Some Concerns With Regard To Financial

[cheshire_red]

Very Concerning

[Barrs Court Red]

Sorry my good man, but what has this got to do with Bristol City or its Supporters Trust.

Very misleading title

[thatcham red]

Concerning for Derby for sure, but what is the relevance to Bristol City Supporters Trust?

[tompo]

Very Concerning

Very misleading title to this thread which has nothing much to do with Supporters Trusts other than to reinforce their value to clubs.

Having waded through this thread it appears that the people who bought Derby are now looking to invest in Bournemouth. The Trusts of Derby and QPR, two clubs who have had dealings with these people, have offered help and advice to their counterparts in Bournemouth.

Situation at Derby also acts a salutary warning that clubs should be very careful when people approach them offering to put vast sums of money in.

[lukejones2]

As Treasurer of the BCST I know a number of other treasurers from different Trusts and was very surprised to read the title of this thread - until of course I read the article and found that it is actually about financial irregularities in football clubs (nothing new there and something that the Trust movement is certainly battling against by attempting to make the running of football more transparant) ans not Trusts.

In fact, I think this article shows how the Trust network is helpful with the Rams Trust offering

"RamsTrust are talking to Paul

We have even discussed coming all the way down to Bournemouth to assist you if necessary - THAT is how important it is that these people are not allowed near your club.

By the way, Jeremy Keith was a director of Portsmouth. He resigned the day before it went bust."

Which I think is a very kind offer.

For anyone who is concerned about any aspect of accouning or finance for the Trust, rest assured there is no reason to be concerned. Please feel free to PM me if you have any questions. There is a robust audit structure in place for Trusts to follow (far, far more stringent than company audit guidelines) and I will be spending a fair chunk of my two week holiday from work preparing for our very own audit - the results of which will be given at our AGM in March/April time to which all members are more than welcome to attend and I am sure there will be room for non members too.

[cheshire_red]

Derby fans I know, a couple of which are members of their Trust are concerned about their Trusts involement. It wasn't a dig at BCFC's Trust, surprised you took it as one, why so defensive? But about concerns with Trusts involvement in clubs where there have been financial irregularities.

[lukejones2]

Nothing defensive at all Chesh... just clarifying that the article does not suggest any irregularities with Trusts, and taking the chance to allay any fears that anyone may have.

Incidentally, I would also be happy to share with your concerned Derby fan friends the detaiked regulatory structure that all Trusts have to follow if they like. As would their Trust I am sure, or Supporters Direct (the governing body).

[zookeeper]

Derby fans I know, a couple of which are members of their Trust are concerned about their Trusts involement. It wasn't a dig at BCFC's Trust, surprised you took it as one, why so defensive? But about concerns with Trusts involvement in clubs where there have been financial irregularities.

I would say that with the way you have titled the thread they have every right to be defensive. A lot of people won't bother to read the detail of the link you provided and will just assume that the Trust or Trusts as a whole do not have financialy robust systems in place.

Personally, with the title and the forum it was placed on, I read it as a direct dig at BCFC's trust until I read further into the article.

[Barrs Court Red]

So anyway, has anyone found even a tenuous link to Bristol City yet?

[tompo]

So anyway, has anyone found even a tenuous link to Bristol City yet?

Erm...we have a supporters trust?

[cheshire_red]

So what you are saying is that there is no link to Bristol City so should be moved to another section?

If I wanted to have a dig at the Supporters Trust I know a medium with news feed links in which I could place such a dig. As I haven't one would perhaps presume I don't have an issue with the ST. alternatively I would write to the Chairman pointing out a concern, which I did once in the past.

I am concerned at such a defensive position and an attempt to ridicule what is a serious concern and should be noted.

[Ian M]

So what you are saying is that there is no link to Bristol City so should be moved to another section?

If I wanted to have a dig at the Supporters Trust I know a medium with news feed links in which I could place such a dig. As I haven't one would perhaps presume I don't have an issue with the ST. alternatively I would write to the Chairman pointing out a concern, which I did once in the past.

I am concerned at such a defensive position and an attempt to ridicule what is a serious concern and should be noted.

Have you read it all though?

To me it came across as Supporters Trusts FIGHTING AGAINST financial irregularities within clubs and looking to prevent it happening, even when it wasn't their club that was affected.

In the opinion of another outsider, you seem to be coming across as believing it was the STs involved in the financial irregularities.

