Trust Welcomes Return to Two Year Kit Cycle

[OldGit]

Any evidence for that assertation, boc? I.e, the amount raised by subs and the Trust's raffles, etc. after the initial bucket rattling? I lobbed £50 in the bucket ( and paid my subs ) not caring who claimed what kudos was going - I just knew my money was going in some small way to try to get the club out of the sh#t.

And there was a fair number of individual 3 or 4 figure donations (including mine) made direct to the trust on the same basis.

 

[Real Sharapova]

You are an accountant. I am sure that you can do the sums.

I have not looked at the accounts for some time - I assume you must have done to make the statement you did.

 

[homer]

I have not looked at the accounts for some time - I assume you must have done to make the statement you did.

Think he was referring to your fifty quid donation compared to your ten quid subs

 

[bocadillo]

Most Trust communications are sent by mail nowerdays.

Really? How many? Do you really believe that the extra postage warrants a 50% premium for overseas members?

 

[Real Sharapova]

Really? How many? Do you really believe that the extra postage warrants a 50% premium for overseas members?

All newsletters are going by post now. So my answer is yes.

 

[Real Sharapova]

Think he was referring to your fifty quid donation compared to your ten quid subs

Not my reading.

 

[bocadillo]

All newsletters are going by post now. So my answer is yes.

Must be right then.

 

[bocadillo]

Think he was referring to your fifty quid donation compared to your ten quid subs

Not my reading.

I'm not quite sure what part of what I said Homer is trying to interpret - if indeed that is what he was doing.

To avoid doubt and to repeat what I have said many times before, I believe that a large part of what the FT paid into the club was money that was thrown into buckets :

• by people who believed that the money would be going directly into the club
  
• by people who were 'not caring about who was going to claim the kudos'
  
• by people who were told that there was no direct method of donating towards the saving of the club so they should do it throught the FT

I don't think that the FT should claim credit for these amounts - only for amounts that were donated intentionally to further the work of the FT.


Further, if the FT receives a 'windfall' as a result of City performing well in the coming years, it is my belief that they willl receive money that was morally donated to the Football Club and not to the FT. I am aware that they have committed to consulting with members on the future use of any such money - but perhaps it is the people that gave the money who they should be consulting (a totally impractical proposition) rather than the comparitively fewer people who will by then be members. Perhaps the money that was not donated specifically 'to further the work of the FT' should be given back to the Football Club.

 

[Durham Fox]

I'm not quite sure what part of what I said Homer is trying to interpret - if indeed that is what he was doing.

To avoid doubt and to repeat what I have said many times before, I believe that a large part of what the FT paid into the club was money that was thrown into buckets :

• by people who believed that the money would be going directly into the club
• by people who were 'not caring about who was going to claim the kudos'
• by people who were told that there was no direct method of donating towards the saving of the club so they should do it throught the FT

I don't think that the FT should claim credit for these amounts - only for amounts that were donated intentionally to further the work of the FT.


Further, if the FT receives a 'windfall' as a result of City performing well in the coming years, it is my belief that they willl receive money that was morally donated to the Football Club and not to the FT. I am aware that they have committed to consulting with members on the future use of any such money - but perhaps it is the people that gave the money who they should be consulting (a totally impractical proposition) rather than the comparitively fewer people who will by then be members. Perhaps the money that was not donated specifically 'to further the work of the FT' should be given back to the Football Club.

100% spot on. I put quite a bit of cash in to a bucket, more than I could afford at the time and certainly more than the cost of a years subs for the FT. It wasn't clear that they were going to take that money and then claim it as their own. Indeed it was further unclear that this didnt make me as much of a worthwhile consultation point as someone who gave them a tenner and filled in a form.

 

[Real Sharapova]

I'm not quite sure what part of what I said Homer is trying to interpret - if indeed that is what he was doing.

To avoid doubt and to repeat what I have said many times before, I believe that a large part of what the FT paid into the club was money that was thrown into buckets :

• by people who believed that the money would be going directly into the club
  
• by people who were 'not caring about who was going to claim the kudos'
  
• by people who were told that there was no direct method of donating towards the saving of the club so they should do it throught the FT

I don't think that the FT should claim credit for these amounts - only for amounts that were donated intentionally to further the work of the FT.


Further, if the FT receives a 'windfall' as a result of City performing well in the coming years, it is my belief that they willl receive money that was morally donated to the Football Club and not to the FT. I am aware that they have committed to consulting with members on the future use of any such money - but perhaps it is the people that gave the money who they should be consulting (a totally impractical proposition) rather than the comparitively fewer people who will by then be members. Perhaps the money that was not donated specifically 'to further the work of the FT' should be given back to the Football Club.

If the trust is wound up, any monies go to a local ( preferably sporting ) charity. I'm not sure many people would be happy with any monies effectively being donated to MM.

