• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Question Is it time the trust ‘stop working with Ron’ and facilitate more robust action

Is it time the trust ‘stop working with Ron’ and facilitate more robust action


  • Total voters
    129
Property Developers and Football Clubs don't go together. Unfortunately, the only way forward is to get the new stadium, in whatever guise it arrives in.

As much as I want Ron to clear off and sell up and give us our Club back, he still represents the best chance of the stadium being delivered before Roots Hall is condemned. For that reason only I will have to vote No.
 
I have voted yes. However, as Liam AAS says above, what does ‘robust action’ actually mean?

What possible ‘robust action’ could the trust carry out that would bring about positive change?
 
I hear these vague sentiments that the Trust "should be doing more" or should be taking more "robust action". That is absolutely fair enough but there don't seem to be any specifics.

Here's an idea - as another thread has been started on an issue that has been covered in other threads, how about we make this one worthwhile - what more robust action should the Shrimpers Trust specifically be taking to make Ron Martin forego his nine-figure fortune and ride out of town? Specific suggestions with realistic action plans only.
 
I realise what im about to say is a tad outrageous, but any consortium or mega rich man /arab who who would like to put in a bid to buy the club,i would like first to get into talks with the Shrimpers Trust before approaching RM , have a member of the trust in their /his company when talking to RM ,at least that way we will learn the ins and outs of what is going on in that mans head ,also knowing the bid put to RM is a good and reasonable offer we can then together fully support the ones trying to buy the club. Yes i know it sounds rediculous. But as been said in Shrimperzone ,RM has has offers but wont listen to them, Us knowing perhaps can put pressure on him to listen.
 
Only thing trust realistically can do imo is drum up media attention.

It’s up to staff at the club to decide if they want to walk away or strike
And fans to protest or boycott
As we’ve seen players aren’t afraid to take action.
 
What robust action?
This is a good question. One step at a time. Once the views have been collated then options can be put on the table. The best that’s been put forward and not by the trust is the withdrawal of purchasing a season ticket.

This would be just the start. We should reach out to other trusts who have achieved the goal.

Then we should reach out to the MP and council

Then we should reach out to the wider fan base

Then my friend we formulate a plan and maximise leverage to remove Ron and get our club back
 
This is a good question. One step at a time. Once the views have been collated then options can be put on the table. The best that’s been put forward and not by the trust is the withdrawal of purchasing a season ticket.

This would be just the start. We should reach out to other trusts who have achieved the goal.

Then we should reach out to the MP and council

Then we should reach out to the wider fan base

Then my friend we formulate a plan and maximise leverage to remove Ron and get our club back
As is my understanding all of those things, at various stages, are already being explored/worked on by the trust.
 
Only thing trust realistically can do imo is drum up media attention.

It’s up to staff at the club to decide if they want to walk away or strike
And fans to protest or boycott
As we’ve seen players aren’t afraid to take action.
I disagree - the trust in my view should represent the supporter base of which once upon a time there were 30k souls in Wembley and still 5-6k average in the national league.

However my view is that there current stance of working with Ron will go against the grain of the majority and thus splinter the support groups.

Have another meeting, with the majority of the fan base represented, reconsider ‘working with Ron’.

Isn’t the definition of madness doing the same thing and expecting different results
 
I realise what im about to say is a tad outrageous, but any consortium or mega rich man /arab who who would like to put in a bid to buy the club,i would like first to get into talks with the Shrimpers Trust before approaching RM , have a member of the trust in their /his company when talking to RM ,at least that way we will learn the ins and outs of what is going on in that mans head ,also knowing the bid put to RM is a good and reasonable offer we can then together fully support the ones trying to buy the club. Yes i know it sounds rediculous. But as been said in Shrimperzone ,RM has has offers but wont listen to them, Us knowing perhaps can put pressure on him to listen.
I would not say this is outrageous- if we want our club back we need to be proactive. Ron is not disclosing offers so they can use the trust as a conduit. Then we can get rid of all the **** that no one else wants it.
 
I would not say this is outrageous- if we want our club back we need to be proactive. Ron is not disclosing offers so they can use the trust as a conduit. Then we can get rid of all the **** that no one else wants it.
Hang on I thought you just had a pop at the Trust for "working with Ron" you have just suggested the exact same thing.

Essentially I think you have misunderstood the Trust's statement. It is very clear they do not see Ron as a suitable custodian, and want him out. However, like it or not, he is the only person who can give the supporters the answers they crave in the short term. That is what they mean by working with him - encouraging him/threatening him with action to open up to supporters.
 
Back
Top