Jags Trust Announcment (Part Two)

[Steven H]

BCG Jag will no doubt confirm one way or another, but something tells me that plan might not be on the agenda now.

 

I won't ask why.

 

Edit: in fact, I don't need to...cheered me up a bit but I'd still like to see a sweeping of the decks

Edited November 17, 2010 by Steven H

[MerryHell]

Hmm, I just don't think they get the point do they?

 

The Jags Trust board always seem to hide behind 'the constitution' as a justification for any action, no matter how unpalatable it is to any of the Jags Trust members.

 

What we really wanted/needed was a mass resignation of the remaining JT board and elections to fill the relevant positions. What we get is 'the constitution says we can just elect new people who we fancy being on the board, so that's what we'll do'. But it's worse than that - they just go ahead and have wee meetings and then inform us that that's what they've done - here's the new names, now be happy. They have a cheek to criticise the Club Board for not revealing what their programme notes are going to say - the JT board don't even inform the members that a meeting is scheduled or what was going to be discussed. Look at the news section of the JT website - three resign, another one resigns, we've had a chat and appointed three replacement members, Let the Festivities Begin!. Indeed.

 

It's interesting to see that they quote Cowan directly as a way of highlighting a time when the trust and club lived in 'harmony'.

 

For me it's also interesting (and reassuring) that the club approached David with a view to getting him more involved. It reassures me that the board really are looking for people who are articulate and seem able to easily bridge the gap between board and supporter. Stangely enough, I commend David on rejecting this advance, to me it shows an integrity that is often lacking in people of office these days. He'd be a fine trust chair. Bugger.

 

I hope the club do not get involved in a war of words with the trust now - their 'statment' makes them even less representative of the trust membership. I would have thought that Morag McHaffie, as our representative, would have been aware of our feelings on this issue and advised against such a destructive response.

 

Where do we go from here ... ?

[erty13]

As a member of the jags trust, I have never really known anything about the people left running the trust or the new co-opted board members

 

All we have is their names on the website. How about a putting on a CV and statement of why they believe the are the right people to direct and move forward the trust.

 

erty13

[Vom Itorium]

As a member of the jags trust, I have never really known anything about the people left running the trust or the new co-opted board members

 

All we have is their names on the website. How about a putting on a CV and statement of why they believe the are the right people to direct and move forward the trust.

 

erty13

Who needs CVs, Here they are...

Edited November 18, 2010 by Vom Itorium

[MerryHell]

I won't ask why.Edit: in fact, I don't need to...cheered me up a bit but I'd still like to see a sweeping of the decks

 

Aw fcuk - i've just put 2+2 together. This actually depresses me. Aw fcuk. Don't make an arse of yourself mate - you were better off trying to force an EGM. It's too late now, but REALLY? Aw fcuk. Can't you see that good people have tried and failed to reason with these people and ended up giving up. This statement was released with you on board??! In my eyes, you appear to have been bought. It makes my comments on David's integrity all the more relevant. Aw fcuk. I thought I articulated myself pretty well in my last post and now i'm reduced to this. Aw fcuk.

[Steven H]

Aw fcuk - i've just put 2+2 together. This actually depresses me. Aw fcuk. Don't make an arse of yourself mate - you were better off trying to force an EGM. It's too late now, but REALLY? Aw fcuk. Can't you see that good people have tried and failed to reason with these people and ended up giving up. This statement was released with you on board??! In my eyes, you appear to have been bought. It makes my comments on David's integrity all the more relevant. Aw fcuk. I thought I articulated myself pretty well in my last post and now i'm reduced to this. Aw fcuk.

 

Do you think he'd give us the names he already has if someone decided to take this on ?

[Big Col]

Who needs CVs, Here they are...

 

Superb!

 

Did GP take the photo?

[jags365]

Do you think he'd give us the names he already has if someone decided to take this on ?

In regards to BCG's being co-opted, I made it clear to him that if he feels that he still wants to get an SGM then that's fine by me.

 

However, if people want to email [email protected] with their names, I'm happy to build upon his list.

[erty13]

I am slightly confused. I gave BCG Jag my name. Have I been taken in by a double agent.

 

or has he been paid off

 

erty13

Edited November 18, 2010 by erty13

[Steven H]

In regards to BCG's being co-opted, I made it clear to him that if he feels that he still wants to get an SGM then that's fine by me.

 

However, if people want to email [email protected] with their names, I'm happy to build upon his list.

