Latest Liaison Meeting Minutes

[Beaver]

Quote[/b] (The Flying Scotsman @ Mar. 03 2005,10:00)]

Quote[/b] (TrueBlue @ Mar. 03 2005,09:38)]

Quote[/b] ]GK said that he was disappointed when he visited the Shrimpers Bar at 6.20pm on the night of the Scunthorpe game to find that there were no Trust members carrying out the signing-in duties. PY said that the majority of the Trust Committee work and it is difficult to get there on time for an evening match due to traffic but this case in question, it was an isolated incident. GK said that he could get there and PY said that he worked next door. GK said that signing-in was a condition and the Trust must have at least one member who could carry out the early signing-in.

PY asked if a member of the security staff could sign people in until a Trust member could get there. GK said that was not part of their duties and it had to be a Trust member. PY asked if a member of the security staff who was also a Trust member could carry out the duties early on until cover arrived. GK said that he would speak to David Jobson about this.

More pathetic attitude by the club!

Why is that pathetic? GK is making very valid points. Granted it can be difficult for some people to get there early for evening kick offs but that was one of the conditions from the very off - it's not a new thing. Is GK supposed to turn a blind eye to it? I don't think so, and he is quite right that it isn't a stewards job to do so.

It was just the attitude. The majority of the Trust Committee all have day Jobs, there was also a hold up on the Trains and we were therefore a few minutes late in getting someone on the door. I was in the Bar sorting out Travel. Mrs. Beaver normally did the early stint if no one had arrived, but she was ill.

We were also making a valid point. You do not have to be a Member of the Committee to sign people in. Any Trust Member can sign a Guest in, which is why we asked if one of the Security Guards whose is a Member could do it if we were running late.

Strangely though, since the meeting and I'm sure it's not a coincidence, the normal Security Guard we have on the door at the Shrimpers Bar, who is a Member of the Trust, has now been moved to another job.

 

[Beaver]

Quote[/b] (Bucks_blue @ Mar. 03 2005,10:23)]

Quote[/b] (SoC @ Mar. 03 2005,09:57)]In this particular instance, I side with GK. It might come across in the minutes as a bit petulant foot stamping by GK (and it may have been just like that in the meeting, for all I know) but it is a requirement, I believe agreed by the local rozza's, that a Trust member sign people in.

Yeah maybe GK is right about this but what he mustn't forget is how much money the Shrimpers Bar makes for the club now it is run by the Trust as opposed to when it was run solely by the club.

For the extra revenue that has been brought in by the Trust's excellent  efforts you would have thought he might have at least entertained the idea of providing a steward for the half hour or so it takes for a Trust member to get there on an evening kick off.

We have to be there at 6.

Security don't have to be there until 6.30.

Work that one out

 

[The Flying Scotsman]

To be honest, it just looks like the meeting is full of pettiness from both sides.

 

[One O'Clock At The Crane]

I very much enjoyed the irony of GK extolling the virtues of the club's catering, making favourable comparisons with anywhere else in the country, then stating the difficulties of a "health problem" with one of the said snack bars.

Interesting note about people abusing the kids a quid scheme. Every game, you can clearly see people vault the fence separating the RBS from the West Stand. Every game, whatever stewards are present do absolutely nothing. If GK is monitoring the messagebaords and 'situation' then he should also perhaps monitor the stewarding in that part of the ground as well.

The item regarding LDV travel, especially from last year, caught my eye too.

 

[Bob Cratchitt]

Quote[/b] (Beaver @ Mar. 03 2005,10:18)]

Quote[/b] (sufcintheprem @ Mar. 03 2005,10:13)]

Quote[/b] (Beaver @ Mar. 03 2005,10:12)]

Quote[/b] (sufcintheprem @ Mar. 03 2005,09:57)]Clicked on document then all it did was to link to shrimperstrust.co.uk on exactly the same page I was on. No sign of any liaison section.

What browser are you using ?

If it's Firefox for some reason the Tabs don't show

I don't know why - perhaps a techie out there can advise.

There is another link at the bottom of the home page which takes you straight to the document

Yeah, it is Firefox. When I hover over the link, it just has a link to the page again and that's all that's loaded when I click on it.

I have the same problem with firefox and I haven't a clue why. It's a pain in the arse when I want to check stuff I have uploaded.

