Lincoln City Forum - Rob Bradley Q&A The Answers
Vital Football

Latest Lincoln City News

Lincoln City Football Club News

Vital Football on FacebookVital Football on TwitterVital Football via RSS Feed
Not logged in.
( Login | register | forgotten password )
Random quote: 'If you're 0-0 down, there's no-one better to get you back on terms than Ian Wright.' - Robbie Earle
- (Added by: lindumimp)
Current Poll (see more polls)
Will we win, lose or draw against Coventry City
Suggested By: Vital Lincoln City
Win32%
Lose47%
Draw21%
Vital Football Comment
Vital Members League Table
RankNamePoints
1.Stevie_imp757
2.Jules698
3.Davidimp374
4.Scotimp301
5.Impalex296
6.Barney Imp294
7.NottyImp294
8.devonexlondonimp224
9.Croozey193
10.Luke Imp176
Write for Vital Football
Breaking League News
Jump to forum:
Frozen
Rob Bradley Q&A The Answers
[Locked]

27 May 2010 18:57 Post ID: #256001
76 John McClelland
50002000500100100100252525
Thanks go to Rob Bradley for turning these many questions round. I intend to lock this thread. If you wish to comment on specific issues then I suggest you start a new thread. One question was removed at the request of the poster.

Enjoy!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Dean

Rob, Should the Trust be more proactive when it comes to fund raising. I am aware they have a hand in getting grants and hand over membership money to the club, but should they be more proactive when it comes to raising funds for the playing side?

A : I believe the trust IS pro-active in raising funds. Our subs go to the club , we produce calendars that net around £1800, we put on dinners, race nights, and so on to bring in funds. The Gold scheme brings in money every year and next year should reach the £100k
milestone. We’ve worked with the club for years to bring in funding for community projects. At the moment we are running our Trust Us To Cover It campaign to raise funds towards new pitch covers. Maybe we need to get the message out more about what we do
in fairness to your question, Dean.

Rob, sorry another. We keep hearing that the Trust will co-opt people on to the board if they can bring certain skills to the table. What skills are the Trust looking for?

A : Yes, we co-opt people because any organisation ( like Lincolnshire Co-operative or Supporters Direct - people we are allied to ) find that this good practice in providing skills and running effectively. Co-opted members can bring in expertise in any area that benefits the members either by advising us on, say, disabled fans’ issues, fundraising, community projects, etc. They can also be from other supporters bodies so that we can co-ordinate what we do. We welcome people to come forward and tell us what they can
give to us and the club.

Rob, given the fiasco that was the last Trust AGM. Have the Trust taken on board the errors if indeed they were errors and learnt from them?

A : I don’t think it was a fiasco. From the feedback I’ve had, the bulk of the audience was happy with the evening and what the trust had to say. Two or three individuals raised various points which they are entitled to do as members. It is not for me to say what the reasoning behind their questions were, and if they are critical of the trust, that’s up to them.

Rob, why is it more to join the Trust if you are not a season ticket holder, and do you think 1, it is fair and 2, do you think the extra £5 will put people off knowing they are paying more for membership?

A : The club are keen that as many people as possible buy season tickets, so a £5 discount is our way of promoting that. Maybe £20 is a lot to join otherwise, but I think it is good value and compares favourably with what trusts all over the country charge.

Rob, how do you think Chris Sutton is shaping up as a manager?

A : As the club said, it was a gamble appointing an inexperienced manager, but he has passed his first test by keeping us in the Football League. The next test is having full season with his own squad and trying to get us promoted, so we’ll wait and see !
Personally, I think he could be an excellent manager for us.

NottyImp

Rob, do you think the £15/£20 fee to join the Trust is too high and will deter people in tough economic times?

A : Supporters Direct advise trusts that a sum that isn’t too far away from the cost of admission into a ground is a fair level to set subscriptions at. Neither too cheap or too dear. I hope these tough times don’t put people off joining. In 2000 the spirit of everyone
including those who set up the trust went beyond was the sub a pound or two too expensive. We joined up and got stuck in.

I wonder what variety of grape is Rob's favourite tipple?

