Cannibal Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 It's untenable now because as CfcUk has continually pointed out, and been proven correct, that the 'owners' are getting a fairly disproportionate slice of the pie ((ie decisions) for little or no action (initiative, forward thinking, etc). You'll be wishing your life away hoping for anything more than what occurred from the ownership in this instance, or in any other...what you, i and we all got was the stark reality. This isn't a new dawn; an announcement on a ground is all that could represent that. I think we're entering limbo with where we go with this from here, and i say that with the current board in mind. With no sugar daddy to propel us to the First Division again, the only way the club can, or will go forward is with important decisions being taken away from fairly easily-swayed members, and greater autonomy restored to those in the comfy seats.....there are lessons in all of this....it'd be wise to heed them. I don't think anyone thought yesterday was a new dawn - it was putting to bed a contentious issue and it required an EGM to be called. There was no reason to think anything else would happen yesterday. You point out yourself that the owners are "easily-swayed" so I don't really think giving the current Board carte blanche would make much difference in practice. It's almost like you are saying it would be better if the Board could have moved us and changed the name without any consultation or authority from the their fellow owners. I can't see how that is better, or indeed, workable You can't pick and choose who you want as members for f**k's sake....and you're certainly not going to inherit a mythical new membership......i dont like it any more than you, but the clear result here is that this vote only occurred due to extensive hearsay and confusion among supporters....not a White knight rounding everyone up to save us. I don't know where I said anything about picking and choosing members (although I am sure the CIC reserve the right to refuse someone membership). I am merely saying it would be quite easy to offer a "free" membership with a season ticket but that it could be worth making them actively accept it rather than be automatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 It's untenable now because as CfcUk has continually pointed out, and been proven correct, that the 'owners' are getting a fairly disproportionate slice of the pie ((ie decisions) for little or no action (initiative, forward thinking, etc). You'll be wishing your life away hoping for anything more than what occurred from the ownership in this instance, or in any other...what you, i and we all got was the stark reality. This isn't a new dawn; an announcement on a ground is all that could represent that. I think we're entering limbo with where we go with this from here, and i say that with the current board in mind. With no sugar daddy to propel us to the First Division again, the only way the club can, or will go forward is with important decisions being taken away from fairly easily-swayed members, and greater autonomy restored to those in the comfy seats.....there are lessons in all of this....it'd be wise to heed them. I honestly believe the worst people to run a football club are the fans , we can't even agree on the best colour of a strip football clubs need run by strong indivduals not some sort of football kibbutz yes you run the risk of a megalomaniac in charge who ignores the fans but really and go along to any fans meetings and you will hear unadulterated trivial p*** trotter out on the most mundane my matters most fans including myself want to go along support the team pay my money and blame managers players and the board when we lose don't want any responsibility for the club just want to milk the good times and produce the scatter gun of blame if the team isn't doing well ???? leave running the club to guys with some money and the dedication and the ego''s to match Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Sally Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 You can't pick and choose who you want as members for f**k's sake....and you're certainly not going to inherit a mythical new membership......i dont like it any more than you, but the clear result here is that this vote only occurred due to extensive hearsay and confusion among supporters....not a White knight rounding everyone up to save us. Your not going to get a new membership unless you get new Clyde supporters joining the CIC. You can't go back to the old model so the actual question should be - what can the Clyde board do to get more supporters to join the CIC and make it more representative? It benefits no one to have a membership that is not diverse and representative of the whole support. I'd be interested to know the demographics of the 400 odd members but I'd guess that the under 25s are under represented like in most organisations. Pricing is one aspect of it. As Cannibal says, you can't just have automatic membership as you need engagement to get things done. Do you make it free and reduce the income and run the risk of too many novelty owners? Do you make it season ticket only and alienate people who pay at the gate? Do you give season ticket holders a free membership and reduce income? Do you make it only people who attend games and push away the exiles? How do you prove they go to games? Do you make it a £100 and push away the low income fans? Do you make it £500 and return it to being only the rich get a say? Do you require people to take an exam on their Clyde knowledge? Its not something with an easy answer and probably doesn't have a perfect one. This would be a positive discussion with limited things to be raging at though so might prove unpopular! