The Share Issue statement from the OS last Friday

Quoted from Squarkus

I personally could not give a ff for how you voted,no body has supported him with the parker situation,he is a lone ranger, otherwise we would have people quewing up to put money into the club, its future investment that is needed and he is the only one that is prepared to step upto the plate,so does your balance veiw and encouragement help this situation, i think not, if i was him i would be of like a shot, and guess what chris we wouldn,t have a club at all.

For someone who doesnt give a "ff" how I voted, you dont have enjoy having a dig at me and my perceived negativity! Anyone would think you had an agenda or personal interest.

Tell you what, to paraphrase Rob Scott, "if you don't fackin like it, don't read it". You have my number if you want an adult conversation about it and I will always accept your calls unless otherwise engaged. in the meantime, I continue to reserve the right to have and express my opinions.

Quoted from Chris

GTFC should have looked to have worked with the trust regardless of its shareholding in my personal opinion.

Agree with that.
So why have you contradicted yourself later by saying

Quoted from Chris

the shares presenting an opportunity for the supporters to have a real input into the club.

?

What opportunity do the "shares" themselves present ?
Alone they mean nothing - it's the same hollow flannel we heard from the trust right from the start !

Now the vote is here I won't speak out against the yes choice (probably go for it if I had to), but it's hardly the point...
I never realised this "real input into the club" the shares presented, was gonna be a few hundred fans deciding whether to let them go !  

in terms of what's gonna happen later, it proves the trust need to stop a wishy-washy PR campaign that no-one can relate to.

Quoted from Chris

In fact, the share issue (as mentioned by Gobby) has indeed polarised opinion on the Trust as JF effectively set (some) fans against the Trust from day 1 by implying we were a barrier for progression rather than the shares presenting an opportunity for the supporters to have a real input into the club.

I say the trusts incompetence, unwillingness to engage and failure to address the REAL isses has turned fans against the trust all by themselves !

The trust THEMSELVES say: (see Q&A page)

"Not immediately but our long term aim is to have a seat, or even seats on the board, however, we accept that we initially have to build our membership and be able to quantify any financial commitment we can put our name to."

So they agreed with JF they had to at least be able to make a financial commitment for a seat on the board.

But questions like "How do you help bankroll the club long term ?" have to my knowledge, never been seriously thought about.

"An evening with Alan Buckley" is a nice touch and proves they care but sadly it's small fry and not addressing the fundemantal issue.

I think what really happened was, they thought they'd get enough people signed up FIRST (without telling them much or what was round the corner) and they would gain the credibility (and maybe the finance) they needed from there.

But even if you sign everyone up, what happens after the membership money dries up ?
If the trust are indeed "making plans" they aint talking about them openly !
No-one really knows what the aims are but more importantly, there's a huge lack of trust.
Mind you, when you decide to form a small group and avoid answering questions with a bunch of waffle that's what happens !
Yes JF may waffle too but the difference is he's generally accurate, the trust board are out of their depth.

To be frank it's been a shambles from day one.
I warned about a "leap in find answers later" approach right from the start and here we all are (yet again !)  
Have the majority of fans generally been given what they want so far ?
Why fans would want THIS trust board within 100 yards of the boardroom I have no idea !  

Most fans want THEIR say on footballing/matchday matters and want to leave shareholding decisions to those with money and power.

If I was the trust board, I would....

- Cancel the vote (permanently) and not consult members admitting they're not representative enough of the "fanbase" yet.
- Purely as custodians of major shareholder "Mariners Trust" do what they think is best (perhaps taking into account the possible consequences of an ongoing squabble affecting on field matters) - if it means putting control back in the boardroom tomorrow then so be it !
- Seriously consider whether (judging by membership numbers and credibility) they have enough of a mandate to represent the fans interests let alone take a place on the board at the present time. (i.e. admit they can't and stop trying to)
- Go back to the drawing board and WORK TOGETHER on the fishy DRAWING UP A PLAN FOR A REAL FANS TRUST WE CAN ALL HAVE FAITH IN and make it work with a view to co-operation from the boardroom.

If fans spent half as much time all working on a plan we could all agree with instead of arguing over something that's obviously not working, maybe we'd be halfway home already.

Quoted from 1600

Agree with that.
So why have you contradicted yourself later by saying
?

In what possible way is that contradictory?

The two statements aren't even linked.

They are if you think about it.
Fans suposedly get their voice through the trust who work with the club.
Either the shares presented the "opportunity" for the fans to have a voice or the opportunity was already there regardless of shareholding.
You can't have it both ways.

But as I said above, the ironic thing is that the voice fans got was whether they wanted to give up the shares they'd just been given.