A : Depends who’s paying.

Rob, could you clearly explain the role, function and the methodology of selecting coopted members? Do you think this process is anti-democratic?

A : Most “ best practice “ advice for the governance of any organisation recommends the cooption of individuals who aren’t a natural candidate for being elected. They are either asked if they wish to get involved, or they ask us because they have something to offer. It isn’t anti-democratic because the amount of elected board members always exceeds coopted members. As I say, it’s a system all good organisations adopt.

Gijsbert_bos

Maybe, given the popularity of horticulture on the site, we should ask Rob if he likes gardening? Does he lovingly tend an allotment (Or "lotty" as some young upstarts would have it)?

A : I may be old and decrepit, but I’m not into gardening. I was going to make a joke about liking grass, but I don’t want to get arrested.

BrownImp

Firstly, thanks for all you do Rob. Are the trust aware of the animosity and scepticism towards them by certain sections of
Lincoln fans? Are their plans to try and dispel this?

A : Yes we are aware, and take it or leave it from me, a lot of trust people are upset about it. They think it’s divisive, unfair, and facts are bandied about that are patently inaccurate. As someone who was involved during a fantastic time at the club where EVERYONE
pulled together, I’m very saddened by some of the things some people have put on Vitals.

The trust mean well, work hard, and love the club. To then get slagged off is out of order. To dispel it we need to keep doing what we’ve always been doing. To be fair, we’d love some of these critics to show up and get involved and prove they can do better. Sadly, they never do.

Nottinghamimp

OK I will bite the bullet.
Rob, what is the rationale behind the trust purchasing shares on the open market (at a discount) rather than putting 'new' money into the club from the issue of new authorised but previously unissued equity shares. Genuine question not any form of mischief.

A : No problem with the question. A very fair one. Yes, we bought some shares from a shareholder who didn’t want them any more. For what we believed to be a very fair sum, it helped us in our efforts to keep a 25% shareholding. This is a very rare occasion when the money we raise didn’t go to the club, but we got reports that the club finances were OK, and it was a good decision at the time. We would like to keep over 25% so that our members, the fans, can have a say if any massive issue came up. There are a lot of unsold shares available so keeping above 25% may one day prove impossible.

LindumImp

Rob a few issues regarding the AGM that were obviously commented on by people. These questions relate to issues raised by members on the night and posted previously so apologies to anyone who may have wanted to repeat their previous queries I am just trying to summarise concerns raised over the conduct of the Trust AGM - if I mess anything or you want to add to them feel free.

No agenda papers were handed out, isn't it normal practice at an AGM for these to be given to members on arrival so they know the sequence of events for the evening?

A : Agendas went out with the notice advising of the AGM. If people had forgotten to bring them, then we had some to hand out on request.

Again an issue to do with paperwork, why was time not given for the accounts to be properly scrutinised before this item was voted on?

A : The bottom line with this is that our auditors confirmed that our accounts are in order and are healthy. However, although we have followed procedure as advised, it will be better to issue reports in future when the notice goes out. Then everyone has time to
digest them and raise any queries they wish. I’m not sure if this answers this, but one thing is for sure, we’ve absolutely got nothing to hide !

Some people thought the AGM was rushed through, comments?

A : There were issues about questions not being asked but then a full Q and A followed that covered matters people wished to raise, such as co-options and the like.

How do you see the membership going now the membership itself has been untied from season tickets?

A : It may drop a little but we think it is only right that fans have a choice. It is up to us to prove that it is worthwhile joining the trust.

What is the Trusts view on a ground move, is it for or against.

A : The trust board’s policy isn’t important. In fact it hasn’t got one. It’s the members who would decide, should such a proposal come up.

We know that members of the L&DFSC are not getting any younger but they have been fantastic fundraisers for many years. Redimps are maybe not quite in the same category age wise but again there is an ageing top hierarchy who may have to hand over at some point. Would it not make sense to have all supporters organisations in one grouping. That way one committee, one set of accounts etc? Radical perhaps but it would also give the Trust more identity and purpose.