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggy Snake Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Well I doubt I am alone in thinking the yes vote did damage, as did the complete lack of effort from those who believed the lies to overturn the resolution or to make those who lied accountable. I doubt many would disagree with that. I've happily left it alone but was merely pointing out to one member that not voting was not a neutral position. Let's all move on by all means but don't come on and say it did no damage. I didn't say it (as in the whole situation and outcome) didn't do damage. I was picking up on you saying yes voters did the damage, when they merely made a sensible decision based on the information provided. It was, at the very least, poor judgement by the chairman and board that did the damage. But anyway, yes, let's move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawfieldAggro Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Your not going to get a new membership unless you get new Clyde supporters joining the CIC. You can't go back to the old model so the actual question should be - what can the Clyde board do to get more supporters to join the CIC and make it more representative? It benefits no one to have a membership that is not diverse and representative of the whole support. I'd be interested to know the demographics of the 400 odd members but I'd guess that the under 25s are under represented like in most organisations. Pricing is one aspect of it. As Cannibal says, you can't just have automatic membership as you need engagement to get things done. Do you make it free and reduce the income and run the risk of too many novelty owners? Do you make it season ticket only and alienate people who pay at the gate? Do you give season ticket holders a free membership and reduce income? Do you make it only people who attend games and push away the exiles? How do you prove they go to games? Do you make it a £100 and push away the low income fans? Do you make it £500 and return it to being only the rich get a say? Do you require people to take an exam on their Clyde knowledge? Its not something with an easy answer and probably doesn't have a perfect one. This would be a positive discussion with limited things to be raging at though so might prove unpopular! Well Sally, the horse has bolted on many of those fronts.....rightly or wrongly, a distinction was bestowed upon supporters who paid, probably with heart rather than mind, to become owners. The division existed before that, but its most relevant to this situation. I've suggested to our chairman and board members that an increased levy on a season ticket, with a guarunteed membership, is fairly simple economic practicality, and no more a gamble than guessing your gates to determine your budget. It's also inclusive, offers something valuable for your extra outlay, still entitles those who wish to join it from a distance (or those who cannot attend all matches) the opportunity to do so for the same thirty quid. I'm erring on the argument that would Clyde fans currently getting a very good gig for their entry fee honestly refuse to support the club with additional income if such an olive branch was put out to regular attendees who are largely disregarded?? A lot of people are extremely disenfranchised with many of the clubs actions recently, who may well stand sccused of making their own choice too when it comes to additional funding going to the club....but in principle, its easy to see why novelty owners having a say over 40+ years supporters is palpably wrong. If this is about money, and what the club can extract from largely ignorant sources, then may i remind you....isn't the purpose of the CIC sustainability with non profit?? There's been a lot more lost through the turnstile than whats been raised from the yearly Archie Robertson Vladikavkaz Supporter's Club bash, that's for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_BullyWee Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 So who are all these novelty owners that you keep going on about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawfieldAggro Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 Take a swatch at the list of owners and you'd see for yourself....a fairly disproprtionate percentage of far-off well-wishers (or arses from afar, in another poster's words one might say) who obviously are merely contributing towards the upkeep of the club, and iv no.doubt there's no intent or agenda involved. But it doesnt change the fact they arent involved on any scale in the week to week or month to month affairs of the club....this is not a slagging off, its a fact. There's no real justification as to why a long-term physical commitment isn't at least worth the same or perhaps more. And i agree with those who have a problem with it not being so 100%. Add ons like website membership and so on are fair enough, but we're talking firmitive decision making here....i'm surprised Cannibal doesn't want more autonomy for Board members, after he worked long enough on the premise that the members acted on info supplied by the club in the first instance, thus admonishing the responsibility of the board back on to the said members. While i believed the whole scenario (ek) to be a sham from the word go, i believe that had a cast-iron opportunity to look after the clubs interests.....ie one which exists, and the club had some control in, then yes, making the decision to go should have been down to those running things. But it didn't (exist), and they had none (control), so the club was left in limbo over it.....whether anyone could do anything about it until presented with the motion to remove. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde soccer trendy Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 Why isn't John Alexander being held to task over the whole shambolic East Kilbride move & name change? Genuine question?