Time is up for the Foxes Trust?

[Hullfox]

How about for starters the fact it says "they represent the fans" as one of the choices.

They have never professed that they represent "the fans". They represent thier membership, if you are not a member they do not represent you.

Actually Babs, if you look at the FT's aims on their website, not once do they state they are there for their members interests. The clearly state "LCFC supporters".

I am an LCFC supporter but they do not represent me.

I know no one organisation will represent everyone but it is their words on their website.

[Thracian]

Hullfox: "I am an LCFC supporter but they do not represent me."

And they should be thankful for small mercies...!

[Babylon]

Actually Babs, if you look at the FT's aims on their website, not once do they state they are there for their members interests. The clearly state "LCFC supporters".

I am an LCFC supporter but they do not represent me.

I know no one organisation will represent everyone but it is their words on their website.

The Foxes Trust is the Leicester City FC supporters' trust.

Welcome to our website where you can read about us and what we do. If you'd like to become a member you can join online.

Who We Are

Leicester City Supporters Trust

• Is a non-profit making Supporters Trust.

• Membership is open to all fans of Leicester City Football Club.

• Is totally independent of Leicester City Football Club.

• Is democratic. On a one member one vote basis.

• Roles are undertaken on a voluntary basis. Committee members are democratically elected.

• Believes the Directors and Chairman of Leicester City Football Club should act in the best interests of the community that the club serves.

Foxes Trust is NOT a Supporters Club. Foxes Trust and the Supporters Club will co-exist, with each having a distinct and important role to play. We are NOT a protest group but a positive force for change."

They don't state that no, but they don't state they speak for everyone. Their members are afterall lcfc fans. And it's clear that it's a membership group. Especially when you read the constitution.

[Daggers]

Godammit! I was about to post that Babylon.

The trouble with this thread is that legitimate concerns from members and potential members are being lost under a swell of ignorant and rude invective.

My point, that I have been banging away at, that the level of communications fluctuates from proficient to shambolic is valid...irrespective of who the Trust are representing.

Certainly, the vitriol expressed recently is something that the Board of the Trust should have addressed a long time ago, or rather - the reasons for such anger to exist. They haven't.

If they do not reply to polite emails and PM's, if they persist with the current actions, then I hardly see how they are going to boost membership and assuage the current dissatisfaction with them. The head in the sand policy is not working.

[Hullfox]

Hullfox: "I am an LCFC supporter but they do not represent me."

And they should be thankful for small mercies...!

[Thracian]

Try Horlicks.

[Hullfox]

The Foxes Trust is the Leicester City FC supporters' trust.

Welcome to our website where you can read about us and what we do. If you'd like to become a member you can join online.

Who We Are

Leicester City Supporters Trust

• Is a non-profit making Supporters Trust.

• Membership is open to all fans of Leicester City Football Club.

• Is totally independent of Leicester City Football Club.

• Is democratic. On a one member one vote basis.

• Roles are undertaken on a voluntary basis. Committee members are democratically elected.

• Believes the Directors and Chairman of Leicester City Football Club should act in the best interests of the community that the club serves.

Foxes Trust is NOT a Supporters Club. Foxes Trust and the Supporters Club will co-exist, with each having a distinct and important role to play. We are NOT a protest group but a positive force for change."

They don't state that no, but they don't state they speak for everyone. Their members are afterall lcfc fans. And it's clear that it's a membership group. Especially when you read the constitution.

I'm not trying to labour a point but......

I was referring to the aims page.

Our Aims

• To lobby, publicise and campaign to encourage the Board to take into account the interests of supporters when making its decisions.

• To create an independent forum to raise the concerns of Leicester City Football Club supporters.

• To enable a democratically elected director representing the views of the supporters to influence the decision making of the board, and to enshrine in the football club’s Memorandum and Articles of Association the representation of the Trust on the Board.

• To raise money for the benefit of the club. Funds raised are to be used appropriately as to benefit the best interests of Leicester City Football Club and its supporters.

