Early AGM: Your Chance To Change The Foxes Trust

[Gazza3]

I haven’t had a link . Thanks very much . 

[FoxesTez]

Just now, Gazza3 said:

I haven’t had a link . Thanks very much . 

Check your spam - it came from an odd email address like ‘Auntie Linda’ or something. Sounds dodgy but isn’t 

[ramboacdc]

18 minutes ago, Gazza3 said:

I haven’t had a link . Thanks very much . 

PM'd it you mate

[accessory]

About 70 in attendance tonight - 30 online, the rest in the Keith Weller Lounge.

 

This is a big increase on previous seasons, but still a miniscule proportion of the fanbase.

 

We haven't yet reached discussion on the motion tabled. My guess is that it will be passed and thus put to ratification by the entire Trust membership.

 

Update: no vote will be taken at the meeting - the motion will be put straight to the membership online or by post.

Edited 13 January 2025 by accessory

[Guest RYM]

Is there anyone here that sits fairly neutral on the vote to take place? Interested in hearing if so as the whole AGM seemed very THEM and US and I’d like a neutral view on that to see if that was the case?
 

On top of that minutes wise I guess that’ll be full of Lynn deflecting questions back to people “what would you do?” rather than discuss any Trust strategy on those issues raised, Simon getting called out as “a good politician” by Paul after making various strong and relevant points, the constant reference to “we’re only volunteers” to justify any lack of action (it still needs to be run professionally) the same desires to praise the club about the FAB etc despite complete negligence on anything fan related whatsoever, lots of energy to push “other clubs are worse” when it comes to fan engagement etc. All as expected I guess.

 

We also had a good couple of minutes talking about stamps and lots of time on emails and CRM systems which is needed I know but that’s not going to appeal to the young ones the trust need.

 

I’ve a lot of time for Jamie, Harry and Becky but those that back them need to help keep their energy high as I fear that could be sucked out of them very quickly based on all that we already know.

[Guest Lako42]

70 people out of the entire fanbase. 

 

 

If that doesn't convince you that the FT is unfit for purpose and needs massive changes then nothing will. 

 

 

Pathetic numbers for a PL clubs main supporter organisation. 

 

 

 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

59 minutes ago, Lako42 said:

70 people out of the entire fanbase. 

 

 

If that doesn't convince you that the FT is unfit for purpose and needs massive changes then nothing will. 

 

 

Pathetic numbers for a PL clubs main supporter organisation. 

Pressuambly you were there, what's the next steps in the process?

[ramboacdc]

I joined online so wasn't sure of numbers in the room, but my takeaway points are:

 

The push last year nearly doubled the size of the trust from ~300 to over 600. A lot are in the 21+ region. The drive to get more people signed up, with the hope of getting thousands of members, seemed to be non existent. At one point talking about how they need a TikTok account to draw in under 21s. If that doesn't show how out of touch they are I don't know what will. No discussion of using the £46k in the bank to do any sort of promotion on socials or anywhere else as a recruitment drive for the trust, but they want to increase membership. 

 

There were times where any sort of feedback around the trust was taken almost personally by the board member addressing the question. Asked why the trust still wants to sit on the FAB despite not liking the parameters set by the club the answer was "if we leave, we risk alienating the club and we wont get anything from them. We are not a protest group." Later on they spoke about how they contact the club for responses and hear nothing, so it's a moot point as naff all already comes back to the trust in the first place. 

 

The new treasurer seems pretty switched on. Like the above poster said, I couldn't give 2 tosses about stamps, but we had to be told how we buy them to post newsletters. Could easily save money on postage by not sending pointless certificates out to new members. 

 

On the presentation from the chair, one of the challenges listed was "Foxes Trust Reform" and then they glossed over it. This was because a few people had already ruffled their feathers around the FAB stuff and they didn't want to hear anything more against them. 

 

The website may be getting updated and a new members area made. It would need major overhaul and as it stands the members areas would be devoid of any information apart from name, contact details and member number. There isn't anything they could add to a resource hub or anything like that, so it feels as useful as a chocolate teapot. 

