[Archived] Rovers Trust/Action Group/Ians

[chaddyrovers]

8 minutes ago, Dunnfc said:

Inventing more examples? We are nothing to do with the trust btw. Hopefully though through the changes they may use us including the modernisation group. Caller again made another cracking call today to not JEROME but someone else, a bit revealing on suhail.

tbh allot know me on here via personally or business and I'm sure can vouch for me tbh with out jepidising the caller or people spoken too whom have since moved on to better things.

 

I hope in time these calls or minutes can be share with all fans and not just kept within a close circle of people. 

I have no reason not to trust you at all. 

[Dunnfc]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

I hope in time these calls or minutes can be share with all fans and not just kept within a close circle of people. 

I have no reason not to trust you at all. 

Indeed chaddy everyone would love to get to that position mate for the good of those still attending and boycotting. All as one on this front!

#venkysout

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, Dunnfc said:

Indeed chaddy everyone would love to get to that position mate for the good of those still attending and boycotting. All as one on this front!

#venkysout

Thanks Dunnfc

At the end of the day we are all Blackburn Rovers football supporters whether we attend or not. 

[Dunnfc]

Chaddy fans who I work with put aside any of this and just want the club to be in good, healthy and responsible trustworthy people with local connections who can as you've described for years get that structure what's craved and badly needed in place ready for a huge rebuild.

Have to realise our revenues are strangled, poor sponsorship overall our big one Dafabet ending in a few months which is lower PL money wise for a sponsor and mortgaged season tickets already where 6k have been sold in advance are decisive in the rebuild process. New trustees to understand that? Those up who I know you bet!

 

[blueboy3333]

Just now, Dunnfc said:

Chaddy fans who I work with put aside any of this and just want the club to be in good, healthy and responsible trustworthy people with local connections who can as you've described for years get that structure what's craved and badly needed in place ready for a huge rebuild.

Have to realise our revenues are strangled, poor sponsorship overall our big one Dafabet ending in a few months which is lower PL money wise for a sponsor and mortgaged season tickets already where 6k have been sold in advance are decisive in the rebuild process. New trustees to understand that? Those up who I know you bet!

 

you work with Chaddy fans?

World's gone mad.

[Dunnfc]

Just now, blueboy3333 said:

you work with Chaddy fans?

World's gone mad.

Touché. What I will say is these fans care highly about not just the club but the town of Blackburn and its people and businesses. 

[blueboy3333]

Just now, Dunnfc said:

Touché. What I will say is these fans care highly about not just the club but the town of Blackburn and its people and businesses. 

I'm sure they do. Just pulling yer leg

[Paul]

"Modernisation Group" - it can only be healthy that for the first time since its inception five new individuals are standing for election to the Trust board. I'm sure the existing board members will welcome fresh ideas, new engagement and motivation to add to existing skills and experience. Who can say what further progress could have been made in recent years if similar support had been more forthcoming?

I would urge those standing, and others, to stop referring to the "Modernisation Group." The last thing needed is another "group."

Those standing for election should put their ideas forward, give the Trust members reason to elect them but don't stand on a ticket of modernisation which by inference suggests the current board members are in some manner outdated. Most, probably all, current board members will be amongst the fans who have given the most.

I hope new faces are welcomed and those new faces take the time to integrate, for want of a better word, with care. Hopefully we won't hear the word modernisation again. 

[Mike E]

30 minutes ago, Paul said:

"Modernisation Group" - it can only be healthy that for the first time since its inception five new individuals are standing for election to the Trust board. I'm sure the existing board members will welcome fresh ideas, new engagement and motivation to add to existing skills and experience. Who can say what further progress could have been made in recent years if similar support had been more forthcoming?

I would urge those standing, and others, to stop referring to the "Modernisation Group." The last thing needed is another "group."

Those standing for election should put their ideas forward, give the Trust members reason to elect them but don't stand on a ticket of modernisation which by inference suggests the current board members are in some manner outdated. Most, probably all, current board members will be amongst the fans who have given the most.

I hope new faces are welcomed and those new faces take the time to integrate, for want of a better word, with care. Hopefully we won't hear the word modernisation again. 

It isn't meant to be a 'new group', but intended to imply that the Trust is moving forward and will try to engage its members (and the wider fanbase) more efficiently.

[Paul]

That's not how it reads Mike which is why I commented. 

