I don't usually post much, but last night's AGM obliges me to put forward some personal views. With regards to fan representation on the board the lost vote, though personally disappointing, was no surprise. The board saw it coming. Former chairman/hero (both titles accurate and deserved, genuinely) emerged from the body of the assembled shareholders to speak against the motion. After patting the Trust, and all other supporters groups on the head, for their splendid help, the thrust of his objections followed 2 main themes; confidentiality, and cash. Any notion that the confidentiality issue wouldn't be fully and explicitly explored, understood and declared openly would be totally unacceptable to all interested parties. Of course there will be issues which can't come out of the boardroom, the Trust members understand that. The key point is that a fan voice would be part of that confidential discussion. The Trust would need to trust their representative to represent their views in matters in which the total membership was not involved, while understanding that what they each want might not always happen! To repeat, the key point is that a fan voice would be part of that confidential discussion. The cash issue, for me, is trickier. That's mainly because I've never been a director! Mr Blount, said that it was a "formal obligation" on directors to be able and willing to bring forward "tens of thousands of pounds from their own pockets" in times of club need. Well, that took many of us by surprise. I have briefly searched for that formal written obligation but without pre-knowledge of the complexities of company law I've been unable to find it in that tangled web. If someone can help me here, please do. Once I've seen it I unhesitatingly withdraw any reservations I might be harbouring; our directors, agreeing to that condition, deserve not praise, but medals! Naïvely I'd always thought that there was perhaps an understanding that board members would step forward in difficult times; to find it described as an obligation shook me. It shook the Trust argument, that's for sure. It left the pro-fan representative camp with a whole new consideration ('gas at a peep' comes to mind). If someone can clarify this "obligation/understanding" thing it would certainly help me. Honestly, last point...."If it ain't broke don't fix it." was quoted more than once. The wooden wheel worked fine, it wasn't broke, but someone came up with a better wheel. The vote was clear. The people had their say. With full understanding of the facts (see Brexit, Trump) the majority had their way. What lingers is a body of fans who feel the club has an issue still to address properly. Apologies for long posting, at least I feel better!
