|
Post by terrygillooly on Mar 22, 2024 20:25:31 GMT
Even with the basic GDPR training I have had it doesn’t seem right - I can understand giving out names but not addresses. I will check it with some colleagues. Good point, the AGM will be a good opportunity to ask the questions. Fan ownership may have come to nothing, but it would be good see one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by rovers on Mar 22, 2024 20:31:19 GMT
A couple of things based on the thread as I wasn't at the meeting.
1. The group leading the investigation have nothing but the clubs interests at heart. The reasons for investigating club ownership and what it means is two-fold 1) investment and advancement at the club is stifled at present with the ownership structure 2) to keep self-interest charlatans as far from gaining influence in the club as possibke.
Agree with we can "agree to disagree" line and it does feel like Jordan has some personal vendetta against Ronnie which is getting into the way of his judgement.
Also echo two things from Terry: If the board do not allow share transfers does that mean fan ownership is over? Is there a specific reason why the board are against it?
Important answers to be heard no doubt to be asked at the AGM.
As always with fitba the fans are everything particularly so with the Rovers from sponsorship (for example, all of the strip sponsors comes from supporers connections), to volunteering. In my head investigating fan ownership allows us to establish a) is it possible and its wider ramifications including getting some new life and enthusiasm into the club.
|
|
|
Post by Rovergrant on Mar 22, 2024 20:36:32 GMT
Agree, Terry, that`s why I wrote to the club in the first place after speaking to the Help Desk at the Information Commissioners Office. They didn`t think it right but without full details could not formally advise and suggested I contact the Company (ARFC) direct which I did and almost by return got the response I laid out in full above from their legal advisor. All avenues - including fan ownership - must be explored to find the best way of taking the club forward as, in my opinion, its still sliding backwards.
|
|
|
Post by Rovergrant on Mar 22, 2024 20:47:04 GMT
A couple of things based on the thread as I wasn't at the meeting. 1. The group leading the investigation have nothing but the clubs interests at heart. The reasons for investigating club ownership and what it means is two-fold 1) investment and advancement at the club is stifled at present with the ownership structure 2) to keep self-interest charlatans as far from gaining influence in the club as possibke. Agree with we can "agree to disagree" line and it does feel like Jordan has some personal vendetta against Ronnie which is getting into the way of his judgement. Also echo two things from Terry: If the board do not allow share transfers does that mean fan ownership is over? Is there a specific reason why the board are against it? Important answers to be heard no doubt to be asked at the AGM. As always with fitba the fans are everything particularly so with the Rovers from sponsorship (for example, all of the strip sponsors comes from supporers connections), to volunteering. In my head investigating fan ownership allows us to establish a) is it possible and its wider ramifications including getting some new life and enthusiasm into the club. The Articles of Association clearly state that all share transfers must be approved by the BOD. Clause 22 in A of A
|
|
|
Post by sam on Mar 22, 2024 21:16:55 GMT
.
Also echo two things from Terry: If the board do not allow share transfers does that mean fan ownership is over?
Bobbys statement was that the board felt that the focus must be on the team getting out of the Lowland league next season and the idea of fan ownership would be a distraction but could be looked at in later years. Don’t think anybody would disagree that escape from the Lowland League is what everybody’s aim is and Bobby has certainly been quite open about what the plans are for both the team and development within the ground and should be congratulated for that However I personally don’t think it would be.. why would it. It wouldn’t impinge on team selection or the purchase of new players or the workings of the present board
The idea of fan ownership was only raised because of the goings on with Reilly. As I mentioned last night if someone approached the shareholders again but was a far better salesman than Mr Reilly, who just riled everyone up, then whose to say those shareholders would not be persuaded to sell their holdings… sentiment and emotional ties are all well and good but cold hard, confirmed, cash has a way of smoothing all that out.
