Jump to content

Caldwell and Low update from PTFC


westertonjagfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 12/30/2018 at 3:26 PM, allyo said:

Low and Britton getting an awful lot of stick. Some of it probably warranted but let's face it, if the team was doing better they'd be under a lot less scrutiny. So for all that the PR may be poor or the Chesterfield statement embarrassing, it's really their choice of manager that is letting them down. 

So i admit there's an element of devil's advocate here, but (without benefit of hindsight obviously) was Caldwell such a bad appointment? At the time I was cautiously optimistic. His previous record wasn't great but he's young enough to learn, he's worked at a high level with good people, he obviously gave a good interview (for all it's been ridiculed since), probably demonstrated fresh ideas and hunger to succeed, and wasn't one of the "usual suspects" that so many on here were so keen to avoid. He seemed at the time to tick a lot of boxes; and when you look back at the forum the appointment was generally welcomed.

In their position you have to make a decision and hope for the best. It hasn't worked out, but since the appointment the team performance has been entirely out of their hands. 

So questioning and criticism is valid. But my question is, are they really to blame for the shambles we've become?  To the (at times vitriolic) level that seems to be the consensus on this forum? 

Sorry, coming to this thread a tad late. 

 

Don't believe it's vitriolic. Reasonable and measured, defendable and to the point. That doesn't make it viriolic, that suggests it's random, thoughless, personal. Deffo not. Tye chair and manager have performed abysmally and it's our role as fans to tell them so. We should be far mor vitriolic imho

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, KemoAvdiu said:

The role of the Trust really does have to be examined and questioned. I have posted on this before, and to repeat I don’t mean any of this as criticism of the volunteers running the Trust, but it is entirely invisible and seems wholly designed to act as a patsy to the board. I think I’m right in saying both the Chief Exec and the Chairman sit on the Trust board (plus maybe one other Director?). For a fans’ Trust this is not credible.

If the Weirs’ involvement in the club is predicated upon certain individuals being involved in the club and/or a non-credible Trust holding shares then that really isn’t a sustainable involvement. 

The PTFC Trust has 3 Club Trustees & 5 Supporters Trustees, this will rise to 6 by the end of the Jan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, KemoAvdiu said:

Do you think it’s credible for a third of the trustees on a supporters trust to be club directors?

Irrespective of our current, and hopefully short term, travails, KemoAvdiu is I think right to raise the issue of the operation of the Trust. 

Does anyone have a copy of the Trust's constitution they could post here?  How is the composition of trustees determined?  How are Trustees elected?  If push comes to shove, how does the Trust decide how to vote on any crucial resolution at a shareholders' meeting (for example use/cost of the new training ground)?  Does Low determine this?

The Trust and the Weirs between them hold 29% of the Club's shares, which  means they have a veto over any substantive changes the Board may wish to make.  The Weirs should be true to their aim of ensuring the fans have a say in the running of the Club and give the Trust a seat on the Board, with that person chosen by trustees elected by the fans.   The Weirs could still influence the Club through their own shareholding via Low as Chair and by their powers of persuasion, but there should be a much clearer seperation between the Board and the Trust.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You could interpret it that way, equally of course you could view it that the 19% issued to the new trust when combined with The Jags Trust shareholding gives the supporters veto over any substantive changes the Board wish to make. Interpreting it that way, puts an entirely different slant on it!

Beattie said at the time of the establishment of the trust that it was to "give the fans a greater say in the running of the club".

I think rather than criticise the trust we all ought to be sure we are cognisant of what it does, who is involved, and what it is supposed to do - maybe even get involved yourself/ourselves.

I am not lecturing anyone, as I have been guilty of not doing any of the above myself!

I do not believe Colin Weir designed this for Machiavellian reasons, I believe he did it for altruistic reasons. If it is not fulfilling its potential, or is not fit for purpose in its present role, that is up to us to change that from within IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I raised the point at the Meet the Manager night that I’d heard nothing from the trust. They said might be down to contact details held by the club which isn’t the case as they’ve been the same for years. 

They were looking for someone else to be voted on but I’ve heard nothing since. For a body meant to be communicating between the fans and the club I have to say I’m not impressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jaf said:

 

You could interpret it that way, equally of course you could view it that the 19% issued to the new trust when combined with The Jags Trust shareholding gives the supporters veto over any substantive changes the Board wish to make. Interpreting it that way, puts an entirely different slant on it!

Beattie said at the time of the establishment of the trust that it was to "give the fans a greater say in the running of the club".

I think rather than criticise the trust we all ought to be sure we are cognisant of what it does, who is involved, and what it is supposed to do - maybe even get involved yourself/ourselves.

I am not lecturing anyone, as I have been guilty of not doing any of the above myself!

I do not believe Colin Weir designed this for Machiavellian reasons, I believe he did it for altruistic reasons. If it is not fulfilling its potential, or is not fit for purpose in its present role, that is up to us to change that from within IMO.

Good post, Niccolo would approve i'm sure.

I am also guilty of not getting involved, but perhaps this is down to a lack transparency or poor advertising of what the trust do/can do/want to do. Principally, how does a fan get onto the trust board, how does the ordinary fan who is not capable or able to join the trust, get their point/position accross to the board or trust. Is there a vote for ordinary game by game paying fans to influence process?

I do not for a minute believe anyone at the club is trying to suppress the fans voices, especially not the Weirs though their appointment/choice of Chairperson is flawed as is evidenced by recent decisions and her over ruling gerreeeee's input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the points you make JAF, and I am not criticising either the Weirs or the Trust.  But without its own voice on the Board, it does not meet Beattie's nor the Weir's aim of giving the fans a "greater say" without the risk of the fans' elected trustees having thier views filtered through the Board's trustees.

