Why would CTWD being in regular contact with them from the beginning if you were always a single issue campaign group? That's an interesting statement. So they're not working with CTWD at all. Thats an even more interesting statement. It now looks like CTWD are using members of Tiger Co-op to leverage a multi issue campaign. Or that the Tiger Co-op are using CTWD to expand and achieve their aims. This is starting to feel like one of those rocks you turn over and wonder what the hell you've found.
"I can of course, meet up in the Manchester area at other times if 11th December in London isn’t convenient for your people. Best wishes Jacqui" I can publish a copy of the full email if you like.
I'm slightly bothered by the fact it seems people have been giving money to a single issue campaign, i.e. one against a name change, yet all along it seems this was a plan to fund Tigers Co-op (whatever you end up calling it). People have been donating cash, and buying stuff on the understanding CTWD is ONLY about no name change, yet it seems that from the beginning, that was never the intention. Surely there's something dodgy about that? Will you offer full refunds to people not happy with joining a co-op?
I must make this point, I am not trying to pick a fight with CTWD. I want an active supporters trust. But I am concerned that a single issue group polarises the supporter base and the owner.
Have you just made all this up? The money we collect is to pay for our campaigning activity. The membership fees also pay for the campaign. In case you've forgotten we have issued 9,000 badges, close on to 30,000 leaflets, laid out the money for the scarves and bought an enormous flag. We do still have money left in the bank which will fund our future activities. I don't really think there will be much left to buy Hull City when the campaign finishes. The publicity announcing membership of CTWD clearly stated that we are looking at reinvigorating the Tigers Co-op with a view to the supporters having a stake in Hull City. So I don't think we have mislead anyone. My understanding of the campaign is that it was formed to stop the name change. That is the main focus of our activity.
We are all entitled to our opinion. You haven't answered my question though. At the meeting in London or Manchester are you representing the Tigers Co-op?
Your post off CI "Our campaign will continue and if it is successful either Assem Allam or the FA will have stopped us becoming Hull City Tigers or Hull Tigers. We may even end up owning the club. And from a fellow CTWD on the same thread "What's in it for AA? He wants to leave a legacy as he keeps telling us. He saves the club from liquidation, takes it to the Premier League and then gifts the stakeholders of the club - the fans - ownership. PREMIER LEAGUE CHAIRMAN HANDS OVER CLUB TO FANS It would be the biggest legacy he could ever wish for. And he guarantees the money he paid out, is paid back in instalments. Everyone wins. Power is appealing isnt it Obi . You know what publish the minutes of the meeting with AA. As everything CTWD is hidden in secrecy.
The "we" refers to Hull City fans in general, not CTWD in particular. As I've said before on here I have no interest in becoming a director of Hull City. I will do my bit and go back to just watching Hull City when we've stopped the name change. So in answer to your question to me, power, ie being a director of Hull City, isn't appealing. I think you'll find that very little is secret with regard to CTWD. I don't think the minutes should be published. We said we'd agree them with the club but we didn't reach agreement. I think if you give your word you should keep it. Some old fashioned values are worth keeping.
Omega mans post "But that is different to what you are saying. You are jumping the gun yet again. Supporters Direct are not working with you, they cannot WORK with anyone other than the Tiger Co op as they only WORK with one clubs supporters trust. CTWD have been told already by Jacqui not to say that they are working with Supporters Direct. It's misleading and should stop. As very little is secret can you confirm you've been told not to say your working with Supporters Direct?? Yes or No
From the same CI thread "Brilliant stuff Exiled and Nash. Does this mean the "Fans' ownership" model is now officially out in the open? I LOVE it and SUPPORT it (as you both know) but it's surprised me how you've both just casually announced the theory on here! Anyway, everyone; believe it because... YES IT CAN BE DONE... But I'd just like to say to those doubters of the financing: 1) Allam, himself, supports the idea of a gradual fans' buyout. 2) I believe that (in simple business terms) that, as long as we stay in the Premier League ... the income we bring in from Media, The PL, revenue from home & away games and merchandising (which needs massive improvement of course) - then we can pay a team of top professionals, AND cover the rest of our operating costs WITHOUT MAKING A LOSS! (Like Exiled has pointed out though, we REALLY do need to expand the capacity of the stadium.) This is the way forward, but as Nash has now announced, this is going to need a lot of stakeholders (ie; US) - and a coherent plan. I'm in anyway. (But I can only speak for myself.) Let's hope we can get every "Tigers" fan in the world involved and then this can really happen. Hull City a "SOCIEADAD" (is that spelt right Exiled?) - a club owned by the Fans. Fantastic. No secrets!!!
Wasn't it all much better when we'd turn up at 3.00 on a Saturday and watch Hull City play a football match?
Chazz, you'll not like this but here goes. I don't recall CTWD telling anybody we were "working" with Supporters Direct. We have had discussions with them and it has been mentioned on this forum. I think. I don't recall being told we couldn't say we were "working" with them. It has always been clear to me that the Tigers' Co-op is the supporters trust and we'd get no help setting up a new one. I see you are quoting Tenfoot Tiger. Yes the fan ownership model is out in the open. It has been since we launched the membership scheme. "As long ago as 2010 Dr Allam announced his preference for supporter ownership of Hull City (1) and this was reiterated when the CTWD team met him last month. He asked us not to mention the supporter ownership proposals following that meeting, a request that seems redundant now he has hinted at it in the club’s latest statement (2). We are in discussions with umbrella group Supporters Direct to reinvigorate Tigers Co-op (3), the existing Supporters’ Trust for Hull City, and provide an independent voice for Hull City fans across the globe. The Trust will be established in the New Year by merging City Till We Die with Tigers Co-op. It will provide a vehicle for supporters to take part ownership of the club in line with Dr Allam’s wishes and, perhaps, a role in managing the KC Stadium and its surrounding development potential. Not only will this initiative provide supporters with a stake in the future of their beloved Hull City, it could provide a revenue stream that will allow Dr Allam’s investment to be repaid over time." I'm not sure when it was issued but it will be on the Facebook page together with the date. Anyway it was before the Palace match. As I said very little is secret.
