|
Post by teanbiscuits on Jan 15, 2020 9:46:37 GMT
If nothing else it shows how irrelevant the supporters club is to the football club. I've not been a member since they were stopped from selling tickets and merchandise and subsequently shut the supporters club shop.
I asked at the time how they plan to continue being a relevant entity and adapt to the changing relationship with the club and that was ignored so my choice was made there and then. Even if they have lost members for similar reasons they must be coining it in without shop overheads and I've no idea what they've done with that. Probably blowing it on legal fees by the sound of it.
In some ways with the clubs current ownership, I wish they would cut ties with the Supporters Club altogether and build up something that works for everyone. It looks to me from the outside the Supporters Club is a vehicle for some people to have a bit of status while all the efforts the minnows are doing raising money on a match day are paying for it.
I'd love to corrected by people that work within the supporters club as there must be some good things going on that I don't know about. It just seems to be stuck in the past with no real purpose.
|
|
pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 18,744
|
Post by pirate on Jan 15, 2020 10:19:33 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2020 10:22:17 GMT
Because reports suggest Ken has been a very naughty bloke. They’ve not blocked the supporters club, they’ve blocked Ken. If they sue the club over this, then that’s taking time, money and effort away from focusing on getting us a new stadium and investing in new playing staff that can help us progress .They’re behaving like a boys club, and they’re upset their boy isn’t in charge any more. Just send someone else in who’s agreeable. I’m a member of the supporters club but don’t see them doing anything to hold the club to account in the correct way. Spreading false information, and leaking true information, is not the way to do this. Carefully released press releases to our supporters and open dialogue with people paying into the club is. If the supporters club wants to progress Ken needs to be replaced with someone who can do this. Good points. I would join and support a supporters club that did this. Our owners should be accountable to fans and thats what I see the role of the SC director being. That was one of the main pillars of the share scheme. It was the SC itself that diluted that premise, back in the day.
|
|
|
Post by rememberhalifax on Jan 15, 2020 10:24:24 GMT
Forgive my naivety and ignorance on the subject but as a long standing member of the supporters club, for reasons that are obvious from the title , could someone explain why it is subject to so much animosity on this forum?, i know ever since time there have been fall outs twixt the FC and the SC, and the SC has been let down by an individual in recent years but is that any reason to ridicule their existence or indeed any individual who has to all good intent worked tirelessly for the club we all presume to support? , find it all a bit sad, really.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2020 10:25:19 GMT
I'd be suprised if they could sue and win. At absolute worst- it's very unlikely that removal of a director is illegal. With regard to banning from the boxes- weve seen that many times At best a court might decide some refund could be due. Obviously not illegal, but breach of any contract between the FC and the SC / share scheme? No breach Under the terms of the Share Scheme the nominated SC Director was subject to board approval.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2020 10:26:07 GMT
Forgive my naivety and ignorance on the subject but as a long standing member of the supporters club, for reasons that are obvious from the title , could someone explain why it is subject to so much animosity on this forum?, i know ever since time there have been fall outs twixt the FC and the SC, and the SC has been let down by an individual in recent years but is that any reason to ridicule their existence or indeed any individual who has to all good intent worked tirelessly for the club we all presume to support? , find it all a bit sad, really. Personal experience, 2002 to 2004.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2020 10:29:28 GMT
And as per usual the club have said absolutely nothing despite banning a director. Yep. water poor that. I disagree entirely. The board are perfectly within their rights remove the SC Director under the terms of the Share Scheme. On banning, they must have a reason and realise it might be subject to litigation, knowing Masters as they do. It would be stupid to make a public comment in those circumstances.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2020 10:30:35 GMT
And as per usual the club have said absolutely nothing despite banning a director. To be fair he is the SC/Share Scheme representative.
