Meet The Manager Tomorrow Night

[kevin energy]

Jagstrust meeting with Archie 7.30 tomorrow as in 7th December wednedsday at the Community Central Hall

[lady-isobel-barnett]

Jagstrust meeting with Archie 7.30 tomorrow as in 7th December wednedsday at the Community Central Hall

 

A well publicised event?

[potty trained]

The Jags Trust website hasnt had any updates since April!

 

I think its fair to assume they have no interest in increasing their membership. The Trust Board have given up, haven't they?

 

They havent tweeted since october 2014.

Edited December 6, 2016 by potty trained

[javeajag]

What's the jags trust ?

[ian_mac]

Is it open to non members? In fact, will I be able to join tonight if I turn up?

[lady-isobel-barnett]

Is it open to non members? In fact, will I be able to join tonight if I turn up?

 

Fairly certain you'll be able to. Come out the S & G about half past six tonight, turn left into Trossachs St and join the back of the queue.

[Pinhead]

Time for the jags trust to fold and hand their shares back

[Lindau]

Any juicy bits from Archies meet the fans? Injury updates, potential signings, his thoughts on being bottom of the league. Any morsel would be appreciated!

[Fearchar]

Time for the jags trust to fold and hand their shares back

Why not? They could hand over the shares to PropCo, so that the "leap of faith" claque can cheer on a self-appointed group of rich people whose sense of entitlement can shine a path into the future for the club. After all, it's worked so well in the past, hasn't it?

[ian_mac]

Fearchar - was it not the trust themselves that encouraged a "leap of faith" that brought an end to the 1876 fund? From my memory it was a serious amount of proxy votes from the North West bus that won the vote in favour of dissolving the 1876 fund and merging with the centenary fund? The trust completely neutered themselves and drove away a lot of good proactive people in the process and that's why they now find themselves in the position they are in.

 

You seem to be the only one who ever sticks up for the JT on here so can you tell me what it is they are actually doing these days? It would seem to me that they are not functioning in any way shape or form.

[potty trained]

David Beattie made the request for members to take a Leap of Faith.

 

Quite a few on the Trust Board backed it during the meeting, including a fantastical power point presentation of pie in the sky figures demonstrating just how greener the grass was if the Trust neutered their 1876 Club.

 

Another Trust Board member gave a presentation, but that was even more bizarre and came across as a self congratulatory PR exercise.

 

Then Yes, The NW bus proxy secured the Leap of Faith was complete.

 

And as you say, that was that. The Trust lost all credibility with a lot of proactive and potentially proactive members.

 

To date, I don't think the club has kept it's side of the deal.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

David Beattie made the request for members to take a Leap of Faith.

 

Quite a few on the Trust Board backed it during the meeting, including a fantastical power point presentation of pie in the sky figures demonstrating just how greener the grass was if the Trust neutered their 1876 Club.

 

Another Trust Board member gave a presentation, but that was even more bizarre and came across as a self congratulatory PR exercise.

 

Then Yes, The NW bus proxy secured the Leap of Faith was complete.

 

And as you say, that was that. The Trust lost all credibility with a lot of proactive and potentially proactive members.

 

To date, I don't think the club has kept it's side of the deal.

 

That's the way I saw it. There was also a far larger turnout that evening. Folk that I'd never seen attend other meetings before. I can't say after as I was fairly sickened with the outcome. It's stretching the imagination too far to believe that the Centenary Fund has been anywhere close to the success the 1876 Fund would've been.

[Willjag]

It's been unfortunate what's happened with the Trust. There was an opportunity to make it what it should be, however those that took up the posts of responsibility bent at the first signs of pressure from the old board and undone a lot of good work done by those that were seeking change. It seems now to have totally regressed to what it was prior to then but with even less stake in the running of the Club. If it were to disappear, would anyone notice?

[Willjag]

Just to add. I know one Chairman of the resurgent Trust at the time did do a lot of good things and communicated to the rest of the support well, I don't include him in the statement above but there were another couple that were too soft.

[Willjag]

As for the vote on the night, collecting the voting papers I was slightly taken aback at the amount of proxy votes I was handed at the time! Then there was the Trust representatives backing the Club and one of the deal breakers was if it got passed that night the Trust would get their insignia in the Club sign! The impression I got was that some Trust members just wanted rid of the responsibility and hassle of running the 1876 Club and were determined to let the Club have it at any cost and maybe also because other Trust members wanted to keep it!

