Will you back CTWD if they became a supporters trust?

[TreeHugger]

This is a fairly good summary...

In British sports, a supporters' trust is a formal, democratic and not-for-profit organisation of fans who attempt to strengthen the influence of supporters over the running of the club they support. There are over 140 supporters' trusts across England, Wales and Scotland and the majority of these are affiliated to football clubs, however trusts also exist for Rugby League and Rugby Union.

With government and with cross-party support, Supporters Direct was established to encourage the formation of supporters' trusts to promote democratic supporter ownership. Supporters Direct encourages these bodies to be formed as Industrial and Provident Societies (IPSs) and assists with their formation, legal and start-up costs.

Supporters' trusts were commonly founded in response to a financial crisis which threatens the future of a team, as was the case at Chesterfield, Lincoln City and York City. Their involvement has reportedly ensured the survival of over 20 different clubs entering into administration, particularly during the period of crisis as a result of the collapse of ITV Digital. Supporters' trusts are now more commonly founded in order to increase influence at clubs through a financial stake in the club.

The first trust established was at Northampton Town in January 1992. The largest is the Manchester United Supporters Trust, which used to be known as Shareholders United and currently has over 200,000 members.[1] Other large trusts such as Leeds, Exeter City, Dundee United, Reading, Spurs and Glasgow Rangers have between 3,000 and 7,000 members.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supporters'_trust

Thanks.

We aren't in financial crisis so I'm not seeing what the benefit of us having one would be. Seems just a way for people to engage in pointless arguments with the owners to me.

I would advise the people who have the time to run such a trust that they could easily find a worthwhile local charity who would really appreciate their time and such time could be used to a more worthwhile cause.

 

[originallambrettaman]

Thanks.

We aren't in financial crisis so I'm not seeing what the benefit of us having one would be. Seems just a way for people to engage in pointless arguments with the owners to me.

I would advise the people who have the time to run such a trust that they could easily find a worthwhile local charity who would really appreciate their time and such time could be used to a more worthwhile cause.

If all a supporters trust does is argue with the owners, then it's failed in it's primary objective, the aim is to build relations with the club, not damage them further.

 

[ollyhcafc]

This is a fairly good summary...

In British sports, a supporters' trust is a formal, democratic and not-for-profit organisation of fans who attempt to strengthen the influence of supporters over the running of the club they support. There are over 140 supporters' trusts across England, Wales and Scotland and the majority of these are affiliated to football clubs, however trusts also exist for Rugby League and Rugby Union.

With government and with cross-party support, Supporters Direct was established to encourage the formation of supporters' trusts to promote democratic supporter ownership. Supporters Direct encourages these bodies to be formed as Industrial and Provident Societies (IPSs) and assists with their formation, legal and start-up costs.

Supporters' trusts were commonly founded in response to a financial crisis which threatens the future of a team, as was the case at Chesterfield, Lincoln City and York City. Their involvement has reportedly ensured the survival of over 20 different clubs entering into administration, particularly during the period of crisis as a result of the collapse of ITV Digital. Supporters' trusts are now more commonly founded in order to increase influence at clubs through a financial stake in the club.

The first trust established was at Northampton Town in January 1992. The largest is the Manchester United Supporters Trust, which used to be known as Shareholders United and currently has over 200,000 members.[1] Other large trusts such as Leeds, Exeter City, Dundee United, Reading, Spurs and Glasgow Rangers have between 3,000 and 7,000 members.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supporters'_trust

What if non members (majority of fans) don't agree with what you say. You'll be influencing your organizations view onto the club not what all the supporters want. Complete bullshit! the clubs not broke don't try and fix it.

 

[rovertiger]

I voted yes because I found the name change presentation was put forward in a professional and dignified way and achieved the result I wanted. So why wouldn't I continue to back them?

 

[CMPUNK]

No. The fan base of the club is made up of many individual people who all have different opinions. I don't need some group representing me as a fan when the likelihood is that it would be different to me every time.

I get the impression that if you don't agree with what they think then 'f**k you' you're wrong. What qualifies them any more than anyone else to speak on the behalf of the fan base.

Plus there are too many idiots associated with it.

 

[TreeHugger]

If all a supporters trust does is argue with the owners, then it's failed in it's primary objective, the aim is to build relations with the club, not damage them further.

But why is there even a need for building relations? Wet turn up, we support our team, we leave. Why the need for such involvement in every minor detail?

 

[Quill]

What if non members (majority of fans) don't agree with what you say. You'll be influencing your organizations view onto the club not what all the supporters want. Complete bullshit! the clubs not broke don't try and fix it.

Why not tell that to your esteemed owner? He started all of this ****ing ****.

 

[Muffinthegoat]

What if non members (majority of fans) don't agree with what you say. You'll be influencing your organizations view onto the club not what all the supporters want. Complete bullshit! the clubs not broke don't try and fix it.

Isn't James Mooney setting up his own version of supporter liaison? What if the majority of the fans don't agree with those people either? Surely the whole point of a supporters trust, and membership of that trust, is to have a direct voice in the same way you can be a member of a political party. No-one is trying to "fix" anything.

