Arabtrust - actions speak louder than words

[PortugueseFrank]

Frank, you made a lot of good points in your posts above. I've never swerved a thread in my entire time on here, but at work so can't devote much time to this. I'll post a proper response tonight.

No worries Stoke. You make good points and you’re a good poster. 👍🏻

It’s good to have debate. That’s what these boards are all about.

Would love to see more people get involved in this particular one.

[Whitfieldarab]

What is the aim? Change or awareness and debate?

Cause if it’s change people want the steps are remarkably straightforward.

Straightforward to such a degree that it should scare the **** out of ordinary fans that those promoting and wanting to bring about change have ignored or worst are unaware of the simplest route to achieving it.

DUSF spending 13k setting up seems insane to me when they could have simply taken control of the Trust board and implemented their programme with the added clout of a place on the board (albeit a powerless AD) and the third largest shareholding.

Is it just me?

If a supporters group were to get elected in as the new AT and have their place on the Utd board as the 3rd major shareholders what powers does ST have to oust them from the board? Can our chairman vote with the rest of the board to get rid of them? I'd imagine AT were handed their shares and never bought into the club so where would they stand on this? The new AT obviously wouldn't tow the party line and be yes men and would make life as uneasy as possible for ST and his cronies so what then? How much clout would the new AT really have?

Genuine questions and not a dig

[PortugueseFrank]

If a supporters group were to get elected in as the new AT and have their place on the Utd board as the 3rd major shareholders what powers does ST have to oust them from the board? Can our chairman vote with the rest of the board to get rid of them? I'd imagine AT were handed their shares and never bought into the club so where would they stand on this? The new AT obviously wouldn't tow the party line and be yes men and would make life as uneasy as possible for ST and his cronies so what then? How much clout would the new AT really have?

Genuine questions and not a dig

ST can remove their AD. As has been done in the past. But I’d imagine a new AT board that are wanting to remove ST would likely resign their AD position in protest at the way the club is run before that happened.

AT own their shares. So they’d continue to own them and be the third largest shareholder in the club. They could then do what DUSF want to do in collecting funds to entice new investors.

The clout would be the opportunity to bring about change as the third largest shareholder. Unifying the support behind one group (which is never going to happen in a million years as the supporter groups are so tribal anyway).

With their percentage they could perhaps club together with other minority shareholders to force a club EGM (5%) needed to get publicity and force a humiliating vote of no confidence in the current directors (which ST etc would see off with his 51% but it’s the publicity that would ratchet up the pressure).

Is this not the action people want? To crank up the pressure on ST etc?

I’m not advocating that specific action per se. Merely pointing out that when people say they want action to get ST out then these are strategies they could put in action themselves rather than saying “the trust should do x/y”.

People can actually make it happen themselves if they really wanted to.

[blackandtangerine]

Easiest thing for disgruntled fans is to take over the Trust.

Fans United, The Fed, DUSF( who spent a ridiculous 13k setting up) could so easily have forced an EGM to take over the Trust, at no cost other than membership.

Then they’d collectively control the THIRD LARGEST SHAREHOLDER IN UNITED.

Yet for some reason they don’t.

What a waste of energy.

That is why we simply can’t take these multiple groups seriously. All of them

The trust can so easily be taken over yet for some reason these groups set up themselves?

These multiple groups’ lack of intelligence when it comes to the ease in which they could control the third largest shareholding group shows how fundamentally we as a support are beyond a joke in terms of intelligence and organisation.

I despair at the thought of fan ownership for United,

Can anyone argue to me that I’m wrong?

Maybe it has been discussed.

[PortugueseFrank]

Maybe it has been discussed.

And what was the outcome of these discussions?

[blackandtangerine]

And what was the outcome of these discussions?

Nothing obviously as it never happened but it was discussed briefly. Maybe its something that should be discussed further with all the groups though.

[TerryTheTerror]

Nothing obviously as it never happened but it was discussed briefly. Maybe its something that should be discussed further with all the groups though.

It seems you're missing Frank's point that you think this needs discussed with 'all the groups'.

[PortugueseFrank]

And for anyone wondering how easy it is to call an EGM to install a new leadership of the trust the answer is:

“b. if a written requisition signed (except where these Rules say otherwise) by not less than 20 members or 10% of the membership, whichever is the higher, is delivered to the Society’s registered office. The requisition must state the purpose for which the meeting is to be convened. If the Secretary is not within the United Kingdom or is unwilling to convene a general meeting any Society Board member may call a general meeting.”

(Above is from a Trust website. Page 10 of the society rules)

So if it’s 500 members then you only need 50 folk to get a EGM. Surely doable if there are so many that want the Trust to go in a different direction?

[blackandtangerine]

It seems you're missing Frank's point that you think this needs discussed with 'all the groups'.

I think you are missing my point.

[Retired Arab]

I think you are missing my point.

What is your point caller? The clock is ticking TICK TOCK...