Event Shrimpers Trust AGM & Steve Kavanagh Q&A - Monday 4th February 2013

[Shrimperstrust]

The Shrimpers Trust AGM will be held on Monday 4th February 2013 in the Shrimpers Bar, Roots Hall starting at 8.00pm.

This will be followed by a Q&A Session with new SUFC CEO Steve Kavanagh.

For further details click here.

 

[McNasty]

Will there be chips and pizza at the meeting Mr Fitz ?

(and please don't reply with "Search me"). :smile:

 

[TrueBlue]

Will there be chips and pizza at the meeting Mr Fitz ?

(and please don't reply with "Search me"). :smile:

Think you will find Mr Yeomanson updates SZ trust account

 

[jamesmut2000]

Is anyone going to this?

 

[McNasty]

Is anyone going to this?

I will go and observe.

 

[OldBlueLady]

Is anyone going to this?

I'll be there, other than that I expect it will be the usual turn out

 

[jamesmut2000]

Can't make it myself (due to the fact I completely forgot it was on and only got the email reminder late last week!) so would appreciate any news/reports from what SK has to say. I hope there will be a few probing questions! :smile:

 

[McNasty]

See you all there tonight.

 

[Napster]

How did it go?

 

[ldnfatso]

Did the expensive Trust Coach question come up again? Was the meagre amount of TZ sponsorship stressed once again??

 

[OldBlueLady]

How did it go?

Pretty well, one of the biggest turn outs for some years.

Did the expensive Trust Coach question come up again? Was the meagre amount of TZ sponsorship stressed once again??

No and no :smile:

Steve Kavanagh was pretty good value, answered everyone's questions except the one on Mohsni, which he said he was unable to comment on at this moment in time but confirmed he wasn't a) going to Stevenage or b) going to play for us. He hoped to be able to update on this situation in a few weeks.

Comes across so much better than either Tara or Gary (and that's no disrespect to either) because he actually knows what he's talking about. Season ticket prices for next year should be out in the next couple of weeks, they've really been looking into some new initiatives to draw absent supporters and new ones in. Ron is actually talking about the new stadium rather than ignoring questions, hopefully some news soon (another Council meeting due - I think - next month). Has talked to Chris Barker at length about the importance of today's game, not just because it's the JPT area final but because it's Orient, as the majority of the players don't have the vaguest idea about local rivalries. Praised the new media guy, Tom and said some hopeful things about prospects surrounding Ben Reeves.

From Trust perspective, no doubt there will be an official report soon, but 3 committee members stepped down and a further one resigned just ahead of the meeting. A new member was appointed. It's hoped to have some news about a change of membership secretary in the next few weeks, and there is consideration of a new position as an "associate" member - which would mean people who are unable to attend meetings but want to be involved can do so.

 

[McNasty]

Did the expensive Trust Coach question come up again? Was the meagre amount of TZ sponsorship stressed once again??

As the accounts showed a loss of over £1000 I am sure steps will be taken to redress this issue .

 

[Smiffy]

Out of interest, who stepped down from the Trust Committee?

 

[OldBlueLady]

Out of interest, who stepped down from the Trust Committee?

PM sent Smiffy.

 

[McNasty]

Out of interest, who stepped down from the Trust Committee?

From memory and I could be wrong Phil Alsford , Gary Crowe and Bryan Woodford resigned and Gareth Pummery gave notice to resign too late for the meeting .

 

[jamesmut2000]

Did the expensive Trust Coach question come up again? Was the meagre amount of TZ sponsorship stressed once again??

Another one of the pointless questions that seems to get endlessly raised these days. I thought the point was to give as many fans as possible the opportunity to travel to away games and not a needless point scoring exercise about who runs the better or cheaper service?

 

[McNasty]

Another one of the pointless questions that seems to get endlessly raised these days. I thought the point was to give as many fans as possible the opportunity to travel to away games and not a needless point scoring exercise about who runs the better or cheaper service?

James, AGMs are the one time a year that members get the opportunity to question the officers of an organisation about all aspects of the running of the club.

If anyone felt strongly enough about the Trust coaches the matter would have been raised --- point scoring or not.

 

[jamesmut2000]

Ken, the point I was making was that it wasn't raised other than on here in a 'point scoring' manner.

 

[ldnfatso]

Ken, the point I was making was that it wasn't raised other than on here in a 'point scoring' manner.

This ain't a point scoring exercise and i have no reason to make it one. The reason i brought it up was because we have 2 services, Trust and TZ. The Trust is 99% of the time more expensive than TZ, yet The Trust insist they are getting the cheapest deal for its members (which i am one btw). They argue that TZ is cheaper because they get sponsorship, but in fact TZ were actually cheaper prior to sponsorship. Also, the sponsorship is apparently minimal and certainly not to the extent The Trust believe it is.
As the idea is to get as many supporters to away games as cheap as possible, how comes SBC are consistently given The Trust's contract when evidently they are not cheapest and havent been the cheapest in the past? I just don't understand why a good contract like The Trust away travel is not more competitively priced.
These questions are consistently going unanswered.

 

[Shrimperstrust]

This ain't a point scoring exercise and i have no reason to make it one. The reason i brought it up was because we have 2 services, Trust and TZ. The Trust is 99% of the time more expensive than TZ, yet The Trust insist they are getting the cheapest deal for its members (which i am one btw). They argue that TZ is cheaper because they get sponsorship, but in fact TZ were actually cheaper prior to sponsorship. Also, the sponsorship is apparently minimal and certainly not to the extent The Trust believe it is.
As the idea is to get as many supporters to away games as cheap as possible, how comes SBC are consistently given The Trust's contract when evidently they are not cheapest and havent been the cheapest in the past? I just don't understand why a good contract like The Trust away travel is not more competitively priced.
These questions are consistently going unanswered.

Steve,

Once again you have your facts totally wrong.

We have offered a cheaper price than TZ on nearly all our trips this year, and if not cheaper the same.
Of course we could always run each trip at a loss and then you can complain about the Trust losing Money - we can't win.

We did go out for 3 quotes at the start of the season and SBC came out the cheapest (and if you want I will show you the quotes, although hopefully my word will be good enough for you).

We do not have sponsorship - TZ do.

These questions are not consistently unanswered, I have always responded to you either by PM, email or in person.

And finally if it bothers you that much why did you not come along Monday & ask the question instead of stirring it up on here?