TrustSTFC - direction & AGM

[Quagmire]

Meh…

It’s all too late to encourage and support the owner in any aspect.

The trust (no pun intended) has already been broken, and we can’t take a word the club say at face value. I can not for the life of me see the club changing anyone’s mind that has been made up on that.

I do feel it’s a bit of a soft statement from the Trust and let’s the club off the hook, how many chances do the club need, how many lies do they need to tell before the Trust start demanding change?

The damage has been done, and unfortunately the Trust don’t seem keen to do much about it. They are just toeing the line.

[theakston2k]

Meh the horse for all that bolted 2 years ago, it’s more softly softly stuff that Morfuni will just take advantage of.

The joint venture has ironically ruined the Trust as they are terrified of upsetting the club and not having a ‘working relationship’.

Think we can count the Trust out of mobilising the fanbase.

[Pericardinho]

Load of bollocks.

They 100% get the club to proof read that before submitting to the public. You cannot convince me otherwise.

The trust are simply not fit for purpose. They are supposed to represent the fans. They absolutely do not speak for the current majority.

Abolish.

[Nemo]

I think that's alright really. It's a bit later than I would like but better late than never and a clear shift in approach. Proof will be in what happens next.

[STFC_Manc]

Load of bollocks.

They 100% get the club to proof read that before submitting to the public. You cannot convince me otherwise.

The trust are simply not fit for purpose. They are supposed to represent the fans. They absolutely do not speak for the current majority.

Abolish.

Isn't this the 'new' board, you all wanted?

[tans]

https://x.com/danwood_adver/status/1776289030486851894?s=46&t=sUQ-fFgelrF5oqTmo-D8tA

They havent been paying on time have they

[Nemo]

People can make up their own mind on the Trust statement but here's my defence of it: it's a trap. There's a bunch of totally reasonable stuff in there that we highly suspect - but can't prove - that the club are breaking. The club can't publicly disagree with a lot of it, and if (when) they break it, that's reasonable grounds for.complaint. The rent thing is a good example, also the family friendly characters reference, we all know who they mean.

Totally get that a lot of fans are further along past the giving the.club a chance thing but this reads as trying to prove the malice to others - or, ideally, get the club to genuinely improve.

[ChalkyWhiteIsGod]

https://x.com/danwood_adver/status/1776289030486851894?s=46&t=sUQ-fFgelrF5oqTmo-D8tA

They havent been paying on time have they

Not the first hint, is it?

[Leggett]

People can make up their own mind on the Trust statement but here's my defence of it: it's a trap. There's a bunch of totally reasonable stuff in there that we highly suspect - but can't prove - that the club are breaking. The club can't publicly disagree with a lot of it, and if (when) they break it, that's reasonable grounds for.complaint. The rent thing is a good example, also the family friendly characters reference, we all know who they mean.

Totally get that a lot of fans are further along past the giving the.club a chance thing but this reads as trying to prove the malice to others - or, ideally, get the club to genuinely improve.

Nail, head. Can't accuse them of anything without evidence. If there's no shady shit going on, those totally reasonable requests will be easy to meet. If not...

[4D]

Isn't this the 'new' board, you all wanted?

Independent is the word you are struggling to find

[Jimmy HaveHave]

Some are happy

[DiV]

Isn't this the 'new' board, you all wanted?

I think ‘some’ wanted a ‘new’ board who would shout loud and call Clem a cunt and ask @STFC questions on twitter - as if they would even acknowledge it let alone answer it. Of course those ‘some’ call for that type of board are the type of people who would do the sorta things they wanted…but none of them will actually put their name forward.

For me, the statement is a bit to ‘nice’ for my liking but kinda get the point the new board can’t go in all guns blazing at this point. They’ve made it clear what they expect to see from the club going forward and they have offered their help.

Hopefully when the club inevitably do not deliver on any of the set out points and completely refuse any ‘encouragement or support’ from the Trust - then they earn they keep so to speak.

Let’s see what they do after they given the club ‘a chance’ that will be the important bit

[RedRag]

"We will seek to positively engage with Owners, by representing Supporter’s legitimate concerns, opinions and ideas without fear or favour. Where possible we will offer our advice and help to support the Club in the future to attain our mutual desire for success. We will also be prepared to call out issues that need to be improved upon or are in our view a hindrance to achieving success."

It has been an issue for Companies House, never mind the Trust, identifying the actual shareholders.  Let alone the indebtedness of the those shareholders to third parties.  There is a JV with an acquisition agreement that includes legal obligations to develop the Ground.  The Trust is still being kept in the dark on ownership and owner indebtedness and there are no plans or funding sources identified for Ground development.  Only evidence of late payments.  Of under resourced management in terms of admin and coaching. Of inadequate training facilities.  Of a pitch in decline.  Of the near guaranteed worst ever finish in STFC history.  Of falling season ticket sales compared to last year.

The Trust needs to wake the **** up and smell the coffee.  Its duties are to its members, the club and its supporters.  Not to the owners for the time being of the club.  On the whole, clubs either move forward or stagnate and soon enough decline.  If we are not moving forward after everything the Eadie Trust has gifted, then that is most definitely NOT satisfactory and answers need to be sought NOW.  And spare us any "calling out" when it is all too late.

We've been (quite rightly) trying the constructive partnership approach long enough.

[STFC_Manc]

Independent is the word you are struggling to find

No it's not - 'new' is the word I used.

[ThreeDrawsMentality]

People can make up their own mind on the Trust statement but here's my defence of it: it's a trap. There's a bunch of totally reasonable stuff in there that we highly suspect - but can't prove - that the club are breaking. The club can't publicly disagree with a lot of it, and if (when) they break it, that's reasonable grounds for.complaint. The rent thing is a good example, also the family friendly characters reference, we all know who they mean.

I think setting traps would have been the right way to have gone 6-12 months ago. Can be really effective too just like those early PMQ's between Starmer and Johnson. But feel that there isn't really a huge silver bullet in the list of encouragements that would have any immediate short term impact, especially with how perilous our situation is now for immediate action to prevent entering non-league in 25/26. The one that's most interesting is the late payment of rent, but I feel the club could easily swing that as another admin error or prioritising playing budget, or fans need to put more money in etc that won't divide the fanbase anymore than they already are.

The family friendly characters and converting loans to equity points I feel could easily be addressed by club too. Clem always has a quick defence when it comes to the character questions already and the wider fanbase don't seem to be really aware of whose frequenting the boardroom/matchday hospitality. I'm sure with the equity front they'd have an easy no to give.