[Mattyblue]

How about 'Momentum'?

[Gav]

50 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

How about 'Momentum'?

Very good 

[mhead]

2 hours ago, Gav said:

Very good 

If GAV likes Momentum then that seems an excellent heading for the time being.

5 going forward for the Trust Board....we never discussed a title only what the Trust needs to do in the future!

[Leonard Venkhater]

Just now, mhead said:

If GAV likes Momentum then that seems an excellent heading for the time being.

5 going forward for the Trust Board....we never discussed a title only what the Trust needs to do in the future!

Hopefully, new nominees will not seek to tarnish the efforts of people, who have donated a good deal of their own time in difficult circumstances.I stress that I have not seen any evidence of actual nominees tarnishing anyone.

Any group needs replenishing after 6 years -no shame in that. And this has been six years of pretty thankless work and growing apathy/despair in the fanbase.

My own sense is that this requires a decent blend of the old and the new without defensiveness from existing members or, indeed, arrogance from the new nominees. I was present on Saturday and I could not escape the sense that this had got off on the wrong foot. Nominees appeared -to me at least-to be perceived as a  hostile takeover.?

For me, any set of aims and objectives should be revisited after 6 years and a new action plan prepared in light of any agreed changes.

I would be willing to work on behalf of the Trust to carry our specific tasks. I did actually decide to put myself forward, but I know I don't need to become a board member to help a newly replenished Trust.

[Daniel Louis Grabko (Dan)]

This is an excellent post and one I agree wholeheartedly with. It should be about carrying on the work and bringing new energy. It shouldn't a political slag fest - we're standing down, we're passing on the torch. I feel we should be thanked for our efforts and instead of talking about we may have done wrong or not enough of, speak with actions once the election has taken place. I wish the new board, hopefully with a blend new and old, all the best.

It definitely isn't a cakewalk!! 

[Leonard Venkhater]

Just now, Daniel Louis Grabko (Dan) said:

This is an excellent post and one I agree wholeheartedly with. It should be about carrying on the work and bringing new energy. It shouldn't a political slag fest - we're standing down, we're passing on the torch. I feel we should be thanked for our efforts and instead of talking about we may have done wrong or not enough of, speak with actions once the election has taken place. I wish the new board, hopefully with a blend new and old, all the best.

It definitely isn't a cakewalk!! 

"We sit here stranded, though we're all doing our best to deny it"

[glen9mullan]

On 3/23/2017 at 3:50 PM, Daniel Louis Grabko (Dan) said:

This is an excellent post and one I agree wholeheartedly with. It should be about carrying on the work and bringing new energy. It shouldn't a political slag fest - we're standing down, we're passing on the torch. I feel we should be thanked for our efforts and instead of talking about we may have done wrong or not enough of, speak with actions once the election has taken place. I wish the new board, hopefully with a blend new and old, all the best.

It definitely isn't a cakewalk!! 

I hope the old board reconsider , the skills within that board are not easily replaceable. I'd hope the new nominees join the existing board members to make the trust stronger and take it forward together. It don't need the passing of the baton , it just needs more pushing on all fronts to help those isolated in their efforts 

[mhead]

You heard from me 5 days ago re a ;group; of active,experienced and qualified Supporters who are standing for election to the Rovers Trust Board.

We are currently waiting for the Election process to start. We have agreed a statement to send to all members of the Trust who also contribute(or lurk) on this the main Rovers Supporters Web-site. It will also be sent to friends who run the Facebook account for Rovers supporters.

It aims to get up to 4 of our 'team'...currently and a little ironically called the 'Momentum' team(ex-Modernisation Group)

The five ....in no order are:

- John Murray(Mhead)   - David Metcalfe(leonard Venkhater on here) -Duncan Miller(original Trust Board Member)

                                       -Steve Mack (voluntary Chair of EwoodWMC meeting) -Mick Cahill (well knownRovers Supporter)

As I said we will be putting out a Statement with some of our ideas. We do appreciate the work that the existing Board have put in to establish the Trust and seek to protect some of the Rovers assets and infra-structure. However, by standing for the Trust Board we clearly seek "group" election so we can give the Trust momentum and several changes of direction....the main one being to make it more inclusive of Supporters(present and past). All for now!

[Daniel Louis Grabko (Dan)]

8 hours ago, mhead said:

You heard from me 5 days ago re a ;group; of active,experienced and qualified Supporters who are standing for election to the Rovers Trust Board.

