Questions for the Advisory Board

[theakston2k]

The Trust have lost their purpose currently, there is a blurred line between them, the OSC and the club.  They are obviously enjoying working closely with the club but it has come at a cost to their independence and objectivity, they are basically doing what I would expect the OSC to do normally.

I think a few Trust board members such as James Spencer need to step away from social media for a while as they really aren’t showing the Trust in a great light currently IMO and getting beyond defensive when questions are asked.  

[Berniman]

The Trust have lost their purpose currently, there is a blurred line between them, the OSC and the club.  They are obviously enjoying working closely with the club but it has come at a cost to their independence and objectivity, they are basically doing what I would expect the OSC to do normally.

I think a few Trust board members such as James Spencer need to step away from social media for a while as they really aren’t showing the Trust in a great light currently IMO and getting beyond defensive when questions are asked. 

Spot on

[Shrivvy Road]

100 percent agree they have seemed alot more defensive lately. Still unsure though apart from that what they seem to have done wrong really. As far as i understand it the questions have now been answered that people want answering, if the Karachi and Hart questions are not answered that people seem to want by next advisory then yeah i get it but what is it they are not doing at the moment

[Shrivvy Road]

This isn't me being argumentative either just intrigued to what some people see that i don't, and vice versa tbf. Maybe i am being blind to it myself

[Berniman]

I see a lot of people saying they are cozy etc and i do agree that a few things of late they have been a bit bad with but last week the fans were saying they wanted to hear from the owners about new debt and budget cuts which have been addressed in the local media already

What are the actual things that you want them to stop doing

Allowing themselves to be used as the communication point to fans (in particular when bad news needs to be delivered) I would prefer to see them challenging bad news where possible on behalf of the fans.

Wearing the club hat when changes that would affect fans are proposed, such as price increases.  As a fan organisation you would expect the first reaction to price increases (whether for a special match or season pricing) to be no, but allow us to work with you on what might work to keep everybody happy.  Sending out a poll on twitter to gauge fan reaction and manage any potential fall out is not the way these things should be done.

Working day to day at the club answering emails and all of the other stuff that was stated online etc.  this all points towards them having the clubs best interests at heart over the fans.  I get it that sometimes things are in both sides interests, which is fine, but when the next thing comes along that isn't in the fans interest, the trust will find themselves in a difficult position to then pull the covers back and stand there supporting the fans, potentially against the clubs wishes.

[BambooToTheFuture]

100 percent agree they have seemed alot more defensive lately. Still unsure though apart from that what they seem to have done wrong really. As far as i understand it the questions have now been answered that people want answering, if the Karachi and Hart questions are not answered that people seem to want by next advisory then yeah i get it but what is it they are not doing at the moment

For me it's not so much the Trust per se. I can see they are "triers", and there's nothing wrong with that. For me it's seemingly that Clem has played a masterstroke in appointing  RA as CEO; it's tugged at the heartstrings of several. On the surface that's a wonderful bit of PR but it has meant the Trust are appearing to vehemently nod and smile (I know James has said different but I don't fully buy it) all whilst ignoring bigger questions posed from the fanbase.

It's easy to address things like the continuation of physical programme sales and giving an 108 yr old the keys to SN1 for life and suchlike. Of course these things should be put forward and ensured the Club notices and then actions them. But when things become a little murky and more serious questions need to be fronted this is also where the Trust come in. Currently, they appear to have responded but responded as if they represent the Club and not representing a fan/supporter of the Club.

The guilt tripping from the off regarding season ticket renewals was such a red flag for me right at the beginning. I've continued stating I personally feel it doesn't look good but the Trust spun it to make it look like we were "all in this together". They essentially backed the Club stance (or rolled over) and if you didn't comply, then it made the fan/supporter look a bit of a cunt (it's moot as to whether they already were or not ).

The short form in all of this is (and it's possibly regarding the CEO appointment) most of the time it's best not to mix business with pleasure. For me Clem knows what he was doing there and it's in no way detrimental to RA skills in business etc. I just feel that with him there it's given more time to the likes of Clem (and Xav/Zav) to crack on with whatever they are REALLY doing because on the outside, fans (and likely the Trust) will think "oh it's ok RA is there, we're in safe hands".

I would go as far as saying something else but I would rather discuss that one with my solicitors first

[STFC_Manc]

For me it's not so much the Trust per se. I can see they are "triers", and there's nothing wrong with that. For me it's seemingly that Clem has played a masterstroke in appointing  RA as CEO; it's tugged at the heartstrings of several. On the surface that's a wonderful bit of PR but it has meant the Trust are appearing to vehemently nod and smile (I know James has said different but I don't fully buy it) all whilst ignoring bigger questions posed from the fanbase.

It's easy to address things like the continuation of physical programme sales and giving an 108 yr old the keys to SN1 for life and suchlike. Of course these things should be put forward and ensured the Club notices and then actions them. But when things become a little murky and more serious questions need to be fronted this is also where the Trust come in. Currently, they appear to have responded but responded as if they represent the Club and not representing a fan/supporter of the Club.