A : That is why we co-opt people onto the trust board. We have representatives from the other two fans groups on our board. That way we all act in a co-ordinated way, don’t duplicate stuff, but retain our own identity and concentrate on doing what we are good at. Maybe we could all amalgamate, but your last sentence reveals the possible problem. Why should the trust be entitled to take them over ? Hardly fair on them !

Going back to the AGM - there were a number of unanswered questions in AOB - do you have a copy of these? Will they be answered?

A : Assuming they weren’t asked for them not to be answered, I’m not sure therefore what they were ! If they are the ones that follow, I’ll be answering them later.

It's great to see money going to the Cover It campaign and the donation from the Redimps Association must be welcome but isn't this money that would have gone to the club anyway so isn't in effect new money? Your thoughts?

A : Yes of course the Red Imps donation would have gone to the club, but they could have done that at the club AGM to gain publicity independently, or they could have bought shares. They preferred, however, to show their support to our new campaign, so I think they deserve credit for that.

Neil Gentleman-Hobbs/Steveimp

Since I am no longer a member of the forums, I would like to ask the following question to Rob: Are you going to answer all the points in Neil Gentleman-Hobbs Front Page article? If yes that's great. If not will The Trust or Lissie Wilkins be replying to it? He is,
after all a Trust member.

Steve imp

A : Although I look at Vitals a fair bit I’m gambling you mean the ones below. I’ll do my best.

An Open Letter To Imps Trust
In the interests of openness here is a copy of a letter sent to both the Lincoln City Supporters Trust and Supporters Direct. I feel openness and transparency to be the key element here to ensure we get democasy and a say back.

Attention of Lissie Wilkins, Chairperson.

Dear Sirs
The 2010 Trust AGM has not been conducted in a professional manner, and I would like your comments and reply to the points raised below as soon as possible.

Supporters Direct Rule 23 c. states: In addition to the provisions relating to the Annual General Meeting. all meetings may consider any other business relating to the affairs of the Society which any member of the Board may wish to raise but no resolution may be
put to the vote of the meeting under this item. Rule 25 c) states: Notice of a general meeting is to be given in writing at least 14 clear days before the date of the meeting. The Notice must indicate the business to be dealt with at the meeting.

The fact is that the Trust's AGM Notice, Item 6. to transact 'any other business' cannot be removed, unless a new Notice is sent to all members with Item 6. deleted. This as you well know was not done.

In the event, the Trust Chairperson failed in her duty to conduct the meeting in accordance with the Notice given to all members.

A : I’m told that AOB was on the agenda, but wasn’t brought up after our chair took advice. There did follow, however, an open Q and A session to answer everyone’s questions. The bulk of the attendees were more than happy with this.

With regards to the Trust's omission regarding the Rights and Powers of members to
propose a resolution, it is clear you are not prepared to take the necessary action to make amends for this serious error. The Trust Board can resolve this matter by calling an EGM within a few weeks, and if the addition is passed, my resolution can be put to members.
The excuse that the cost is prohibitive is not relevant. The Trust Board admit it is their
error, therefore it is your responsibility to deal with matter immediately. You have already known of this problem for some weeks now, and have not given members at the AGM a
time scale to sort the problem out. Even when you do, the earliest a resolution can be put forward is a year away at the earliest. This is not good enough, and action should be taken to call an EGM.

A : Let’s take a step back a moment. And let me ask you a question. WHAT DOES ALL THIS ACHIEVE ? We all support LCFC and we all want the club to succeed. Does all this time and effort on procedure, rules, and so on actually have a worthwhile end
product ?

Back to the question. The trust need to make sure that members have the opportunity to put a resolution to a general meeting in advance within a reasonable timescale. Clearly we need to look at that ( even though our rules as an IPS have been approved, and were followed on this occasion ) because there may be an anomaly there. At the AGM we confirmed we’d do that.

If you feel strongly about these issues you need to call an SGM. We will then notify all our members, set up the meeting, and your issue can be resolved. I personally would prefer to see trust funds passed to the club than spent on printing, stamps, and arranging
another meeting ( around £800 I believe ? ), but you have that right.