 

[Obadiah]

But why is there even a need for building relations? Wet turn up, we support our team, we leave. Why the need for such involvement in every minor detail?

There is no need for involvement in every minor detail. The club has to build relations with the fans because it is part of being in the Premier League. The Premier League recognise the importance of supporters trusts and encourage their development. If you're not bothered you don't have to join, its not compulsory. Same as if you're happy with the way the club is run you don't have to contribute to the fans forums they set up.

I was evicted from my seat and I think the least the club could have done is discussed this with the people concerned or, failing that, a representative body of supporters.

The club isn't in financial crisis only because Allamhouse haven't demanded their money back. One day the debt will have to be repaid, or else written off.

 

[originallambrettaman]

But why is there even a need for building relations? Wet turn up, we support our team, we leave. Why the need for such involvement in every minor detail?

A supporters trust is not there to interfere in the owners running of the club, it is merely there to state the position of the fans. It would push the owners to consult the fans on major issues such as the club name, the club badge, where they sit in the ground, ticket pricing, ticket allocations etc. Personally, I'd like to go further and encourage the club to use local companies as suppliers, particularly on catering, but that's just my personal preference.

Why would anyone not want the fans to have a voice at the club on these issues?

 

[originallambrettaman]

No. The fan base of the club is made up of many individual people who all have different opinions. I don't need some group representing me as a fan when the likelihood is that it would be different to me every time.

I get the impression that if you don't agree with what they think then 'f**k you' you're wrong. What qualifies them any more than anyone else to speak on the behalf of the fan base.

Plus there are too many idiots associated with it.

You're basing that on the No To Hull Tigers campaign, in other areas I don't believe there is a likelihood that the fans views would differ that much.

 

[ollyhcafc]

Isn't James Mooney setting up his own version of supporter liaison? What if the majority of the fans don't agree with those people either? Surely the whole point of a supporters trust, and membership of that trust, is to have a direct voice in the same way you can be a member of a political party. No-one is trying to "fix" anything.

The supporters liaison is a spread of fans with different views which create debate and discussion. CTWD is one group one voice with history of being hostile with the owners which I dislike alot.

 

[originallambrettaman]

What if non members (majority of fans) don't agree with what you say. You'll be influencing your organizations view onto the club not what all the supporters want. Complete bullshit! the clubs not broke don't try and fix it.

If people don't agree with what we say, they they won't join and we'll achieve nothing, but I don't believe that will be the case.

 

[originallambrettaman]

The supporters liaison is a spread of fans with different views which create debate and discussion. CTWD is one group one voice with history of being hostile with the owners which I dislike alot.

CTWD have not been hostile with the owners, in the face of great provocation, we were very restrained and supportive of the owners.

We disagreed with the name change, we fought to protect our name, but we did it in a respectful manner and frequently thanked the owner for the other things he'd done.

 

[BillyBobBallbag]

So your initial post was wrong then

CTWD were actually very restrained and moderate in their actions and did a good job in the circumstances considering there were more militant individuals opposed to the name change

Correct, I hold my hands up for that
Im still voting no because of some members of the groups bully boy tactits

And that is a shame that I turned away from something I once supported because of a few individuals

 

[Muffinthegoat]

The supporters liaison is a spread of fans with different views which create debate and discussion. CTWD is one group one voice with history of being hostile with the owners which I dislike alot.

Where is the evidence of CTWD showing any hostility to the owners? As far as I can recall, there was absolutely none.

 

[FILEYseadog]

It's not CTWD who use bully boy tactics and whatever, it's some of the people who follow it. Different things completely.

I foresaw that the more aggressive anti allamists would be portrayed as the face of CTWD and drag opinion of the group down to their levels. I was ignored (hate to say I told you so).i

The folks on the committee did a Sterling job with the campaign. If the club was willing to listen to the group I don't think you could find a group of people do a much better job. I mean those people who actually matter with CTWD like OLM, Obi etc. not the keyboard renegades like Blampers and co.

Once again I agree with Mr Hat.

I might join a supporters trust
Can't say till till it's formed or what the aims might be or not be .

 

[Kempton]

Correct, I hold my hands up for that
Im still voting no because of some members of the groups bully boy tactits

And that is a shame that I turned away from something I once supported because of a few individuals

What exactly were these"bully boy tactics" ? Who are these bully boys ? You need to be more specific,if your going to make such accusations.

 

[Happy Tiger]

My dealings with CTWD have been mostly on here, and once at a game.

For these reasons I wouldn't trust them to run me a bath let alone have anything to do with running a supporters trust.

I fail to see why CTWD and Tigers Co-Op need to merge. If you lot want to join a supporters trust, why not just join the existing one as individuals?

 

[originallambrettaman]

My dealings with CTWD have been mostly on here, and once at a game.

For these reasons I wouldn't trust them to run me a bath let alone have anything to do with running a supporters trust.

I fail to see why CTWD and Tigers Co-Op need to merge. If you lot want to join a supporters trust, why not just join the existing one as individuals?

The Tigers Co-op have had enough and want out, they haven't been active for years.