Foxes Trust

[bocadillo]

Like who?
I know that I'm dead gullible and will believe anything that people tell me, but I was under the impression that the Club was literally hours away from ceasing to exist.

And do you think that all of the other shareholders would have let the club go for the sake of that last £50,000?

The truth is always in such cases, that a huge amount of 'brinkmanship' is going on - as it will now with the MM and any other bid. The club was 'dead' without that last £50,000 - but I think you can be sure that any one of a number of people would have put it in at the last minute (or the administrators might have reduced the amount needed by £50,000) - it was really in nobody's interests to let the club die.

As it was the other players in the game could see that the FT had a big pile of money, which they had received in one way or another for the express purpose of saving the club. I think that if I had been one of those other players, I too would have forced the FT's hand and made them hand it over - whatever else were they going to do with it?

Big football clubs aren't allowed to die - and the Foxes Trust did not save this one!

 

[bocadillo]

Hulio is Duzza. He was temporarily loaned to Joe_ for a while several months ago, he's back with Duzza again now.

Thank you for explaining that. I can feel the smirch running off me.

 

[Real Sharapova]

Big football clubs aren't allowed to die

Fair enough, but we are talking about Leicester here.

 

[OldGit]

Course they wouldn't have been allowed to die. They'd have been shovelled off to the you know whos.:icon_eek:

And we'd hav e been getting this every other Saturday.
View attachment 771

 

[norman leet]

that tipped it

 

[Polar Bear]

I understand why the FT only want to/are able to deal with their membership, rather than fans in general, in terms of canvassing opinion on a "potential groundshare" or whatever. I am surprised that they don't seem to understand (or care?) why this policy makes them look secretive and as if they have already made their 'collective' mind up. It seems to me that the way things have gone that the FT have forfeited any mandate they once had to represent the support as a whole, and can now only claim to represent themselves. Doubtless some would respond that they only ever represented themselves anyway, but I do not believe that the Supporters' Trust movement was set up with the aim of getting well-heeled lawyer/accountant types influence with football clubs at boardroom level, wasn't it supposed to represent something, erm, more democratic than that? They now seem to be a privileged pressure group, great, just what we need.

I would like to know why there have been no statements from club or any other direction regarding supposed bids other than MM's. Wasn't transparency supposed to be some sort of ideal? Instead rumour and counter-rumour are just left to fester.

Sorry this is a disjointed post, and yes before anyone jumps on me I do recognise all the effort the Trust put in in the first place etc. but the way things have gone I would frankly like to see the back of everyone connected with the current regime - board, Trust, the lot. It's like Animal Farm over there - and no, I'm not talking equine sighs of pleasure...

 

[Jeff]

I do not believe that the Supporters' Trust movement was set up with the aim of getting well-heeled lawyer/accountant types influence with football clubs at boardroom level, wasn't it supposed to represent something, erm, more democratic than that? They now seem to be a privileged pressure group, great, just what we need.

The FT is a democratic organisation, anyone can join, anyone can stand for election to the trust board. It certainly isn't a 'privileged pressure group'.
Not sure where you get the 'well-heeled lawyer/accountant types' thing from either.

 

[OldGit]

Trusts generally have the aim of shareholding and board representation. Most don't have it, but some do.

At Brentford, of course, they recently raised enough to buy the club to save it from extinction.

 

[Fox Fan]

Haven't voted, as none of the 4 options seem adequate. Not sure what you mean by "antics of the last few weeks" - there have been so many allegations flying around about what they have done or not done and supposed motives.

In principle I am strongly in favour of the whole supporters direct movement and its aim of getting a more influential voice for ordinary fans in the running of the game.

As far as the Foxes Trust is concerned, I believe it played a vital role in the rescue package post admin. The fact that large numbers of ordinary fans were prepared to chip in helped to make up some people's minds to join the consortium with substantial sums. It also allowed a number of us who wanted to be part of the rescue, but could not come up with the sort of sums needed, to do so.