We are currently waiting for the Election process to start. We have agreed a statement to send to all members of the Trust who also contribute(or lurk) on this the main Rovers Supporters Web-site. It will also be sent to friends who run the Facebook account for Rovers supporters.

It aims to get up to 4 of our 'team'...currently and a little ironically called the 'Momentum' team(ex-Modernisation Group)

The five ....in no order are:

- John Murray(Mhead)   - David Metcalfe(leonard Venkhater on here) -Duncan Miller(original Trust Board Member)

                                       -Steve Mack (voluntary Chair of EwoodWMC meeting) -Mick Cahill (well knownRovers Supporter)

As I said we will be putting out a Statement with some of our ideas. We do appreciate the work that the existing Board have put in to establish the Trust and seek to protect some of the Rovers assets and infra-structure. However, by standing for the Trust Board we clearly seek "group" election so we can give the Trust momentum and several changes of direction....the main one being to make it more inclusive of Supporters(present and past). All for now!

As a current Board member I think it is important to impress upon all the nominees that Rovers Trust members should receive specific outlines of specifics actions a nominee plans on taking in order to achieve the very abstract and diffuse rhetoric of "modernisation," "momentum," and "being more inclusive."

I applaud new energy, different insights, and dedication & commitment. That's what the 3 of us (myself, Neil and Wayne) want to come out as a result of stepping aside.

As a member who will be voting this coming week, I would like to raise this question with all 5 of you. What specifically are you planning to do to achieve your three pronged campaign promise?

I also do have a concern, as Duncan Miller was an original co-opted Board Member. He was also an original member of the Blackburn Rovers Supporters Society (BRSS), which was Rovers Trust's predecessor, but never got off the ground. He was given the role of Membership Officer by the Rovers Trust Board but was unable to meet those obligations, and one day just stopped responding to email or phones calls, and basically nobody knew what had become of him. The Board had to hunt him down to retrieve membership pack materials that had become sorely overdue. I not writing this to slag him off or single him out, but it puts into question whether he will stay the course this time around? (Maybe 3rd time's a charm?)

I want to feel comfortable that the people that have come forward and stood for election appreciate the commitment, time, effort, and own personal resources required. I want to know that if I vote for someone, they will not just turn their backs when the going gets tough, or they "don't have the time," or "have personal issues," or the criticism levels become uncomfortable, or whatever other excuse there could be.

I hope that everyone who is standing understands that in order to significantly change the remit or stance of the Community Benefit Society, they need the mandate of the members of that society, and must take appropriate action according to the society's rules to obtain that mandate before ratifying any such change. Such as going from trying to communicate and help the current ownership to calling for them to leave, as the current Board has done.

I hope they have a plan for successful succession of fundamental key functions, such as IT, Accounting/Finance, Regulatory Administration, Social media management, Membership Administration, and Governing Body Liaising in the event that those fulfilling those functions now as co-opted Board members decide they no longer wish to after the election.

I hope that they are running in order help continue and realise the vision of the founders to make Rovers Trust an indispensable and obvious partner in any new ownership structure of Blackburn Rovers going forward when the day finally comes that a change of ownership does mercifully occur.

I hope they are prepared to continue the community benefit work that has been a part of the Trust's mandate as a registered CBS from day one.

I hope they are going to be be fiscally responsible with the society's limited financial resources and have a plan for helping to grow them.

I feel that through their actions of the last 5-6 years, those current board members still up for (re-)election have shown their appreciation of the above points, and would be invaluable assets to have to anyone new elected in, and my own personal feeling is that I do hope that at least one of the current Board members wins one of the elected seats.

I hope to and plan on using at least one of my votes on the new nominees, maybe more. All credit to all 5 of you for stepping up - let's not forget that.

My post is mainly in response to my own personal trepidation at not being directly involved after this election, and the countless hours and thousands of pounds of my own personal money I've put in to help it get where it is today. It is no more or less than any of the other current Board members have done either, all making lots of sacrifices in our personal and professional lives for the sake of the Trust. We just want it to not only continue, but to thrive and become even better. I just want the best for Blackburn Rovers, and for Rovers Trust.

[Daniel Louis Grabko (Dan)]

Don't follow - if you'd like to elaborate, please? I've heard this diffuse and speculative "agenda" item named often in regards to Wayne, but never have actually heard a specific actual "agenda" or ulterior motive named.