The guilt tripping from the off regarding season ticket renewals was such a red flag for me right at the beginning. I've continued stating I personally feel it doesn't look good but the Trust spun it to make it look like we were "all in this together". They essentially backed the Club stance (or rolled over) and if you didn't comply, then it made the fan/supporter look a bit of a cunt (it's moot as to whether they already were or not ).

The short form in all of this is (and it's possibly regarding the CEO appointment) most of the time it's best not to mix business with pleasure. For me Clem knows what he was doing there and it's in no way detrimental to RA skills in business etc. I just feel that with him there it's given more time to the likes of Clem (and Xav/Zav) to crack on with whatever they are REALLY doing because on the outside, fans (and likely the Trust) will think "oh it's ok RA is there, we're in safe hands".

I would go as far as saying something else but I would rather discuss that one with my solicitors first

This escalated quickly - so what do you REALLY think Clem is up to?

[BambooToTheFuture]

This escalated quickly - so what do you REALLY think Clem is up to?

Well I knew I'd get slated - especially on here; that's nothing new. Can you categorically say you have zero concerns?

To answer your question...It could be anything but I would hazard a guess it might not be in the best interests of STFC and more likely in the interests of Formuni and anyone connected to Formuni (what an ironic anagram).

[Pookemon]

Well I knew I'd get slated - especially on here; that's nothing new. Can you categorically say you have zero concerns?

To answer your question...It could be anything but I would hazard a guess it might not be in the best interests of STFC and more likely in the interests of Formuni and anyone connected to Formuni (what an ironic anagram).

Slated?  Seems like sensible questioning.   
You're answer is essentially saying  "he owns Swindon town so he must be dodgy."   

We all get that but it's not rational.   

[BambooToTheFuture]

Slated?  Seems like sensible questioning.   
You're answer is essentially saying  "he owns Swindon town so he must be dodgy."   

We all get that but it's not rational.   

It's more rational than anything coming out of our incumbent government's mouth at present (or ever) but then again, that bar is fucking low.

But actually my answer didn't say that, those are your words or at the minimum they are your interpretation of my words. I've simply stated his interests are more likely for himself or those connected to him.

Would hardly be a shock would it?! Headline: Businessman is ruthless in making profit for himself...

Where my issue lays is that I'd rather that not happen whilst it's under ownership of STFC. As fans we've every right to be uber cautious and extra scrutinous - theory being, we've seen it all before.

[STFC_Manc]

It's more rational than anything coming out of our incumbent government's mouth at present (or ever) but then again, that bar is fucking low.

But actually my answer didn't say that, those are your words or at the minimum they are your interpretation of my words. I've simply stated his interests are more likely for himself or those connected to him.

Would hardly be a shock would it?! Headline: Businessman is ruthless in making profit for himself...

Where my issue lays is that I'd rather that not happen whilst it's under ownership of STFC. As fans we've every right to be uber cautious and extra scrutinous - theory being, we've seen it all before.

I'm still not clear on what you REALLY think Clem is up to, if you are implying he is trying to make a profit? Then i've no issue with that as to make a profit he would have to get STFC up the leagues.

I'm not sure I how 'slated' you, I don't have any serious concerns, no.  Maybe I'm more of a glass hald full than empty kind of guy.

[The Million Pound Man]

Its not an outrageous comment.

No fucking way is it as simple as he fell in love with the club so he bought it. There's clearly an opportunity to make money somewhere, be it getting the club ship shape and flipping for profit or from the CG redevelopment...  which I don't have an issue with as long as the club is preserved and not run into the ground i'm more than happy for CM to gain from it.

My biggest, unsubstantiated, fear is that Clem isn't the true owner and just a puppet/ friendly face with limited skeletons to be the front man. People like ZA being involved and rumours of Standings continued involvement do little to ease these fears.

[STFC_Manc]

Its not an outrageous comment.

No fucking way is it as simple as he fell in love with the club so he bought it. There's clearly an opportunity to make money somewhere, be it getting the club ship shape and flipping for profit or from the CG redevelopment...  which I don't have an issue with as long as the club is preserved and not run into the ground i'm more than happy for CM to gain from it.

My biggest, unsubstantiated, fear is that Clem isn't the true owner and just a puppet/ friendly face with limited skeletons to be the front man. People like ZA being involved and rumours of Standings continued involvement do little to ease these fears.

The last point I can understand, as that is what LP did but even in that case he wasn't a puppet.  The difference for me is that Clem has a business which actually generates profit and has stated that they will provide transparency, while actually delivering transparency on mutliple fronts.

[Audrey]

Lots of clubs have ‘front man’ owners with the finance coming from behind the scenes. The piss stains have the little Thai fella fronting for some kind of consortium funnelling the money.

I have no idea if Standing is still in the shadows - that may become clearer once the court case with Power is settled. But let’s be clear, without his supposed £6m he put in God knows what Power would have done. Obviously had no qualms about putting the club in admin if it suited him.

And you’re right, what independent means did Power have to run a club/own racehorses.

[Bob's Orange]

Latest minutes Klaxon.