TUST Updates

[Tired Old Gull]

I do Teigngull. It feels a little unclear on what fans wish to achieve. Is it securing Plainmoor as a football ground or the future of Torquay United? I don't think the first does the second. I don't really mind where we play, I don't really mind what league it's in, I do mind that there is at least some enjoyment in going to the game and supporting the team regardless of the result. It all feels a bit toxic at the moment. I don't understand what TUST do or do with any money collected. It seemed one of their objectives was "data management".....in the current predicament they should have a bigger goal that all can get behind. In simple terms I do think if the council close the door on development of Plainmoor to GI then there can be no interest in TUFC from GI. What's the point in something that is a loss making hassle? I do think that with realistic expectations and the support of fans a little financially and a little by helping and volunteering the club could come together again. TUST or similar should be trying to pull us all together for that goal. I know it's not as simple as this but if 1500 fans bought £500 of shares in a company then that company has £750k to buy out GI and start again. Given the current losses and hassle I don't think it would take £750k to do this. I'm not sure what TUST do with their subscriptions but given that for £20 per month (£240 per year) they appear to be giving you leaflets if they aspire to having more members then what do they plan to do with the money? Given the value of TUFC it won't take much to buy the club at some point. Bearing in mind we got into this mess for the sake of a small amount of money loaned from GI

That makes the same points as I have been trying to say.
What the TUST are trying to do is very unclear, and not only to me it seems. Merse says they don't want to own the club, so exactly what are they trying to do - and what do they do with the funds collected, save them for a rainy day?

I still find it all very confusing and some seem to think that if we don't all tug our TUST forelock then we are against them, the club survival etc. Far from it, we are just trying to get our heads around what is going on in the anti-CO/GI regime. (I also fully agree that outright confrontation is futile and could prove catastrophic)

Again I ask the TUST chairman (Mike/Michel Thomas) to get the point across to us all on here, so we don't have to depend upon others who think they know what is going on.
Thanks in advance

[Southampton Gull]

There are a lot of things about "Trust Ownership" that people don't understand so I would say support TUST and allow them the opportunity to do what others have done. First of all though they can hardly give out a vision for the future without the necessary membership and finance required.

TUST need us all to get on board and express how we see things in the future for the club, their ideas will be your ideas, give them a chance to explain how things can progress before condemning htem as "not wanting to buy the club".

Tired Old Gull, it isn't for an elected TUST leader to come on here and explain their plans, it's down to people to join, attend their meetings and put forward proposals of their own and also vote on ideas from others. They need help, they need support and they need direction that can only come from the fan base as a whole. If people still can't see the urgency for a strong Trust then I really fear for our future.

[WHG]

500 members paying £240 per year equals annual income £120,000
TUST has been going for about 11 years so they should have a large chunk of money saved?
Can any TUST member let us know how much they have in the bank according to last set of Accounts they prepared up to 30/06/2017 ?

[Yorkieandy]

It's £24 a year (minimum) not £240

[WHG]

It's £24 a year (minimum) not £240

My bad
Maths never my best subject
Definitely need more members

[Southampton Gull]

My bad
Maths never my best subject
Definitely need more members

Given the way the club has spunked money in recent years we kind of gathered that

[Tired Old Gull]

Tired Old Gull, it isn't for an elected TUST leader to come on here and explain their plans, it's down to people to join, attend their meetings and put forward proposals of their own and also vote on ideas from others. They need help, they need support and they need direction that can only come from the fan base as a whole. If people still can't see the urgency for a strong Trust then I really fear for our future.

Well there I have to disagree Dave - the TUST need to use every tool available to them to get their message(s) across, and that message should explain their plans, ambitions and proposals in full.
Your comment seems to imply that everyone should just join up regardless, passing on their money without having any idea as to the 'whys and wherefores' of the TUST. People can only help if they know what the plan is - and keeping that plan unexplained is not going to generate a higher membership.

[Southampton Gull]

That is why they've called the meeting though.

[torregull]

As Dave says the meeting tomorrow is to agree "the plan"-which will then be made public; non-members can decide whether they agree with the plan and decide whether they wish to join or not.
As a democratic organisation it's not for the TUST board to decide a strategy without full input from it's membership.

[Tired Old Gull]

So after the meeting with all available members- someone from the TUST will then be able to cast some light on this issue and let the rest of us know the TUST objectives.
Good!

[Yorkieandy]

I think this is where the confusion lies. Initially i thought the same as Tired Old Gull about the TUST in so much as i was expecting them to already have a mandate or a fixed direction but the reason why they haven't, as has been pointed out to me also, is that they are a democratic group formed to represent the will of it's members. If the small (but respected) group of people who run the trust formed their own opinions on how the TUST should proceed then in a way that's kind of dictatorial and it's members wouldn't get any say.

