Foxes Trust Reform - show your support!

[Finnegan]

22 hours ago, brucey said:

Everton's FAB is fan-only and most of their meetings are without club representatives

https://efc-fanadvisoryboard.com/meetings/

 

 

 

lol, how is an advisory board meant to advise someone if that someone doesn't attend. 

 

[Daggers]

25 minutes ago, Foxes_Trust said:

As a counter argument based on having a paid membership, surely members should expect their board to serve them ahead of fans who pay nothing & then expect to be represented

 

Hence becoming a member to influence the future direction of the Trust, as many have in recent months

 

This doesn't mean the Trust will only listen to members views, but some of the consultation and sharing of information (via a members newsletter) should be with members only

You haven’t described a football club trust, you’ve described a private members club - and this runs to the core of everything that has gone wrong with the Trust over the last decade and why you need to stand down in order to invite change. 
 

I’m sure you aren’t a bad person, we share mutual friends and I trust their judgement, but the staid and non-confrontational nature of the Trust under your watch has led to it becoming a standing joke among the larger fanbase. 
 

The current rush of sign ups is an indication that there is a desire for change, you must see this? So facilitate it. Go with grace. 
 

Absolutely the Trust should be standing up for the views of everyone who supports the club, of genuine fans - because if you aren’t doing that then what the fvck good are you?

 

Change is now inevitable; be someone who encourages it, who takes plaudits for keeping the Trust going through a lull, and doesn’t prolong the transition phase when action is now required. 

[Motty]

19 hours ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Feel it's very important that whoever ends up on the FAB meets like this without the club semi-regularly. 

 

The club will be relying on being able to sweep this under the rug as much as possible, like they do with any fan engagement. They'll be banking on the FAB representatives being unorganised and being basically able to bullshit their way through the minimum number of meetings per season, fobbing off any topics to the next meeting infinitely. 

 

Meeting without them, allows the FAB members to align on the topics they want to discuss, so they can go into the meetings on the same page and ready to hold the club to account on topics. The Foxestrust reform stuff came from the UFS fan forum, held without the club. 

 

Organisation is the only way forward. 

Everton's quarterly with club is to infrequent. 6 times a year would be the minimum requirement.

I have been watching this develop with interest. Whilst change is definitely required I think we might be seeing the word constitutions being used soon.

 

I hope that when the FAB is formed that it is not made up of to many representatives from one section of the fans. 

Club engagement is imperative else why bother at all.

Open confrontations will only steel the clubs resolve.

The one issue that needs addressing immediately is the £25 season ticket charge. I went digital but most fans prefer a physical card. Around 18000 to 19000 I think. The problem is if you protest by not renewing the only person you are punishing is yourselves.

I don't know if there is a petition started but I think it may need one to sway the club. The donation to the foundation is no answer. 

 

 

[Splodgefox]

14 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

lol, how is an advisory board meant to advise someone if that someone doesn't attend. 

 

This sort of statement is why there needs to be clarity. You might be right but you could also say "how is a fan advisory board meant to advise the club if it's represented by non-fans(the club)?"
You would have club stooges advising themselves - if true.

I don't know the empirical truth at this point and it doesn't seem like the authority on this can be expected to be reading this on Foxes Talk. Maybe it's the FSA?

I don't want semantics and interpretation I want to hear facts and Motty is right - constitution is the word and an LCFC message board is not the forum for analysing such details contained within long PDFs

[Foxes Trust Reform]

15 hours ago, Foxes_Trust said:

As a counter argument based on having a paid membership, surely members should expect their board to serve them ahead of fans who pay nothing & then expect to be represented

 

Hence becoming a member to influence the future direction of the Trust, as many have in recent months

 

This doesn't mean the Trust will only listen to members views, but some of the consultation and sharing of information (via a members newsletter) should be with members only

Just to comment that this is a point where those of us leading the reform efforts are massively opposed to the kind of thinking in the comment above.

 

Our view is that, if you have a paid membership model, people pay to be part of a Trust that is making a difference. A Trust that is representing the fan base effectively, championing the right causes and finding ways to provide value when fans are negatively impacted (for example we have seen other Trusts providing compensation funds when fans lose out on booked travel and hotels due to late notice kick-off changes for tv).

 

If people see a Trust that is doing great things, they will identify with it and want to support it to continue to do those things. There shouldn’t be a quid-pro-quo that the Trust will only represent you or consult with you if you have paid money because that leads to the place where we are now with a Trust working for only a small sub-section of the supporter base.

Yes, there are ways and means of giving paid members more access and membership benefits but we would never want consultation or representation to sit behind a paywall. It is also worth noting that the Foxes Trust currently has circa £42,000 sat in the bank. As a reform campaign, we believe this offers a real opportunity to start doing more for LCFC fans if the right leadership is in place.

 

We have been blown away by the support we have received in our inbox to date (so a massive ‘thank you’ for that) and appeal for anyone else supportive of our thinking and/or our efforts to email “count me in” to [email protected]. We will be sending out communications via our mailing list in the coming days.