I just don't see how they can raise the concerns of supporters when everyone's concerns are different. They are certainly able to raise the concerns of their members and have every right to.

*Disappears and awaits constructive opposition from Babs and Dave and something else from Thrach*

[Thracian]

I'm not trying to labour a point but......

I was referring to the aims page.

Our Aims

• To lobby, publicise and campaign to encourage the Board to take into account the interests of supporters when making its decisions.

• To create an independent forum to raise the concerns of Leicester City Football Club supporters.

• To enable a democratically elected director representing the views of the supporters to influence the decision making of the board, and to enshrine in the football club’s Memorandum and Articles of Association the representation of the Trust on the Board.

• To raise money for the benefit of the club. Funds raised are to be used appropriately as to benefit the best interests of Leicester City Football Club and its supporters.

I just don't see how they can raise the concerns of supporters when everyone's concerns are different. They are certainly able to raise the concerns of their members and have every right to.

*Disappears and awaits constructive opposition from Babs and Dave and something else from Thrach*

Well seeing the members are, by definition, supporters I think you're being pedantic.

They don't even claim to seek to raise all the concerns of all the supporters anyway just, by implication, some concerns of the supporters who happen to become their members.

Why would they worry about the concerns of supporters who weren't in their organisation - unless, perhaps if they were asked to do so?.

Perhaps you should do that. Ask them to express your concerns to the club.

They might ignore you, they might oblige and, depending on the length of the list, they might decide to fold up and save themselves further punishment.

Either way, you've got a 2-1-on chance of a happy outcome.

[Babylon]

Godammit! I was about to post that Babylon.

The trouble with this thread is that legitimate concerns from members and potential members are being lost under a swell of ignorant and rude invective.

My point, that I have been banging away at, that the level of communications fluctuates from proficient to shambolic is valid...irrespective of who the Trust are representing.

Certainly, the vitriol expressed recently is something that the Board of the Trust should have addressed a long time ago, or rather - the reasons for such anger to exist. They haven't.

If they do not reply to polite emails and PM's, if they persist with the current actions, then I hardly see how they are going to boost membership and assuage the current dissatisfaction with them. The head in the sand policy is not working.

I completely agree, I find myself getting embroiled in a crusade to stick up for the trust. When I myself think certain things that have gone on shouldn't have. I'm no trust lover, I just don't like over the top criticism or unwarranted criticism they receive from a majority on here.

There are lots of people on here like yourself, like Hull, Like Ric. Who bring up valid arguments, (as hull has done in his last couple of posts. see below*) I have no problem with that at all and i'm sure the trust wouldn't either.

To reply to your post hull. I'd agree the trust should clarify somewhere that they represent their members. I think we all know that they represent their members and not all of us, but if the site doesn't stipulate that it's very hard to stick up for them if people want to be pedantic.

[Hullfox]

I completely agree, I find myself getting embroiled in a crusade to stick up for the trust. When I myself think certain things that have gone on shouldn't have. I'm no trust lover, I just don't like over the top criticism or unwarranted criticism they receive from a majority on here.

There are lots of people on here like yourself, like Hull, Like Ric. Who bring up valid arguments, (as hull has done in his last couple of posts. see below*) I have no problem with that at all and i'm sure the trust wouldn't either.

To reply to your post hull. I'd agree the trust should clarify somewhere that they represent their members. I think we all know that they represent their members and not all of us, but if the site doesn't stipulate that it's very hard to stick up for them if people want to be pedantic.

Agreed mate.

I think I've let my arguments get personal because of my own experience. Time to take a step back.

[Smudge]

The title asks 'Time is up for the Foxes Trust?' and the poll asks 'Is it not true that they should not not be allowed to not carry on not bumbling?' The two options are 'They are useless', 'They represent the fans', the second option seems to imply that they represent all fans, which they've never claimed to do, they represent their members, which just leaves 'They are useless' for everyone to vote in. What is wrong with a simple, 'yes', 'no', 'don't know'?