I would suggest the onus is on the SC to tell us why he has been banned, but all they have said is they have consulted their solicitors and said he has done nothing wrong (Which insinuates he has been banned for doing something wrong)
The SC should be telling us why our representative has been banned and why they believe him to be innocent
Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 15, 2020 10:32:01 GMT
I disagree entirely. The board are perfectly within their rights remove the SC Director under the terms of the Share Scheme. On banning, they must have a reason and realise it might be subject to litigation, knowing Masters as they do. It would be stupid to make a public comment in those circumstances. Fair enough. I would have at least expected a "Ken has left the board, contact the SC for further details" announcement but I accept you may be right.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2020 10:34:35 GMT
Regardless of who is in the right or wrong here, this is just another sad tale in the ever-increasing tales in our anthology of embarrassments. Our club seems to be a total shambles and I believe the lack of communication from the top on important issues is mostly to blame. We need strong leadership to guide the whole club and unite it. The lack of communication has created a breeding ground for negativity, scaremongering and in-fighting between factions of Gasheads. It's absolutely ridiculous. This is said without me having an ounce of bias towards any one director or party at the top of our club. I just want a professional, united club looking towards the future. Is that so hard to ask!? Jomo, It has been ever thus since the relegation in 2001. 2003 with GD 2006 with NH and GD 2007/8 with the share dilution The fiasco with the planned redevelopment of the Mem The fiasco with UWE And now this period.
|
|
|
Post by meader on Jan 15, 2020 10:52:28 GMT
What on earth is going on at our football club? Ken Masters banned from boardroom and executive boxes. Ian Holtby banned from buying tickets for Home AND away games!
Something is serious wrong in our football club. Time for us supporters to kick up a fuss and demand answers.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jan 15, 2020 11:04:00 GMT
What on earth is going on at our football club? Ken Masters banned from boardroom and executive boxes. Ian Holtby banned from buying tickets for Home AND away games! Something is serious wrong in our football club. Time for us supporters to kick up a fuss and demand answers. At least one of those claims has already been disproved.
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Jan 15, 2020 11:05:22 GMT
What on earth is going on at our football club? Ken Masters banned from boardroom and executive boxes. Ian Holtby banned from buying tickets for Home AND away games! Something is serious wrong in our football club. Time for us supporters to kick up a fuss and demand answers. Ian Holtby = fake news
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Jan 15, 2020 12:31:20 GMT
Obviously not illegal, but breach of any contract between the FC and the SC / share scheme? No breach Under the terms of the Share Scheme the nominated SC Director was subject to board approval. Is there a clause saying that approval, once given, can be withdrawn? Guess there must be
|
|
|
Post by RD on Jan 15, 2020 12:34:50 GMT
Just got some more shocking news passed to me.
It transpires that Tom Nichols was BANNED from scoring goals. He broke this promise in the game against MK Dons and as such will be offloaded at the earliest possible opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Jan 15, 2020 12:38:24 GMT
Just got some more shocking news passed to me. It transpires that Tom Nichols was BANNED from scoring goals. He broke this promise in the game against MK Dons and as such will be offloaded at the earliest possible opportunity. Have you got any proof?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2020 12:43:25 GMT
Man leaks confidential information to his friends and then wonders why he’s banned.
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Jan 15, 2020 12:43:53 GMT
Just got some more shocking news passed to me. It transpires that Tom Nichols was BANNED from scoring goals. He broke this promise in the game against MK Dons and as such will be offloaded at the earliest possible opportunity. Have you got any proof? No, but here is a Haiku. Poor old Tom Nichols Banned from scoring any goals Goalscoring bonus. I think that's proof enough.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Jan 15, 2020 12:49:45 GMT
Man leaks confidential information to his friends and then wonders why he’s banned. Pretty much.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 15, 2020 12:50:43 GMT
I disagree entirely. The board are perfectly within their rights remove the SC Director under the terms of the Share Scheme. On banning, they must have a reason and realise it might be subject to litigation, knowing Masters as they do. It would be stupid to make a public comment in those circumstances. As it actually been confirmed that KM's been removed as either an SC Director a club Board member, as he still seems to be listed as the former at Companies House, plus I doubt being banned from the Boardroom will have much effect on him attending Board meetings given than none seem to take place anyway?
|
|