|
|
|
Post by chris on Mar 22, 2024 22:15:32 GMT
I am genuinely interested in how much money per month fan ownership would take,
I reckon as a guess, you would need about £4000 a month
That's 80 people putting in £50 a month
I guess the Board, who have a legal obligation to do the best for the club and the shareholders don't think that is possible
I would need to be convinced this is possible, but see no harm in a group investigating this
i would like it to be possible, but think that's alot of money you need to guarantee every month
|
|
|
Post by jordancampbell on Mar 23, 2024 0:03:08 GMT
A few things: • Quite incredible that, with ten full days notice, the turnout at the meeting was so poor. Less than 20, with 6 who would have been in the stadium anyway (media team, Directors, and a volunteer). • This was the best opportunity (to date) to openly discuss the merits and “plan” for fan ownership in an honest, open, and transparent way. Utterly baffled at why so few actually bothered to turn up. Including some who are particularly vocal on this forum and elsewhere. • The Interim Chairman (Bobby) was very clear indeed re: the Boards collective position and reasoning behind this. Despite this, he was subject to ridiculous scrutiny and was interrupted on a few occasions from certain quarters. • There is utter contempt (particularly from Ronnie Boyd) towards anyone who holds a considerable amount of shares but doesn’t turn up “week in, week out” or contribute “significant finance”. Absolutely no understanding of personal circumstances, emotional ties to the Club, or any other mitigating factors. To me, it was a well rehearsed and tedious stage play. Nothing new was learned re: fan ownership, tired old lines were repeated, and a few people in the room attempted to dominate proceedings and railroad the Trust members into backing their position. Oh, and a threat to “walk away” was made repeatedly along with litany of sarcastic comments and applause. The last person to threaten that? I’ll leave it with you. I’d urge everyone who can (and is willing) to step and up and support the current Board of Directors in any way they can ahead of next season. It is clear to me that, after last night, there needs to be unity and not division. There also needs to be a laser focus on next season and diverting all our attention towards making it a success. Division is not the answer. Jordan, it baffles me how arrogant you are. People that are involved with the club you choose to rival them due to the spite of jealousy you have towards them. I get the impression you hide behind certain people and cannot name names, in simple terms for you to understand you are coward. As soon as the meeting ended you ran away like a little boy in the substitution of having a conversation with people that have the best intentions of the club. Nothing but jealous coward. Ps. Tell the fans that it was you that gave Paul Reilly the share register. You were caught out by a certain individual that you are scared to name. You admitted to this and the board informed the individual that it was you that released the share register. Max Gillooly So I’m “arrogant” and a “coward” - the compliments keep coming! I’ve learned more about my character on this forum over the space of 24 hours than I have in my lifetime. I’m not entirely sure who/what I am jealous of or what has caused you to reach such a conclusion. Quite remarkable, really, but it’s all about opinions. As Grant quite rightly points out, the Club acted upon the advice of our Solicitor. I was simply the person who sent the information to Paul Reilly on behalf of the Board. That isn’t some sort of breaking news story or a revelation - despite Pat Gillooly’s attempts to make it seem so. The meeting had ended when I left and there was no conversation to be had - I’d said everything I felt necessary during the hour or so it was taking place. I was there as a fan. Nothing more or nothing less.
|
|
|
Post by jordancampbell on Mar 23, 2024 0:10:18 GMT
I am genuinely interested in how much money per month fan ownership would take, I reckon as a guess, you would need about £4000 a month That's 80 people putting in £50 a month I guess the Board, who have a legal obligation to do the best for the club and the shareholders don't think that is possible I would need to be convinced this is possible, but see no harm in a group investigating this i would like it to be possible, but think that's alot of money you need to guarantee every month Chris, Great post and some really important points. As I’ve said before, and will continue to say, I’m just not convinced there is enough interest for this to have legs. I base this on a few things: 1) Thursday night was advertised ten days in advance and open to ALL who support and care for ARFC. The turnout was poor and the contributions were limited to 3/4 people in the room. I don’t believe enough universal passion exists for people to realistically pledge £50+ per month. 2) The only pledge based initiative at the Club just now provides circa £200 to the playing budget a month. This is hardly encouraging. Not game changing. I’m sure Sandy/the BoD are grateful, but it’s a drop in the ocean. 3) We’re four (4) months down the line and no real detail or options have been proposed by the “steering” group or those advocating fan ownership.