Not to mention the fact that polls like this are useless anyway as it is up to the members whether the FT exists or not, not the general public. And that it is pretty shameful to hold polls like this anyway asking for the disbanding of a voluntary society of LCFC fans who all have the club's best interests at heart, who have put in money and hard work in their spare time over the last 5 years and who have received very little other than flack and accusations for their troubles. IMO.

I took this as an opinion poll not a vote to disband the Trust.

[Daggers]

There are lots of people on here like yourself, like Hull, Like Ric. Who bring up valid arguments, (as hull has done in his last couple of posts. see below*) I have no problem with that at all and i'm sure the trust wouldn't either.

It would be nice if they opened themselves up to some productive discussions and took a few ideas on board. I have said this in PM's and in emails...and not one has been replied to to date.

There is a problem here that is not 'The Takeover' - it is the problem that has resulted in a drop in membership. Their solution? A possible use of share sales to subsidise membership. Someone is having a laugh.

I firmly believe that the concept of a Trust is very valuable to supporters - debate should be held on what their purpose should be. We know why this Trust was set up, but that job has passed...new focus, new club, new times. The Trust has not moved forward.

Silence over the takeover should not extend to silence over any other issue appertaining to them. Why will they not engage in a sensible debate?

[Foxes_Trust]

It would be nice if they opened themselves up to some productive discussions and took a few ideas on board. I have said this in PM's and in emails...and not one has been replied to to date.

5 e-mails received, 4 responded, last one didn't need a response

2 PM's received, 1 response, 2nd received indicated didn't want a reply.

That is far from a "not one" response

[Foxes_Trust]

Silence over the takeover should not extend to silence over any other issue appertaining to them. Why will they not engage in a sensible debate?

Once the takeover is resolved, then the Trust Board will sit down & plan our next path ahead

[Daggers]

5 e-mails received, 4 responded, last one didn't need a response

2 PM's received, 1 response, 2nd received indicated didn't want a reply.

That is far from a "not one" response

..and that is the kind of response that (not only being factually incorrect) is why good willed people such as myself are tempted to use the vernacular when discussing "The Trust".

What a sanctimonious **** you are.

[Foxes_Trust]

..and that is the kind of response that (not only being factually incorrect) is why good willed people such as myself are tempted to use the vernacular when discussing "The Trust".

What a sanctimonious **** you are.

So you admit that "not one" was incorrect then ?

We have a right to respond if somebody has posted critical information about us which is incorrect

[Michael Doyle]

OK maybe the Foxes Trust can answer the following Yes or No question to clarify their position.

On behalf of the supporters they represent do they unreservedly support the take over bid from MM?

COME ON YOU MIGHTY FOXES

MadMick

ps. As a supporter representing myself my answer is YES I DO.

[Daggers]

So you admit that "not one" was incorrect then ?

We have a right to respond if somebody has posted critical information about us which is incorrect

The playground mentality displayed in your reply is laughable.

Rather than address any of the issues I have raised with the Trust Board or on this forum you are content to debate semantics in public. Rather than be proactive you are content to fight your corner only when you perceive it as a slur on your ability to keep track on your admin.

You preside over a period of decline for the Trust, during the most important period since its inception, and wibble about having a right to respond.

If you had the wherewithal to bear in mind the context of the posts in this thread: No - I do not "admit" it. Not one email was addressed, not one PM was addressed when raising issues about the Trust and communications, just as none of the issues criticising the Trust raised on FoxesTalk by anyone are ever addressed.

Tell you what though, I'll make this easy...simply forget anything I have said from hereon. You carry on doing what you do, remove me from the membership and email list and I'll be content to lob mud at you and laugh every time you fall flat on your face rather than offering help and support.

Pathetic.

[The People's Hero]

The playground mentality displayed in your reply is laughable.

Rather than address any of the issues I have raised with the Trust Board or on this forum you are content to debate semantics in public. Rather than be proactive you are content to fight your corner only when you perceive it as a slur on your ability to keep track on your admin.

You preside over a period of decline for the Trust, during the most important period since its inception, and wibble about having a right to respond.

