SC Meeting

[geosname]

One would assume a confidentiality agreement between administrators and SC was a condition of meeting.

I dont see the SC as duty bound to reveal any and all information it gathers by way of meeting the administrators or any other, they are perhaps duty bound to represent the fans interests and concerns to the administrators, but thats not quite the same.

If they did reveal, if they know, who the bidders or interested parties are what good would it do? The SC would lose any credibility they have built up and the administrators would refrain from further meetings, some of the interested parties would probably disappear because of the breach whilst others would lose faith and trust in the administrators ability to retain confidential information... and what would we gain, as fans??

[Trentham Lakes Valiant]

One would assume a confidentiality agreement between administrators and SC was a condition of meeting.

I dont see the SC as duty bound to reveal any and all information it gathers by way of meeting the administrators or any other, they are perhaps duty bound to represent the fans interests and concerns to the administrators, but thats not quite the same.

If they did reveal, if they know, who the bidders or interested parties are what good would it do? The SC would lose any credibility they have built up and the administrators would refrain from further meetings, some of the interested parties would probably disappear because of the breach whilst others would lose faith and trust in the administrators ability to retain confidential information... and what would we gain, as fans??

 

Geo, I understand all that. My point is that the Admins will have confidentiality agreements with prospective buyers but have revealed their identities to the SC. The SC is exactly that; a Club for the Supporters. They are not part of the Admin team.

[Jimmy]

Geo, I understand all that. My point is that the Admins will have confidentiality agreements with prospective buyers but have revealed their identities to the SC. The SC is exactly that; a Club for the Supporters. They are not part of the Admin team.

 

Spot on.......Why should the SC Committee have privy to information its membership does NOT, it does not make sense.

[Guppy 4 England]

Lets be honest if the admins want 5000 fans through the door they really do have to tell us something, they can't have it both ways. In my opinion the supporters club is coming over as very toothless and really tell us nothing more than we already know. Just look at the last few statements from the SC it's pretty much bob young saying nothing an the SC nodding to say they agree. I would like more pressure from the SC on the admins and at the end Of the day if bob young doesn't like it an Isnt prepared to tell anymore then the SC remove their support for the admins and leave them to get on with it

 

Completely agree.

[Jacko51]

I would not dispute any of that. However, if as I believe to be the case, if the SC Committee know of any interested parties, they are duty bound to inform the fans. Howsoever they came across such info is no concern of ours. The SC have signed no confidentiality agreements so any information that comes into the public domain would be the fault of the Adminstrator.

 

Not sure what purpose would be served by releasing the names of people who might be bidding for the club, Simon? How will it further the process of the sale?

[geosname]

There will undoubtedly be an agreement of confidentiality between the SC and the administrators.... if there wasnt I doubt the administrators would talk to the SC.

The SC represents the fans to the club... it doesnt represent the club to the fans.... IF the administrators have told the SC who is interested they will have told them on the condition its kept confidential.... whats more important.... having a good working relationship with the club or gossip?

I realise the general rule for most seems to be.... "I know something so I have to tell".... but if the SC do tell, if they know, they will get shot from all sides..... the information is useless anyway.... it doesnt progress the club any if the fans know who may be interested, it only has any value when a buyer takes the bit between their teeth and moves forward, hopefully, with the SC as a useful intermediary.

 

I dont care who is interested in buying it, I care who has bought it and what they intend to do with it... which will be revealed when it happens.

[Jimmy]

There will undoubtedly be an agreement of confidentiality between the SC and the administrators.... if there wasnt I doubt the administrators would talk to the SC.

The SC represents the fans to the club... it doesnt represent the club to the fans.... IF the administrators have told the SC who is interested they will have told them on the condition its kept confidential.... whats more important.... having a good working relationship with the club or gossip?

I realise the general rule for most seems to be.... "I know something so I have to tell".... but if the SC do tell, if they know, they will get shot from all sides..... the information is useless anyway.... it doesnt progress the club any if the fans know who may be interested, it only has any value when a buyer takes the bit between their teeth and moves forward, hopefully, with the SC as a useful intermediary.

 

I dont care who is interested in buying it, I care who has bought it and what they intend to do with it... which will be revealed when it happens.

 

GEO the SC a

ARE the Supporters.