During the meeting the fans (members) get the opportunity to raise their views and then a overall majority come to an agreement on how best to structure the way forward for the TUST with regard to the clear aims now agreed by the majority. As is democracy i think this is fair and reasonable, however i am pretty certain that the course of action that most members will agree on will differ to mine and give me cause to re-assess things.

I will be helped to do so hopefully with clear and concise information from those on here who know their onions and can explain in layman's terms the pro's and cons of what is eventually agreed. No offence to Merse and others who often post detailed information about these kind of political things and all good and appreciated but in all honesty and don't understand any of them. I just want the basic nuts and bolts of it all so i'm able to understand if the agreed way forward is in line with my values and also to help me decide if i consider it to be robust enough and actually viable.

Like i said, any info from anyone who attend the meeting would be very grateful to read on here for those of us who refuse to use most other forms of social media. Thanks.

[Tired Old Gull]

I think this is where the confusion lies. Initially i thought the same as Tired Old Gull about the TUST in so much as i was expecting them to already have a mandate or a fixed direction but the reason why they haven't, as has been pointed out to me also, is that they are a democratic group formed to represent the will of it's members. If the small (but respected) group of people who run the trust formed their own opinions on how the TUST should proceed then in a way that's kind of dictatorial and it's members wouldn't get any say.

During the meeting the fans (members) get the opportunity to raise their views and then a overall majority come to an agreement on how best to structure the way forward for the TUST with regard to the clear aims now agreed by the majority. As is democracy i think this is fair and reasonable, however i am pretty certain that the course of action that most members will agree on will differ to mine and give me cause to re-assess things.

I will be helped to do so hopefully with clear and concise information from those on here who know their onions and can explain in layman's terms the pro's and cons of what is eventually agreed. No offence to Merse and others who often post detailed information about these kind of political things and all good and appreciated but in all honesty and don't understand any of them. I just want the basic nuts and bolts of it all so i'm able to understand if the agreed way forward is in line with my values and also to help me decide if i consider it to be robust enough and actually viable.

Like i said, any info from anyone who attend the meeting would be very grateful to read on here for those of us who refuse to use most other forms of social media. Thanks.

[merse btpir]

" No offence to Merse and others who often post detailed information about these kind of political things and all good and appreciated but in all honesty and don't understand any of them. I just want the basic nuts and bolts of it all so i'm able to understand if the agreed way forward is in line with my values and also to help me decide if i consider it to be robust enough and actually viable."

A trust is not 'political' it is APolitical; I thought that much should be obvious. Promoting and seeking to enable democracy, suffrage and representation has nothing to do with many different political schools of thought the body generally consists of; but a comprehensive desire to ensure that the interests of a major stakeholder in the football club are given first priority........

I find it hard to believe that after all this time anyone who is a regular user of either this forum or BTPIR has any misconceptions or difficulties grasping the FACT that TUST is a wholly democratic organisation where one member one vote is sacrosanct.

I find it extremely hard to believe that anyone can object to it that policy and expect to be able to attend one of it's meetings without being a member.

Come on guys; it's not rocket science ~ if you want a say in how an organisation acts then you have to join it! £24 a year breaks no-one does it and I'm sure that if the majority express a wish for it; a system of voluntary enhanced subscription can be more fully made easy to understand and join in with.

The users of this forum should be taking the word onto the terraces and into the seats that TUST is the body to belong to in order to get the type of representation the supporters of any football club require and deserve.

If you are not a trust member think about this: you (as a supporter) are a stakeholder in the football club and as such are a valuable asset to that football club that indeed without; it might as not exist at all.

How much do you value YOUR football club and how concerned are you as to it's future?

[Yorkieandy]

No. It is not obvious that a trust is APolitical. To most probably it is but to some it' not. To some 2+2 obviously equals 4 but to some it doesn't. I see your point Merse but you are assuming.

Also i don't recalling anyone objecting to the fact that the TUST is a wholly democratic organisation. More that they were a little confused as to how it worked which i've touched upon.

Agree with the final sentiments though which is why i joined. Hopefully my fellow members will make the majority decisions going forward the right ones.

[Soupdragon]

Agree with the final sentiments though which is why i joined. Hopefully my fellow members will make the majority decisions going forward the right ones.

If you're a member now, you have as much right to a vote on the future of TUST as any other member. I don't know whether proxies will be allowed for the upcoming EGM, but if they are, and you have a particular course of action you want to see taken and you can't be at the EGM, then email the trust ([email protected], as I'm sure you know) and formally give the chairman your proxy to vote on your behalf. Always assuming, of course, that what you want to happen is what the chairman wishes also.

You can't "hopefully" wish that others - who are prepared to take responsibility - do precisely what you think is right.

However, I suspect that, because of the nature of the meeting - which is likely to take the form of an open-ended discussion, as I understand it - then it might not be possible to have proxy voting, as the precise form of words or actions that you want might not be put forward. In that case, perhaps someone on here who is going might be persuaded to make your arguments. Whatever they might be. If they agree with them.