And Dutch, where have I or the trust dismissed comments which don't fit the agenda? That's another unsupported claim like Chazz's. Plenty of issues were raised and discussed at the AGM yesterday and all got a response which was deemed satisfactory.
In answer to your other post, I can see why you read it as personal, but I meant comments in general from CTWD/HCST reps. As for the above, it's not difficult to answer at all, in fact it's been answered when asked. To be representative and act under it's chosen name, HCST needs to show where it has looked for fans views and where it continues to consider them, as opossed to pushing it's self chosen agenda and dismissing other issues. The Trust can neither ignore what it's shareholders want nor support them if they've not being asked to say what those wants are. I don't think people commenting have an axe to grind, I certainly don't. I'm a City fan commenting on a group implying itself to be a group for Hull City fans. That comment there is you very much being dismissive. Surely, such a group should welcome interest and views from supporters of the club whose name it uses?
When have they ever not welcomed views of supporters? Like any trust, it's open to all but if you decline to be involved you can't complain at not being heard.
The trust can represent people who haven't joined because it thinks it is the right thing to do. So, the fledgling trust could have helped City supporters respond to the seat moves by getting people together with the club to find an acceptable solution in difficult circumstances. Dutch on his own showed what could be achieved. The benefit of the Trust doing that is it gets a nod of appreciation from the people it helps, some of whom may then join. There will be people who just want to do the Trust down but there are some who disagreed with CTWD and its methods but want to see a successful Trust. The aim is to break down those barriers without abandoning your principles. If the Trust fails to do that we will remain a minority that will be asked about certain things but will fail to become a major influence on the club for the benefit of all our supporters. For every one that tries to wind you up there may be one or two readers who may agree with the gist of what's written but want you to give them a reason for supporting the Trust or joining. They want to know if the Trust has a place for them and their ideas. They may not come out and say it in that way, they may even come across as aggressive but you need to listen closely to see if what you think they are saying is something completely different from what they are saying. A difficult skill to acquire but one that is essential. If you do not respond correctly you end up putting a barrier between yourself and people who could contribute to the growth of a successful Trust. Something you may like to think about. You are lucky in one sense as you're young enough to be able to see how successful, or not, the Trust will have become in 40 years time. Hopefully the Trust will own the club and we'll still be in the top division of English football.
Leaving aside how unlikely it is that Labour will win, let alone lead a majority coalition.... When a stake of more than 30% in any club in England or Wales changed hands, the purchaser would be obliged to offer 10% of those shares to the supporters’ trust at the average sale price. A supporters’ trust would have 240 days to raise the money to buy the shares. The obligation to sell shares would cease once a trust owned 10% overall. So the club would have to be sold. Then the ST would have to raise a ****e load of money in 240 days. It's fine dreaming and such, but Chazz is right. Given the membership numbers and way that anything questioning HCST is responded to, it's a good job too.
Allamhouse paid £1 for the shares in Hull City. If it sells the shares for millions it will pay Capital Gains Tax on the massive profits. If however the new owner pays off the loan it will pay no Capital Gain Tax if the shares are sold for £100. The Trust would then get a 10% stake in the club for £10 under Labour's plans. The club would have been effectively sold for £60 million even though the shares changed hands for £100. Of course the new owners would be happy with the Supporters Trust being on board otherwise they wouldn't have signed the cheques buying the club. The second part of article mentions giving Supporters' Trusts a statutory right to a place on the Board before any sale takes place. Most of these things have been discussed in the Parliamentary Committee looking at football and may have some cross party support for some of the measures.
You see you see!!!! Happy Patty was right, a few of you CTWDers knew about this for ages and that's why you all want to be on the board of the trust. Sneaky bastards didn't tell anyone about the meeting to get yourselfs elected did you. Then you can buy the club for a hundred quid and the sell it for millions. Ah ha see see!!!! I told you but no one would listen . To be read very fast in a high pitched squeaky voice for the full effect.
Bloody hell, TOM, you really couldn't get it more wrong if you tried and it is starting to seem like you are trying. CTWD is defunct, no membership of that organisation was carried over to the Trust membership was newly and separately applied and paid for - I know this to be true as I did it. So, this onversationbecomes totally foolish, accept you are wrong on that. As for relationships with the club, can you tell me who has one of value and mutual trust. The Trust can develop as it grows, members can use votes and lobbying to effect change and the Allams can leave , as he promised. But we know about his promises, don't we? Sorry,ate, but you're talking bunkum
The tooth fairy riding in on the unicorn will sprinkle magic dust and it will all go away . You're sticking your fingers in your ears again saying shut up shut up shut up. Its a trust its good for you just shut up and join it and dont ask questions dont debate . Here's a question for you or others. Why is the take up so poor? If its 500-600 its been 3 months and heavily publicised to join yet there is not many takers. Why?
Allamhouse could use any tax losses incurred in trading to offset against the capital gain. However if the nature of the business isn't going to change any unused tax allowances could go with the company to the new owners. Unused tax allowances would be part of the sale price. How valuable the tax allowances are will be determined by how much profit City makes and how much of the allowances are used by other group companies. In 5 or 6 years time the losses may well have been used up. If Assem Allam wanted to minimise his tax risks he'd use up all the tax losses and sell City for the outstanding loan balance. In the meantime he'd have had the benefit of the tax allowances and interest at the rates charged.
I was more meaning the responsibilities for any losses for the new board. Would the group be responsible for their share, and would that fall to the individual share holders?
If you mean responsibility for City's losses it would be the same as any other limited company. The Trust would be responsible for any amounts unpaid on their shares and that would be it, unless it had done something stupid like give unlimited guarantees.
Not really "the facts" but at least its a number. You seem to be in the know. What are your thoughts on the poor take up?
My ears are wide open waiting for someone to tell why a supporters trust is a bad thing. It may have been started by the same people as CTWD it may have some of the same commitee. But a trust has to be a good thing unless you know different. I am not telling anyone to shut up. Why is the take up so poor ? the answer is !!!!! its always like that. Pick any subject, topic or theme and you will find a group of willing volunteers doing their best for all. Everyone wants to save the world but how many join Greenpeace. Everyone likes panda's but how many join WWF.
If I am talking bunkum why is an elected member talking about pro and anti name change when discussing the trust? Obi, puts my case better than I have. I disagree with CTWD but want to see a successful supporters trust that works with the club. I do not want to be represented by board members who call the owner of the club a ****. I believe that a trust should appeal to the majority and not the minority. There are different groups who have good relationships with the club. HCOSC and HCSS for a start.
