Could Southend United be owned by a Supporters Trust ?

[Supa Shrimpa]

It doesn't impress me, i'm afraid ! (only my opinion)

 

[OldBlueLady]

The funds raised from the SOS appeal are ring fenced within the Trust's accounts and, as such, available to be viewed be any member.

 

[Supa Shrimpa]

Sounds good ! :thumbsup:

 

[Supa Shrimpa]

The funds raised from the SOS appeal are ring fenced within the Trust's accounts and, as such, available to be viewed be any member.

Was there enough to buy a football stadium with adjacent flats, cinema and commercial retail units ?

 

[Beefy]

Was there enough to buy a football stadium with adjacent flats, cinema and commercial retail units ?

There isn't enough to pay a week's wages for the first team unfortunately. That is what the Trust is up against.

I raised this possibility with the trust in 2009 and was assured that every possibility had been and was being explored. The fact is though that just having the fans run a club is not an easy solution or a guarantee that things would be better and that either way it's a moot point as the Chairman has no interest in selling.

 

[Supa Shrimpa]

There isn't enough to pay a week's wages for the first team unfortunately. That is what the Trust is up against.

I raised this possibility with the trust in 2009 and was assured that every possibility had been and was being explored. The fact is though that just having the fans run a club is not an easy solution or a guarantee that things would be better and that either way it's a moot point as the Chairman has no interest in selling.

Everyone has a price !

 

[TrueBlue]

SUFC will never be owned by the trust, why? I just don't think they have the clout or will have with the current setup.

Problem you have is for me is that our trust have no teeth and its become all about the youth and the total dive that is the shrimpers bar. For me that is about the extent of what I believe the supporters (especially non members) see. Obviously they run the trust coach service and have done for years and years and a decent service it is too.

This is not a trust bashing post I'm to old for that old chestnut, you have a committee of supporters who give up their time for free all for the love of it, I just think the direction needs to be one of more striving for answers and to be seen more at the forefront.

That's just my opinion I am sure people will have others.

 

[Firestorm]

SUFC will never be owned by the trust, why? I just don't think they have the clout or will have with the current setup.

Problem you have is for me is that our trust have no teeth and its become all about the youth and the total dive that is the shrimpers bar. For me that is about the extent of what I believe the supporters (especially non members) see. Obviously they run the trust coach service and have done for years and years and a decent service it is too.

This is not a trust bashing post I'm to old for that old chestnut, you have a committee of supporters who give up their time for free all for the love of it, I just think the direction needs to be one of more striving for answers and to be seen more at the forefront.

That's just my opinion I am sure people will have others.

As the trust stands at the moment Scott, I agree, those involved do a grand job, but they don not have the time / inclination / wherewithal (delete applicable ) to run a football club full time.

Given that the trust have accepted everyone who has volunteered for the committee for the past few years, it would appear that anyone who is suitable within our fanbase currently does not have the inclination , or they would have stepped forward

 

[Supa Shrimpa]

SUFC will never be owned by the trust, why? I just don't think they have the clout or will have with the current setup.

Problem you have is for me is that our trust have no teeth and its become all about the youth and the total dive that is the shrimpers bar. For me that is about the extent of what I believe the supporters (especially non members) see. Obviously they run the trust coach service and have done for years and years and a decent service it is too.

This is not a trust bashing post I'm to old for that old chestnut, you have a committee of supporters who give up their time for free all for the love of it, I just think the direction needs to be one of more striving for answers and to be seen more at the forefront.

That's just my opinion I am sure people will have others.

To be honest, that's how I feel, aswell. Nothing against them at all, and I don't want to bash them, but they seem pretty toothless as an organisation. The direction seems to be wrong, in my opinion. I feel helping the club (not hindering it) would be achieved by spending more time and money in dialogue with other supporters groups, building experts etc to find out what can be done in order to safeguard the long-term future of the club.

 

[TrueBlue]

To be honest, that's how I feel, aswell. Nothing against them at all, and I don't want to bash them, but they seem pretty toothless as an organisation. The direction seems to be wrong, in my opinion. I feel helping the club (not hindering it) would be achieved by spending more time and money in dialogue with other supporters groups, building experts etc to find out what can be done in order to safeguard the long-term future of the club.

Fully agree, however they do have plenty of dialogue with other groups. Like I have said though just feeling its all gone a bit quiet from a long term future, is there a publicised strategy?

Ron has gone silent again and in my opinion it should be the trust that's probing or at least getting answers as to what stage we are at.