 

I'm not really certain about the finer details of this sort of motion...but would a JTB member be in the best position to carry out such a task? Just thinking of that old 'conflict of interest' thing...taking names to declare a vote of no confidence in yourselves. I know there are a lot of new Board members, yourself include, and imo the no confidence thing is not about them...but you're flying wi the craws now Donald.

[jags365]

I am slightly confused. I gave BCG Jag my name. Have I been taken in by a double agent.

 

or has he been paid off

 

erty13

You would need to ask him that question. However if he still wants to present the required number of names (10% of members) then there's nothing that anyone can do to prevent an SGM being called.

[Big Col]

I've just read the statement again and I still can't believe that so called mature adults in a position of responsibility published it in the name of JT members.

 

That just cut off the JT from PTFC completely in my opinion. Well done.

 

Who is the new JT chairperson anyway?

Edited November 18, 2010 by Big Col

[Tom Hosie]

It may be the only thing that gets the message through that the members are NOT interested in this tits-for-tat nonsense at a time when the club is in peril.

 

Summed up perfectly.

 

As much as I hate a lot of what is going on at Dundee at present I couldn't fail to be impressed by the fact that in a relatively short space of time they had raised over £100,000 to help save their club.

 

Now just imagine for a second that the shit were to hit the fan at Firhill. Now, I'm not suggesting that it is about to but given that the Club have admitted that they face some fairly challenging times it's proably safe to say that cash is a little tight at present.

 

In these challenging times do we have an effective Supporters organisation that can get everyone pulling together to help the club, difference of opinions on so many different subjects aside, that we all love?

 

No.

 

We have a Supporters organisation seemingly obsessed with a Board Rep position that nobody put themselves forward for. A supporters organisation that issue long statements that appear to alienate their members further. For goodness sake it seems the Club Board are more in tune with the fans' views than our own Supporters Association is.

 

I care too much and devote far too much time to this football club. Football isn't "more important than life and death" but it is still something that I care very much about. I want this special club's future to be a long and bright one.

 

Our Supporters Association should be at the forefront of that. Working alongside the Club to make us as strong as we can be. It angers and saddens me that it is anything but that. We deserve better.

 

Sorry for the late night rant.

 

PS Forgot the JT are producing Christmas cards. Our future is safe.

[1971]

Summed up perfectly.

 

As much as I hate a lot of what is going on at Dundee at present I couldn't fail to be impressed by the fact that in a relatively short space of time they had raised over £100,000 to help save their club.

 

Now just imagine for a second that the shit were to hit the fan at Firhill. Now, I'm not suggesting that it is about to but given that the Club have admitted that they face some fairly challenging times it's proably safe to say that cash is a little tight at present.

 

In these challenging times do we have an effective Supporters organisation that can get everyone pulling together to help the club, difference of opinions on so many different subjects aside, that we all love?

 

No.

 

We have a Supporters organisation seemingly obsessed with a Board Rep position that nobody put themselves forward for. A supporters organisation that issue long statements that appear to alienate their members further. For goodness sake it seems the Club Board are more in tune with the fans' views than our own Supporters Association is.

 

I care too much and devote far too much time to this football club. Football isn't "more important than life and death" but it is still something that I care very much about. I want this special club's future to be a long and bright one.

 

Our Supporters Association should be at the forefront of that. Working alongside the Club to make us as strong as we can be. It angers and saddens me that it is anything but that. We deserve better.

 

Sorry for the late night rant.

 

PS Forgot the JT are producing Christmas cards. Our future is safe.

 

Absolutely spot on. The statement from the Jags Trust is an absolute embarassment from an absolute embarassment of an organisation. Just pathetic.

[PaleGreySky]

The Club Board are right. The trust is all talk, and it gives the impression of being full of individuals who want to be more important than they are. I used to be a member, but I didn't see what difference it is making.

 

The new club board could have better representation of the views of the fans through open meetings in the Aitken Suite every 2/3 months or so. Any organised representation seems to go to people's heads. How many times can someone use the word 'constitutional' in one message?

[sandy]

What a disappointing statement from the Trust.

 

What's the point of a sabre-rattling, negative and confused rant at the Board over one issue (Club Board Rep), when David Beattie has shown willingness to have fan input behind the scenes at Firhill ?

 

This is hardly going to get the Trust accepted again within the Boardroom.

[B.C.G. JAG]

I was gathering a list to force an EGM. I still am.

 

The number of names on that list currently falls short of being able to force change and so I agreed to be co-opted to the Board and argue that case within. As yet I haven't met my new colleagues so I can only speak for myself here. However, speaking very much in that personal capacity, there is clearly some notable depth of feeling in this thread and I would suggest than anyone who who felt strongly about change contacted me to add their name to the list if they felt an EGM and Vote Of No Confidence was appropriate.

