Resignation

[Southport - TOWNER]

Quote:

Southport - TOWNER said:
Having served the club and board of ETFC for number of years, I think the time has come to stand down and allow the inner circle who run the club to have their way. I feel that being a supporter is not conducive with being a member of the current board. I will continue to support the club, but I can not support the current board.

I stand by my original comment.
The inner circle run the club, and to clarify, that is without any consultation with other members of the board.

I would not speak for other ex directors, but I think you will find they would agree that the word "consultation" is alien, to the great booted and suited.


Anyway, HAPPY CHRISTMAS, and see you all Boxing Day


<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bisou.gif" alt="" />

[Sponsor of Beer]

Is it the case then that all Directors expect to be consulted about all matters; surely that's not the intention when specialist portfolios are created and allocated. Nor is it practical, unless the Board is in almost permanant session.

 

As an example, after Saturday's game I negotiated for the football club & supporters club to share the cost of a coach for the Reserves Middx Premier Cup game at Ashford Town on 9 January. Is it really suggested that a full consultation should have taken place? Perhaps the supporters club should have convened a meeting and postal ballot, too!

[Hawkeye Pierce]

Originally Posted By: Sponsor of Beer

Is it the case then that all Directors expect to be consulted about all matters; surely that's not the intention when specialist portfolios are created and allocated. Nor is it practical, unless the Board is in almost permanant session.

As an example, after Saturday's game I negotiated for the football club & supporters club to share the cost of a coach for the Reserves Middx Premier Cup game at Ashford Town on 9 January. Is it really suggested that a full consultation should have taken place? Perhaps the supporters club should have convened a meeting and postal ballot, too!

At last - nice to see you Sponsor!

I don't think I said the inner circle were just directors? Quite often you knew before the board didn't you? Nothing to do with who you were friends with?

As per the example you gave no nobody expects day to day issues to be dealt with in Board there was always a measure of empowerment. But when errors and exceptions or new matters of signficance by-passed the Board. Maybe changing a football kickoff on Boxing Day for example to 12:00? It may have been an error, it certainly is an exception that not all were happy about when other fund raising activities may have been proposed?

[Hawkeye Pierce]

Well the Programme folding Director went on strike today with fans folding their own programmes. What is the world coming too!

[Gazza]

Originally Posted By: Rhymenreason

Well the Programme folding Director went on strike today with fans folding their own programmes. What is the world coming too!

As its christmas maybe he deserves a day off!

[Arkwright]

Originally Posted By: The Southern Dandy

Quote:

Arkwright said:

Quote:

Mr Happy said:

Quote:

The Horse'sMouth said:
I disagree Invisible One.

We have heard numerous mention of a so called Inner Circle within the club. My opinion is that these so called Inner Circle members have to be voted in by the supporters. If Society members are unhappy about the Inner Circle they have the ability if they so wish to vote them out.

So what I am saying is if "Outer Circle" members want to change the direction of the club then they should stand for election to the board en mass at the next opportunity.

It really is a case of "put up or shut up"

You cannot vote board members out. You can only vote board members in. If there are not enough society members standing for election then those board members standing for re-election are automatically elected. you may put the point that if you are not happy then you should stand. However, there are plenty of fans who do have certain views on how the club is run who just do not have the time to give to act as a director. that does not mean that they should not have a point of view or make comments. At the end of the day, the board should answer to the society members and not the members to the board.

It's good to know that someone who writes in the local press is fully supporting free speech....

The man with the icon of a revolutionary chastises THM and mentions writing in the press...more than a hint of jealousy from the bumbling shopkeeper, methinks...

How rude, a bit like me making assumptions about you. No my anon little Townie friend, His column is excellent in my opinion, that wasn't the point.

[theabbeyabbott]

Can you put more quotes in there please?

[Southport - TOWNER]

Originally Posted By: Sponsor of Beer

Is it the case then that all Directors expect to be consulted about all matters; .......!

you are been schooled very well by your buddies, as you manage to quote verbatim.

But is it also the case that as directors of a limited company, that when information is asked for it should be shared, and not the same old line trotted out about not all directors having to be consulted.

[MbrunoB]

Originally Posted By: abbeynut

Can you put more quotes in there please?

We can only try...

[andyetfc]

We are all very trying!

[MbrunoB]

Some more than others!!

[Mr Happy]

I would just like to add to Southport's comment about info being given to serving directors. I have been a director of three companies and a charity that was also limited. Should any major problems occur with a limited company be they financial or other then all directors can be held to account by Companies House. As such, any questions raised by any director should be answered by fellow directors.

[Hawkeye Pierce]

For me despite our differences of approach I still believe that the Supporters Trust is STILL the best business model for a football club. Imagine a single owner with own agenda, it is the stuff of de ja vu nightmares.

[littlehampton]

Not sure what Southport 'Towner' means by the inner circle. He has not made clear his real reason for resigning. No one is bigger than the Club, and in a democratically run Club, some Board members have, of necessity, to shoulder more responsibility than others. And you can't jump with the horses and run with the hounds. Certain Board matters have to remain confidential, and are not for public consumption on the terraces, in the bar, or on the fans forum. There are a lot of frustrations serving on a Board, but it is a privilege, not a right, and everyone elected should feel proud to serve and contribute to a worthwhile cause.

[andyetfc]

'Certain Board matters have to remain confidential.'

 

But to whom?

[Sponsor of Beer]

'you are been schooled very well by your buddies, as you manage to quote verbatim'

 

Afraid not. No schooling required. Just an application of common sense.

 

Isn't the reality of this whole debate that, irrespective of the business model, an established club doesn't need such a large Board of Directors. Everybody can do their bit, to whatever degree they are able, without being a Director (which quite frankly doesn't seem to be worth the grief if this thread is anything to go by).

[theabbeyabbott]

Originally Posted By: andyetfc

'Certain Board matters have to remain confidential.'

But to whom?

er..... to the board?

[The Invisible Man]

Precisely! Not to some of the Board!

 

I think this is where we came in!

[theabbeyabbott]

Shall we continue? !!!!

[enfield T]

The grievance of those that have resigned from the board,is that half of the board were not privy to the plans of the club.Ie..The most senior board members were(are)keeping plans secret not only from the fans but from half of the boardroom as well.

 

Maybe they were correct in keeping things from fellow board members who frequent this forum and who chat behind the goal? But that indicates that the current boardroom structure is not working,and we should be looking to create a 4-5 man boardroom with general committee of 8-12 working alongside them