As several of the the resolutions put forward by the board of the WST conflict with those proposed by ourselves we will be putting forward our views on them over the next few nights.
We start with Resolution D
Resolution D. (Proposed by the Societys board)
Following the recent successful exit from administration, the Trust board would like to re-iterate its commitment to helping the clubs recovery by proposing a 50/50 split on future Trust profits, above those set out in Resolution C.
This split would be used to allow the Trust to a invest a proportion of future funds into practical projects specifically aimed at helping Wrexham FC and its recovery, in line with existing Trust principles
Our view.
Until the owners plans have crystallised we do not know how much money would be required to take over the club or when this might happen, if at all.
Resolution D, taken in conjunction with Resolution C, would basically cap our available stake to around £300k.We cannot afford to make this business decision until we have a clearer picture of what we are buying and at what price.
Furthermore with no plans or funding applications put in place for the new Kop we do not know what funds the clubs new owners, potentially WST, would have to find to ensure it is built.
Resolution H states our position on the matter of fundraising and is supported by the board of the WST.
There is a further reason for our opposition to this resolution which we state below together with what we suggest most members would find an equitable solution to this issue.
Resolution D may prove to be the most divisive resolution to be considered by the membership at this AGM as many of the members feel that whilst the club is making a trading profit all the Trust funds should be set aside to assist the club owners exit strategy.
If this resolution is passed then this will result in many members withdrawing their support for the Trust or reducing their contributions.
However we do recognise that many members also feel that the WST could be doing more to assist the clubs recovery. Also some fans have used this as a reason not to join the WST, which is not in the best interests of the WST.
Therefore as a compromise solution we would recommend that these members have the choice to elect to have their membership fees paid into a sub-fund (less a fair contribution to Trust running costs) which can be paid over to the club on the same terms as originally suggested in Resolution D.
Any surplus from other WST activities could also be split on a pro rata basis.
For example,
If 25% of members elect to join the new sub fund then 25% of profit is taken from other WST activities and added to the potential contribution.
This we feel would be an arrangement that would satisfy all of our members wishes.
We have spoken to the WST on this issue and they have confirmed that it is possible to deal with contributions in this manner.
Therefore we are suggesting that Resolution D is withdrawn and that the board of WST formulates a new resolution along the lines suggested and which would find widespread support.
This resolution could be put to the membership at the next members meeting which would then become an EGM for the purposes of endorsing, or not, this strategy.
By following this strategy the WST would be getting the best of both worlds.
# No loss of membership due to a vote going one-way or the other
# A truly democratic solution to the problem, you actually decide what to do with your money.
# The ability to attract new members based on a flexible membership policy.
# By being able to demonstrate to the club and the town our practical support in aiding the clubs recovery we will build a better relationship.
We feel that the strength of WST is not due to the sum of money in its bank account.
Its strength is due to the support received from Wrexham fans. Any measure which impacts on this support in a negative fashion must be avoided.
We welcome your views on this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
This is the way to go. It enables non-WST fans to contribute to the clubs recovery through the WST. It enables WST members to apportion their donations according to their personal beliefs/preferences. It provides a more attractive proposition for future members.
Relations between the WST and the club owners should improve which has to be a good thing; the club itself will benefit overall.
It would also demonstrate that common ground can be found within the WST at board level which will be a relief for some.
Just one questiont for clarification... would members get to choose where their membership fee/monthly payments went?
yes they would have.unfortunately it looks like this solution has been rejected by the board of wst.
Well I have to say... that is just bizzare. Why does everything have to be so black and white? My feeling is that the WST will win this one but I see no benefit to alienating some members when some middle ground could easily be found. Although I was equally suprised at the attutude to the pro-fresh approach lot on RP expressing reluctance to compromise too.
How would the WST ever be able to deal at board level at the club??
Post a Comment