may be spot on Fred, but no organisation is going to comprise a membership that agrees on absolutely everything and with the same level of conviction on each element of a manifesto (eg Tories, Church of England).

Also, and obviously, the Trust will never be able to claim it represents the whole fanbase (and I'm sure it would never attempt to make such a claim).

However, even if it has no financial clout, or any direct ability to influence goings-on at the club, it can be a voice for asking questions of the club's board of directors. And if it had a membership that represented a decent proportion of the average match-day attendance, it would be difficult for the club board to ignore the sorts of questions that both Trust and non-Trust members would like answered.

[Flashheart]

I spoke out when the trust were making demands for immediate answers from a board that had not even been officially installed yet and, to boot, were under an NDA. It struck me as ill thought out and toothless.

I agree in general about wanting answers etc but I'd rather my thoughts were represented by a person or organisation that would think it through a little better.

Why make a demand for for immediate answers from a body that is under an NDA? What is that going to achieve?

[Samdy Gray]

I don't think it was an immediate demand for answers, it was a list of questions that most fans wanted answered as soon as reasonably possible. I like to think that it set the stall out that the fans aren't naive and we request transparency. I'd rather they got the questions in up front than sat with their thumbs up their arses.

[Flashheart]

I don;t want to labour the point too much as I agree with the premise.

But they did ask for immediate answers from a body that was allegedly under an NDA. We all get bees under our bonnets, this is one of mine.

Was Jason Roberts at the meeting?

[fittons_coaching_badge]

Was Wray also there in his capacity as the ex-chairman who increased our annual losses from c£1.5m to c£3m a season?

Did anyone ask him how the club will cover these massive losses if his gamble to win promotion fails?

I know most people are big Wray fans but I'm not one of them. That kind of spending is reckless and is one of the main problems in football today, pushing up player wages and leaving many clubs facing financial ruin.

Nail on head!  Wray has as many questions to answer about our financial state as anyone.  His position as chairman intimated a responsibility to run the club in a financially secure manner which he failed miserably.  Seeing Wray back as a chairman or figurehead of some party seeking a takeover would make me nervous.

[ronnie21]

Slight difference, Wray was spending somebody else's money at the time, somebody who we all thought was quite prepared to sign the cheques . . . . it does now appear not to be the case.  Sadly he couldn't rein in JW who in turn couldn't rein in PDC so he got rid of  one chairman to put in another to sell the club.  A lot would depend on who else is the the party thinking about such a move and how close they would keep those purse strings.

[Batch]

Other than the transfer fee fuck up of TAH and Collins, I've not seen any allegations Wray was operating outside agreed budget. Have I missed it?

[jonny72]

It was in the Black tweets.

[Batch]

I didn't see him say that explicitly. Only that he wasn't happy we breached the wage cap and that player transactions were not being communicated as per his instructions.

[jonny72]

I agree. But he appeared to hold Wray responsible for the embargo and lack of communication.

Though there was this bit as well;

“Di Canio and Spencer were not happy with the chairman being changed and began issuing press releases criticising the board. I didn't like the way it was going. The budget plan changed with the forecasts for this year and next going a lot higher. At the start of the season I had decided to put in another year, but I changed my mind.

My problem with Wray is that he is the one that came up with the plan to spend to buy promotion, with an expensive high profile manager who was given money for players. It was his business model and him that convinced Black to bankroll it.

It was a complete change of plan as Fitton had always wanted to balance the books.

Wray is reckless and I wouldn't want him anywhere near the club again. We might have some short term success but it will come back to haunt us and very likely result in administration. I kind of wish I'd been able to go to the AGM so I could explain my views to him, face to face.