|
jonnyboy82 |
|
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 6,324
Posts Per Day: 1.28
Reputation: 67.42%
Rep Score: +71 / -36
Approval: +5,688
Gold Stars: 95
|
Dont want to see like im having a go but when BigChris was on the mariners trust board nothing was exactly different then was it if i recall ? The trust was supposed to be our voice and im afraid no matter who resigns stays or just moves on nothing has changed.
The grip the directors has on this club is suffocating it and yes now is time for action but i agree league survival first.
|
| GTFC |
|
|
|
|
Cloudy |
|
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,335
Posts Per Day: 1.14
Reputation: 71.17%
Rep Score: +17 / -8
Approval: +6,431
|
Dont want to see like im having a go but when BigChris was on the board nothing was exactly different then was it if i recall ? The trust was supposed to be our voice and im afraid no matter who resigns stays or just moves on nothing has changed.
The grip the directors has on this club is suffocating it and yes now is time for action but i agree league survival first.
Don't think he was ever on the board was he?
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
pizzzza |
|
Pontoonite
Posts: 5,663
Posts Per Day: 1.06
Reputation: 69.75%
Rep Score: +20 / -10
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +6,701
Gold Stars: 137
|
It is OK former Trust board members coming on here calling for change at the top, removal of Fenty, but what put Fenty in such a powerful position in the first place? That's right, the Trust's decision to gift Fenty all those shares. Who was on the Trust board at the time? They should have canvassed their members to make the correct decision (ie hold onto the shares!), unless the carrot of a place on the board was too much of a temptation for those who were "self-serving" (not my words...).
Either the Trust board at the time: 1. Welcomed the hand-over of shares in return for the much coveted seat on the board. or... 2. Lacked the foresight to see what the consequences of the hand-over would be. This should have been made clear to their membership.
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
jonnyboy82 |
|
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 6,324
Posts Per Day: 1.28
Reputation: 67.42%
Rep Score: +71 / -36
Approval: +5,688
Gold Stars: 95
|
Im off for a sit down as i actually agree pizzza.
|
| GTFC |
|
|
|
|
fleabag1970 |
|
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,260
Posts Per Day: 0.27
Reputation: 80.72%
Rep Score: +13 / -3
Approval: -1,244
|
To be honest I got bored reading the OP. There is nothing in it I havnt read on here before .
|
| ]Remember its just my opinion ..... It might not be true ............ |
|
|
|
|
dapperz fun pub |
|
Posts: 9,346
Posts Per Day: 1.59
Reputation: 84.95%
Rep Score: +37 / -6
Approval: +9,929
Gold Stars: 82
|
It will never happen. The trust treats its members with the same contempt that Fenty treats his customers. Look at the number of people who have posted that they have heard nothing since paying their membership. Is this ths dynamic inclusive group we need to influence our club? You have had your chance and blown it
Whs
|
|
|
|
|
dapperz fun pub |
|
Posts: 9,346
Posts Per Day: 1.59
Reputation: 84.95%
Rep Score: +37 / -6
Approval: +9,929
Gold Stars: 82
|
It is OK former Trust board members coming on here calling for change at the top, removal of Fenty, but what put Fenty in such a powerful position in the first place? That's right, the Trust's decision to gift Fenty all those shares. Who was on the Trust board at the time? They should have canvassed their members to make the correct decision (ie hold onto the shares!), unless the carrot of a place on the board was too much of a temptation for those who were "self-serving" (not my words...).
Either the Trust board at the time: 1. Welcomed the hand-over of shares in return for the much coveted seat on the board. or... 2. Lacked the foresight to see what the consequences of the hand-over would be. This should have been made clear to their membership.
I was thinking the same about the shares ... who made that decision ? Awaits spin and deflection type answer
|
|
|
|
|
ginnywings |
|
Recovering Alcoholic
Posts: 28,144
Posts Per Day: 5.03
Reputation: 73.79%
Rep Score: +88 / -32
Approval: +56,122
Gold Stars: 548
|
The whole Trust membership voted in favour of handing over the shares, so it was certainly democratic. Not everyone, but a majority anyway. I think if the vote were done now, there would certainly be a different outcome.
I also think the Trust have drifted for far too long and lost focus. There doesn't appear to me to be anything to rally around, as no matter what the views of the fans, and whichever way the Trust vote on matters, they will always be outvoted by the other board members.
|
|
|
|
|
Cloudy |
|
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,335
Posts Per Day: 1.14
Reputation: 71.17%
Rep Score: +17 / -8
Approval: +6,431
|
I was thinking the same about the shares ... who made that decision ? Awaits spin and deflection type answer
IIRC it has been posted on here before that the membership voted to transfer the shares by an overwhelming 86% in return for a seat on the board and JF buying an additional £200k worth of shares. No spin whatsover the Membership voted in a democratic way. I doubt they would vote the same way now but we would all like to re-write history from time to time
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
Cloudy |
|
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,335
Posts Per Day: 1.14
Reputation: 71.17%
Rep Score: +17 / -8
Approval: +6,431
|
It is OK former Trust board members coming on here calling for change at the top, removal of Fenty, but what put Fenty in such a powerful position in the first place? That's right, the Trust's decision to gift Fenty all those shares. Who was on the Trust board at the time? They should have canvassed their members to make the correct decision (ie hold onto the shares!), unless the carrot of a place on the board was too much of a temptation for those who were "self-serving" (not my words...).
Either the Trust board at the time: 1. Welcomed the hand-over of shares in return for the much coveted seat on the board. or... 2. Lacked the foresight to see what the consequences of the hand-over would be. This should have been made clear to their membership.
The members voted in favour of the transfer of the shares and has others have put it the seat on the board WAS hugely attractive at the time
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|