What product do you use to create the pages for the website??

Please let it not be Frontpage!!

 

[The Flying Scotsman]

Quote[/b] (One O'Clock At The Crane @ Mar. 03 2005,12:17)]the difficulties of a "health problem" with one of the said snack bars.  

This is the reason that area is not open. If it was i'm sure there would be worried people!!

 

[Westcliff Shrimper]

Quote[/b] (The Flying Scotsman @ Mar. 03 2005,10:31)]To be honest, it just looks like the meeting is full of pettiness from both sides.

Pains me to say it, but I have to agree.

It seems to me that GK doesn't really what these meetings to work, as all the action points from the previous meetings still haven't been addressed.

I hope I am wrong, as the Trust liaison committee spend a lot of their free time doing this....

 

[Beaver]

Quote[/b] (Bob Cratchitt @ Mar. 03 2005,12:24)]

Quote[/b] (Beaver @ Mar. 03 2005,10:18)]

Quote[/b] (sufcintheprem @ Mar. 03 2005,10:13)]

Quote[/b] (Beaver @ Mar. 03 2005,10:12)]

Quote[/b] (sufcintheprem @ Mar. 03 2005,09:57)]Clicked on document then all it did was to link to shrimperstrust.co.uk on exactly the same page I was on.  No sign of any liaison section.

What browser are you using ?

If it's Firefox for some reason the Tabs don't show  

I don't know why - perhaps a techie out there can advise.

There is another link at the bottom of the home page which takes you straight to the document  

Yeah, it is Firefox.  When I hover over the link, it just has a link to the page again and that's all that's loaded when I click on it.

I have the same problem with firefox and I haven't a clue why. It's a pain in the arse when I want to check stuff I have uploaded.

What product do you use to create the pages for the website??

Please let it not be Frontpage!!  

Err yep !!!!!

It's the one I know best, and I did inherit the Website from McScriven

 

[TerryintheWest]

Quote[/b] ]To be honest, it just looks like the meeting is full of pettiness from both sides.

I'm still trying to think where I've been petty.  

 

[Beaver]

Quote[/b] (TerryintheWest @ Mar. 03 2005,12:47)]

Quote[/b] ]To be honest, it just looks like the meeting is full of pettiness from both sides.

I'm still trying to think where I've been petty.  

And me

Perhaps talking about Catering, Sound Levels, Money, Travel etc is not in the best interests of our members or SUFC supporters

 

[The General]

Quote[/b] (Beaver @ Mar. 03 2005,12:57)]

Quote[/b] (TerryintheWest @ Mar. 03 2005,12:47)]

Quote[/b] ]To be honest, it just looks like the meeting is full of pettiness from both sides.

I'm still trying to think where I've been petty.

And me

Perhaps talking about Catering, Sound Levels, Money, Travel etc is not in the best interests of our members or SUFC supporters

Good points being talked about but nothing is really happening about it. It all just comes across as quite childish. This isn't a pop, just an observation from an interested member ...

 

[Beaver]

Quote[/b] (The General @ Mar. 03 2005,13:12)]

Quote[/b] (Beaver @ Mar. 03 2005,12:57)]

Quote[/b] (TerryintheWest @ Mar. 03 2005,12:47)]

Quote[/b] ]To be honest, it just looks like the meeting is full of pettiness from both sides.

I'm still trying to think where I've been petty.  

And me  

Perhaps talking about Catering, Sound Levels, Money, Travel etc is not in the best interests of our members or SUFC supporters  

Good points being talked about but nothing is really happening about it. It all just comes across as quite childish. This isn't a pop, just an observation from an interested member ...

Kev,

The meetings are anything but petty or childish. If that's how the written minutes appear to read, then our apologies, but I can assure you that both myself & the other Trust representatives at the Liaison Meetings take them very seriously.

 

[The Artful Shrimper]

It will be interesting iof we get to "C" how the club fare at organizing trains as opposed to C2C or One.

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (The Artful Shrimper @ Mar. 03 2005,13:40)]It will be interesting iof we get to "C" how the club fare at organizing trains as opposed to C2C or One.

Given the club's track record of 'organising' stuff, it's a bit worrying...!

 

[Beaver]

Quote[/b] (Whatever @ Mar. 03 2005,13:53)]

Quote[/b] (The Artful Shrimper @ Mar. 03 2005,13:40)]It will be interesting iof we get to "C" how the club fare at organizing trains as opposed to C2C or One.