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salute Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 plenty wont be back til alexander is gone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_BullyWee Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 plenty wont be back til alexander is gone Is that the next excuse for people that don't go to games anymore? I thought with the name change being off the table now that would bring people back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dillan Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 Clyde at this point are putting a good team on the park this year so all supporters past and present should be out supporting the team to promotion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawfieldAggro Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 You don't seriously believe that do you?? Only success will see a return of lapsed supporters...in spite of what people think of Oleksandar, not because of what they think of him. Its as much a reason for some not to return, as it is for others to hide behind and cat-call everyone else as boo-boys. I honestly think John Alexander has done a lot more good for the club than he has bad. The EK thing was a huge mistake, a total fuckin shambles in fact and one I disagreed hugely with him and his son. However, he's taken defeat over the whole issue and the new path he's set is one of excitement. Happy enough for him to remain in post, like the rest of us, he wants the best for the club and works hard with little reward to get the best for the club. Changing the name to EK Clyde was a fuckin horrible idea, but that's my only major disagreement with John.What path is it that's been set?? I agree the EK clusterfuck is probably the darkest shadow thats ever been cast on the club, but i struggle to accept that any responsibility of 'mistake' has even been mentioned.....certainly not by any protagonists. It's only been acted upon becsuse of minor grumbles from those closest to it about the time thats been swallowed up, which could have been put to better use. As it is, ts very much as you were, but with even more uncertainty. The ongoing situation with the ground everyone hates is becoming another problem which needs to be solved, rather than a blueprint to be followed.....the recurring theme bring that no one is saying anything. Must do better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidalexander85 Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 Sorry to butt in here lads............ Highland Tour - Is there many going? A few of us have had the (daft) idea of organising a Clyde supporters match on the morning of the Brora game against a Highland League fans select. We've raised a squad of 6 so far with a couple more to confirm but we need some more names. Do we have any more who are travelling up and interested in a game? Get in touch with myself or Andrew Clark. Ability and fitness not required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 think you will find he was one of the biggest supporters of the ek Clyde franchise Nah, just not true. Could see some potential and put against the Armageddon forecast it had some upside (name aside). Moving on, first game at new Annfield and we will see how attractive and successful we may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 Nah, just not true. Could see some potential and put against the Armageddon forecast it had some upside (name aside). Moving on, first game at new Annfield and we will see how attractive and successful we may be. funny it's hard to find any of the 300 plus that voted yes to admit they were 100 % behind the move most now blame the chairman or come up with some other mundane excuseand some of it's fiercest backers appear to have broken keyboards , no Internet connection or just simply in the huff ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pride Of The Clyde Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 People saying they will not be back until the EK name change is off the table, now people won't be back until Alexander is gone, whatever next. First and foremost you are Clyde supporters so go out and support your team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 think you will find he was one of the biggest supporters of the ek Clyde franchise Nah, just not true. Could see some potential and put against the Armageddon forecast it had some upside (name aside). Moving on, first game at new Annfield and we will see how attractive and successful we may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 if the team start winning the fans will come back ???? sorry that should have been when we start winning league champions 2015/16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 funny it's hard to find any of the 300 plus that voted yes to admit they were 100 % behind the move most now blame the chairman or come up with some other mundane excuse and some of it's fiercest backers appear to have broken keyboards , no Internet connection or just simply in the huff Are you some kind of mind reader? How do you know if anyone was 100% behind it. Almost everyone I know voted yes as the lesser of two evils, so to present anything else is in my view very misleading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 People saying they will not be back until the EK name change is off the table, now people won't be back until Alexander is gone, whatever next. First and foremost you are Clyde supporters so go out and support your team. well according to the board they have no evidence of any impact the name change idea had on attendances ps and they still think it was a good idea I like to think of them visionaries in the land of the blind???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.