 

Anyway, just wouldn't say it was the NW bus contingent that were solely to blame for how the vote went.

[sandy]

It's always interesting to see folk look back with the benefit of hindsight and criticise elected JTB members without knowing the facts we had at our disposal at the time and extent of the discussions we had.

 

There was actually a paper prepared by the Chair proposing that we drive a harder bargain around things like the emerging & useful1876 Club. But one JTB member persuasively put forward the 'leap of faith' argument, then it came down to a democratic vote of wider members. I think the majority of JT reps at the time had at least some reservations about the deal, but that one rep seemed to have the inside track on things. And he spoke with passion on the night.

 

We trusted him. History may judge that trust more harshly. But the fact remains that the elected reps then did put the decision in the hands of the members.

 

If a particular supporters bus gets its members to turnout in numbers, that unfortunately will (and did) influence outcomes.

 

But that is how democracy works. If more opposing members had cast proxy votes, there would have been a different outcome that evening.

[ian_mac]

I would love to know how exactly those proxy votes were gathered.

[Willjag]

Ian, I gathered a few proxy votes from ptfc.net members, they were not all voting the same way as I recall. I guess I was just a bit shocked to see a stack of proxy votes being handed in by just one other person. Just for clarity I'm not talking hundreds here. But enough to perhaps make a difference with the number of votes on the night. Remember also, those votes could have been a split either way.

 

Sandy, you're correct there was quite a persuasive speech made on the night and perhaps I'm wrong, but I thought the person that made that speech was the JT Chair at the time? It was someone entirely different who thought the Jags Trust emblem in the Club banner for the new scheme was a good thing! I remember thinking at the time I thought it was ridiculous that someone thought that was such an important factor to even mention it!

[Fearchar]

I would love to know how exactly those proxy votes were gathered.

 

It's not unreasonable to suggest that the Board/David Beattie saw the opportunity to form a caucus which would swing the decision. The result, which is entirely in line with what any board wants (they are essentially groups opposed to any whiff of democracy, but perfectly prepared to use democratic means to exclude it), is the emasculation of the only independent body capable of representing fans' interests. That's all history now, though.

[Willjag]

That situation at the time was highly unlikely Fearcher.

[Fearchar]

I don't think so, Will, given what we now know of David Beattie's health at the time. My suspicion is that he wanted to follow the example of Gretna, but with lasting success as his legacy. However, he has lasted longer and the board has not lived up to its optimistic start (not to mention the string of reboots that have amounted to overblown marketing twaddle - real football, TAG and the rest of the clishmaclavers). The manager has also proved to be hugely popular with the fans, almost regardless of results, which restricts the board's options.

 

Looking forward, the fans' stake cannot lie in the board's pet advisory body, even if it's dressed up as representing fans, because it won't be allowed to provide an outlet for dissent. The Jags Trust has not just been emasculated, but its shareholding has been diluted (despite years of claims that new shares could not be issued); as pt said, the board has not kept its side of the bargain, failing to allocate shares to the Jags Trust as agreed. Sandy rightly said of the JT decision, "that is how democracy works" but, sadly, it has militated against the wishes of the majority, which surely are to see a successful football club with significant influence from the fans.

[sandy]

Ian, I gathered a few proxy votes from ptfc.net members, they were not all voting the same way as I recall. I guess I was just a bit shocked to see a stack of proxy votes being handed in by just one other person. Just for clarity I'm not talking hundreds here. But enough to perhaps make a difference with the number of votes on the night. Remember also, those votes could have been a split either way.

 

Sandy, you're correct there was quite a persuasive speech made on the night and perhaps I'm wrong, but I thought the person that made that speech was the JT Chair at the time? It was someone entirely different who thought the Jags Trust emblem in the Club banner for the new scheme was a good thing! I remember thinking at the time I thought it was ridiculous that someone thought that was such an important factor to even mention it!

 

Will, it was the JT Club Board rep who made that speech. I don't remember the emblem thing; I agree it seems an insignificant factor in the wider debate at that time.

[Willjag]

Of course. I was forgetting the JT Chairman and the Board Rep weren't the same person.

[sandy]

Of course. I was forgetting the JT Chairman and the Board Rep weren't the same person.

 

Indeed. And the latter had a big influence on what the JTB recommended that evening.

[jagfox]

Jags Trust, such a contradiction of terms...