Fans Advisory Board: Minutes, Discussion etc ..

[Melbourne Cobbler]

As I said, personally I think it’s a pointless debate, but understand opinions may vary and hope may remain for some. As I see it the challenge is whether any new owners have an appetite for dealing with the current board, and I think that’s a long way from being conclusive. It just depends on the individuals involved and their perspective on the historical events, who knows the situation might even put some people off? The Trust Board relationship with the current owners and relevant events are likely to come up in any diligence process. So ultimately perhaps it may even affect negotiations regarding any sale, but thats pure speculation obviously.

[Horsham Cobbler]

I totally agree with this Melly.
We’re all stakeholders in things we enjoy attending, be it a football club, a theatre or a restaurant.
We’re customers.
What on earth gives the Trust the idea that we can demand things from the owners baffles me.
The FAB will never be able to not indeed should it strive to dictate, however, it can suggest, just as a feedback page on a restaurant website may allow customers to request better disabled access for example or more choice for vegetarians.
We never hear of supporters groups calling for the owners of the derngate to resign because they’ve chosen  to not upgrade the seats in a few years.

It’s Advisory by name and nature.
It benefits the club as they can base decisions on fans desires (not demands).
It benefits the fans as they can have that input regardless of whether or not the input is actioned upon.

The Trust role in keeping the owners honest was always an admirable one.
However, the consistent practice of issuing potentially libellous statements, tarring current owners with the past, has burned all bridges which is unfortunate to say the least.

I hope that one day, this whole thread is locked and never needed again…. Although somehow I doubt this will be the case.

A great post.

[TVOR]

I totally agree with this Melly.
We’re all stakeholders in things we enjoy attending, be it a football club, a theatre or a restaurant.
We’re customers.
What on earth gives the Trust the idea that we can demand things from the owners baffles me.
The FAB will never be able to not indeed should it strive to dictate, however, it can suggest, just as a feedback page on a restaurant website may allow customers to request better disabled access for example or more choice for vegetarians.
We never hear of supporters groups calling for the owners of the derngate to resign because they’ve chosen  to not upgrade the seats in a few years.

It’s Advisory by name and nature.
It benefits the club as they can base decisions on fans desires (not demands).
It benefits the fans as they can have that input regardless of whether or not the input is actioned upon.

The Trust role in keeping the owners honest was always an admirable one.
However, the consistent practice of issuing potentially libellous statements, tarring current owners with the past, has burned all bridges which is unfortunate to say the least.

I hope that one day, this whole thread is locked and never needed again…. Although somehow I doubt this will be the case.

Agree
And as I have stated previously, I hope at some point in the future we can have a Trust board who can hold the club to account whilst maintaining a professional relationship.

[Peter Frost]

The Trust's correct mandate and mission would always occasionally put a strain on the relationship with the club - The  FAB undoubtably have an easier ride in that respect and people should fully understand the difference.

Whilst strident and in my opinion unnecessarily provocative I think the relationship with the club (both current and any future owners) could have been resolved but it's obvious the point of no return was the attempted partnership with Cildara.

The normal apologists for this action have never explained what the plan was, what outcomes were expected, and other than a somewhat meaningless statements of "protecting the club" have never justified the action. If they were acting as private individuals that is acceptable but acting for a 700 plus membership it is inexcusable and the obvious conclusion was the action was simply an ill though out and arrogant  "anybody but KC/DB"

The FAB initiative is good but I strongly believe a club at our level needs a functioning Trust - but unfortunately without a significant change and the embracing some humility we are still some way off from this happening