What worried me initially was the the cosiness towards the current board at Argyle. Lee Jamieson kept referring to them as Peter (Risdale) and Paul(Stapleton). It was only after the Rev took back the Mic did we get to calling them Risdale and Stapleton.

I fear that Mr Jamieson is getting sucked in. I desperately hope that I am wrong.

What worried me initially was the the cosiness towards the current board at Argyle. Lee Jamieson kept referring to them as Peter (Ridsdale) and Paul(Stapleton). It was only after the Rev took back the Mic did we get to calling them Ridsdale and Stapleton.

I fear that Mr Jamieson is getting sucked in. I desperately hope that I am wrong.

Well said. Too cosy with the existing owners is not a good idea.

At the first meeting the presentation from the ones that started the Exeter City trust made an important point that probably needed to be re-emphasised on Saturday.

One of their biggest challenges was to have to deal and negotiate with the people that had ruined their club.

It is a question of keeping lines of communication open with people not cosying up to them. We got some useful stuff from Ridsdale and Stapleton which would almost certainly not have got had the Trust gone on the offensive.

We have to deal with the current custodians of our club in a civil way in order that the fans may eventually be a part of the future custodianship of the club.

I do not want to be critical (but inevitably will be). The main concern I have is around the positioning of the Trust.

1200 expressing interest in joining. Joining fee set at a reasonable £10. This will raise £8,000 -£10,000. That isn't going to

a) ensure the survival of the club
b) buy a seat on the board
c) buy many shares

That in turn affects the voice of the Trust, as everyone will know it has no true power, in football 'cash is king' like it or not.

I have seriously thought about standing in the forthcoming elections, however I'm not one for wasting my time flogging a dead horse and I'm wondering if there is any milage in this at all.

Peter, I think you must have heard wrong. There has to be a 56 day period before elections can be held. The process for the elections will start as soon as the season finishes. I wonder if you mis-heard the part where they said they wanted people to come forward if they were interested in joining for want of a better phrase a fund raising sub- committee. I think this is because of the amount of work that is being carried out and they think it's better for them to carry on doing what they are doing and for new people to start new work for now. I know at least one of the interim committee will probably not stand and some of the London based ones are hoping Plymouth area people will come forward for the main jobs like,chairperson,secretary and treasurer. Lee Jameson has actually told me he's hoping for 12 people to be on the committee.

Seeking people to raise funds for a trust without an elected committee nor agreed aims & objectives.

If there must be a 56 day wait, why are we having to wait 120?

Let's hope we still have a club left, no hurry then.

Where's that tin hat.

I do not want to be critical (but inevitably will be). The main concern I have is around the positioning of the Trust.

1200 expressing interest in joining. Joining fee set at a reasonable £10. This will raise £8,000 -£10,000. That isn't going to

a) ensure the survival of the club
b) buy a seat on the board
c) buy many shares

That in turn affects the voice of the Trust, as everyone will know it has no true power, in football 'cash is king' like it or not.

I have seriously thought about standing in the forthcoming elections, however I'm not one for wasting my time flogging a dead horse and I'm wondering if there is any milage in this at all.

It is purely a numbers game at the moment.

If the Trust gets several thousand members most of whom are also the clubs paying customers (and some shareholders) then they do have some power.

One of the basic principals of fundraising is to get as many supporters/donors as you can in the first instance at a low level.

Jon,

We discussed the membership fee long and hard. Eventually, on the advice of Supporters Direct, we set it at what we hope is an affordable £10 per year (free for under 16s).

It's all about getting the numbers up, especially in these initial stages - this is how we will demonstrate our strength and acquire a voice and influence.

Then we stand a chance of being listened to - not only by the Club, but by the Council and by the business community also (including potential investors).

The current sub is intended to cover running costs: that is the advice. There is nothing to stop people giving more than the £10 MINIMUM requested.

I was sat near one or two members of the steering committee in the grandstand and I can assure everybody that the last thing they wanted to do was get anywhere near getting into the same building as the board let alone cozying up in bed with them.

The rules are standard rules for Industrial and Provident societies and can't be altered. They are on the trust website and there is reams of it. It takes some reading. Before bouncing up and down moaning about them,have you all actually bothered to read them.