There's a lot of criticism directed on these threads towards the Trust and its board, and whilst everyone has the right to their opinion, I do feel that some of this is very unfair on the individuals on the Trust Board who have found themselves in a very difficult situation.

My personal take on the situation is this:

- The Trust was relaunched as a genuine attempt to develop as an organisation representing the fans, and in a way that consigned to the past the various weaknesses of the previous Trust. The intention was presumably to develop a sufficiently strong membership and a clear consensus about its role and aims that it could both represent a reasonable proportion of fans and contribute to the development of the Club and /or the quality of supporters' engagement with the Club, both on match days and at other times.

- It takes considerable time and effort to do either of those (i.e. build up membership and gain a consensus about its role), and the current Trust was at a very early stage of this when it was presented with the unsolicited opportunity  - and responsibility - to be given ownership of a significant number of shares; and this decision had to be made urgently given the regulatory pressure on the club to resolve the share ownership issue (questions need to be asked about how the Board got itself into this situation,but that's for a separate debate at some time!)

- Not only were the Board of the Trust faced with this great opportunity and  - importantly - serious responsibility (which would be hard enough to consider fully with a well-established organisation led by an experienced Board), but then they were put under considerable pressure in effect by the GTFC Board to present plans and ideas. Arguably this was far too early in the Trust's development - and arguably also it happened only because they accepted the shares. Perhaps it would have been wise to resist the pressure (I don't think they had a legal obligation to respond!) - but that's far easier said than done when you are a new, inexperienced organisation whose common purpose is to help the Club!

- Yet further pressure was placed on them at the end of January which resulted in them transferring (temporarily? - I'm not clear about this!) voting rights to the Chair of any Board meeting as proxy; closely followed by yet further 'encouragement' to assist in resolving the 'control outside the Boardroom' issue by donating a significant proportion of their shares to the prospective major shareholder. Quite correctly they asked their members to vote on this. This has now been further complicated by the offer of negotiations about conditions for a formal seat on the Board.

So I think the Trust Board has been put in an almost impossible situation, which is neither of their making nor their choosing. The Trust has not as yet developed the numbers of members that it might hope for, nor has it sorted out its aims, its role and its limits. It has been gifted a very important opportunity for influence, which it is now being encouraged to consider relinquishing (at least a major part) with considerable 'stick and carrot' pressures being applied - and I suspect the Board lacks the relevant experience and access to sound independent legal and financial advice to help them consider all their options fully.

It's very, very difficult to resist what appears to be overwhelming pressure, and I don't think the Trust Board members should be criticised for the situation they find themselves in: but I do think that resisting that pressure, to allow time for good external advice and consideration of other options, would probably be the wisest course to take now.

Quoted from Squarkus

Chriss your at it again,can you give any evidence that the trust/tarker old GTST and the new GTST was not supported in anyway possable by GTFC/FENTY and informed of upto date information, regardless of the share issues, its a no brainer GTFC need as much posative input and support as it can, the trust is a fantastic vehicle for the fans and the club to achieve additional income ie the buckley night and get together with players/directors have a drink or three and have informal chats ect, when the trust did not have the shares would the club say no, i dont think so do you, so for input Chris the facility has and always will be there, as for his mere statments the power outside the boardroom is a major problem, i would not invest a penny  nor would you, to be told three weeks later your services are no longer required, the only invester has come along and all you continue to do is put your negative slant on things, start acting like a board member for us fans, wake up and smell the coffee, we only have one way forward and that is fenty,the way you come over anyone would think there is a long line of people with wads of cash to throw into GTFC there isn,t.

So you just see it as a supporters club? I think you've missed the whole point behind supporters trusts Squarkus.

Quoted from DavidB

The Trust has not as yet developed the numbers of members that it might hope for, nor has it sorted out its aims, its role and its limits.

So if they don't know what their role or aims are, why the hell are they trying to act as a fans voice at all, let alone thinking of taking a place on the board ?!!  
As I said, it needs thinking through first to get fans on board first - and maybe then you'll raise a lot more cash !

Quoted from DavidB

It takes considerable time and effort to do either of those (i.e. build up membership and gain a consensus about its role)

Surely if it was progressing in the right direction, numbers would be more than 300 or so right now ?
Are they talking to fans and seeking consensus to grow in size and stature or will they just continue to move ahead regardless ?

Quoted from DavidB

It's very, very difficult to resist what appears to be overwhelming pressure, and I don't think the Trust Board members should be criticised for the situation they find themselves in:

Well they said they weren't immediately looking for a seat on the board but now they're ready to take it ?
I would suggest they go back to the drawing board first.

