Re: Huw statement
3I think most of us on the 22/23 Accounts thread saw the lie of the land. HJ has clearly set it out in his statement. However, what stands out for me is that this is a great example of transparency through communication. That, I think was something significantly missing in The days of Trust ownership and something that I wanted to put right through my Transparency policy. Even though the Trust Board accepted the proposal, I shall never understand why thirty out of eighty at the AGM voted against the proposal.
Re: Huw statement
4The cynic in me wonders if many of those opposed in principle to a transparency policy are afraid of what/who else is yet to be exposed.Chris Davis wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 5:57 pm I think most of us on the 22/23 Accounts thread saw the lie of the land. HJ has clearly set it out in his statement. However, what stands out for me is that this is a great example of transparency through communication. That, I think was something significantly missing in The days of Trust ownership and something that I wanted to put right through my Transparency policy. Even though the Trust Board accepted the proposal, I shall never understand why thirty out of eighty at the AGM voted against the proposal.
Re: Huw statement
5The trust don't run the club, HJ does, so it is up to HJ to decide how transparent he wants his negotiating to be.OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 7:58 pmThe cynic in me wonders if many of those opposed in principle to a transparency policy are afraid of what/who else is yet to be exposed.Chris Davis wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 5:57 pm I think most of us on the 22/23 Accounts thread saw the lie of the land. HJ has clearly set it out in his statement. However, what stands out for me is that this is a great example of transparency through communication. That, I think was something significantly missing in The days of Trust ownership and something that I wanted to put right through my Transparency policy. Even though the Trust Board accepted the proposal, I shall never understand why thirty out of eighty at the AGM voted against the proposal.
But anyone entering negotiations will not want the other side knowing how far they can push back. It's common sense.
Re: Huw statement
6Really impressed with Huw's statement. Exciting times ahead hopefully. Some sort of mini Bristol Sport arrangement sounds like the sort of model that Huw and Buttress want to aim towards by the sound of things.
Re: Huw statement
7Me neither. Obviously they were ridiculous ostriches unwilling to know the reality of our plight. I’d previously always thought the Trust model was for the best but it certainly wasn’t with the incumbents of the Board as then constituted. Thank god the majority don’t feel that way or we’d be stuffed, I’m equally grateful for Mr Jenkins’ transparency. Now we know the problem, we’re part way to helping to solve it - if we can help.Chris Davis wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 5:57 pm I think most of us on the 22/23 Accounts thread saw the lie of the land. HJ has clearly set it out in his statement. However, what stands out for me is that this is a great example of transparency through communication. That, I think was something significantly missing in The days of Trust ownership and something that I wanted to put right through my Transparency policy. Even though the Trust Board accepted the proposal, I shall never understand why thirty out of eighty at the AGM voted against the proposal.
Re: Huw statement
8The Transparency policy Chris and I are referring to is the Trust board, not the club board.Bangitintrnet wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 8:18 pmThe trust don't run the club, HJ does, so it is up to HJ to decide how transparent he wants his negotiating to be.OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 7:58 pmThe cynic in me wonders if many of those opposed in principle to a transparency policy are afraid of what/who else is yet to be exposed.Chris Davis wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 5:57 pm I think most of us on the 22/23 Accounts thread saw the lie of the land. HJ has clearly set it out in his statement. However, what stands out for me is that this is a great example of transparency through communication. That, I think was something significantly missing in The days of Trust ownership and something that I wanted to put right through my Transparency policy. Even though the Trust Board accepted the proposal, I shall never understand why thirty out of eighty at the AGM voted against the proposal.
But anyone entering negotiations will not want the other side knowing how far they can push back. It's common sense.
Re: Huw statement
9The trust provide two thirds of the club board. Those reps will report back to the Trust Board. Its a matter for HJ who he can trust to work with him, and that is the practical problem when you only look at process not the outcome.OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 11:45 pmThe Transparency policy Chris and I are referring to is the Trust board, not the club board.Bangitintrnet wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 8:18 pmThe trust don't run the club, HJ does, so it is up to HJ to decide how transparent he wants his negotiating to be.OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 7:58 pmThe cynic in me wonders if many of those opposed in principle to a transparency policy are afraid of what/who else is yet to be exposed.Chris Davis wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 5:57 pm I think most of us on the 22/23 Accounts thread saw the lie of the land. HJ has clearly set it out in his statement. However, what stands out for me is that this is a great example of transparency through communication. That, I think was something significantly missing in The days of Trust ownership and something that I wanted to put right through my Transparency policy. Even though the Trust Board accepted the proposal, I shall never understand why thirty out of eighty at the AGM voted against the proposal.
But anyone entering negotiations will not want the other side knowing how far they can push back. It's common sense.
Re: Huw statement
10HJ has told everyone the problem.......that the Dragon's have not invested in RP for years and years.lowandhard wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 10:41 pmMe neither. Obviously they were ridiculous ostriches unwilling to know the reality of our plight. I’d previously always thought the Trust model was for the best but it certainly wasn’t with the incumbents of the Board as then constituted. Thank god the majority don’t feel that way or we’d be stuffed, I’m equally grateful for Mr Jenkins’ transparency. Now we know the problem, we’re part way to helping to solve it - if we can help.Chris Davis wrote: April 3rd, 2024, 5:57 pm I think most of us on the 22/23 Accounts thread saw the lie of the land. HJ has clearly set it out in his statement. However, what stands out for me is that this is a great example of transparency through communication. That, I think was something significantly missing in The days of Trust ownership and something that I wanted to put right through my Transparency policy. Even though the Trust Board accepted the proposal, I shall never understand why thirty out of eighty at the AGM voted against the proposal.