I do not dismiss the points you raise, however. Can I suggest that, if you and any others, want to bring up matters of procedure / rules / governance / etc, then let me know. I will personally chair a meeting with you, and representatives of the trust board if so. I have chaired LCFC board meetings / LCFC AGMs / trust meetings / Supporter Direct meetings / etc in the past, so I am happy to do this and we can discuss these things face to face and sort them out once and for all.

These issues should have been dealt with fully on the night, or an adjournment called, as you were obviously not sure of the correct procedure. Your own Rule 36. a) relating to general meetings state: the issues to be decided are clearly explained. You and I know this was not the case. 1) The Trust Notice regarding item 6., 2) The Rights and Powers of Members, and 3) issues to be decided clearly, were not dealt with in the appropriate manner. The details above are indisputable and it is your duty to accept this and call an
EGM.

A : See above.

Would you also please clarify the answer the 3C's gave to a Q & A regarding spouses etc. of Board Members being elected to the Board. The answer given was 'If they have arrived there in an acceptable democratic way and they have a lot to offer the trust and club, why on earth shouldn't say a man and wife be involved.' I realise that may be acceptable, but in the case of a man and wife being on the Lincoln Trust Board, the man has not been democratically elected, and therefore your argument falls down at the first hurdle. Will the man stand down and make way for someone else to be co-opted?

A : This question implies that we haven’t got the integrity to co-opt a person for his skills alone, and being married to someone else on the trust board has had some bearing on it. It hasn’t. The gentleman concerned has provided a great deal of skill, and you only need to take a walk around The Goal club at the ground to realise this.

Thank you.
Neil Gentleman-Hobbs
Trust Member

ImpAlaska

First let me just say how much better the website is now, nice one! Please comment on my following points.

A : The website is better, but we still need to keep working on it.

I think there is a case for an intermediate Trust membership level. I've considered Gold memebership, but feel it is too expensive for me, but on the other hand feel that I can go further than basic membership. I understand the option to make contributions, but I would like some recognition for going that extra step. (Gosh, that feels awkward to say when addressing Rob and others who having given and risked so much!)

A : An excellent point. In 1999 / 2000 we set up systems so that fans could contribute to the club based on their ability to pay. Each tier of support would be represented in the boardroom. It is, as you say, a big jump from ordinary membership to gold membership.
Just as it is a huge leap from being a gold member to being an associate director or a director. We thought at the time, and this still might apply, that if you have too many rungs on the ladder, you may not have enough people in each group to be entitled to have a rep in the boardroom. I think we should re-address this and maybe talk about it when the trust board and the club board next have our joint meeting.

Perversly, given my first point, I object to paying more because I am not a season ticket holder. It feels like a punishment. As a potential member living overseas I believe living 3,000 miles from the hallowed turf is sufficient justification for not having a season
ticket.

A : See earlier, but another fair comment. We find, however, that, especially with the gold scheme, a lot of exiles who can’t attend many matches like to contribute to the club / trust in other ways because they are not putting money in through the turnstiles as much as they’d like. It’s their way of showing support.
Rolling recruitment: It's always irked me that membership is a fixed period and having joined mid season in the past, I felt short changed. Possibly connected to this, I did not get any reminders.

A : I believe this is done to reduce workload and therefore costs for the membership officers.

Q : Technology: Let's use technology to sign people up. I am nervous about sending bank details in the post from overseas.

A : Now that we have a better website, I think things like this will naturally follow. We now send out e news bulletins, and we will develop our technology as you ask.

Members only message board: An alternative feedback mechanism, using real names and limited to paid up members. Doreen to moderate of course.

A : Members can get through to our website now and we can introduce such facilities should we find our members press us for it, subject to us ( and Mrs A ) having the time to run it.

Taking into account the above points, membership levels, overseas/distant members, I would suggest that it is possible to create a mix and match membership. In other words individuals could pick and chose benefits and this would affect their membership dues.

Factors to consider could be family memberships, credits for helping with fundraising (please don't send raffle tickets to San Francisco), choice of benefits bought (e.g. opt out of shop discount), and loyalty/ long term memberships.

