Foxes Trust

[James.]

Dave's post is the post I was hoping I would read in this thread.

Out of interest do you have the time, motivation and energy to actually join the Trust as a member?

Apologies if you have already answered that question but from your post I think you have accurately and eloquently summed up the basic problems with the Trust as it is and the changes that could be made to improve it.

So why not take it one step further... The more people they have with a clear vision the more chance we have of turning things around and using the slipstream of the Mandaric takeover to propel the Trust into the organisation it should be.

[Poakey]

Good post Dave.

Wouldn't expect 95% of this forum to understand it but I found myself agreeing with every point.

I dont quite know what you think of the OTHER 95%(im guessing its everyone but you,manwell,fez and daggers dave)here on FT,were obviously below you so why do you spend so much time on here if 95% of us are'nt on your level?

Oh yeah,Have you created your own "cogs"room yet?

[James.]

I dont quite know what you think of the OTHER 95%(im guessing its everyone but you,manuel,fez and daggers dave)here on FT,were obviously below you so why do you spend so much time on here if 95% of us are'nt on your level?

Oh yeah,Have you created your on "cogs"room yet?

To be fair 5% of the total members is 179 people.

I reckon I might just about sneak in.

[Daggers]

I've read your detailed and interesting post carefully, but I'd genuinely be interested in how they should 'speak to the fans at large'

If you have time would you expand upon what you mean? Sincere question. I'm not looking to get into an argument with you.

Out of interest do you have the time, motivation and energy to actually join the Trust as a member?

I'm not looking for a fight here either

I was a member of the Trust and, as detailed in posts this season, lost all faith in the executive and one person in particular over their behaviour during the takeover process. Consequently, I asked them to remove me from the membership list and shredded my certificate...I have received no communications from the Trust since.

With regards 'speaking to the fans' I am referring to the manner the Trust should conduct itself: As I have said many times, I want to see a successful Trust and firmly believe that it has a pivotal role to play at the club. I believe that it should represent fans on issues that are of large concern to us. I believe it should be open, encourage a two-way dialogue with supporters and carry out its business in a transparent manner.

I do not believe that the Trust should be a lapdog to the club and should always make decisions and take action in order to prevent that perception occurring.

I fear that I am starting to repeat myself and so I'll stop after saying one more thing - with some of the money coming through from the sale of the club...maybe carrying out a detailed survey into fan attitudes and opinions may not be a bad use of cash.

[James.]

I fear that I am starting to repeat myself and so I'll stop after saying one more thing - with some of the money coming through from the sale of the club...maybe carrying out a detailed survey into fan attitudes and opinions may not be a bad use of cash.

And crucially acting positively on the results.

By the way my question wasn't meant to sound aggressive

[Foxes_Trust]

Number of members is certainly the key. If Milan is supportive of there being a fans organistion, I would suggest the trust get in touch with the club with the following suggestion - when a season ticket is bought, all purchasers should have the option to join the trust for £1 added to the cost of their season ticket. Whn you are spending a couple of hundred quid you won't notice the extra pound, so you should get a lot more members. The club could tally it up and pay over to the trust. Just a thought.

A few Trust's have utilised this approach with some success (although it was more than £1, which certainly wouldn't cover administration costs).

On that basis we asked about sending out membership applications with Season Tickets in our first year and this was refused by the club.

[davieG]

A few Trust's have utilised this approach with some success (although it was more than £1, which certainly wouldn't cover administration costs).

On that basis we asked about sending out membership applications with Season Tickets in our first year and this was refused by the club.

How does it cost more than a £1 to register members?

I would have thought that a significant increase in membership would bring some economy of scale and provide an opportunity for some form of sponsorship/advertising!

As a member I can say I can't recall ever see a financial statement of costs against expenditure.

I guess I shouldn't be asking these questions in the forum as it encourages the form of communication I've advocated against, shows how easy it is to get drawn in.

[Michael Doyle]

I can assure you we didn't "just sit back" during the takeover. Our AGM was the first opportunity we had to give members an insight into how the takeover progressed & our role in it. The feedback we had from members on the night was they were amazed at the amount of time FT Board members committed to the process. The FT Board also acknowledged the frustration many members felt as the FT Board weren't able to give them regular detailed updates.