As for the aims and objectives,these were drawn up by the steering committee who had a mandate from everybody at the first meeting. They also got a mandate from everybody at the 2nd meeting,totally unopposed with no abstentions. These people are giving their time and no doubt spending some of their own money for no recompense what so ever. They have also not had any training in setting up or running this sort of body (apologies if any one has) to my knowledge. So I think some people should be cutting them some slack.

It was also emphasized that we (all those who enroll) are the trust, all of us. So if some of you have any good ideas for what you think we should or should not be doing (eg. aims and objectives) contact the steering group and say so.

As for having businessmen or sopranos running the thing. There wasn't any of them who came up with this idea and got it off the ground. Now if some sopranos,tenors or spice girls would like to take control,I suggest they stand for election.

I'm not sure about businessmen though,as it is a bunch of them that has caused this utter chaos to start with. I'm sure some nice honest ones will be welcome though

Jon,

We discussed the membership fee long and hard. Eventually, on the advice of Supporters Direct, we set it at what we hope is an affordable £10 per year (free for under 16s).

It's all about getting the numbers up, especially in these initial stages - this is how we will demonstrate our strength and acquire a voice and influence.

Then we stand a chance of being listened to - not only by the Club, but by the Council and by the business community also (including potential investors).

The current sub is intended to cover running costs: that is the advice. There is nothing to stop people giving more than the £10 MINIMUM requested.

I dont disagree with the membership fee at all - after all we are all experiencing hard times and belt tightening and we are in a low income area of the country.

My concern is that the Trust will have no real voice, numbers or not, because ultimately in football, cash is king, and the Trust is not in a position to have influence through its riches.

An example - the Trust may have a voice through numbers but so did PASOTI when raising funds for the staff. Newsworthy in the short term, just as the Trust is, but will it last?

Example 2 - that internet supporters who bought a football club £35 each a year. Year 1 lots of interest, Year 2 virtually none. If we survive this year will the Trust have as many members (and ultimately, such a voice) next year?

Jon,

We discussed the membership fee long and hard. Eventually, on the advice of Supporters Direct, we set it at what we hope is an affordable £10 per year (free for under 16s).

It's all about getting the numbers up, especially in these initial stages - this is how we will demonstrate our strength and acquire a voice and influence.

Then we stand a chance of being listened to - not only by the Club, but by the Council and by the business community also (including potential investors).

The current sub is intended to cover running costs: that is the advice. There is nothing to stop people giving more than the £10 MINIMUM requested.

I dont disagree with the membership fee at all - after all we are all experiencing hard times and belt tightening and we are in a low income area of the country.

My concern is that the Trust will have no real voice, numbers or not, because ultimately in football, cash is king, and the Trust is not in a position to have influence through its riches.

An example - the Trust may have a voice through numbers but so did PASOTI when raising funds for the staff. Newsworthy in the short term, just as the Trust is, but will it last?

Example 2 - that internet supporters who bought a football club £35 each a year. Year 1 lots of interest, Year 2 virtually none. If we survive this year will the Trust have as many members (and ultimately, such a voice) next year?

It doesn't necessarily mean raising the millions needed to buy a majority stake. Having the money to either buy a 5-10% share in the club, or encouraging current individual shareholders to donate their proxy to the Trust, could mean that the Trust develops either a good 'blocking' vote to stop things happening that members think is bad for the club, or it means that an incoming investor may need that 5 or 10%, meaning that the Trust will be in a good position to have a say in what happens going forward.

To do all that takes time, support and money. It starts with individual fans donating their tenner, or whatever they can afford over and above that. It starts with the Trust using its numbers and its members' time and skills to raise awareness of the issue both in Plymouth and in the wider football community. It starts with re-establishing the connection that says that a healthy club is an important part of a vibrant and culturally diverse city. It starts with establishing more of a presence in the town centre on match days, getting kids interested in the club, providing a fun reason to go over and above the football.

It starts, ultimately, with small steps.

Everything in Life has to start somewhere.

At least the current 'Steering Committee' had the verve to get things rolling.

From little acorns grow!!