[Rob1742]

For a Trust or whatever it is to be called to work, they need to have the ability to connect to the football club.

 

Sounds simple and obvious, but it isn’t and the Foxes Trust haven’t been able to do this and from what I hear they are seen as an irritation rather than a vehicle that could help with customer communications.

 

A very good example of someone who is excellent at connecting between club and fans is Jim in the ticket office. You cannot underestimate how good he is at being able to communicate between two parties.

 

The Foxes Trust seem like a group of accountant types who don’t have the ability to connect two parties. They speak up every so often but don’t really have a voice.

 

A reform of the organisation I think is a great idea, but those currently in control of their empire won’t want this as it won’t fit their agenda.

 

The chances of succeeding in communicating with the club are remote as you are basically questioning them and so there is instant resistance. However there is a chance that with a reform in the trust a great communicator is put in place who has the ability to communicate effectively between two sides. But it will be a tough ask.

 

The Trust can’t see how ineffective they are, but stepping aside and letting someone else have a go under the same trust branding gives a small chance of enabling better communication between club and fans. 

 

 

[Finnegan]

2 hours ago, Splodgefox said:

This sort of statement is why there needs to be clarity. You might be right but you could also say "how is a fan advisory board meant to advise the club if it's represented by non-fans(the club)?"
You would have club stooges advising themselves - if true.

I don't know the empirical truth at this point and it doesn't seem like the authority on this can be expected to be reading this on Foxes Talk. Maybe it's the FSA?

I don't want semantics and interpretation I want to hear facts and Motty is right - constitution is the word and an LCFC message board is not the forum for analysing such details contained within long PDFs

 

This is why you have a Trust or other Supporter Groups. You need to have groups that are for the fans, obviously. You wouldn't invite an employee of the club to come and chair the Trust meetings would you? I'm with you on that. 

 

But then you also need to have a body that's set up as a forum for both the club and the fans to come together to have productive discussion, surely that's what an FAB is? 

 

I know very little about football fan groups so I'm not trying to speak like an authority. But I see absolutely no issue with the club being on an FAB and if anything it sounds obvious they would be? 

 

Otherwise, what the **** even is that Everton group?

 

[Foxes_Trust]

8 hours ago, Splodgefox said:

This sort of statement is why there needs to be clarity. You might be right but you could also say "how is a fan advisory board meant to advise the club if it's represented by non-fans(the club)?"
You would have club stooges advising themselves - if true.

I don't know the empirical truth at this point and it doesn't seem like the authority on this can be expected to be reading this on Foxes Talk. Maybe it's the FSA?

I don't want semantics and interpretation I want to hear facts and Motty is right - constitution is the word and an LCFC message board is not the forum for analysing such details contained within long PDFs

Both the Foxes Trust and LCFC have both separately held discussions with the Football Supporters Association about Fans Advisory Boards in terms of scope and potential format.

 

By attending the EFL Network Meetings (this season) the Trust keeps up to date on Fan Engagement Plans around the clubs and there was an interesting session at the beginning of this month with a case study presented by Stoke City's SLO. We have kept in contact with the Premier League Network throughout this season and are attending the latest meeting on Monday night.

[Lako42]

On 18/05/2024 at 00:03, Foxes_Trust said:

As a counter argument based on having a paid membership, surely members should expect their board to serve them ahead of fans who pay nothing & then expect to be represented

 

Hence becoming a member to influence the future direction of the Trust, as many have in recent months

 

This doesn't mean the Trust will only listen to members views, but some of the consultation and sharing of information (via a members newsletter) should be with members only

Outrageous for me. 

 

 

So all of that cash in your buckets doesn't mean a thing, 

 

You are an organisation that should represent the leicester city supporter base imo. 

 

Luckily it will be out of your archaic hands soon 

[the draper]

22 hours ago, Rob1742 said:

For a Trust or whatever it is to be called to work, they need to have the ability to connect to the football club.

 

Sounds simple and obvious, but it isn’t and the Foxes Trust haven’t been able to do this and from what I hear they are seen as an irritation rather than a vehicle that could help with customer communications.

 

A very good example of someone who is excellent at connecting between club and fans is Jim in the ticket office. You cannot underestimate how good he is at being able to communicate between two parties.

 

The Foxes Trust seem like a group of accountant types who don’t have the ability to connect two parties. They speak up every so often but don’t really have a voice.

 

A reform of the organisation I think is a great idea, but those currently in control of their empire won’t want this as it won’t fit their agenda.

 

The chances of succeeding in communicating with the club are remote as you are basically questioning them and so there is instant resistance. However there is a chance that with a reform in the trust a great communicator is put in place who has the ability to communicate effectively between two sides. But it will be a tough ask.

 

The Trust can’t see how ineffective they are, but stepping aside and letting someone else have a go under the same trust branding gives a small chance of enabling better communication between club and fans. 