A : Having a variety of membership types and a range of benefits is good but a very time consuming thing to actually provide. Family membership is a good idea and is well worth looking at. Shame you live away - you would be an asset if you got involved !
Incidentally the choice of benefits would give real feedback about what is important to members.

Having read some of the other postings let me move to a more strategic observation/suggestion and again I would ask you to comment. I echo the calls to streamline the fundraising groups, but think this is something that should be done over a period of time. It is important not to lose the goodwill/ contacts built up over time by the other groups. In the first instance it would be useful for all
groups to have a publically visible memorandum of understanding as regards their respective roles in supporting Lincoln City. All potential members/supporters could then clearly see the demarkations and make an informed choice.

A : The question of goodwill is important. No single group should risk losing the support of another by making overtures about combining or taking them over. Working hand in hand and supporting each other, like we want to with the relatively new 12th man as well as the older established groups, is an admirable arrangement. Again your point about clarity for supporters in terms of knowing what each group does is valid, so that people
are aware of all the different disciplines each undertakes, aren’t confused by them all, and can chose who they wish to subscribe to ( one, more than one, or hopefully all of them ).

Others are calling into question the relevance of the Trust and the extent to which it represents the greater community of Lincoln City supporters. My view is that the Trust should, in addition to current activities, act as a consultant to the club and/or audit certain
activities on behalf of the supporters. To illustrate, each season the Trust could examine/report on the effectiveness of commercial or operational activities such as ImpPlayer, Archives website, catering, and so on. Hopefully this could draw individuals' expertise, provide direct feedback to suporters and provide positive suggestions to the club. All within the confines of commercial confidentiality. Incidentally I would steer well clear of the playing side, other than to facilitate fans forum/ forums/ fora.
(Nottingham- help me here!)

A : Firstly, I believe our trust and the trust movement is more relevant than ever. In this age of club debt and questionable ownership the views of the football authorities, political
parties, and others, now include a firm belief that fans should have a stake in their club and have representation in how their club is run. Our hybrid model, of fans ownership combined with business ownership and business skills, is proving to be a success and
something others at both small clubs and now much bigger ones aspire to.

Feedback of the club’s activities already gets heard in the boardroom through our elected representatives, and the boards strategy and decision making travels the other way. A broader examination of this process would be worthwhile and we can now carry this out through electronic surveys, which we are starting to do. Don’t worry about the playing side, but we do need to provide the conduit, along with the club, to get the manager’s messages out.

I believe the three Cs should be managed by the club, but with the trust providing the independent audit/ analysis of complaints. in this regard the Trust should be the hairshirt of the club. Incidentally I would like to see the three Cs report publically general statistics
to show the number and type of complaints and the number of matters resolved or outstanding.

A : At the moment 3 C’s comments pass through the trust to the club, and findings conveyed back to the person involved. Action if necessary is taken in response to complaints made. Getting the statistics out more generally is a good idea.

The Trust's strategic vision should be to become the club's strategic partner of choice and number one source of accountabilty for the fans. Tag line: "Imps Trust; the Due Diligence of Lincoln City"

A : A “critical friend” is how we describe ourselves. Part of the club but independent of it too.

The Source

Is The Trust Still Good Value For Money?

A : Yes, I believe so. Maybe we have been a bit quiet in the last couple of years, and we certainly intend to bang the drum about what we do from now on. The perception of something is often not an accurate view of it, and I think we’ve suffered from that in the
past.

Does It Really Need Such A Huge Committee/Board Looking After It? Is The Size Of The Committee Stifling Debate And Decision Making?

A : Good point. Best practice ( again ) tells you that you should not have too many individuals forming a board. We have around the same as the board of Supporters Direct, and we are limited to the maximum we can have, so the board certainly won’t grow too
big.

Does The Trust Really Deserve 2 Places On The Club Board?

A : It most certainly does. The trust have put in funds that easily entitles us to two representatives. We continue to put funds in. We have two out of eight directors on the club board which is a good balance.

Should The Trust Be Run Solely By 'Energetic Amateurs'? (Perhaps Links To Q2)

A : That’s the whole point. A trust is a collection of fans and those fans elect the majority of their board. Out of hundreds of members we should be able to ( and do in my opinion ) find the people to run the trust professionally. Then any other skills we need can be coopted on.

