So who is able to show me where the dividing line is between the GASB and the AFT and their involvements with PAFC. I get the feeling that there is already tensions between them,it already seems that Bowden and Chown have stepped down from leading the Trust. With the AFT being given the option of buying up to 20% of PAFC, doesn't that put them in a strong position,assuming that they can raise that sort of money from it's membership or would they take on board a loan,or both ? You get the feeling that in the next few months there will be a power struggle to get as many of the twelve members that will make up the GASB from your "camp" (for want of a better term) . The problem I see is that many of these represenatives will be multi-members of quite a few of PAFC's supporter organization,and who will they be supporting on any given occasion when decisions will be made during a vote. Even the six members of the board,who are on there as individual members will belong to one or more of the other groups of supporters surely........or are they looking for six members who are not part of any group.......the question then is are they supporters at all if that is the case. There are certain people who at present hold sway over opinions at these "supporter" groups that will be seeking to get elected,some of them will be a disaster if they get on the GASB......I'll leave you to put names to them.
As a structure, I don't see a problem. Fans, whichever website they use, join the Trust and fund it to buy 20% of the club. The Trust has a right to appoint X number of directors to the GASB. These are democratically elected by Trust members and have the duty to represent Trust policy as agreed democratically within the Trust. It's not about Pasoti and ATD or anything else, the Trust is open to all. I take comfort because as far as I know, all those involved are genuine Argyle fans, almost certainly with a far greater claim to recent real-world support than I could muster, for one. I presume therefore they'll primarily be supporting Argyle, according to their own personal interpretation of that admittedly. There may be different supporter groups but presumably they are all supporters! Ideally we don't want block-voting and all the chicanery traditionally associated with - ummmmm - trade union politics, but I keep saying it, it's no use moaning about those at the helm of this project if you don't yourself get involved. Neither can you complain if you do get involved but are over-ruled by a proper democratic process, assuming that's what's happening.
Morning to you notDistant.........chicanery,block-voting how terrible..........chicanery, that certainly sounds the right description for the Governments involvement with the Sky/Murdock organization........corruption sounds another good description..........it took less than two years for this Government of Millionaires to succumb to the love of money and power.........whilst they turn the thumb screws on the rest of us and suck us dry from their ivory towers of opulence. I had a Tory canvasser knock on the door last night......telling me why I should vote for Boris to keep out those nasty people who would take away my comfortable lifestyle.......having asked me the inevitable question.....and receiving a NO I will not be voting for him......I got the the typical Tory womans look.....suggesting that we don't need your type living around here.....(Boris's little brother is are shipped in MP...)......money,power and class.......that is politics in the last two years.
Sorry notDistant ....I got off subject a little there.....one of the silent majority not being silent. I feel concerned that there are individuals who will try and "organize" who will get elected by wearing different hats at different times......especially from PASOTI direction. There seems to be so much skullduggery going on between a certain two so called supporter groups. Where does that leave some of us who bear allegiance first to this supporters website........NO ONE seems to recognize us as a supporters group within PAFC etc. I did contact Greens-on-Screen awhile ago and asked them why we didn't show up on their list of Argyle supporters groups..........the answer I got was.........no answer at all.....thank you very much. I did talk to Chris Webb about it......he said he would check us out........result......NOTHING.
My advice - join the Trust and forget the websites. Oh and PS politicians of all hues have been at Murdoch's beck & call for years, until perhaps The Clunking Fist became unhinged. If you don't believe me, believe the man himself. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17843752
Lets put names to this shall we. You are talking about Webb and Newell who both fought in the War. Webb has tried to be a little more distant recently but it would seem that Newell has been conducting some sort of weird campaign of his own to disrupt the Trust and the board members. The resignation of one was due to use of an account on PASOTI to rubbish other Trust board members having been rubbished himself. Account supplied by Newell and the **** hit the fan when it was found out. Newell is also accused of trying to get ATD out on a limb and possibly close the site down. Neither he nor Webb should be alllowed anywhere near either the Trust or GASB but what you fear plymborn is that both will use their influence on PASOTI and contacts to get elected. This would be a tragedy of the highest order because the Trust and 20% ownership should be a great thing for fans and club and not a political movers and shakers plaything. Webb probably has the right motivation at least but with Newell it is an ego come power thing and he is not clever enough to be any good.