 

 

Lots have found Jim great 

 

But reality is the job is too big and a little above his pay grade

 

Fan engagement and service improvement needs to have senior management control 

 

But the rest of your post is spot on 

[SemperEadem]

1 hour ago, the draper said:

Lots have found Jim great 

 

But reality is the job is too big and a little above his pay grade

 

Fan engagement and service improvement needs to have senior management control 

 

But the rest of your post is spot on 

The club have created a role above his level. The lady who got the role has been in it since April time.

[the draper]

5 minutes ago, SemperEadem said:

The club have created a role above his level. The lady who got the role has been in it since April time.

That's good to know

 

Be good for Jim as well 

[Nolucklcfc]

1 hour ago, the draper said:

That's good to know

 

Be good for Jim as well 

Well maybe … depends how good they are doesn’t it. I’m not convinced anyone in the club gives a shit what the fans say. We are an irritation to the club, nothing more nothing less. 

[kenny]

1 hour ago, SemperEadem said:

The club have created a role above his level. The lady who got the role has been in it since April time.

He still has to deal with the complaint emails.

 

Hope they pay him well.

[Paninistickers]

3 hours ago, SemperEadem said:

The club have created a role above his level. The lady who got the role has been in it since April time.

Isn't that fan engagement? As opposed to fan liaison? 

 

Two very different things....

[PabloEFC]

Hello all,

I'm a member of the Everton Fan Advisory Board and I've been made aware of this thread that mentions us, so I just thought I'd pop in and explain a few bits about the way we work (and the way we don't!). We were planning to get in touch with all 3 promoted teams this summer anyway, to welcome them to the Premier League and to offer any assistance they might need in formulating their FAB as we went through that process 2 years ago (after 18 months of discussion and planning) so we're happy to help and answer any questions about the challenges we faced and how we have evolved. I'll include a few relevant links to our website where relevant for some further reading.

Before that though, after reading this thread, I think there's one thing that's important to emphasise - there is absolutely no requirement for a FAB to have even a single club employee as a member. This is something that we collectively feel very strongly about, and to be perfectly honest, we can't understand how a Fan Advisory Board can consist of anything but fans. We need to be able to speak openly about the club in our meetings in order to hold the club to account and we don't see how this would be possible with an employee of the club sitting there. However, as we have reached out to other FABs in the Premier League throughout the season - often via our pre-match DropIn Sessions - we are finding that more and more have either been talked into having club employees on their FAB, been told that they must have club employees on their FAB, in some cases have had it completely taken out of their hands and the club has literally hand-picked and announced who is on their FAB without any input from fans, whilst others are still fighting their corner as they don't want to have club employees on their FAB, but the clubs are insisting on it. We're keen to let other fan groups know that there is another way.

So...the Everton FAB is made up of 11 Everton fans (all of whom are fan-elected in some way) and no club employees. Meetings-wise, the "headlines" are that we meet monthly as a FAB and we have mandated quarterly meetings with the club (i.e. the senior management team, including at least one board member, and the CEO must be present for 2 of the 4 meetings). However, the reality is that the FAB members are talking to each other and working on various projects on a daily basis, and we're also in regular contact with various club employees, and we hold ad-hoc meetings with them as and when necessary (i.e. outside of the mandated quarterly meetings). We also have several sub-committees within the FAB (e.g. Comms, Business & Technology, Everton Women) who have their own meetings and ongoing projects. Minutes of our FAB meetings and summaries of our meetings with the club are on our website.

The make-up of our 11 FAB positions is that 6 spaces are "reserved" for representatives of other fan groups (e.g. the Fans Forum, Disabled Supporters Association, Heritage Society, Supporters Clubs, etc.) - these members are are nominated via their own organisations to represent them on the FAB. We also hold an election each year where all Evertonians that are registered with the club can vote to fill the remaining positions - one is a reserved position for an FSA representative, alongside 4 other "unreserved" places with other requirements such as protected characteristics, a shareholder, etc. The decision was made to "stagger" the terms of the unreserved places to be either one or three seasons so we can ensure some continuity whilst also keeping the FAB fresh. Full details are available on our website and the election process is currently ongoing for the 2024/25 season with two places up for grabs this year.

Those are the basics (although that was a LOT of waffle - apologies!) but there is a lot more information on our website and our Twitter/X and social media accounts, so feel free to have a look and I hope that this was of some use to you all in explaining how FABs can work independently so that you are fully informed whilst forming your own FAB.

[CosbehFox]

Thanks for that - really interesting 

[RYM]

Interesting read @PabloEFC . I know your club is set up completely differently to most when it comes to fan engagement. Quite ground breaking for a UK team.

Scott McLeod set up a great team and processes there (from experience in similar roles). It looked good and I heard decent things from Kevin and David at the FSA, plus Mark Bradley (Fan Experience Co) and others.

 

For context ours is the polar opposite. Complete minimalist tick box service when it comes to FE and SLO’s (Jim is a good guy but heavily restricted IMO). We as a club say NO before we ever think or say WHAT IF. Anyway, has that understanding from the club helped you progress issues / helped with communications etc and what as a shining light have you managed to push through the FAB or start to?

 

(sorry for the waffle)