 

When it came to the motion, they were very dismissive, Simon held his own and was very good at responding to questions. I will be voting for it, but I do believe the finer details need adding to it. The board asked the audience questions of "what would you do?" and "say if I was on a multi year project and didn't come up with results in a year, are you voting me out?" to which the answer is no, but they span it to make it seem like people will call a confidence vote at a whim throughout the year, which is impossible as there have been no SGM's or EGM's this year and the board avoid them where they can claiming "resource issues." A lot of heart strings were being pulled saying they are volunteers who are "only human" and have to take time away some time (Lynn mentioning her recent bereavement and Matt saying he had issues in the past year that made him unable to perform to what he believes is an adequate level). In Matts case he was aware of this and offered his resignation, but it was declined and he did little for that period. He said "would you be voting me out as I couldn't perform?" No response was allowed and the meeting wrapped. But as someone wrote in the chat Matt did everything correct there and the Board decided to leave someone on the board they knew couldn't perform and didn't offer a temporary replacement, say who took over his duties or even tell the members. 

 

The whole time through this debate, Alan sat doing his best impression of the Churchill dog. He knows the way the votes are going, so much so he told us the votes were interesting on email, and then they changed the amount needed to pass from 67% to 75% and all proxy votes discarded. So now they have a rough poll and it feels the goalposts have been shifted hoping the older parts of the fan base see the reformists as some sort of trouble makers and it shuts Simon and his proposition down.

 

It would take 10 of our switched on fans to make an officially recognised fan trust of twice the size in 6 months for sure. The whole thing is lame duck until dead wood is cleared. It's all jobs for the boys, possible perks for staying on the club sides (I can't prove that) and annual meetings where naff all is agreed apart from the notes from last year and the price of stamps. 

 

[CosbehFox]

1 hour ago, Lako42 said:

70 people out of the entire fanbase. 

 

 

If that doesn't convince you that the FT is unfit for purpose and needs massive changes then nothing will. 

 

 

Pathetic numbers for a PL clubs main supporter organisation. 

 

 

 

You can argue that's a failure of the Trust to present themselves better and communicate better (hence my final comments on the evening) but equally the low numbers hinge on the participation of people willing to attend and use their time. 

 

When I started on this whole campaign, I attended a Union FS open evening, they had 80 to 100 people say they would come and in the end 30ish turned up. 

 

The biggest challenge of any LCFC fan group is apathy and people actually getting involved. That's the biggest obstacle in my opinion. Typically I've put myself forward to give it a go trying to jump over it! I honestly think the same issue would strike up for any fan group at the moment. 

Edited 14 January 2025 by CosbehFox

[Gazza3]

14 hours ago, ramboacdc said:

PM'd it you mate

Thanks but I had moved on so didn’t get to log on . I checked spam and inbox . I had one from Aunie Sarah at ntlworld ..( wow) saying I would get a link but never did . Hope it went well

[Guest Lako42]

Is there any merit in starting an entirely new supporter group that isn't impeded by the old fashioned reputation that the FT has? 

 

I don't think it would take long to surpass the numbers in the FT and arguably it would be a quicker way of gaining actual input and not just apathy. 

 

I understand the club won't initially even recognise it but really numbers are all that matters and the ability to mobilise quicker and more vocally than the trust do (they don't)

 

The trust being a legacy group means nothing these days as the club clearly thinks very little about it as an organisation. 

Edited 14 January 2025 by Lako42

[grobyfox1990]

1 hour ago, Lako42 said:

70 people out of the entire fanbase. 

 

 

If that doesn't convince you that the FT is unfit for purpose and needs massive changes then nothing will. 

 

 

Pathetic numbers for a PL clubs main supporter organisation. 

 

 

 

People though. It's a Monday night in January, people are too busy feeling sorry for themselves and thinking of excuses for failing their new years resolutions.

It was also long, I logged on around 8pm after work then had to leave at 9.30pm.

TBH, unpopular opinion coming.. I thought it was decent and kept civil.

[CosbehFox]

19 minutes ago, Lako42 said:

Is there any merit in starting an entirely new supporter group that isn't impeded by the old fashioned reputation that the FT has? 

 

I don't think it would take long to surpass the numbers in the FT and arguably it would be a quicker way of gaining actual input and not just apathy. 

 

I understand the club won't initially even recognise it but really numbers are all that matters and the ability to mobilise quicker and more vocally than the trust do (they don't)

 

The trust being a legacy group means nothing these days as the club clearly thinks very little about it as an organisation. 

