GAS Board or Trust Scrutiny plus Supporters Umbrella Group?

[Greenrod]

Excellent proposal. And addresses a goodly number of issues. Even the fact that there have been no responses to your post points to how moribund the issue of the Gasboard is to most supporters and even to those involved in the process.

Thanks LMP - I agree that a lack of response may be indicative of the rather tired nature of the process. Then I saw the heap of responses bur see that, once again, one or two anonynous posters have polluted this thread, as many others, with their standard negativity.

Sadly, PASOTI is becoming much devalued by this and is diminishing in its usefulness and interest as a result.

You really shouldn't post your thoughts and ideas on Pasoti if you think people won't agree or are negative. This is a democracy, everyone has an opinion whether named or anonymous.

 

[grovehill]

By it's very nature, a Supervisory board set up at the instigation of the owner of the club is going to struggle to be anything like truly independent.

The Trust, in terms of questioning the owner is also unlikely to be independent due to so many of the same people being involved with the trust and the CP'ers. Most of Pasoti also seems to fall into the "Brent can do no wrong" camp.

If supporters (not just those who post on internet fan sites) want a group to represent them/scrutinize the actions of then club than a truly
"Independent Supporters Group" set up and run without any involvement of Club, Trust, Internet geeks etc. would be required.

you seem to have a lot to say for yourself,what you waiting for?,,,or is it just talk with you.i suppose to start your own group your gona need a couple of mates,is that whats holding you back?

Lets do it!

Me, Freathy and Penzance Pirate as the ISC.

 

[Anonymous]

Stick to moaning Ernie, that's all you're good at.

 

[Green Rhino]

You really shouldn't post your thoughts and ideas on Pasoti if you think people won't agree or are negative. This is a democracy, everyone has an opinion whether named or anonymous.

I am happy to have a discussion with anyone if they engage in a reasonable way, whether or not they are anonynmous and I agree 100% that such disagreements add richness. I put the OP up precisely to encourage debate, pro and con.

My point was that the poisonous trolling of a small number of (anonymous) posters makes the whole thing tiresome. Trolling is not debate it is juvenile wrecking.

 

[grovehill]

Stick to moaning Ernie, that's all you're good at.

"Milkmen" are notorious for being good at things other than moaning-Distasteful comment removed by Site Admin

 

[Miles Bidgood]

I have recently been giving much thought to the issue of the GASB and I am finding it difficult to support for the following reasons:

1/ After attempts to become involved I have had doors shut in my face, this is not democratic, any fan has a voice and people that have shown a desire to have an input should be welcomed with open arms, the steering group should be open to any fan who wishes to take part. (yes no matter how large) votes can be taken at such meetings by a democratic show of hands provided an agenda has been drawn and properly advertised. Venues for such meetings should be acquired on the grounds of those that have shown an interest in attending, after all this was billed as the forum for ALL fans to have an input. I am sure there are plenty of social club function rooms that would be only to glad to host such an event at 1100 on a Saturday, they would be glad of the business.

2/ The thread on PASOTI that started knocking the Trust ( I am a member) leads me to believe there is an agenda for power rather than stability. I am not accusing anyone that is part of the steering group of being directly involved in trying to harm the Trust but it is starting to look like things are pulling in separate directions.

3/ Whilst I somewhat agree with Peter Ryan's letter saying that the steering group proposal should be to split any proposed GASB.

An independent, formalised oversight of strategic issues surrounding PAFC’s continued existence and overall business strategy. This is precisely what the Argyle Fans’ Trust was set up to do and its unique independence protects it from interference. I believe that the Trust should seek meetings with James Brent and the rest of the Board to establish the modus operandi of such a scrutiny arrangement, including boundaries and confidentiality issues, alongside an enthusiastic take-up of the 20% share offer that James has made.

And that remaining issues are those that GASB should take up.

An umbrella group representing supporters of all persuasions (I am far from persuaded of the mythical 20,000 that David Wheeler talks about – some or many of them will come/return according to our league position and the club’s commercial/marketing effectiveness – they can join a supporters’ group/s as they wish then). This umbrella group could meet a few times a year to discuss operational issues. I don’t believe the Trust should have any role in this (of course Trust members could be part of it e.g. via Senior Greens or the Plymouth Supporters Club). This umbrella group instead should a combination of elected and representative (drawn from existing groups, maybe with one or two places reserved for those who don’t want to be part of / represented by, these groups who would be elected directly).

I find it difficult to understand what will separate a fan, from a fan who is a member of the trust ??? I have heard rumours of a membership scheme for all fans....how would this work....who could join........how would they join....how would they be heard.