That will never appease everybody but it will at least some

 

[Firestorm]

Fully agree, however they do have plenty of dialogue with other groups. Like I have said though just feeling its all gone a bit quiet from a long term future, is there a publicised strategy?

Ron has gone silent again and in my opinion it should be the trust that's probing or at least getting answers as to what stage we are at.

That will never appease everybody but it will at least some

The problem there Scott, it why on earth would the developers of FF (be it British Land or MD) want to divulge the status of business plans to a group of disinterested (as in no tangible contractual interest) people, particularly when there is a rival cinema plan in the pipeline which could jeopardise the whole scheme ?

As I said previously, it appears to me that the difficulties the Trust would have in running a club, is getting enough people on board who have the both the business acumen and sufficient time to do it properly

 

[Napster]

As I said previously, it appears to me that the difficulties the Trust would have in running a club, is getting enough people on board who have the both the business acumen and sufficient time to do it properly

and the spondoolies of course. although Im sure Hugh's not short of a few bob.

 

[Supa Shrimpa]

The problem there Scott, it why on earth would the developers of FF (be it British Land or MD) want to divulge the status of business plans to a group of disinterested (as in no tangible contractual interest) people, particularly when there is a rival cinema plan in the pipeline which could jeopardise the whole scheme ?

As I said previously, it appears to me that the difficulties the Trust would have in running a club, is getting enough people on board who have the both the business acumen and sufficient time to do it properly

I wouldn't say the members of the trust, who they represent, were disinterested. In fact, I think they'd welcome more feedback from the developers. I don't think they would expect the full ins and outs. Especially anything that is confidential that could jeopardise the scheme. However, i'm sure there are many aspects that could be shared that would help drive support from the fanbase for the project. The silence only leads to scepticism. I wouldn't for one minute expect anyone in the trust to run the club, but it has access to a wide range of supporters (many that have their own companies), that possibly could, given the opportunity. Or they could hire professionals with a proven track history.

 

[Firestorm]

I wouldn't say the members of the trust, who they represent, were disinterested. In fact, I think they'd welcome more feedback from the developers. I don't think they would expect the full ins and outs. Especially anything that is confidential that could jeopardise the scheme. However, i'm sure there are many aspects that could be shared that would help drive support from the fanbase for the project. The silence only leads to scepticism. I wouldn't for one minute expect anyone in the trust to run the club, but it has access to a wide range of supporters (many that have their own companies), that possibly could, given the opportunity. Or they could hire professionals with a proven track history.

They certainly are not uninterested, however as they don't have any contractual interest in the ff development, I do feel that they will be viewed by BL as a disinterested party.

 

[Supa Shrimpa]

Is that a technical term in the world of planning, then ?

 

[Firestorm]

Is that a technical term in the world of planning, then ?

Sorry, I am not in planning so I dont know any Technical Terms.
I am beginning to think I may have slipped up and got my disinterested and uninterested confused. I'll go away and check, sorry for any confusion.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Sorry, I am not in planning so I dont know any Technical Terms.
I am beginning to think I may have slipped up and got my disinterested and uninterested confused. I'll go away and check, sorry for any confusion.

A judge should be disinterested ie impartial and not take sides.If he is uninterested he might doze off,because that would mean he's bored by the proceedings.

This useful distinction has no value however,unless it's widely accepted and understood.The way it's going,the difference between disinterested and uninteresting is fading out.

The safer words to use now ,to indicate that you are not influenced by personal gain,or prejudice are "unbiased", "impartial" or "have no axe to grind."

Hope this helps.

 

[Firestorm]

A judge should be disinterested ie impartial and not take sides.If he is uninterested he might doze off,because that would mean he's bored by the proceedings.

This useful distinction has no value however,unless it's widely accepted and understood.The way it's going,the difference between disinterested and uninteresting is fading out.

The safer words to use now ,to indicate that you are not influenced by personal gain,or prejudice are "unbiased", "impartial" or "have no axe to grind."

Hope this helps.

Thanks, so the term with regard to contract parties is disinterested, glad I am not going mad.

 

[Supa Shrimpa]

Yesterdays game and attendance again highlighted to me what huge potential our club has, but the lack of investment and organisation seems embarrassing. I know our leader doesn't want to invest in RH, but in all honesty even if a new stadium does materialise, it's going to be several years from now. If we don't start treating the new supporters with a bit more respect I fear they'll move onto the spammers when they start throwing out cheap tickets in the new stadium.