[rayzer]

I trust what the SC is doing on our behalf. They are being the conduit between the administrators and the fans. It is very frustrating at the length of time it is taking in finding a new owner, which is really down to Bob Young giving unrealistic and false information. For instance stating that he had a buyer lined up if Ryder was to go away and that this buyer was prepared to pay more money than Ryder and that he had already passed the fit and proper test required by the Football League. As I say I am happy with the way the SC is looking after the fan's interest although it would be nice to have a proper update without naming names. I would like confirmation that at least one of the interested party had been put forward to the FL to pass the fit and proper test which would at least show a measure of commitment.

[Trentham Lakes Valiant]

Not sure what purpose would be served by releasing the names of people who might be bidding for the club, Simon? How will it further the process of the sale?

The point being that the Admins have already released info to the SC thus breaking confidentiality clauses. The SC should release ALL info they have. They represent US and are not part of the Admin process.

[geosname]

GEO the SC a

ARE the Supporters.

 

We could disagree about this all day Jimmy but at the end of the day why do we need to know who is THINKING of buying vale? Its irrelevant in my opinion, it only becomes interesting when someone actually buys us.

 

In my opinion..... the supporters are the SC, even those who are not members, the committee, who meet with the administrators, represent the supporters... if they have agreed not to reveal the names of the interested parties [if they have been told] they should stick to that agreement. If they dont the SC, and the supporters, loses any credibility and the very useful bridge and trust between the supporters and "the boss" will be lost. We know from the mold experience that nothing survives in the vacuum created by loss of trust.

[geosname]

The point being that the Admins have already released info to the SC thus breaking confidentiality clauses. The SC should release ALL info they have. They represent US and are not part of the Admin process.

 

Have they released info?.... The confidentiality clauses probably pertain to general/public disclosure.... if the SC has been considered to be "under the umbrella" they are bound by the clauses themselves or by the clause probably imposed by the administrators who, by doing so, brought the SC "under the umbrella".

[Trentham Lakes Valiant]

We could disagree about this all day Jimmy but at the end of the day why do we need to know who is THINKING of buying vale? Its irrelevant in my opinion, it only becomes interesting when someone actually buys us.

 

In my opinion..... the supporters are the SC, even those who are not members, the committee, who meet with the administrators, represent the supporters... if they have agreed not to reveal the names of the interested parties [if they have been told] they should stick to that agreement. If they dont the SC, and the supporters, loses any credibility and the very useful bridge and trust between the supporters and "the boss" will be lost. We know from the mold experience that nothing survives in the vacuum created by loss of trust.

 

Geo, there is not a lot wrong with what you say. I would contend, however that 'trust' is starting to evaporate. I don't k now you personally, but respect your opinions that I have seen on this M B. Jean, however, is someone I do know and I have enormous respect for her and her opinions. I can't help but feeling, though, that her public advocacy of 'the ends justify the means' is something that does not necessarily sit well with her personally. Might be wrong, but it's the feeling I get.

[Trentham Lakes Valiant]

Have they released info?.... The confidentiality clauses probably pertain to general/public disclosure.... if the SC has been considered to be "under the umbrella" they are bound by the clauses themselves or by the clause probably imposed by the administrators who, by doing so, brought the SC "under the umbrella".

 

We are the SC, Geo

[geosname]

TLV... we have no option but to trust the administrators.... or the SC... the alternative is so counter productive it becomes destructive.

In the normal world I would want and expect the SC to represent us, the supporters, and to report back on the contents and context of the meetings with 'The BOSS"...... There may well be restrictions on information passed at these meetings for the meetings to take place.... we are then left with two choices.

1 Trust the SC are representing our interests to the best of their ability and accept the restrictions imposed

2 Accept that the role of the SC has changed from representing the supporters to simply reporting the supporters feelings with no response or input from the other side.

 

The first allows us some input and creates a good working relationship the second recognises the fans have problems but restricts the possibilities to rectify them adequately.

[Marge56]

Seems like there are a lot of 'can do it better' people on here, for goodness sake, they don't get paid for doing this, they were elected by the supporters to represent supporters. Sometimes when you are in this position, you have to use your discretion and inevitabley there will be occassions when some things have to remain confidential. They have built up the trust they have by keeping information confidential when asked of them, that's if they have been privy to certain information, as some people seem to believe !! I can't believe there are people on here who are even questioning the actions of the SC committee. Unbelievable !!!!!

If people don't like what the SC committee are doing, put yourselves up for election at the next meeting !!!!!!!!!