Trust Statement

[parajack]

17 hours ago, WBridgfordowl said:

I genuinely believe the future of our football club is under serious threat. 
 

if players walk away and there are no funds to pay those who remain or need to be recruited, then there isn’t a viable business. Employees wouldn’t make themselves unemployed in these difficult economic times unless they can’t see they’ll ever get what the club owes them. Players won’t be the only unpaid creditors. 
 

This man may well oversee the end of this once proud football club

Players money is nailed on,there wages would be paid before any other creditors from sale of remaining assets,including HMRC..https://www.inbrief.co.uk/football-law/footballers-not-paid-wages/

[@owlstalk]

32 minutes ago, vulva said:

Put the club up for sale? We’ve spent the last 5 years hoarding reserve centre half’s and midfielders. Can you imagine the palaver in actually selling the whole club. DC doesn’t sell anything. He’s a bit like one of them old women on a C4 documentary that boards stuff, and the presenter has to push the door open to get in, minding the cats and old newspapers. 

 

 

 

 

[Lawrie’s Left Peg]

14 minutes ago, Essix Blue said:

Hate is a strong term - and I don’t think it’s helpful in this case. 
 

I don’t hate DC. I think he came with the right intentions and due to bad advice / stubbornness / ignorance he finds himself up the creek and no canoe, never mind a paddle. 
 

Let’s remain civil in all this. 

Relax. It’s a joke. If you know, you know. 

[SWFC Trust]

4 hours ago, Rogers said:

I’d like to know the input and engagement of the football finance lecturer, ex players, etc. and whether there is a plan to use their contacts and influence to initiate debate and discussion on our plight with: 

 

a) the government - review into how football is being run 

b) local government and potential impact on the city and local communities 

c) PFA and / or club captain

d) outside parties that can offer positive input 

e) engage with DC to find out what’s happening (slim chance)
 

I know the Trust remit isn’t aimed at this sort of thing; but it’s going to have to IMO. 

The best outcome I can think of, is that DC has sold and waiting for paperwork to be signed and he’s refusing to put any money in. 

a,b and d - yes. 'Outside parties' is a very broad term there though.

 

c - no though I'll see if we have a link with the PFA through the Football Supporters Association. 

 

e - through the club's Engagement Panel meetings. Which came about, at least in part, after pressure from the Trust for a more transparent relationship between club and fans. 

[@owlstalk]

Just now, SWFC Trust said:

 e - through the club's Engagement Panel meetings. Which came about, at least in part, after pressure from the Trust for a more transparent relationship between club and fans. 

 

 

Those meetings need to be boycotted by every single party that's invited as the first part of the proceedings

[SWFC Trust]

Just now, @owlstalk said:

 

 

Those meetings need to be boycotted by every single party that's invited as the first part of the proceedings

A question asking just that will be on the survey to members. 

[Essix Blue]

40 minutes ago, Lawrie’s Left Peg said:

Relax. It’s a joke. If you know, you know. 

I know - however it’s still useful to remind some fans about keeping it all civil 

[@owlstalk]

Just now, SWFC Trust said:

A question asking just that will be on the survey to members. 

 

 

It's none of my business really but I would love The Trust to speak to all the various groups and parties that are part of the supporters engagement meetings with a view to organising all of them (every single one, without any splitters) to come away and not attend any longer until things have changed both in the chairmans' approach to the club, but also things have changed with regard to the terms and conditions of those meetings and the terms imposed on them by the club

[Rogers]

3 minutes ago, SWFC Trust said:

a,b and d - yes. 'Outside parties' is a very broad term there though.

 

c - no though I'll see if we have a link with the PFA through the Football Supporters Association. 

 

e - through the club's Engagement Panel meetings. Which came about, at least in part, after pressure from the Trust for a more transparent relationship between club and fans. 

I’m more encouraged to join now. Thanks 

context - 

a - we are the perfect case study

D - outside parties - I’m thinking people that can apply pressure, ideas, or contacts

c - even a chat with players to know if they’re are walking out - or gauge the mood 

[matthefish2002]

I am not sure Boycotting any meetings would work.

I have a feeling Chansiri would be delighted not having to explain himself to a bunch of in his eye plebs.

[@owlstalk]

Just now, matthefish2002 said:

I am not sure Boycotting any meetings would work. 