 

[Durham Fox]

If the trust is wound up, any monies go to a local ( preferably sporting ) charity. I'm not sure many people would be happy with any monies effectively being donated to MM.

I would prefer 'my money' went to the club than a charity. I gave it to the club not to charity.

 

[homer]

I'm not quite sure what part of what I said Homer is trying to interpret - if indeed that is what he was doing.

I was agreeing with you

RS chucked five times the amount into a bucket simply to save the club, compared to the money he actually donated via a specific subscription to the Foxes Trust

A situation that I suspect was repeated across the board

 

[homer]

If the trust is wound up, any monies go to a local ( preferably sporting ) charity. I'm not sure many people would be happy with any monies effectively being donated to MM.

But the FT isn't going to be wound up

It will therefore be sat on a sum of money which it is free to spend in any way its members choose

 

[Real Sharapova]

I was agreeing with you

RS chucked five times the amount into a bucket simply to save the club, compared to the money he actually donated via a specific subscription to the Foxes Trust

A situation that I suspect was repeated across the board

I knew at the time that a supporters' trust or something similar would have to handle the money given based on the history of other clubs that had fallen on hard times.

 

[homer]

I would prefer 'my money' went to the club than a charity. I gave it to the club not to charity.

To be honest, DF, I'm not sure Mandaric will be able to do much with a ten Zloty coin and an old bottle top

But it's a nice thought

 

[Real Sharapova]

It will therefore be sat on a sum of money which it is free to spend in any way its members choose

Not for some time, as MM has deferred payment for the shares, and may only end up having to pay 10p per share.

 

[Leesoh]

I'm not quite sure what part of what I said Homer is trying to interpret - if indeed that is what he was doing.

To avoid doubt and to repeat what I have said many times before, I believe that a large part of what the FT paid into the club was money that was thrown into buckets :

• by people who believed that the money would be going directly into the club
• by people who were 'not caring about who was going to claim the kudos'
• by people who were told that there was no direct method of donating towards the saving of the club so they should do it throught the FT

I don't think that the FT should claim credit for these amounts - only for amounts that were donated intentionally to further the work of the FT.


Further, if the FT receives a 'windfall' as a result of City performing well in the coming years, it is my belief that they willl receive money that was morally donated to the Football Club and not to the FT. I am aware that they have committed to consulting with members on the future use of any such money - but perhaps it is the people that gave the money who they should be consulting (a totally impractical proposition) rather than the comparitively fewer people who will by then be members. Perhaps the money that was not donated specifically 'to further the work of the FT' should be given back to the Football Club.

I wanted my contribution to go towards helping to save the club, not as a direct contribution to the Trust.

Wasn't the intial idea to raise money? When did sitting on the board etc come into it (rhetorical question)?

 

[bocadillo]

If the trust is wound up, any monies go to a local ( preferably sporting ) charity. I'm not sure many people would be happy with any monies effectively being donated to MM.

But the intention was to give it to the Football CLub - not to a charity - not to the FT. And if that was the intention, I would say is that is where the money should stay. If it goes to MM, then that's his good luck and perhaps he will use it furthering the aims of the Fooball Club.

It will be interesting for future commentators to report on whether MM or the FT had the greater influence on the life of the Club.

 

[Durham Fox]

But the intention was to give it to the Football CLub - not to a charity - not to the FT. And if that was the intention, I would say is that is where the money should stay. If it goes to MM, then that's his good luck and perhaps he will use it furthering the aims of the Fooball Club.

It will be interesting for future commentators to report on whether MM or the FT had the greater influence on the life of the Club.

Spot on. The Trust should return his payment to him on the proviso that he spends it on the team.

 

[Jeff]

Wasn't the intial idea to raise money? When did sitting on the board etc come into it (rhetorical question)?

The initial idea of the trust was for existing shareholders to be able to group together to have an influence on the way the club was being run - and at that time it also included trying to get a fan on the board.

But the club going into administration changed the focus to raising money, to support whichever consortium was thought best able to take the club forward.

There was never any intention of any money raised from bucket collections going directly to the club at the time of admnistration, it would have just ended up being used by the administrator to pay off debts, rather than used for the future of the club. It was used to go towards buying the club in the same way as the likes of Lineker, Heskey, Holmes etc put their money into the club.

There was a lot of publicity about the aims of the trust at the time, online as well as numerous articles in the Mercury, plus TV and radio interviews and public meetings.
So anyone who didn't know how their money was going to be used had no excuse. I personally put over £300 into a bucket, plus a couple of hundred more directly into the trust a few weeks later, knowing exactly how it would be used, and if the trust gets some of this money back from the sale of shares I expect it will be used sensibly to support the club, maybe in the way of sponsortships etc.