 

I am also happy to receive any PM's you might want to send me in response to the Statement issued by The Trust.

 

I didn't agree to join up to prop up anyone or anything but just to represent the Support. However, it is important to highlight here, I haven't been elected by anyone and the number of names I have on my list fall short of any kind of mandate. I certainly have no problem with having my candidacy tested at an election and personally would feel happier if it was.

 

The list is short, but you're welcome to add your name to it. Even if the required number isn't reached, it will be a pretty good barometer of the feeling in the support - and listening to people is something The Trust needs to improve on.

 

Bob Carey-Grieve

Edited November 18, 2010 by B.C.G. JAG

[Trotter]

I gave up on the JT after the 1876/centenary fund joke of a vote - tom and david had got me slightly interested and supportive again, but since they left, and even more-so tonight with this 'statement', there is no way i could ever join the JT or say it is representative of me, or even speaks the same language as me.

 

This about sums me up word for word and i'm guessing a good majority of the folk that post on here, especially if B.C.G. Jag hasn't been able to get the 20 names.

 

I was at the open meeting at the Uni a few weeks back now and after that night very nearly parted with my £10, maybe I should've as I would have had my name on the 20. But, here's my quest. How many approx are we short of calling an EGM (or if you don't want to post that info on here....)

 

If, and a big if as I realise I can't speak for others, some of the lapsed members on here were to rejoin today or tomorrow, could we put our names towards the 20 needed?

[GrantB]

I was gathering a list to force an EGM. I still am.

 

The number of names on that list currently falls short of being able to force change and so I agreed to be co-opted to the Board and argue that case within. As yet I haven't met my new colleagues so I can only speak for myself here. However, speaking very much in that personal capacity, there is clearly some notable depth of feeling in this thread and I would suggest than anyone who who felt strongly about change contacted me to add their name to the list if they felt an EGM and Vote Of No Confidence was appropriate.

 

I am also happy to receive any PM's you might want to send me in response to the Statement issued by The Trust.

 

I didn't agree to join up to prop up anyone or anything but just to represent the Support. However, it is important to highlight here, I haven't been elected by anyone and the number of names I have on my list fall short of any kind of mandate. I certainly have no problem with having my candidacy tested at an election and personally would feel happier if it was.

 

The list is short, but you're welcome to add your name to it. Even if the required number isn't reached, it will be a pretty good barometer of the feeling in the support - and listening to people is something The Trust needs to improve on.

 

Bob Carey-Grieve

 

What's the position for non JT members to express their dissatisfaction?

[B.C.G. JAG]

What's the position for non JT members to express their dissatisfaction?

Any legal procedure needs to be via actual signed up members, however, if you have any thoughts you'd like me to pass on, I'm happy to do so.

[Fellow Traveller]

BCG Jag - could you share with us who specifically invited you on to the JTB and what reasoning they gave you as to why you should accept? (For the record, I think it was a horrible mistake, but totally accept your good motives in doing it.)

[Junior]

After that statement the JT is pretty much dead in its current format , in my eyes anyway.

 

How can anyone actually put that kind of bullshit out and think that it was constructive is beyond me. Anything that has the word FACTS in it as an argument point is just doomed to failure.

[stolenscone]

I can understand the frustrations that led to this statement being made, but I don't think that it makes a positive contribution to the wellbeing of the football club.

 

My personal view is that the properly appointed supporters' representative should be afforded a place on the club board, but if that is not forthcoming, then you need to find a way to work productively with what you've got to achieve the common goal of supporting the football club and representing its supporters. Oh well.

[Robert Dunn's Potential]

Does anyone know the total membership number of the JT so we know what 10% is? I appreciate that I could email the membership secretary but it's too early in the morning for satire.

[Fellow Traveller]

My personal view is that the properly appointed supporters' representative should be afforded a place on the club board, but if that is not forthcoming, then you need to find a way to work productively with what you've got to achieve the common goal of supporting the football club and representing its supporters. Oh well.

 

David, you stepped down before you could answer the Q&A questions submitted via the forum, but maybe you could do one for old times. Kieron stated at the Trust AGM that an agreement to a free place on the board in perpetuity was one of the great achievements of the Trust, gained in return for giving up the 1876 Club. I wanted to know if that agreement was ever secured in writing and, if so, could the Trust make its wording available to the members as it obviously has a bearing on the Trust's argument now about Morag. You can't personally make it available, but you should be able to confirm whether or not it exists. Everyone's been very evasive on this one so far.