What exactly is it that you believe his agenda to be, and in which instance are you referring to when you write, "instead of backing his fellow Rovers supporters?"

[Meadows2]

Just now, Suhail Slayer said:

You will have heard often because it is widely believed that Wayne wants a place on the Rovers board.

Most commonly believed by the many supporters who attended the meeting at King Georges Hall.

Where Wayne sat at the top table talking a lot in the limelight 

However since then has done nothing

The other groups at that table have followed with Actions.

None of which were publicaly supported by Wayne.

Nowhere to be seen or heard since that night. 

He was going to India in Feb but hasn't done and more importantly hasn't communicated why etc.

 

Suddenly last week he climbs into bed with Danny Davis

statement could have said " a spokesman for WEC said..."

not surprising it said Wayne Wild said..

following his own agenda

not backing his fellow supporters since KGH

Did he not withdraw from stand sponsoring through WEC until the owners started communicating????????????

swear i read that offically somewhere

[glen9mullan]

3 hours ago, Daniel Louis Grabko (Dan) said:

As a current Board member I think it is important to impress upon all the nominees that Rovers Trust members should receive specific outlines of specifics actions a nominee plans on taking in order to achieve the very abstract and diffuse rhetoric of "modernisation," "momentum," and "being more inclusive."

I applaud new energy, different insights, and dedication & commitment. That's what the 3 of us (myself, Neil and Wayne) want to come out as a result of stepping aside.

As a member who will be voting this coming week, I would like to raise this question with all 5 of you. What specifically are you planning to do to achieve your three pronged campaign promise?

I also do have a concern, as Duncan Miller was an original co-opted Board Member. He was also an original member of the Blackburn Rovers Supporters Society (BRSS), which was Rovers Trust's predecessor, but never got off the ground. He was given the role of Membership Officer by the Rovers Trust Board but was unable to meet those obligations, and one day just stopped responding to email or phones calls, and basically nobody knew what had become of him. The Board had to hunt him down to retrieve membership pack materials that had become sorely overdue. I not writing this to slag him off or single him out, but it puts into question whether he will stay the course this time around? (Maybe 3rd time's a charm?)

I want to feel comfortable that the people that have come forward and stood for election appreciate the commitment, time, effort, and own personal resources required. I want to know that if I vote for someone, they will not just turn their backs when the going gets tough, or they "don't have the time," or "have personal issues," or the criticism levels become uncomfortable, or whatever other excuse there could be.

I hope that everyone who is standing understands that in order to significantly change the remit or stance of the Community Benefit Society, they need the mandate of the members of that society, and must take appropriate action according to the society's rules to obtain that mandate before ratifying any such change. Such as going from trying to communicate and help the current ownership to calling for them to leave, as the current Board has done.

I hope they have a plan for successful succession of fundamental key functions, such as IT, Accounting/Finance, Regulatory Administration, Social media management, Membership Administration, and Governing Body Liaising in the event that those fulfilling those functions now as co-opted Board members decide they no longer wish to after the election.

I hope that they are running in order help continue and realise the vision of the founders to make Rovers Trust an indispensable and obvious partner in any new ownership structure of Blackburn Rovers going forward when the day finally comes that a change of ownership does mercifully occur.

I hope they are prepared to continue the community benefit work that has been a part of the Trust's mandate as a registered CBS from day one.

I hope they are going to be be fiscally responsible with the society's limited financial resources and have a plan for helping to grow them.

I feel that through their actions of the last 5-6 years, those current board members still up for (re-)election have shown their appreciation of the above points, and would be invaluable assets to have to anyone new elected in, and my own personal feeling is that I do hope that at least one of the current Board members wins one of the elected seats.

I hope to and plan on using at least one of my votes on the new nominees, maybe more. All credit to all 5 of you for stepping up - let's not forget that.

My post is mainly in response to my own personal trepidation at not being directly involved after this election, and the countless hours and thousands of pounds of my own personal money I've put in to help it get where it is today. It is no more or less than any of the other current Board members have done either, all making lots of sacrifices in our personal and professional lives for the sake of the Trust. We just want it to not only continue, but to thrive and become even better. I just want the best for Blackburn Rovers, and for Rovers Trust.

A very good post Dan and one which I hope all read word for word.

Committees , constitutions , legislation are not just a walk in the park. It takes some real effort and staying power.