Directors Of The Football Club Only Need To Put In A Certain Amount For A 'Lifetime' Directorship. Doesn't This Mean That The Board, That Is Limited In Number, Are Not Prepared To Put Any More Money In After That Initial Sum?

A : We put in funds every year, having already contributed the sums to qualify for directorships. Individual directors contribute by the purchase of shares to qualify to be directors too. If they decide to carry on investing that is up to them. Don’t forget however,
they spend a huge amount of their time unpaid on their duties as directors. As do the trust ones !

Every Question Or Will The Vitals Or Trust Stasi Get To It Beforehand? I Have Absolutely No Faith In This Process Whatsoever.

A : I’ve answered every question. They are not influenced by anyone. I’ll check they’re not edited when they feature on Vitals. You should have faith.

57Harry

The Trust has gone on record and stated its shareholding must not fall below 25%.This concerns many people in that it does not have the financial means to do this by way of new investment.Currently it stands about 26% at present.The substantial new investment
in LCFC,which is needed,will inevitably dilute the Trusts shareholding to well below this. How will the Trust deal with this-will it continue to buy shares on the cheap from existing shareholders? Or will it discourage/veto new investment to maintain its powerbase? A senior Trust member has said to be "they are wary of non-trust investment" so my last question was serious.

A : We HOPE to keep our shareholding at 25% or more. That way the fans have a say should some proposal be made to the club. In other words if something good is proposed, the fans can hear about it and OK it. Or if something horrendous comes along, you have a chance to find out all about it and have your say. If I hear any more about b***dy Munto I’ll scream ( not the trust movements greatest hour ) but you just ask fans of York ( Mr
Batchelor ), Darlington ( Mr Reynolds ), Chester ( a series of people ), and fans of other similar clubs, would they have liked to have a say in what their clubs ended up doing ? I think they would.

If new investment comes in, yes our 25% will reduce. We can’t do anything about that, but we hope the board of directors make the right decision, which I’m sure they would. We have once bought shares from an existing shareholder. I can’t see that happening any
more because of the circumstances of it at the time. “Veto” and “powerbase” are terms that are not appropriate. We would never try and stop good new investment, and we are not bothered about power. All we want is for trust members to have a say. Words like those make me very sad. I spent 5 years involved with the club and here we are with words like that being used, which are way off mark. Our trust clearly hasn’t been getting the message across.

Can you clarify the Trusts position on all these issues and also how it sees its role, if at all in attracting substantial new investment in the club?

A : It is not the trust’s role to go out to influential people to attract them to the club as an actual duty, but we all try to persuade anyone and everyone to get involved at any level. The club board ( including our reps ) are very much responsible for that, and they will no doubt keep us informed should they successfully bring in new investment.

Can the Trust justify having 2 representatives on the club board. Certainley the new money raised in the past from initiatives like the sucessful Goldmembers scheme justify 1-but 2 ?? Also I would say the Trust is not currently raising large sums of money which
puts further questions against the current situation. Also substantial new investors will want a place on the board,no doubt. You can only have so many directors in place so the difficulty is that space will have to made to potentially accomodate new investment.

A : See answer above. You could argue that one day the Gold members scheme will be entitled to two directors ! Of course we don’t want that, but in the not too distant future we will probably theoretically have invested a sum that would normally permit two
directorships. And the ordinary membership has already put in sums in excess of what is needed to qualify for a seat on the board. We continue to put in funds, so why should that
question the situation ? If new investors come in of course they will want a place on the board, and the trust directors will accommodate this. I fail to see why the trust investment
and trust directors have these questions put to them when the board comprises eight in total. Do you ask the others the same questions !

???

If a serious potential investor wanted to take over the club and had the funding to do it but wanted control would the Trust consider the proposal of selling their shares or risk losing
such possible investment and sticking to their 25% policy?

A : If an investor came in with an excellent business plan, sound investment ( not loans ), and the good of the club at heart, I’m pretty damn sure the trust would hand over their shares with smiles on our faces. The trust have not, do not, will not put off new
investment. Now maybe you’ll tell the club where all these investors are !

