Trust

[Ted]

Originally Posted By: HorshamRebel

Ted, I suggest you have a chat with Mike at the match about the meeting.

Sorry HR, I don't believe things should be run on a whispers and secrets basis. If something is to be discussed, I would expect to know about it in advance. That doesn't mean I'm against any motion, it just means I expect the meeting only to cover the items that members have been notified about. There can obviously be exceptions in an emergency, but as no-one has said anything, this presumably isn't an emergency.

[HorshamRebel]

I was not suggesting Whispers and Secrets. As this thread proves, it was started on a false premise, and the initial post was just incorrect. It is very easy to get the wrong end of the stick, when only half the facts are known.

 

I was only suggesting that you, or anybody else talk to Mike on Saturday so you can get all the facts. It is much easier to get a fuller picture face to face.

 

 

[Roger Rebel]

Yes HR perhaps some or you come clean on what's going on.

[Ted]

Originally Posted By: HorshamRebel

I was not suggesting Whispers and Secrets. As this thread proves, it was started on a false premise, and the initial post was just incorrect. It is very easy to get the wrong end of the stick, when only half the facts are known.

I was only suggesting that you, or anybody else talk to Mike on Saturday so you can get all the facts. It is much easier to get a fuller picture face to face.

All it needs is a board member to confirm on here that there are no motions planned for the meeting, and that the purpose of the meeting is what it says in the notification. I really don't think that I should have to ask. If there is to be a motion, I should be told. Anything else is bizarre and worrying.

[Guest Anonymous]

The meeting is a SPECIAL GENERAL MEETING re: the Arbour Vale School site nothing else,not an E.G.M.for which two weeks notice is required. Read and understand simple English

[Ted]

Originally Posted By: Anonymous

Read and understand simple English

I did, and that's what concerned me.

Three people associated with the trust all saying that something was afoot.

I saw, I read and I understood.

[Roger Rebel]

I was thinking as an old pensioner with a broken washing machine, do you think that if I hinted to Mike Lightfoot that I am broke he would offer to give me a fer Quid from the trust?

[brighton_rebel]

Maybe he would if it would shut you up moaning!

[Roger Rebel]

I 'll tell you something that would, if people were more honest and straight forward as to what's going on.

[Amber Rebel]

Originally Posted By: Roger Rebel

I was thinking as an old pensioner with a broken washing machine, do you think that if I hinted to Mike Lightfoot that I am broke he would offer to give me a fer Quid from the trust?

i might be missing something here and im sure people will put me right on here if the trust dont own the club why should it continually bankroll the club, usually if the owners of a football club cant afford to put money in the decent thing to do would be to offer transfer of ownership to i.e the trust/fans or look to sell the club, i know the club have no assets but surely there must be someone who would be interested in investing, i know people are going to say investment will come with the ground project which is true enough,but that is still someway down the line.

[Sue]

Roger how much more honest and straight forward do you want it. You posted that you understood the owners have been cap in hand to the Trust to bail them out for a few weeks. I have told you that is not the case, are you doubting my honesty now.

[Roger Rebel]

You have hit the nail on the head AR, if the owners can't fund the club why should the trust fund the owners?

[A Rebel and a Saint]

because otherwise we would have no club to support?

[Roger Rebel]

Saint read this post from AR

 

i might be missing something here and im sure people will put me right on here if the trust dont own the club why should it continually bankroll the club, usually if the owners of a football club cant afford to put money in the decent thing to do would be to offer transfer of ownership to i.e the trust/fans or look to sell the club, i know the club have no assets but surely there must be someone who would be interested in investing, i know people are going to say investment will come with the ground project which is true enough,but that is still someway down the line.

[Roger Rebel]

Sue if that is the case ie the club did not ask for money and don't need money. Why did the trust offer the money?

[Ian]

What I suggest somebody does is add up the amount of hours that members of the Management Committee spend working on behalf of the Club. Much of it done by people with full time jobs and families. Then multiply that substantial amount of time by ZERO because that's what they get for the privilege of being abused by petty minded people on this forum. Then tell me they aren't contributing.

[Amber Rebel]

look let me put it another way if you were the owner of a house you have to take responsibility to i.e pay the mortgage,bills,repairs,upkeep etc. you may or may not get help from relatives and friends in various ways from time to time and for that you would be grateful, but you would not excpect them to be practically the sole finnacer, you would then consider your postion and may decide to sell your house.

btw no offence meant.

[Amber Rebel]

Originally Posted By: Ian

What I suggest somebody does is add up the amount of hours that members of the Management Committee spend working on behalf of the Club. Much of it done by people with full time jobs and families. Then multiply that substantial amount of time by ZERO because that's what they get for the privilege of being abused by petty minded people on this forum. Then tell me they aren't contributing.

i might be wrong but i dont think anyone one here was attacking the management committee

[Roger Rebel]

Will you cut and post the part when I am abusing them Ian?

 

The Collins dictionary definition of the word abuse is as follows -

 

abuse vb. 1. to use incorrectly or improperly; misuse. 2. to maltreat. 3. to speak insultingly or cruelly to. -n. 4. improper, incorrect or excessive use. 5. maltreatment of a person; injury. 6. Insulting or course speech. 7. an evil, unjust, or corrupt practice. 8. Arch. a deception

 

If you had read my posts Ian you will see I do not mention the Management Committee, in fact you are te only one to do so.

[mrgh]

Blimey you lot, grow up.