Given the club's track record of 'organising' stuff, it's a bit worrying...!

The only reason the Club want to organise the Trains is to maximise profit. Last year they agreed to split any profit made on the Trains/Coaches 50/50 with the Trust.

This year, realising that the Trains made more profit last year than the coaches they have decided that they don't need any help running them, therefore keeping 100% of the profit.

Whilst in it'self that is no bad thing that the club make money, they have however basically snubbed the Trust after all the hardwork put in last year.

But do not fear the Trust will still be running the coaches if we get to C, and will still offer a service that is second to none

 

[The Flying Scotsman]

Quote[/b] (Beaver @ Mar. 03 2005,14:04)]

Quote[/b] (Whatever @ Mar. 03 2005,13:53)]

Quote[/b] (The Artful Shrimper @ Mar. 03 2005,13:40)]It will be interesting iof we get to "C" how the club fare at organizing trains as opposed to C2C or One.

Given the club's track record of 'organising' stuff, it's a bit worrying...!

The only reason the Club want to organise the Trains is to maximise profit. Last year they agreed to split any profit made on the Trains/Coaches 50/50 with the Trust.

This year, realising that the Trains made more profit last year than the coaches they have decided that they don't need any help running them, therefore keeping 100% of the profit.

Whilst in it'self that is no bad thing that the club make money, they have however basically snubbed the Trust after all the hardwork put in last year.

But do not fear the Trust will still be running the coaches if we get to C, and will still offer a service that is second to none  

And the Trust will make 100% profit on the coaches!! At least this way you avoid the hassle of getting the money out of the club for the coaches. Surely the level of profit the trust makes will depend on the price they intend to charge as the take up is pretty much guaranteed. The club are also offering the trust an office to organise. Sounds to me like some people will never be happy.

 

[TerryintheWest]

Quote[/b] ]some people will never be happy

Not where the Trust are involved, that's for certain

 

[Upminster Blue]

Blimey, £15,000 per game catering revenue. Is this a typo or is it really correct? Would mean on average everyone spends £3. Find that hard to believe but good news (unless your eating the food

) if true.

 

[Beaver]

Quote[/b] (The Flying Scotsman @ Mar. 03 2005,14:11)]

Quote[/b] (Beaver @ Mar. 03 2005,14:04)]

Quote[/b] (Whatever @ Mar. 03 2005,13:53)]

Quote[/b] (The Artful Shrimper @ Mar. 03 2005,13:40)]It will be interesting iof we get to "C" how the club fare at organizing trains as opposed to C2C or One.

Given the club's track record of 'organising' stuff, it's a bit worrying...!

The only reason the Club want to organise the Trains is to maximise profit. Last year they agreed to split any profit made on the Trains/Coaches 50/50 with the Trust.

This year, realising that the Trains made more profit last year than the coaches they have decided that they don't need any help running them, therefore keeping 100% of the profit.

Whilst in it'self that is no bad thing that the club make money, they have however basically snubbed the Trust after all the hardwork put in last year.

But do not fear the Trust will still be running the coaches if we get to C, and will still offer a service that is second to none  

And the Trust will make 100% profit on the coaches!! At least this way you avoid the hassle of getting the money out of the club for the coaches. Surely the level of profit the trust makes will depend on the price they intend to charge as the take up is pretty much guaranteed. The club are also offering the trust an office to organise. Sounds to me like some people will never be happy.

Actually when the Trust run coaches we do try to just break even & not make a profit. However with the amount of Coaches there will be a small profit, and you are right we won't have to wait 8 months for the balance of our money.

If you class the Programme Hut as an Office

However it does seem that you have some sort of problem with the Trust as all you have appeared to do today it criticise us and our actions.

 

[Upminster Blue]

Quote[/b] (Beaver @ Mar. 03 2005,14:19)]However it does seem that you have some sort of problem with the Trust as all you have appeared to do today it criticise us and our actions.

Personally I have no problem with the Trust. All they can do is raise the issues which from the minutes they appear to be doing in a sensible and constructive manner. They can not, however, force the club to act - there maybe lies the problem (having said that, the off field running of the club has improved massively in the past few years and the Trust can, IMHO, take some credit for that).