Coxtin

What process are in place for the Trust to be a critical self-evaluating body? What are the weaknesses of the trust and what is being done for continual improvement?

A : We recently carried out a survey of all our members and are acting on the results. The 3C’s tell us of operational issues that involve us. We act on comments we receive through our website. We have two reps on the club board who listen to everyone at every opportunity. The whole trust board takes in what people say to us. I think we have maybe been too quiet in the past, but, to be honest, when the club is being run well, which it is, it isn’t like year 2000 with collections, marches in the street, court cases, and the club nearly going under. You heard lots about the trust then and we were held in good regard. Which situation do you prefer !

Helgy

As you know the 12th man has started the fans shares and next month it will have raised over a grand for the imps. The Trust has come in for some stick over the fact that there is no new investment just the buying of old shares. Why not get your members to come on board with the shares then no one can moan that the Trust is not putting in new investment? From £2 to whatever you want to put in.

A : Hi Helgy - “ no new investment just the buying of old shares “ is not accurate to be fair, as I’ve explained earlier. We continue to raise funds, and the shares thing was a oneoff - a miniscule amount compared to the money we’ve raised historically. Well done
with your fundraising. It seems a darn good scheme.

The fans games have seen the Trust,the 12th man and the club all to work together. So the future definately looks brighter and the 12th man has a new fundraiser that is pulling in the money. I say lets keep working together for the better of the club.

A : The fans game was the best game I’ve seen for weeks ! Of course we’ll work together. All mates together, working for the cause.

Southparkerimp

As a bit of courtesy to Rob it would have been nice for each person asking a question to have put their real name to it instead, as in most cases, of hiding behind keyboard alias's.

A : See later !

Perhaps Rob can turn the tables and ask ImpAlaska why after five years of near dormancy on this board he suddenly pops up with some in depth questions about the Trust and Lindum why the question of what the Vitals money was used for was apparantly never asked to Mike Thompson as mentioned at the AGM? It has been asked at least twice on this board and not yet, to my knowledge, answered.

A : I haven’t a clue who ImpAlaska is or how often he / she contributes. Mike Thompson gave the details of what was raised by Vitals at the AGM. If your question is asking what the money went on ( because I don’t follow your question - sorry ) then I don’t know. Like any organisation if income comes from a great many sources, and then gets spent on a great many things, then how to you allocate one bit of income to one particular expense ? Sorry if this answer isn’t what you asked.

Ty Corcoran

I assume membership details are kept on computer. If so, is it not possible to ask members if they would like information via post or e-mail? Even in normal correspondence, it could save the Trust money by emailing rather than posting.

A : We now send out e news to people who have given us their e mail address. We will continue to post stuff out if e mailing isn’t possible or preferred.

Themightyimp

What were your thoughts about the bid to take over the club by RT,KR & co?
If you were against it why?
If you were for it why?

A : These are my opinions only. I was neither for it or against it. I just thought all the parties should get together and sort out what was best for Lincoln City. The problem was that the takeover was the follow up to a dispute that led to the board being split and
directors leaving the board. As a result it was borne out of feelings and emotion connected with that dispute, which is not the best scenario for something so important to the club going forward.

The most important issue with all that was the tragedy that the split happened in the first place. When I had the honour of being on the board the individuals there all got on as friends and worked with one aim only - the success of the club. For the club to have lost
people like that should never have been allowed to happen. When people go on about new investment coming into Lincoln City, they forget we had someone at the club who would have done that. But because of things that should have been seen and addressed
before things went too far, but weren’t, we lost that potential investor. I won’t go any further on this subject.

Finally, I have answered a lot of questions. If the answers are wrong or controversial, I’ll get criticism from the questioner or the trust board. I have put my name to these answers and apart from one or two, I haven’t a clue who the vast bulk of the people putting questions are. Maybe you’d like to tell me ! Your challenge. Up the Imps
Like post
Like this post
0
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Pages (1):
1
Jump to forum:
Lincoln City Fixtures  >>