|
|
|
Post by Rovergrant on Mar 23, 2024 8:16:10 GMT
I am genuinely interested in how much money per month fan ownership would take, I reckon as a guess, you would need about £4000 a month That's 80 people putting in £50 a month I guess the Board, who have a legal obligation to do the best for the club and the shareholders don't think that is possible I would need to be convinced this is possible, but see no harm in a group investigating this i would like it to be possible, but think that's alot of money you need to guarantee every month Excellent post, Chris. Those who are pushing the fan ownership scenario need to put into the public domain a fully costed business plan and be prepared for said plan to be scrutinised and questioned. I remain sceptical but am open to be convinced this is the way forward if the figures and projections stack up. ARFC is a business - but a football business where it is easy to let the heart rule the head.
|
|
|
Post by MaxG82 on Mar 23, 2024 11:11:03 GMT
Jordan, it baffles me how arrogant you are. People that are involved with the club you choose to rival them due to the spite of jealousy you have towards them. I get the impression you hide behind certain people and cannot name names, in simple terms for you to understand you are coward. As soon as the meeting ended you ran away like a little boy in the substitution of having a conversation with people that have the best intentions of the club. Nothing but jealous coward. Ps. Tell the fans that it was you that gave Paul Reilly the share register. You were caught out by a certain individual that you are scared to name. You admitted to this and the board informed the individual that it was you that released the share register. Max Gillooly So I’m “arrogant” and a “coward” - the compliments keep coming! I’ve learned more about my character on this forum over the space of 24 hours than I have in my lifetime. I’m not entirely sure who/what I am jealous of or what has caused you to reach such a conclusion. Quite remarkable, really, but it’s all about opinions. As Grant quite rightly points out, the Club acted upon the advice of our Solicitor. I was simply the person who sent the information to Paul Reilly on behalf of the Board. That isn’t some sort of breaking news story or a revelation - despite Pat Gillooly’s attempts to make it seem so. The meeting had ended when I left and there was no conversation to be had - I’d said everything I felt necessary during the hour or so it was taking place. I was there as a fan. Nothing more or nothing less. One simple question Jordan, did you supply the addresses of the shareholders to Paul Reilly along with their names.
|
|
|
Post by jordancampbell on Mar 23, 2024 11:20:04 GMT
So I’m “arrogant” and a “coward” - the compliments keep coming! I’ve learned more about my character on this forum over the space of 24 hours than I have in my lifetime. I’m not entirely sure who/what I am jealous of or what has caused you to reach such a conclusion. Quite remarkable, really, but it’s all about opinions. As Grant quite rightly points out, the Club acted upon the advice of our Solicitor. I was simply the person who sent the information to Paul Reilly on behalf of the Board. That isn’t some sort of breaking news story or a revelation - despite Pat Gillooly’s attempts to make it seem so. The meeting had ended when I left and there was no conversation to be had - I’d said everything I felt necessary during the hour or so it was taking place. I was there as a fan. Nothing more or nothing less. One simple question Jordan, did you supply the addresses of the shareholders to Paul Reilly along with their names. As I’ve said before, yes. The Board, at that time, acted on the legal advice we were given.