It was something some of us discussed at the time and I am happy to be clear on my thoughts at the time. No doubt the reputation point was thought about long and hard. 

 

It was the alignment to the FSA as much as to the club - and therefore the Trust has the ability to feed into the FAB as the recognised supporters body. When we started the FAB structure was still on the table as well. As a member of the Trust, you can utilise what the FSA have to offer - a topic brought up yesterday which I am gladly was announced was banning orders. FSA have a good history of helping individuals in such scenarios. 

 

That said I don't think having more fan groups is a bad thing at all - particularly when you compare to other clubs of a similar size. Anything which extends the reach of engaged people is huge. 

Edited 14 January 2025 by CosbehFox

[PAULCFC]

Did I hear Lynn right when she said we'd hear something about the vote today?

[Guest RYM]

1 hour ago, PAULCFC said:

Did I hear Lynn right when she said we'd hear something about the vote today?

“What would you do?”

 

(votes are now in your inbox)

[PAULCFC]

Done.....not sure why they need to know your name though?I thought anything like this would be a secret ballot.

[ramboacdc]

I posted the link to the survey here believing you could vote multiple times and it was a generic link. I was wrong on this. 

 

Edited to correct this. 

 

 

 

 

Edited 14 January 2025 by ramboacdc
See post.

[Guest RYM]

3 minutes ago, PAULCFC said:

Done.....not sure why they need to know your name though?I thought anything like this would be a secret ballot.

It’s a strange process that could easily be manipulated by any of us to be honest. 

[ramboacdc]

8 minutes ago, RYM said:

It’s a strange process that could easily be manipulated by any of us to be honest. 

"Alan has voted 5 times, which I find interesting?" 

 

 

[Blackboots only]

I’m trying to do the online vote, but have no idea what my membership number is ?

searched through emails from when I joined earlier in the year but no luck. 
Any ideas ? 

Edited 14 January 2025 by Blackboots only
Just realised I don’t need my number to complete the survey

[PAULCFC]

Just now, Blackboots only said:

I’m trying to do the online vote, but have no idea what my membership number is ?

searched through emails from when I joined earlier in the year but no luck. 
Any ideas ? 

I just put my name......no idea of mine either.

[Nolucklcfc]

2 hours ago, Lako42 said:

Is there any merit in starting an entirely new supporter group that isn't impeded by the old fashioned reputation that the FT has? 

 

I don't think it would take long to surpass the numbers in the FT and arguably it would be a quicker way of gaining actual input and not just apathy. 

 

I understand the club won't initially even recognise it but really numbers are all that matters and the ability to mobilise quicker and more vocally than the trust do (they don't)

 

The trust being a legacy group means nothing these days as the club clearly thinks very little about it as an organisation. 

I think it’s really needed and would provide something fresh for the club to think about as well as the fanbase. I think sadly people have very fixed views about trust and that is going to be a very difficult challenge to overcome. However, in their defence I think they have improved over the last few months but that’s as a result of the excellent work of the reform group. New fan groups is a positive thing for sure. One that appeals to the younger generation would be massively welcome. 

[PAULCFC]

In this day and age it's not hard to send a one time link to stop multiple votes?

[Guest RYM]

3 minutes ago, PAULCFC said:

In this day and age it's not hard to send a one time link to stop multiple votes?

2 things. 1 at best it could be a deliberately flawed process to force a postal vote that most won’t be arsed with. Or 2, further proof that this lot are totally incompetent and have no idea what they are doing when it comes to anything but nodding along with the club.

 

The fu©️king irony TBH.

[ramboacdc]

40 minutes ago, Blackboots only said:

I’m trying to do the online vote, but have no idea what my membership number is ?

searched through emails from when I joined earlier in the year but no luck. 
Any ideas ? 

 

38 minutes ago, PAULCFC said:

I just put my name......no idea of mine either.

I think your membership number is on the certificate they post out. I lost mine ages ago. 

 

36 minutes ago, PAULCFC said:

In this day and age it's not hard to send a one time link to stop multiple votes?

EDIT: I was wrong on my statement about this. My link has since expired after I have voted. 

 

It is done by allocating a cookie to your browser though, so very simple to either open the link in a new browser, at which point you get a fresh voting page, or delete the cookie by clearing your browser cache. 

 

Easily manipulated, but at least there is an extra step needed to do so. 

Edited 14 January 2025 by ramboacdc