Chazz, I know that you’re a cap-doffer and don’t like nasty things like unions who say mean things about our beloved bosses; but why exactly, are you so against ordinary fans having a say or stake in their club?
http://www.hullcitytigers.com/news/article/201314-club-statement-season-cards-1186220.aspx Dr. Assem Allam has made this offer in light of the confusion that followed the recent meeting with representatives of supporters’ groups, and the fragmented messages that have emanated since that meeting. That meeting closed with one of the representatives requesting the opportunity to develop alternative commercial models, and nothing has yet been presented to the Club. Dr. Allam feels a sense of duty to the majority of fans and stakeholders to secure the future stability of the Club, whilst continuously improving the quality of football, and as such is advancing his plans to generate the commercial opportunities necessary to forge a sustainable future. He is also keen that the majority of fans are able to focus on enjoying the quality of Premier League football at the KC Stadium, without being diverted onto minority interests. The statement you quote is from 2010. No minutes from the meeting you can say what you want cant you. The statement above is his last statement on the matter. you've presented nowt to him. WHY not? When you've been working on all this. He doesnt want to work with you now but you certainly dont want to work with him either do you.
Nice touch, you'd make a good politician. I see the debate moves onto other ground now I've shown our position, re owning the club, wasn't a secret. If we buy a striker in January we will be about £20 million short. He's had since the Cardiff City match to look at commercial opportunities to plug that gap and we haven't heard anything. We had about a week before he issued this statement. I suspect we will eventually sit down and discuss the future of Hull City with Assem Allam. I wouldn't be surprised if those discussions didn't involve the future ownership of the club and the repayment of his loans. He may not want to talk to us but we still want to talk to him.
Why don't you answer my question? This is my third request. I'll repeat it. When you meet with Supporters Direct is it on behalf of the Tigers Co-op? I'll ask him when I see him.
You weaken your case with every post as a little more slips out with prompting from me obviously and CI's thread. You want him to leave the club to you and walk away. Exiled he sociadad model is the same as that enjoyed by the likes of Barcelona and many other top teams in Europe. Instead of a season ticket fans buy a membership to the club which enables them to attend every home game, apply for away game tickets and vote at club elections. The principal elections are those of a president and honorary Vice Presidents whose role is mainly ceremonial. The crucial factor is that such people can donate money to the club as a gift (not a loan) during their term in office - typically 5 years. Alternating between presidential elections the board members would be elected democratically as per the president and would enjoy a fixed term of five years deliberately staggered with the president to eliminate cronyism and produce stability of direction. These positions would be professional and given that this would probably be the most exciting project of this nature in the world of football should attract world class individuals with a track record of prior achievement at the level we aspire to safe in the knowledge they would be able to get on with their job free from interference. Ultimately they would be answerable to the members and the elections. Their principal challenge would be to leverage the unique approach (for the premier league) to attract world class commercial revenue and market the club as the 'deliberately different' option from the city famous for having that ethic in our culture. We would become most thinking peoples 'second club'. With the ability to attract international figures to the president position as a shop window for the very highest level of globally visible philanthropy it should not take long to have a list of suitable candidates. Annual associate memberships would be available globally for anyone wishing to join the project and buy into the values and ethos of Hull City AFC. For that membership they would get an exclusive item that identifies them as a member and would be informed regularly of progress via exclusive media content only available to members. Most Sociedad clubs operate a number of sports and sports facilities so the AA vision of a sports village perhaps spread to YPI could see other sports such as squash being promoted under the same umbrella. With support from the council the club could expand the stadium and offer a 'day member' package to floating fans that do not have voting rights but would be principally aimed at lower incomes and 'tourists' keen to see the project - the first of its kind in the Premier league - for real. With a season limit to the number of games that can be attended via this model and the lure of voting rights members will have enough to differentiate what they are getting for their extra money. The projects timescales should of course be aligned to our city of culture celebrations. AA's legacy would be forever assured and the club would have to negotiate with Allamhouse for the size of the 'gift' given to get us to this point (debt written off) and payback terms for the rest. [/B] With a sociadad model every player would know that essentially they would be playing for the fans and every member would and could expect players to give their all for the shirt. The only condition would be that all this must be done as HULL CITY AFC est. 1904 AP said no years ago. AA will do now and rightly bloody so. You want him to gift the club to you and walk away!!! What ****ing mind altering substances are you lot on!! At least its out in the open now. CTWD want ownership of the club.
You cannot be serious! CTWD will never be in a position to influence any spending in the January window. You will not be able to demonstrate that you can generate any sustainable investment between then and now. Besides that how on earth are you going to put any plans in front of him if he doesn't to discuss anything with CTWD? What if he says he will only work with "Hull Tigers Supporters ?"