|
|
|
Post by ryryster on Mar 23, 2024 11:32:16 GMT
A few things: • Quite incredible that, with ten full days notice, the turnout at the meeting was so poor. Less than 20, with 6 who would have been in the stadium anyway (media team, Directors, and a volunteer). • This was the best opportunity (to date) to openly discuss the merits and “plan” for fan ownership in an honest, open, and transparent way. Utterly baffled at why so few actually bothered to turn up. Including some who are particularly vocal on this forum and elsewhere. • The Interim Chairman (Bobby) was very clear indeed re: the Boards collective position and reasoning behind this. Despite this, he was subject to ridiculous scrutiny and was interrupted on a few occasions from certain quarters. • There is utter contempt (particularly from Ronnie Boyd) towards anyone who holds a considerable amount of shares but doesn’t turn up “week in, week out” or contribute “significant finance”. Absolutely no understanding of personal circumstances, emotional ties to the Club, or any other mitigating factors. To me, it was a well rehearsed and tedious stage play. Nothing new was learned re: fan ownership, tired old lines were repeated, and a few people in the room attempted to dominate proceedings and railroad the Trust members into backing their position. Oh, and a threat to “walk away” was made repeatedly along with litany of sarcastic comments and applause. The last person to threaten that? I’ll leave it with you. I’d urge everyone who can (and is willing) to step and up and support the current Board of Directors in any way they can ahead of next season. It is clear to me that, after last night, there needs to be unity and not division. There also needs to be a laser focus on next season and diverting all our attention towards making it a success. Division is not the answer. Absolute masterclass in spinning a narrative here Jordan, Malcolm Tucker would be proud! The other night you entered into a prolonged exchange with Pat Gilooly which proceeded to dominate most of the meeting, at one point when I tried to interject you proceeded to mutter something under your breath - must've been my fault for interrupting your staging of Shakespeare eh. If you turned up to discuss the merits in an "honest, open, and transparent way" then that definitely wasn't reflected in your own behaviour, you can't call for that kind of discussion or for unity while continually pursuing your own personal vendettas. I left that meeting seriously disappointed with the way it descended into farce (it was like Jeremy Kyle, live from Cliftonhill) and I think there's quite a bit of collective reflection to be done on why we couldn't have had a proper discussion on the merits of becoming a fan owned club and moving away from the failing structure that's held us back for so long - hopefully we can all have far more measured conversations about it all on here and on the terraces today.
|
|
|
Post by ryryster on Mar 23, 2024 11:32:43 GMT
While I’m at it, I understand the board’s position that they feel fan ownership is a divisive distraction but what I don’t understand is why they think blocking any share transfer to a larger collective of Rovers fans wouldn’t be. I genuinely cannot think of a more divisive action than what was implied there. It also shows one of the many issues with the failing old structure our clubs runs on, why would anyone put money into Albion Rovers and help us build back towards the SPFL if that’s the sort of thing stated openly by those that run the club.
A big part of why I support fan ownership is because I worry that the club’s structure is not only holding us back but dragging us down, my fear is that if nothing changes in the next decade then the club will either be bust or stuck in the West of Scotland League, eventually to languish with the Royal Alberts and East Kilbride Thistles of the Scottish footballing world. I don’t think anyone wants that to happen.
There’s still a lot to consider about how fan ownership will actually work but we need to be able to have that conversation and build a proposal, I hope our wee working group gets to those answers sooner rather than later but these things take time.
|
|
|
Post by MaxG82 on Mar 23, 2024 11:34:28 GMT
One simple question Jordan, did you supply the addresses of the shareholders to Paul Reilly along with their names. As I’ve said before, yes. The Board, at that time, acted on the legal advice we were given. Did you ask the shareholders permission before you gave out their personal addresses to Paul Reilly.
|
|
|
Post by ryryster on Mar 23, 2024 11:38:57 GMT
One simple question Jordan, did you supply the addresses of the shareholders to Paul Reilly along with their names. As I’ve said before, yes. The Board, at that time, acted on the legal advice we were given. Was any legal advice given in relation to the GDPR compliance of this? As a shareholder I don't believe I gave the club permission, either implied or outright, to give my data to another party
|
|