Attending them has PROVEN not to.

Every fans group walking away from meetings with those terms imposed on them by the chairman is a strong message to everyone

Sitting there listening to the club trot out false promises in a room full of sycophants isn't productive in the slightest

[SWFC Trust]

12 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

It's none of my business really but I would love The Trust to speak to all the various groups and parties that are part of the supporters engagement meetings with a view to organising all of them (every single one, without any splitters) to come away and not attend any longer until things have changed both in the chairmans' approach to the club, but also things have changed with regard to the terms and conditions of those meetings and the terms imposed on them by the club

Again, whether to do just that is on the survey. 

[matthefish2002]

7 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

Attending them has PROVEN not to.

Every fans group walking away from meetings with those terms imposed on them by the chairman is a strong message to everyone

Sitting there listening to the club trot out false promises in a room full of sycophants isn't productive in the slightest

 

I didn't attend any meetings but I really enjoyed discussing the weird and wonderful things Chansiri came out with on Owlstalk.

Was miles more interesting than talking about things on the pitch.

 

If you are going to attend you need people who will stand up to him. Think it might be better if the questions were asked by journalists who are used to asking questions and are normally better briefed than the average fan.

 

But yes if the Trust and everyone else refuses to attend any meetings I would not argue with them.

[@owlstalk]

Just now, SWFC Trust said:

Again, whether to do just that is on the survey. 

 

Yeah I heard you

 

 

I was just talking out loud in generalities

Good to see it on the survey - I honestly doubt anyone agrees with my approach though and can't see my thoughts being voted for on this occasion

Mostly because I guess most people aren't even aware of the terms and conditions of even attending these meetings and the rules around them that have been imposed

[@owlstalk]

1 minute ago, matthefish2002 said:

 If you are going to attend you need people who will stand up to him.  

 

True

99.99% of those who attend those meetings and fans forum go to listen to him, agree with everything he says, and give him a standing ovation when he's (finally) finished talking

 

 

[SWFC Trust]

13 minutes ago, Rogers said:

I’m more encouraged to join now. Thanks 

context - 

a - we are the perfect case study

D - outside parties - I’m thinking people that can apply pressure, ideas, or contacts

c - even a chat with players to know if they’re are walking out - or gauge the mood 

Thank you. 

 

For a) I think you are quite right. We put our views in through the Football Supporters Association. The government review thing may ask for more details. 

 

c) we have some informal links - not the sort of thing I can put on social media though (sorry)

 

d) yes, I think we're doing that. I don't think we can claim all the credit - but it's interesting that the local press are now pushing very similar ideas to what we have said for the last 14 months. 

[SWFC Trust]

4 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

Yeah I heard you

 

 

I was just talking out loud in generalities

Good to see it on the survey - I honestly doubt anyone agrees with my approach though and can't see my thoughts being voted for on this occasion

Mostly because I guess most people aren't even aware of the terms and conditions of even attending these meetings and the rules around them that have been imposed

 

 

Haha - glad you heard!

 

It's the democratic bit of being a Trust. We have to do our best to follow members wishes.

 

We'd get it in the neck from all angles if we unilaterally pulled out without asking. 

[Guest Grandad]

24 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

It's none of my business really but I would love The Trust to speak to all the various groups and parties that are part of the supporters engagement meetings with a view to organising all of them (every single one, without any splitters) to come away and not attend any longer until things have changed both in the chairmans' approach to the club, but also things have changed with regard to the terms and conditions of those meetings and the terms imposed on them by the club

Can you please video that meeting with 'The Wednesday Sing'

[@owlstalk]

Just now, SWFC Trust said:

 

 

Haha - glad you heard!

 

It's the democratic bit of being a Trust. We have to do our best to follow members wishes.

 

We'd get it in the neck from all angles if we unilaterally pulled out without asking. 

 

 

Oh definitely - I wasn't suggesting that for one second 
I meant to do your process and the Trust membership to all be as one and agree to it

 

[@owlstalk]

Just now, Grandad said:

Can you please video that meeting with 'The Wednesday Sing'

 

7 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

99.99% of those who attend those meetings and fans forum go to listen to him, agree with everything he says, and give him a standing ovation when he's (finally) finished talking

 

 

*cough*