As my colleague said above we will update non-internet members on our role in the takeover in a newsletter in the next few weeks. We believe it is important our members are updated before publishing on our website for non-members to read. Frustrating I know for those of you who want to know the full details but hope you understand our first priority has to be to update members.

To clarify the details of the bid concerned the amount MM was investing in the club (£9m over 15 months), payments to shareholders & the scheduling of those payments plus other legal stuff required to complete a takover/buyout.

There were NO details as to MM's future plans for the club on such things as the Stadium, the Academy or ticket prices etc.

In fairness a bid document wouldn't contain those issues, however we did ask those questions both publicly & privately to MM's representative in the early stages of the takeover. Interestingly when we did raise these points on message boards & in the Mercury we were accused of being anti MM!

MM has only been at the club a matter of a couple of weeks, so will no doubt be conducting is own thorough review of the club before putting his business plan into place. The Trust also needs to review where it's at & the direction it goes from here, which is why we'll be looking at the issues DaveG raised above & many others. No doubt in the next couple of weeks we'll meet with MM & discuss how the FT can work with him for the benefit of all fans.

We have a commitment from MM that he will hold a Q&A evening with Trust members, probably sometime in April & once a date has been confirmed will publish that on our website & mail non internet members.

Finally what do those on here, both members & non-members believe is the way forward for FT?

If you are a member what are your priorities for FT now?

If you are not a member what would encourage you to join?

Btw I've not deliberately avoided the question re member numbers, but we are currently going through the renewal process & once that is complete will be able to give better indications as to membership levels.

Thanks FT.

Firstly let me say that I understand your time and commitment and commend you all for it. After all you are volunteers aren't you? ( I assume no one is paid for the role they play)

On one hand the FT say it has a "commitment from MM that he will hold a Q&A evening with Trust members, probably sometime in April & once a date has been confirmed will publish that on our website & mail non internet members". On the other hand the FT say "we will update non-internet members on our role in the takeover in a newsletter in the next few weeks. We believe it is important our members are updated before publishing on our website for non-members to read. Frustrating I know for those of you who want to know the full details but hope you understand our first priority has to be to update members".

Its not frustrating its poor practice.

You should be very open (to non members and members) about what your doing and you will find that this will create new members because they have faith in what your doing rather than letting a little bit of information out here (members) and confirming it weeks or days later (non members). (leads to rumour, inaccuracy and most importantly mistrust)

If you profess to represent all club supporters (which by the sounds of it (forum feedback) you don't) the only thing you need to keep within the membership is the constitutional requirements i.e., funds in bank, notice of motions, election of committees etc etc.

Thanks for the bid clarification but I have already read the bid and think its very simple and very effective document and the way forward fort he club. I also might not say this if I was a current share holder with their current financial commitments but at the end of the day it is the best thing for the club. The bid is also weeks old and the FT should have determined a view by now, be advertising that view in regards the stadium, training ground etc by now. (Issues you think are important for the supporters to know)

As a non member I think the FT should be positioning its self to be a true representative of club supporters in stead of sitting on the fence waiting to hear what is going to happen. (Take a position to influence the decision don't sit back and wait for the decision as you may not like what it is!)

This is what I don't see the FT doing (taking a position)

This is why I will not join it

From a distance it appears to be a boys/girls club.

You want the tag of representing all City fans but only want to inform you members (no wonder distrust is rife)

From a personal perspective I hope its not a status thing where office bearers fear losing some of the privileges they have become accustomed to. If it is this would be a worry.

Finally, I understand that you are reviewing the current membership renewals. My request was as a matter of interest so last years details would suffice. Can you provide these please?.

COME ON YOU MIGHTY FOXES

MadMick

[Babylon]

To my mind they have not addressed their communication issues and they have not clarified what they stand for or what they are campaigning for. As such, what purpose do they serve?

I have seen something posted by them that they will now communicate via website bullitins rather than message boards. That's not to say they won't post, but it certainly won't be like it was before. "EDITED TO SAY: i've just seen their post after I wrote all this".

I think they have seen the error of posting on here because that just leads to more critisism due to their emotive posting and not being able to respond to every question posted.

They have also said that they will be sorting out where they go from here, aims etc etc. When things have been decided i'd expect there will be a bullitin on the website.

[Babylon]

How does it cost more than a £1 to register members?

If you take into account costs of running websites and emails, postage costs, stationary costs to name just a few I would imagine your up above the £1 a member cost. I wouldn't imagine it costs £1 to register someone, but to cover the annual costs it could easily.