So promises were made, options taken, the WRU knew that RP wasn't viable, so helped with providing finance for both codes, and deferring payments when it was clear both would default due to lack of income.
However the Dragon's takeover was timed when the County needed a ground agreement..........
Re: Huw statement
11A really good statement, I'm still mixed on HJ BUT he's clearly a very savvy businessman.
Re: Huw statement
12I think following Mr Jenkins statement yesterday that there might be some forseen consequences to come that will have a direct impact on fans:
1. A significant increase in ticket fees across the board of maybe 10-15 %. However, there might be a more 'business savvy' price structure with, say as an example, 7.5%-12.5% for Trust members, who buy season tickets, with perhaps an 'installment plan' to help spread the cost.
2. A shelving of plans to improve the academy, provide better training facilities etc. because all the money, including the Trust' contribution, will be needed for day to day running expenses.
3. An increasing call for volunteers at many levels to reduce costs and/or provide better experience and expertise than is currently at the Club.
4. A joint effort between the Club and the Trust to make the Trust more attractive to fans, so that they both stay in the Trust and new members join the Trust and increase the contribution the Trust is able to make to the Club.
5. Creating a 'County Ambassador' scheme, where fans are encouraged to put forward to their community, employers, councillors, AM's and MP's the significance to the life and economy of the area that the County brings. There could also be some 'Special Ambassadors' that could have a more focused and active voluntary part time role in creating an ongoing link with business and government organisations.
1. A significant increase in ticket fees across the board of maybe 10-15 %. However, there might be a more 'business savvy' price structure with, say as an example, 7.5%-12.5% for Trust members, who buy season tickets, with perhaps an 'installment plan' to help spread the cost.
2. A shelving of plans to improve the academy, provide better training facilities etc. because all the money, including the Trust' contribution, will be needed for day to day running expenses.
3. An increasing call for volunteers at many levels to reduce costs and/or provide better experience and expertise than is currently at the Club.
4. A joint effort between the Club and the Trust to make the Trust more attractive to fans, so that they both stay in the Trust and new members join the Trust and increase the contribution the Trust is able to make to the Club.
5. Creating a 'County Ambassador' scheme, where fans are encouraged to put forward to their community, employers, councillors, AM's and MP's the significance to the life and economy of the area that the County brings. There could also be some 'Special Ambassadors' that could have a more focused and active voluntary part time role in creating an ongoing link with business and government organisations.
Re: Huw statement
13The Wimbledon trust has 5000 members because it is £25 to join.
Our Trust needs to increase its membership by reducing its fees to a nominal amount, and then members will be less concerned about how money is actually spent, and more about what is achieved.
All of the County staff in the shops are unpaid volunteers, the Rugby Staff are paid.
The focus IMO needs to be away from trust donations, and into commercial activity. If that means scrapping the senior season ticket reductions, so be it. We don't need to pay for the trust, we need to pay to watch the club.
Our Trust needs to increase its membership by reducing its fees to a nominal amount, and then members will be less concerned about how money is actually spent, and more about what is achieved.
All of the County staff in the shops are unpaid volunteers, the Rugby Staff are paid.
The focus IMO needs to be away from trust donations, and into commercial activity. If that means scrapping the senior season ticket reductions, so be it. We don't need to pay for the trust, we need to pay to watch the club.
Re: Huw statement
14I think more should be stated about the volunteers and how many regulars who give up their time and how much they save the c!ub. In my mind they are stars in their own right.
Maybe bucket collections at home matches for those who do more than a certain amount of hours
Maybe bucket collections at home matches for those who do more than a certain amount of hours
Re: Huw statement
15I agree, Mr Jenkins said very little we didn't either already know or anticipate but has set the scene nicely for future price increases.Chris Davis wrote: April 4th, 2024, 9:02 am I think following Mr Jenkins statement yesterday that there might be some forseen consequences to come that will have a direct impact on fans:
1. A significant increase in ticket fees across the board of maybe 10-15 %. However, there might be a more 'business savvy' price structure with, say as an example, 7.5%-12.5% for Trust members, who buy season tickets, with perhaps an 'installment plan' to help spread the cost.
2. A shelving of plans to improve the academy, provide better training facilities etc. because all the money, including the Trust' contribution, will be needed for day to day running expenses.
3. An increasing call for volunteers at many levels to reduce costs and/or provide better experience and expertise than is currently at the Club.
4. A joint effort between the Club and the Trust to make the Trust more attractive to fans, so that they both stay in the Trust and new members join the Trust and increase the contribution the Trust is able to make to the Club.
5. Creating a 'County Ambassador' scheme, where fans are encouraged to put forward to their community, employers, councillors, AM's and MP's the significance to the life and economy of the area that the County brings. There could also be some 'Special Ambassadors' that could have a more focused and active voluntary part time role in creating an ongoing link with business and government organisations.
I think the future direction for the academy will depend greatly on how well he understands how little money changes hands when a young player moves from one academy to another and whether he is willing to risk giving decent contracts to older teenage players in the hope they will break through and can be sold on under contract rather than rely on compensation committee valuations.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: OLDCROMWELLIAN, wattsville_boy