Trust chair to stand down

[offshore_arab83]

What questions have the fed, dusf etc asked?

The support deserves truth not spin.

We need one fan group. I don't care who it is

Just get the egos away to **** and start with one from scratch.

The fed asked that many questions the club stopped meeting with them...

[offshore_arab83]

Question 8 sees them questioning football governance.

As it is. I only remember the Jackie drink stuff being rumours. How come other fan groups didn't question it?

It's not always just the trust is it?

Its only really the trust and the fed to be honest and the club didnt want to talk to the fed due to the questions being asked

[ahlltanyirhide]

No not responsible but it was public knowledge about their antics over in St Andrews plus the fact we were signing all these unknown donkeys so I would have though they, as the 3rd largest shareholder should have been saying ‘hold on and f ucking minute’ just the same as we all were

They have more ‘pull’ than your average punter and IMO could have and should have done more.

As far as Q&A’s are concerned, again, you need to be a member to find out anything or any stories, plus I’d wager the questions were agreed as it seems to be th way Mr A operates these days. If he doesn’t know what questions are coming his way the Q&A doesn’t go ahead

RE: standing for election, dare say you’d need to be a member to be considered eh, you need to be a member for absolutely everything trust related

You don’t need to wager that questions are forwarded in advance, it also happens at First Minister Questions at Hollywood and Prime Minister questions in Westminster, s’pose if it’s good enough for those running the country eh

[ahlltanyirhide]

The fed asked that many questions the club stopped meeting with them...

Was it not that the Fed wanted to further question any answer that was given to certain questions they intended to present, which in all probability would have descended any meeting into chaos, and this was the reason the club stopped meeting them?

[ahlltanyirhide]

I thought it was an anonymous letter to the fed?

I phukkin love when this gets brought up, the ever mysterious letter, apparently compiled by a ‘director’ and handed to certain top Fed boys detailing very sensitive aspects of an employees contract. Wonder if the rumour was true that it was the director of youth football at the time who was complicit in this skullduggery

[offshore_arab83]

Was it not that the Fed wanted to further question any answer that was given to certain questions they intended to present, which in all probability would have descended any meeting into chaos, and this was the reason the club stopped meeting them?

yeah which IMO is perfectly fine, you ask a question, you get an answer that you want to ask another question on the back of but Dundee United wont allow it? Whole things stinks

[PortugueseFrank]

The problem with the need for further answers is that it inevitably leads to the point where the people answering will stop.

Rightly or wrongly. There's comes a point where they will say "we can't answer anymore"

And tbh the less than friendly/diplomatic approach which has been employed will naturally make the club say "that's yer lot".

Especially in business (and football is a business) you can't be realistically expected to provide running commentaries.

In the company I work for we have a couple of shareholders groups that dislike those in control but they know they can't expect to be provided a running commentary on every penny spent.

They get the accounts and the AGM and grill then. Then ultimately if they want to change the folk in charge they have to gain support from more of the shareholders (both individual and groups) to remove the current leadership.

And whether we like it or not, that's the situation we are in with the club.

Personally I can understand the club board not wanting to talk finances until the accounts and AGM. That is standard business practise wether we like it or not.

The problem comes when the auditors won't sign off on going concern statement.

If that happens then we need any potential owners to step up to the plate.

Wether we like it or not, the ball is in the court of those who want to change the leadership at Tannadice.

And that's yet another reason why I think we need only one fan group.

Be it the Fed, the trust, DUSF or the ****ing Goonies for I care.

One group with a centralised aim to channel the will of the support.

That will be the most effective vehicle for driving change.

[SmedDUm]

The problem with the need for further answers is that it inevitably leads to the point where the people answering will stop.

Rightly or wrongly. There's comes a point where they will say "we can't answer anymore"

And tbh the less than friendly/diplomatic approach which has been employed will naturally make the club say "that's yer lot".

Especially in business (and football is a business) you can't be realistically expected to provide running commentaries.

In the company I work for we have a couple of shareholders groups that dislike those in control but they know they can't expect to be provided a running commentary on every penny spent.

They get the accounts and the AGM and grill then. Then ultimately if they want to change the folk in charge they have to gain support from more of the shareholders (both individual and groups) to remove the current leadership.

And whether we like it or not, that's the situation we are in with the club.

Personally I can understand the club board not wanting to talk finances until the accounts and AGM. That is standard business practise wether we like it or not.

The problem comes when the auditors won't sign off on going concern statement.

If that happens then we need any potential owners to step up to the plate.

Wether we like it or not, the ball is in the court of those who want to change the leadership at Tannadice.

And that's yet another reason why I think we need only one fan group.

Be it the Fed, the trust, DUSF or the ****ing Goonies for I care.

One group with a centralised aim to channel the will of the support.

That will be the most effective vehicle for driving change.

Divide and rule?
Shed (not) rule?

[PortugueseFrank]

Divided factions seeking to change any company's direction, wether a football club or whatever, will only achieve their aims if they come together.

It's the only way shareholders have any chance to oust an unpopular leadership in my experience.

[ahlltanyirhide]

Divided factions seeking to change any company's direction, wether a football club or whatever, will only achieve their aims if they come together.

It's the only way shareholders have any chance to oust an unpopular leadership in my experience.

United under one banner? that would take some doing indeed! Another new group would never get going, the Fed for me are tainted by the frother brigade which is a pity as there’s been some great lads involved in the past. DUSF? think the 86 fans that joined deserve full credit, but can’t see many more prepared to join up.

This leaves the ever popular arabTRUST as probably the most realistic option to garner the support, and at only £15 for yearly membership it represents the most cost effective route into the boardroom for the fan base. A lot of people would have to vetted though before being allowed to join, and with me being a Diamond Elite member of the Trust I would offer my services to be chief vetter.

Each application would need to be accompanied by a recent mugshot so I could do the good guy, good guy, frother selection routine in order to separate the wheat from the chaff. Also, at the resultant emergency general meeting everyone would be searched for Bombay mix and cheesy puffs as this is another way to identify frothers in disguise. Should be fun, doncha think ��