[Jon the Hat]

If you take into account costs of running websites and emails, postage costs, stationary costs to name just a few I would imagine your up above the £1 a member cost. I wouldn't imagine it costs £1 to register someone, but to cover the annual costs it could easily.

Would it not be possible to cover the cost of webhosting and email through sponsorship / advertising? How about and additional charge for memebers wo want to recieve printed newsletters?

I would be interested to see the costs which are being incurred. The finances of the trust should be fully visible to those considering memebrship as well as exisitng members.

Other suggestions would be limiting the amount if time a member can spend on the board, as this would avoid members not joining for reasons of disliking individuals.

[Surreal Madrid]

Consequently, I asked them to remove me from the membership list and shredded my certificate...I have received no communications from the Trust since.

Not quite sure what you are saying here - are you complaining that they haven't contacted you?

[Ric Flair]

2. Toadying.

Summed it up in one word for me!

[Fox in a Box]

Your quotation is pretty pointless in this discussion, the final sentence is the only point of note.

I would say that the large level of dissatisfaction with the Trust stems from a number of issues:

1. Lack of clarity of campaigning priorities. If you look at any pressure group/organisation you should be able to find clear action priorities...the Trust has none. When ask the question on a repeated basis over the course of this season it has never been answered...not even the concept has been addressed. Look at the website for all of their communication for this season - spot an issue they have tackled?

2. Toadying. Any independent body needs to publicly affirm its independence rather than climbing into bed with those it is seeking to check up on. The free programmes, the padded seats and the aftermatch shmoozing has been another example of misdirected energy...in the belief that 'unspoken' conversations in this environment helped to...err...not quite sure what they helped to achieve because we can not be told for what ever reason.

3. Communication. You can berate those that seek to convey to the Trust exec the need to improve its communication in both style and substance if you wish but that does not detract from the fact that if they have been doing anything for the last year then they've made a damn good job of keeping silent about it. When they have chosen to adress forums it has been done in a wholly unprofessional manner.

Also, far too often, the Trust acts as if it is a private members club - "we must give our members the..." - and loses sight of gaining the confidence and trust of the fanbase. All of its actions should be prefaced with one question - is it in the best interests of the supporters of Leicester City?

For the Trust to post here asking for suggestions smacks of a group of people devoid of ideas and direction...and the answers have been given on this forum (and others) time and time again.

Speak to the fans at large

Give up the box seats and the freebies

Define the issues to be addressed

Give regular feedback as to the progress

Be more open and accountable

Do a decent and open job and support for the Trust will increase...or continue to hide behind weasel words and inaction and have people being critical.

To my mind it's a clear choice.

Yes Toadying.....well done dave ....sweet words to my ears......... is Barber a member of the FT....hes quite Toady too.........infact Toadfish like?

[Daggers]

Not quite sure what you are saying here - are you complaining that they haven't contacted you?

No. Just clearly stating my position.

[Foxes_Trust]

Just a couple of points

Babylon- "They have also said that they will be sorting out where they go from here, aims etc etc. When things have been decided i'd expect there will be a bullitin on the website."

That is correct

Would it not be possible to cover the cost of webhosting and email through sponsorship / advertising? How about and additional charge for memebers wo want to recieve printed newsletters?

I would be interested to see the costs which are being incurred. The finances of the trust should be fully visible to those considering memebrship as well as exisitng members.

Other suggestions would be limiting the amount if time a member can spend on the board, as this would avoid members not joining for reasons of disliking individuals.

Copies of the annual accounts are given out to members at the AGM. Any member wishing to receive a copy can e-mail to be sent a copy (as a number have done). We haven't actively avoided given accounts to non-members, but there has to be some information which members receive that non-members don't, in other words member benefits.

Costs incurred, the Trust board considers to be very low, we have tried to penny pinch to maximise the amount of money available to invest in shares, obviously a situation that has now changed. Fund raising has not been a strength of the Trust for sometime, we would happily invite members with experience in this area to join the board.

Each board member serves a maximum of a 3 year term after that time they will seek re-election if they want to continue. The lack of other members standing has lead to unopposed re-election, in fact there are still several board vacancies. A limit to block those willing to be active would be a damaging idea & result in the board losing those most experienced at running the Trust (perhaps losing those lessons learnt through experience).