[cheshire_red]

You're reading too much into the headline, this is my gripe, it's as if the ST are suggesting that i was blaming the Trusts involved. This is an immediate defensive position which I find hard to understand. Where have I said the Trust's were to blame.

Is this a 'bunker' mentality?

[zookeeper]

So what you are saying is that there is no link to Bristol City so should be moved to another section?

If I wanted to have a dig at the Supporters Trust I know a medium with news feed links in which I could place such a dig. As I haven't one would perhaps presume I don't have an issue with the ST. alternatively I would write to the Chairman pointing out a concern, which I did once in the past.

I am concerned at such a defensive position and an attempt to ridicule what is a serious concern and should be noted.

I'm not too sure who you think has riduculed the idea. People have asked why you think it is relevant but I don't seem any taking of the mick!

I would be defensive if you had posted any article of anything which had such a sensationalised title, which I don't believe to be either fair nor accurate with the article.

It seems to come straight out of the Sunday Sport world of journalism and is aimed at getting people to come to a conclusion without reading the article or understanding it.

[cheshire_red]

'Trust caught with their knickers down' is a sensationalist title. The title of the thread is hardly sensational and not a problem unless you are looking for one, clearly you are.

Pop your head above the parapet for a moment eh.

[zookeeper]

'Trust caught with their knickers down' is a sensationalist title. The title of the thread is hardly sensational and not a problem unless you are looking for one, clearly you are.

Pop your head above the parapet for a moment eh.

So you don't want people to ridicule you or your messages but your fine doing it to others??

It seems that I'm not the only one to feel this way so maybe you should learn to accept others opinions and the fact that maybe (just maybe) something that you wrote was done poorly and conveyed a message that maybe it wasn't meant to, which was picked up by others who you are now accusing of being defensive.

I'm glad my head is only under the parapet whilst yours seems to be stuck somewhere else!!

[cheshire_red]

The only one's who appeared to have a problem are Trust Committee Members.I have no idea if you are a member of the trust or not and quite frankly I don't care.

You can find something in any title or article if you are determined to find it. The fact that I have stated a couple of times that what you thought was there actually wasn't there is plain enough.

It wasn't the fact that an attempt was made to ridicule the post which annoyed me, it was the reason why the attempt was made to ridicule the post that annoyed.

[zookeeper]

The only one's who appeared to have a problem are Trust Committee Members.I have no idea if you are a member of the trust or not and quite frankly I don't care.

You can find something in any title or article if you are determined to find it. The fact that I have stated a couple of times that what you thought was there actually wasn't there is plain enough.

It wasn't the fact that an attempt was made to ridicule the post which annoyed me, it was the reason why the attempt was made to ridicule the post that annoyed.

I'm not even sure if "they" have a problem or have ridiculed the post. They have merely asked what the relevance is to the city trust and said about the strict financial regulations for trusts.

"They" have merely answered concerns that may have arisen from reading your title and from the article. Just because people did not ask direct questions does not mean that they shouldn't provide information that surrounded this subject.

I think in fact you have implied that the title was not a dig but have not stated it.

To me it appears that you are looking for cracks from the fact that people are providing information on why their system is robust.

[Ian M]

The only one's who appeared to have a problem are Trust Committee Members.I have no idea if you are a member of the trust or not and quite frankly I don't care.

You can find something in any title or article if you are determined to find it. The fact that I have stated a couple of times that what you thought was there actually wasn't there is plain enough.

It wasn't the fact that an attempt was made to ridicule the post which annoyed me, it was the reason why the attempt was made to ridicule the post that annoyed.

I would counter that Moomin Liberation Army, Zookeeper & myself are not Trust Committee Members.

Again, to me it came across as delivering a message that was at odds to what was a very long series of articles.

Anyone who took one look at the other end of the link and decided not to bother reading them would be left with the impression that Trusts were involved in financial irregularities.

Why shouldn't the Trust Committee Members be allowed to "defend themselves" against such misinformation?

[cheshire_red]

I'll

[cinker]

I am a member of the ST. I can understand the response of luke Jones as a responsible treasurer. There is alot of responsibility and hard work in running a ST. I believe the guys running the BCFC ST are doing a good job and it is often a thankless task.

The posting, although innocent, gave me a totally different meaning to the topic at hand.

I also think this posting is getting a little over the top and should be stopped.

Thanks again ST.

[zookeeper]

I'll

Good!!

I value your input chesh and believe that your questions are worthwhile although I hope that taking answers as a sign of guilt isn't very fair on people who spent a bit of time responding and relaying their point.