 

That ability to have an opinion somewhat gets taken away and diluted.

 

In my time at the action group I think the first election had 10 on the committee , within 3 months that was down to half that, whilst many others have come for a few weeks and found its not for them.

As a former secretary of the trust, I also found it hard trying to get some of those involved in simple mundane things , I found it less proactive than the action group in terms of how much they met up, how much they communicated and how pro-active they were.

That being said , the core of the board were a bit more proactive.

Staying power is important , it's not just about passion , or being on a committee, it's a full time responsibility to a paying membership board. 

It's taking public criticism which often gets personal and having the ability to not bite. It's having to be squeeky clean always ,especially in public in the way you act, speak and who you associate with. It's about keeping a level of professionalism and keeping your head, when others lose theirs.

Have you , Wayne and Neil considered re-standing and is there still time for you to re-stand?

Are the trust still taking candidates given there has been no election? 

Is the intention to send a mail out on the AGM, tell members of who is standing , and extend the invitation for others to stand who perhaps don't know that it's election time?

Not everyone uses emails , social media and I'd of thought that an open invitation would perhaps have gone in LT?

I can't help thinking this is not the time stand down, but is the time to welcome more onto the board with you to make the trust stronger?

[mhead]

Errrm. Lots of questions and lots of zig-zagging.

All I need say at this stage is 2 things:

-the EwoodWMC meeting is full of doers and 5 of the 'senior'  guys with most experience have nominated themselves(but after internal discussions within the meeting and outside of it)

-3 of the 5 put forward CVs to the Trust in September 2016 after some appeal for 'new blood'. All 3 of us got an acknowledgement but no further contact

Ozz also appealed for new Board Members after the 3 resigned. Did anyone else apply?The closing date was mid-March.

As for staying power well we have to see...but from the recent evidence of how things within the Trust have gone quiet then we have a chance of making an impact. Myself, as someone with experience at Chief Executive level in London,Manchester and Liverpool and in Voluntary and NGOs(plus QUANGOS!) then its normal to put forward ideas and change in a more democratic style after weighing up the situation. Its hard to weigh up the Trust's current situation, even though I have been a member since the Cathedral meeting of 4 years ago.

As someone normally working in Eastern Europe/Turkey/Georgia/ even South Pacific over the last 10 years well that phase of my life is over and I have met some really good people in the WMC meetings who feel the same way as me: OUR Club is not safe in the hands of the current Owners. Plan A has certainly not worked...we need a Plan B and probably a Plan C!

Now its Saturday night etc etc

[glen9mullan]

It's not with criticism to you or the other nominees I have posted what I posted, it's also not the time to reel out personal CVS too.

Throughout the supporter base there is lots of doers , lots of opinions (they all count).

I see this as a great opportunity for more doers to quote you, to work together to make the trust as powerful entity and viable alternative. The trust needs like minded people to join those who for 6 years have given their all to get the trust to where it currently is. Fresh people , bring fresh ideas , but that should be to add to what we have, not reinvent it.

Venkys came in , dismantled the club from top to bottom and that's why the club is where it's at.

If the infastructure of the trust is totally replaced, I see this as a step back, regardless of who comes in, what's on their CV etc.

I remember the trust before it was taken over by BRSIT, I'm sure the likes of Mark Fish, Paul Keogh remember too as it was going nowhere . They even filled the application form to supporters direct in a red pen and held a piece of paper which nearly killed the trust ever getting off the ground. It then merged with BRSIT and became a different animal.

As someone who has crossed swords with some of the trust board on many occasions and also been the secretary a couple of years back, I can assure you, the ones standing down are the driving force on anything that the trust has achieved to date, which is actually quite a bit. A few years ago other key people like Paul and Brian stepped down, they too have never been adequately replaced.

5 nominees for the trust is fantastic if there is not more, as that's the first time since the trust formed that there has been anyone step forward at election time to help and get involved.

This is a great opportunity for the joining of hands, remembering it's not a popularity contest , you don't have to like one another to work with one another for a common goal.

It's just my opinion and certainly not aimed with any criticism 

[Tom]

For me the 5 (from what I know) are exactly the type of people I would want involved - we need people willing to get their hands dirty and do what's needed.

Its not for all of us but one day we can all look back and thank those hopefully.

Im not sure what's different about rovers fans but we just can't seem to get everyone united.