If you had the wherewithal to bear in mind the context of the posts in this thread: No - I do not "admit" it. Not one email was addressed, not one PM was addressed when raising issues about the Trust and communications, just as none of the issues criticising the Trust raised on FoxesTalk by anyone are ever addressed.

Tell you what though, I'll make this easy...simply forget anything I have said from hereon. You carry on doing what you do, remove me from the membership and email list and I'll be content to lob mud at you and laugh every time you fall flat on your face rather than offering help and support.

Pathetic.

Spot on Disco Bob..

The 'fans' are behind you.

The canape addict are running scared... what I love though is how with each post they make themselves appear less and less capable, professional and useful!

[newtonfox]

The playground mentality displayed in your reply is laughable.

Rather than address any of the issues I have raised with the Trust Board or on this forum you are content to debate semantics in public. Rather than be proactive you are content to fight your corner only when you perceive it as a slur on your ability to keep track on your admin.

You preside over a period of decline for the Trust, during the most important period since its inception, and wibble about having a right to respond.

If you had the wherewithal to bear in mind the context of the posts in this thread: No - I do not "admit" it. Not one email was addressed, not one PM was addressed when raising issues about the Trust and communications, just as none of the issues criticising the Trust raised on FoxesTalk by anyone are ever addressed.

Tell you what though, I'll make this easy...simply forget anything I have said from hereon. You carry on doing what you do, remove me from the membership and email list and I'll be content to lob mud at you and laugh every time you fall flat on your face rather than offering help and support.

Pathetic.

well siad

[Surreal Madrid]

The title asks 'Time is up for the Foxes Trust?' and the poll asks 'Is it not true that they should not not be allowed to not carry on not bumbling?' The two options are 'They are useless', 'They represent the fans', the second option seems to imply that they represent all fans, which they've never claimed to do, they represent their members, which just leaves 'They are useless' for everyone to vote in. What is wrong with a simple, 'yes', 'no', 'don't know'?

Not to mention the fact that polls like this are useless anyway as it is up to the members whether the FT exists or not, not the general public. And that it is pretty shameful to hold polls like this anyway asking for the disbanding of a voluntary society of LCFC fans who all have the club's best interests at heart, who have put in money and hard work in their spare time over the last 5 years and who have received very little other than flack and accusations for their troubles. IMO.

Wise words, L.

[Manwell Pablo]

The title asks 'Time is up for the Foxes Trust?' and the poll asks 'Is it not true that they should not not be allowed to not carry on not bumbling?' The two options are 'They are useless', 'They represent the fans', the second option seems to imply that they represent all fans, which they've never claimed to do, they represent their members, which just leaves 'They are useless' for everyone to vote in. What is wrong with a simple, 'yes', 'no', 'don't know'?

Not to mention the fact that polls like this are useless anyway as it is up to the members whether the FT exists or not, not the general public. And that it is pretty shameful to hold polls like this anyway asking for the disbanding of a voluntary society of LCFC fans who all have the club's best interests at heart, who have put in money and hard work in their spare time over the last 5 years and who have received very little other than flack and accusations for their troubles. IMO.

The poll makes next to no sense I'll admit that, this would be beacuse I was behind it.

However in my first post the poll is explained "simple question should the Foxes Trust sell their shares to Madaric yes or no" I have no problem with them exisisting, their just not proffesional enough to have such a large shareholding in this club.

[davieG]

The poll makes next to no sense I'll admit that, this would be beacuse I was behind it.

However in my first post the poll is explained "simple question should the Foxes Trust sell their shares to Madaric yes or no" I have no problem with them exisisting, their just not proffesional enough to have such a large shareholding in this club.

Since when has being professional had anything to do with holding shares in a business?

[Manwell Pablo]

Since when has being professional had anything to do with holding shares in a business?

Quite a lot when your a major shareholder.

[davieG]

Quite a lot when your a major shareholder.

Anyone with money can buy shares, professionalism has next to nothing to do with it.