And that's precisely what I was alluding to with "block-voting and all the chicanery" - manipulating the electorate by selectively issuing election notices, either to exclude opposing groups or make sure supporters are over-represented, surreptitious under-cover groups voting as a bloc to an agreed agenda, insisting on voting by attendance at intimidating public meetings by show of hands rather than secret postal votes etc etc. There's nothing wrong with the proposed structure but to ensure fairness you need proper governance and as many fans as possible involved. The Pasoti/ATD thing isn't significant in itself but it does suggest that some of the individuals involved have more on their minds than just the best interests of PAFC - i.e. their own aggrandisement and getting their own way whether it's right or wrong or whether it's supported by a majority of the silent masses. I have to admit I'm not a Trust member...... Anyone else? "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)
notDistant......I joined the Trust from the very beginning,being an exile in NW Kent I felt it was a good idea and a way of feel more part of things, I would be interested in financial involvement through the Trust buying shares. Sensible...... I didn't name individual names but Newell and his crones must be the main culprits........I am not so sure about Webb....he has a position that gives him a place in the PAFC hierarchy anyway....he doesn't need that type of hassle.
Except Webb may still see himself as in a war with just a change of enemy. It strikes me that anyone who raises a doubt about anything Argyle is slapped down by a crew of posters who regularly appear. Orchestrated by whom is the question and I don't think Webb can totally distance himself from Newell. This may be because he has bigged him up to the owner previously and would look foolish if he dumped him now. Bit like Blair and Brown in public whereas in private they would have hired a hit man if they thought they could have gotten away with it. Just an example not a political statement by the way. I am not a member of the Trust but it doesn't mean I won't be. I want to see which way the wind is blowing first.
Not good on the arse I know at my age plym and the dents and scars are harder to get rid of..........
Just been on ATD -unbelievable to see that already some are calling for both Fletcher and Brent to go! What a bunch of losers!!
It's not that simple Mrs lalala. I've been jumping on and off there for several months now and you need to go back a bit with some of the posters to see where their opinions are coming from. There are some on there who are real long term Argyle supporters who thought Stapleton and that Board were useless and were like DS did on here predicting our demise. That apparently was from some years back. Having been pretty much proved right they now still see little improvement in the situation despite Brent and the club being saved. They look upon him as a ruthless business bloke who has spent nothing from his own pocket on the club and doesn't intend to. Fletcher was therefore a cheap option only rather than the answer to the problems on the pitch. They find it very hard to give much credit to Brent and therefore Fletcher for anything so far. Now I'm not saying I agree with them but they are consistent in their opinions and still await some grand gesture from Brent for the club. Not quite like DS in the sense that he jumped on the bandwagon at the Championship stage. These people are more senior in years and have been 40/50 year supporters. Fletcher having contract talks shows no ambition in their eyes so it is "same old Argo" for them. If we managed promotion next term that might start to sway them a bit but it would likely be tinged with low praise. It is the way some of them are.
The trouble is with that is that IF you favour a sugar-daddy who'll pump money in to but success, you have to have some clue who that might be. Surely the recent administration process proves beyond a shadow of doubt that there's nobody of that ilk out there with any interest in PAFC. Personally, I'm in favour of Brent's approach of a club living within its means on a sustainable basis. That way there's a fairly low risk of losing the club altogether which we so nearly did over the past year. I see the Championship clubs are negotiating a "financial disarmament" package which will see clubs which overspend being penalised. You'd think this is not a moment too soon given the huge losses flagged up in that League only recently. Let's hope that sort of common sense prevails so that clubs can get back to competing on a fair, low cost basis. Not only would that be good for football as a whole, it would actually be to the advantage of clubs like PAFC who lack big money support.
Like I said notdistant, I don't necessarily agree with them. But, despite the recent troubles some still believe there should be a spend policy wrapped up in an "investment" blanket. I think this stems from the lack of ambition believed to have been shown back in the Holoway days when we sat quite highly in the Championship. As said though they have stuck to their argument and it is their opinion which they are entitled to hold.
To hold an opinion when there has been no actual evidence against it is one thing but, call me pedantic, holding an opinion which very recent events have shown to be impossible is ... umm ... stupid.