Edited by eljaggo
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One way communication appears to be a recurring theme that surfaces far too often on here. Perhaps a pinned thread that logs posters' specifics of such "no replies", whether Club or Trust wouldn't go amiss? Jagfox's recent post being a good example of such a specific. 

Failure to reply to fans isn't clever and could for all we know on occasions become a case of straw and camel's back. Supporters with skills can be getting overlooked, suggestions that could be of benefit to us all overlooked, prospective season ticket sales lost to apathy etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

One way communication appears to be a recurring theme that surfaces far too often on here. Perhaps a pinned thread that logs posters' specifics of such "no replies", whether Club or Trust wouldn't go amiss? Jagfox's recent post being a good example of such a specific. 

Failure to reply to fans isn't clever and could for all we know on occasions become a case of straw and camel's back. Supporters with skills can be getting overlooked, suggestions that could be of benefit to us all overlooked, prospective season ticket sales lost to apathy etc.

Agree with this.

More specifically to the Trust, it is totally legitimate to say that if people want to criticise then they should get involved. But that doesn’t address the issue of how the Trust is constituted and why one-third of Trustees are club appointments.

Again, I do not want to criticise those volunteers who are involved already as these kind of things do take a lot of commitment and it’s not great when you get random folk sniping on internet forums. But there is clearly a lot more that can be done to communicate the existence of the Trust to fans and to fulfil its stated purpose. 

At the Meet the Manager night the main activity of the Trust so far seemed to be (as far as I could tell) managing the Buy a Brick scheme. Not to belittle this, but I do wonder if the limited time that trustees have to devote could be better spent on activities that better fulfil the purpose of representing fans views on the running of the club. I’m sure the brick scheme is important to some people, but it isn’t something that - I would imagine - most fans care an awful lot about or has the potential to influence the direction of the club. 

Again, none of this is intended as a criticism of those who have put themselves forward. What they do is influenced by how the Trust was constituted and by the club’s attitude towards it. 

Edited by KemoAvdiu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 1 John Lambie said:

Details were published in a recent matchday programme & on the PTFC Trust Facebook /Twitter pages.

You aren't voted on - there is no Election - the statement made by them about elections is incorrect - you apply & a vetting Committee which Im assuming includes someone from the Club Board selects what they deem a suitable Trustee who matches there specification 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, jagfox said:

I raised the point at the Meet the Manager night that I’d heard nothing from the trust. They said might be down to contact details held by the club which isn’t the case as they’ve been the same for years. 

They were looking for someone else to be voted on but I’ve heard nothing since. For a body meant to be communicating between the fans and the club I have to say I’m not impressed.

There is no Vote - Members do not participate in the Election - its decided by a Vetting Committee 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, eljaggo said:

Irrespective of our current, and hopefully short term, travails, KemoAvdiu is I think right to raise the issue of the operation of the Trust. 

Does anyone have a copy of the Trust's constitution they could post here?  How is the composition of trustees determined?  How are Trustees elected?  If push comes to shove, how does the Trust decide how to vote on any crucial resolution at a shareholders' meeting (for example use/cost of the new training ground)?  Does Low determine this?

The Trust and the Weirs between them hold 29% of the Club's shares, which  means they have a veto over any substantive changes the Board may wish to make.  The Weirs should be true to their aim of ensuring the fans have a say in the running of the Club and give the Trust a seat on the Board, with that person chosen by trustees elected by the fans.   The Weirs could still influence the Club through their own shareholding via Low as Chair and by their powers of persuasion, but there should be a much clearer seperation between the Board and the Trust.

There are No Elections 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no 'election' to become a Co-Opted Trustee, standard practice I would suggest. An election did recently take place, where all season ticket holders who met the voting criteria as set out in the Trust Deed, were invited to vote & made aware of the vote via post/email. The results of this were published in Saturdays matchday programme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, 1 John Lambie said:

There is no 'election' to become a Co-Opted Trustee, standard practice I would suggest. An election did recently take place, where all season ticket holders who met the voting criteria as set out in the Trust Deed, were invited to vote & made aware of the vote via post/email. The results of this were published in Saturdays matchday programme.

Yes. I remember the election information coming out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

There is no Vote - Members do not participate in the Election - its decided by a Vetting Committee 

If that is the case - and I'm not doubting you - then the Supporters Trust is a sham.  Presumably a PTFC Director is therefore the proxy shareholder for the Trusts' shares and can vote on Board  resolutions/decisions without reference to the Trust.  If true, this needs sorted.  Somebody please tell me I'm talking nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps the Supporters' Trust operates on the political principles of naming - you know, how the Democratic People's Republic of Korea isn't by any stretch democratic or run by the people, is actually a dynastic kingdom by another name and doesn't really take in all of Korea either. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/5/2019 at 10:07 AM, 1 John Lambie said:

There is no 'election' to become a Co-Opted Trustee, standard practice I would suggest. An election did recently take place, where all season ticket holders who met the voting criteria as set out in the Trust Deed, were invited to vote & made aware of the vote via post/email. The results of this were published in Saturdays matchday programme.

It’s good to get this information as it’s something that I wasn’t aware of (maybe a reflection on me not noticing rather than anything else!).

From your responses I’m presuming you’re one of the trustees. If so, thanks for putting yourself forward and apologies if any of the posts on here seem critical towards yourself and your fellow trustees. That’s certainly not what any of my posts have intended.

While you’re here, could you let us know the  explanation from the club as to why the Trust doesn’t have a place on the club board? From my perspective it would be hugely beneficial for the club board, not to mention for the credibility and empowerment of the Trust. Has this issue been raised with the club at all and what was the response?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...