Quoted from Squarkus

ie the buckley night and get together with players/directors have a drink or three and have informal chats ect, when the trust did not have the shares would the club say no, i dont think so do you, so for input Chris the facility has and always will be there, as for his mere statments the power outside the boardroom is a major problem, i would not invest a penny  nor would you, to be told three weeks later your services are no longer required, the only invester has come along and all you continue to do is put your negative slant on things, start acting like a board member for us fans, wake up and smell the coffee, we only have one way forward and that is fenty

Bloody well said that man !

Quoted from DavidB

but I do think that resisting that pressure, to allow time for good external advice and consideration of other options, would probably be the wisest course to take now.

Amen to that !
Personally I think they should go one step further and seriously consider their whole involvement and stop acting in terms of this so called "voice" they haven't managed to get yet. (tbh it's nowhere near !)
Let's face facts, most of the fans don't even agree with how the proposal has been handled !  
I ask you honestly, is it really working and helping or is it just causing more problems than it's worth ?

tbh it's getting beyond a joke now, especially with the state of things on the pitch.  
Who knows what damage may already have been done, I dread to think.
  
You don't speak for the majority of fans Mariner Trust and IMO it's your own fault for being evasive, and failing to sufficiently engage with fans.
Now do the honourable thing, stop pretending you're a fans voice, drop this complete intercourse up of a voting shambles, take responsibility for the situation YOU'VE created by yourselves and sort it for GTFC !  

Quoted from TWAreaTownSupporter

So you just see it as a supporters club? I think you've missed the whole point behind supporters trusts Squarkus.

The cosy 'Guardian readers' view of a trust is club ownership. In practice it will not work imo, supporter representation, yes, ownership no.

I have beeen reading how FC United are in serious trouble as are Wimbledon because of the lack of money!

Mr 80's Glory.

First of all, the Trust have never said we are the voice of the fans, the Trust is the voice of its members. We relaunched in October and you are expecting us to have the same credibility as a Trust that has been round for years...Get real.

We have always said that a long term aim is a seat on the board and this seat on the board was not part of the proposal the Trust brought to his members and the club offering this seat was not our doing. I for one did not expect this to happen so quickly. Accepting the shares was the actions of the GTST board and the MT board have been contact with Supporters Direct throughout this process and have followed their advice throughout.

This situation was created because Mr Fenty wanted control back in the boardroom (This is no dig at all towards Mr Fenty, I fully understand his actions) we were required to take a negotiated proposal (which would be beneficial for the financial stability of GTFC) to the members of the Trust for their consideration as advised by Supporters Direct who are the who have a considerable amount more experience than you and I and probably the majority of this messageboard.

The Trust board are there because nobody else wants to be/ do not have the time. You are a member of the Trust so instead of slagging it off in a public domain, email us and offer your advise.

Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner

Mr 80's Glory.

First of all, the Trust have never said we are the voice of the fans, the Trust is the voice of its members. We relaunched in October and you are expecting us to have the same credibility as a Trust that has been round for years...Get real.

We have always said that a long term aim is a seat on the board and this seat on the board was not part of the proposal the Trust brought to his members and the club offering this seat was not our doing. I for one did not expect this to happen so quickly. Accepting the shares was the actions of the GTST board and the MT board have been contact with Supporters Direct throughout this process and have followed their advice throughout.

This situation was created because Mr Fenty wanted control back in the boardroom (This is no dig at all towards Mr Fenty, I fully understand his actions) we were required to take a negotiated proposal (which would be beneficial for the financial stability of GTFC) to the members of the Trust for their consideration as advised by Supporters Direct who are the who have a considerable amount more experience than you and I and probably the majority of this messageboard.

The Trust board are there because nobody else wants to be/ do not have the time. You are a member of the Trust so instead of slagging it off in a public domain, email us and offer your advise.

First of all, members of the Trust board have said they represent the supporters of GTFC not just members of the Trust....

Secondly, you can't try and pass the buck to the last Trust board... You all knew about the shares being in place before you took your seats on the board and in reality probably was part of the decision process in accepting the shares in the first place...

Thirdly, hasn't 80's got a point? There are 300 members of the Trust, that's only around 10% of our average attendance and a small fraction of our total fanbase... Surely that tells you something, or at least it should...

People on here make out we have nothing better to do than criticise the Trust or that we are speaking out of our arses... Basically we are told we can have no complaints about anything that goes on and our opinions count for nothing if we are not members of the Trust... Sorry but that's not on... I will speak as I find regardless of whether i'm a member or not, the reason being, I was a supporter long before the Trust was about and I want the best for GTFC...

A suggestion for the board (sorry I know i'm not meant to) why don't you stop and think why there is so little uptake from fans in joining the Trust... There is obviously some reason for it and if you don't figure this reason out, you will never make a success of the Trust... Not everybody is just out to snipe and mock your efforts, you may think we are but from a personal point of view, my criticsm (not always constructive I know) of the Trust comes more out of frustration...