I was sat near one or two members of the steering committee in the grandstand and I can assure everybody that the last thing they wanted to do was get anywhere near getting into the same building as the board let alone cozying up in bed with them.

The rules are standard rules for Industrial and Provident societies and can't be altered. They are on the trust website and there is reams of it. It takes some reading. Before bouncing up and down moaning about them,have you all actually bothered to read them.

As for the aims and objectives,these were drawn up by the steering committee who had a mandate from everybody at the first meeting. They also got a mandate from everybody at the 2nd meeting,totally unopposed with no abstentions. These people are giving their time and no doubt spending some of their own money for no recompense what so ever. They have also not had any training in setting up or running this sort of body (apologies if any one has) to my knowledge. So I think some people should be cutting them some slack.

It was also emphasized that we (all those who enroll) are the trust, all of us. So if some of you have any good ideas for what you think we should or should not be doing (eg. aims and objectives) contact the steering group and say so.

As for having businessmen or sopranos running the thing. There wasn't any of them who came up with this idea and got it off the ground. Now if some sopranos,tenors or spice girls would like to take control,I suggest they stand for election.

I'm not sure about businessmen though,as it is a bunch of them that has caused this utter chaos to start with. I'm sure some nice honest ones will be welcome though

Thoroughly under-whelmed by everything I've heard and read so far! Aims and objectives are far too woolly the membership rate far too cheap to achieve anything meaningful and far too many wannabe politicians.

A "board of 12" FFS. Five people are required - enough to run a vote with, enough to make progress quickly. Good communications structure needed and clear aims and objectives. That way you give your money, knowing where it is going and who is going to be using it. This way all you need is a failed politician with a Henry Fonda complex and suddenly we're all screwed - again.

Get rid of the (sorry Lee) local hobby horse lot. Pick a board of people who know what they're doing and have a proven football and or business background and start afresh. You also need a chairman with a bit of profile in the business - a Mickey Evans type.

Less Vicar of Dibley more Sopranos

Jackie from SD said that this process usually takes 6-12 months. For these guys to have it all up in running in 1 month there had to be corners cut. One such corner cutting was in the rules/objectives/blah blah. They're going to be replaced by a new set when SD have finalised them - of which IIRC Jackie is a part of as the lawyer over seeing it.
.

This is not very clear, have the Steering Group decided them or not.

Seems to me opinions & ideas are not being sought from all Argyle fans (& consequently all potential trust members), but rather a small goup of similar minded folk? Whilst a fair minded approach to all parties (Directors, Risdale etc) may be sensible, is it what most down spirited fans want, or do they want a more "tenacious" approach which might gather more support?

The bottom line is that Argyle fans are being asked once again to put hands in pockets because of the boards incompetance, surely a degree of revolution is essential to get the ball rolling and to gain credibility & support. Otherwise it has the possibility of becoming just another toothless fans club, rather than a powerhouse to effect change.

Our club is under threat, we need to be seen as strong and "dangerous", not nice.

Being "transparent" means being open to scrutiny, people need to be able to ask questions without redress.

Good job, getting things going though.

Havent seen the minutes but a bit concerned about lack of discussion re fundraising. That is the only way the fans can have power and it may be only the fans that can save the club or revive it in another form. I think that is a separate issue from £10 membership which will raise peanuts in relative terms. On a previous post I raised the issue of starting a financial vehicle where supporters can pledge as much or as little as they like, whilst ensuring it doesnt go into the pockets of current Directors. Sheff. W did it and raised over a million. I reckon we could raise half that at least. It wouldnt pay off the club's debts but would increase the fans influence massively.

Havent seen the minutes but a bit concerned about lack of discussion re fundraising. That is the only way the fans can have power and it may be only the fans that can save the club or revive it in another form. I think that is a separate issue from £10 membership which will raise peanuts in relative terms. On a previous post I raised the issue of starting a financial vehicle where supporters can pledge as much or as little as they like, whilst ensuring it doesnt go into the pockets of current Directors. Sheff. W did it and raised over a million. I reckon we could raise half that at least. It wouldnt pay off the club's debts but would increase the fans influence massively.

There is an option on the membership form to donate as much money as you like on top of the membership fee. There's also going to be a fund raising sub committee set up.