It has occured to me that any fan that wishes to voice an opinion may consider joining the Trust( this would automatically involve anyone that wishes to be involved ALL FANS).
I can hear you all saying that was exactly what this group was trying to avoid. Please bear the following in mind, " I am a trade union representative in an industry that has multiple unions representing many grades, in my experience the more successful negotiations have been carried out by those that represent one group of people with a common agenda ( in this case Argyle supporters). For that reason I would promote the Trust as the vehicle to promote this idea. I understand that not all fans may wish to be a member but surely if a fan membership scheme is being considered the Trust is already half way there (maybe they could consider full and associate membership) In the same way that a trade union has a procedure agreement with a company, the club should sign up to talk to the Trust. Any issue that is resolved by the Trust will equally affect non members.
It is clear to me that a Trust member on the GASB would serve the interests of the Trust first and foremost as their objectives will be laid out as agreed by trust members, and so they should......but I am for instance a member of the trust and a season ticket holder, so why if elected as a season ticket holder would I act against the Trust. I have come to the conclusion that the Trust should make a proposal for the formation of the GASB including representatives from within it covering all those parties concerned ie. season ticket holders, senior greens, casual fans and any other group that may be deemed as worthy of a place on the GASB, on top of this I would suggest maybe 25% of its make up to come from people outside of this group.

This would ensure the growth of the Trust, make it answerable to its membership and let it carry out the funtion it was intended to carry out.

Your Thoughts

 

[Miles Bidgood]

Just to add to that season ticket renewal could include a box that that automatically renewed trust membership by agreement. IE tick this box if you wish to be a trust member

 

[TCM]

Dont know if ive got the numbers right here? but anyway,as far as i know there were 15/20 poeple at the last meeting,theses are the people who have made the efort and shown a interest in sitting on the gas board,put there 15/20 names in a hat ,select 7 and crack on,its up and running,let these people selected run for 6 months and then out of the people who missed out this time select another 7 and so on,,for the life of me i cant see why that cant happen,,the board could be selected and up and running at the next meeting,,this is about your avarage fan having the chance to be involved?,,,if you picked at random 7 fans coming out of HP after a match you may find a builder a postman a doctor an teenager, a milkman a shopworker, a what ever,,,,all well within there rights to have a crack at being on the board?,or so we were led to beleave,,it dosnt have to be the head of plymouth uni,,or a local radio celeb,,,,its seem to be that everyone wants to take time to pick the right people,,well your avarage argo fan are the right people,surely?lets keep a eye on things now,,,,,,,,,,,another thing that springs to mind is that IMO this needs to be indipendant from the club(which is also the clubs opinion)so i would of thought a venue for the meetings away from HP would be better,,

 

[Miles Bidgood]

Totnes Comie Mike that is not quite correct.....never got to first meeting but have wanted an input and have been unable to gain an invite to any of subsequent meetings ....but totally agree heart is worth more than brains here......when any subsequent board maybe announced they will have the power to decree how the message is delivered and that it is put across in the proper manner

 

[TCM]

what has stoped you getting an invite miles?i certainly thought this was open to all fans,,,i think its a open meeting?i dont think its been nailed down to anyone particular yet ,i maybe wrong? anyway ,what are you veiws on random selection?cus iam trying to push that myself,,as you may have sussed, :greensmile:

 

[David Fisher]

I seem to recall that Miles was excluded on the grounds of numbers yet the meeting went ahead in a half-full room.

 

[TCM]

well again i dont know if people who couldnt get to the first couple of mettings could still get invovled?not sure how thats working,,for me iam just here to keep the debate going,,i think its going to play a very big part in the future running of the club,,in a way i think what i would like to see happen is allready there with pasoti,as far as eyes on the club is concerned,,most info coming out of the club hits pasoti straight away anyway,and i dont think the new board could be much more transparent :nworthy: however ,boards come and go and at some point in the future we will have new people at the helm which is when the gas board would realy come into its own,,,i think at the end of the day we will end up with 7 agro fans keeing a extra watch and that can only be good for all of us,,, :greensmile:

 

[Archie]

Is it set in stone that the GASB members must be from the leadership groups of Argyle Supporters Groups?

I would argue that it should be well away from these people. They are where they are to do a job for that set of supporters and should be allowed to continue that great work without the possibility of the GASB distraction. IMO this should be a group of Argyle fans from all walks of life with no affiliation or agenda other than to improve a community asset. We have all seen how factions can come to blows and i would hope a group so close to the club could be kept as well out of that as possible.

Maybe i am being naive. I can certainly understand the view of recruiting from the supporters groups but would hate for in fighting and pettiness to get in the way of making a real difference. We have been given that opportunity, taking it is going to be far from easy but not impossible.

 

[TCM]

Thats my point aswell,,random selection,,it just cuts out any kind of accusations of old boy network,,and would speed up the prosess,,pull the names out the hat,,,,and crack on,and as far as anyone being targeted for anykind of abuse by being on the board i(as happens with other argo groups)i dont think this would happen if board members were just observing and reporting back,,, :greensmile:

 

[Womble]

By it's very nature, a Supervisory board set up at the instigation of the owner of the club is going to struggle to be anything like truly independent.

The Trust, in terms of questioning the owner is also unlikely to be independent due to so many of the same people being involved with the trust and the CP'ers. Most of Pasoti also seems to fall into the "Brent can do no wrong" camp.

If supporters (not just those who post on internet fan sites) want a group to represent them/scrutinize the actions of then club than a truly
"Independent Supporters Group" set up and run without any involvement of Club, Trust, Internet geeks etc. would be required.

I agree entirely with the highlighted section of Grovehills post (not commenting on the rest), and that is why I believe the only way forward is with a strong Trust, despite the recent problems. The GAS board will never properly represent the fans in the way a Fans Trust will.