It's regular work focusing on the academy & sponsoring young players is in my view invaluable. And it is good to have a grassroots group in a position to prick the consciences of the board from time to time. And its regular lobbying of councillors, MPs etc. is also good.

I would criticise it for sometimes being slow to respond to issues and for not making some of its public statements clear, including getting across why it often has to be constrained by confidentiality. It is also disappointing that the membership is not larger than it is - I really wish that more those who have problems over particular issues (as opposed to those who, for whatever reason simply object to its existence) would join and argue their point.

I could do a 10 page essay, but.....

I think you and I are on the same page OG!

 

[MHS]

I think you and I are on the same page OG!

You're not. He posted on Page 1, you posted on Page 9. :icon_wink

 

[Redditch Fox]

The FT did an excellent job in garnering the cash from supporters at the time of administration.

However, the idea of reps of supporters having influence in the boardroom is either a delusion - or if it happened a bad thing.

Supporters have loads of influence anyway...if the crowd wants a manager out, he's more or less doomed. If the supporters stay away...the club takes notice.

What's needed in professional football clubs is strong leadership...and that leadership should be 'close to the customer' i.e the supporter, but no specific group like a trust should be able to claim to represent or speak for the supporters. What concerns me about trusts is that there is a serious danger that they will seek to prop up those boards that seem most sympathetic the role of the trust rather than that which is best for the club.

 

[Disco Bob]

I'd like to pass on my apologies for being about to steal a brilliant idea ~ and use this poll on "another forum"

I think the behaviour of the Trust has been nothing short of shocking over the last three weeks. If the Trust exec remain then I will be tearing up my certificate and not rejoining.

 

[MHS]

I'd like to pass on my apologies for being about to steal a brilliant idea ~ and use this poll on "another forum"

:icon_wink

 

[NN Fox]

Since they were formed I thought the FT had done an ok sort of job, perhaps a bit full of their own self importance but by and large ok.
Since MM came on the scene though they seem to have lost the plot. Instead of acting responsibly they have helped to fuel the speculation with their nudge, nudge suggestion and innuendo. They've been like a small child who's been told to keep his mum's Christmas present a secret but is really bursting to say what he knows. Bason's reported comments today though are a disgrace. He has no business inviting a bid from the Tigers and I would not be surprised if from now on the board told the trust to take a hike.
Therefore I voted B.

 

[Disco Bob]

:icon_wink

I'm just :icon_evil

 

[Jeff]

Bason's reported comments today though are a disgrace.

Do you know exactly what was said, in context?

Or are you relying on what someone posted on here?

 

[NN Fox]

Do you know exactly what was said, in context?

Or are you relying on what someone posted on here?

Relying on posts, not always wise I know. To me any statement along these lines, in public, at this time, is irresponsible.

 

[Fox Fan]

Do you know exactly what was said, in context?

Or are you relying on what someone posted on here?

Is there a link? Its bloody hard to keep up with it all!

 

[Redditch Fox]

Do you know exactly what was said, in context?

Or are you relying on what someone posted on here?

I think to be fair - that anyone would have to be completely naive not to recognise that the FT has been insiduously downmouthing the MM approach.

Of course, one can only speculate on the reasons for this, but I would assume that the FT fears that the club would be run by the owner according to his - and presumably his advisors - wishes. To me, that represents a scenario that the FT would not like at all.

Of course, the FT is not going to stand up and admit this position..perhaps they wouldn't even want to take a look at themselves and recognise what they are trying to do.

 

[Fox Fan]

I just feel everyone is ready to jump on the first guy that looks at us. That car phone Warehouse guy, supposedly in with the Tiger bid is worth £500 million. If he threw some of that this way I'd have the Tigers deal.



Does anybody think MM just struck lucky at pompy by getting Rednapp? I do, without him who knows where Pompy would be? He could have ended up like the chairmen of so many other clubs....