New Board Director Confirmed - Mark Attanasio

[essex canary 492]

1 hour ago, GMF said:

I’m not sure if the current board can still be held to the 1998 Annual Report - this pre-dates the Trust too. 

Would it be unreasonable to suggest that shareholders around that time or up to 2002 would have bought their shares, at least to some extent  on the strength of such comments?

[A Load of Squit 5,130]

2 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Would it be unreasonable to suggest that shareholders around that time or up to 2002 would have bought their shares, at least to some extent  on the strength of such comments?

Yes it would.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

3 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Would it be unreasonable to suggest that shareholders around that time or up to 2002 would have bought their shares, at least to some extent  on the strength of such comments?

Tbh Essex this gets more tedious by the day. It's like this forum is your very own complaints desk. I get that you feel hard done by about the shares you bought in 2002. But you were not alone. And as far as I'm aware the associate directors have the means to get together to air their grievances. If the other associate directors aren't really bothered can I suggest the Football Ombudsman as a way forward?

[GMF 736]

9 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Tbh Essex this gets more tedious by the day. It's like this forum is your very own complaints desk. I get that you feel hard done by about the shares you bought in 2002. But you were not alone. And as far as I'm aware the associate directors have the means to get together to air their grievances. If the other associate directors aren't really bothered can I suggest the Football Ombudsman as a way forward?

Been there, done that, got the tee shirt, twice. Third time lucky, perhaps? 🤔 

[GMF 736]

20 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Would it be unreasonable to suggest that shareholders around that time or up to 2002 would have bought their shares, at least to some extent  on the strength of such comments?

There were significant purchases in 1998, because the Club was struggling to come to terms with the post-Chase era, and, again in 2002, following the collapse of ITV digital. The fans stepped up, big time and fair play to those who did. However, fast forward 20 years and it’s all about the value of media rights, streaming and corporate sponsorship, whether we like it or not. 

[essex canary 492]

2 hours ago, GMF said:

There were significant purchases in 1998, because the Club was struggling to come to terms with the post-Chase era, and, again in 2002, following the collapse of ITV digital. The fans stepped up, big time and fair play to those who did. However, fast forward 20 years and it’s all about the value of media rights, streaming and corporate sponsorship, whether we like it or not. 

Indeed but the leftovers from yesteryear are still in place and the Trust still projects that owning shares gives more influence but it is hard to see that. 

Interesting to note the Corporate Governance Review within the Annual Report that namechecks the OSP and states, without elaborating, that there is a view among some supporters that they were not as close to the club as has previously been. Moreover the real beneficiaries seem to be these senior managers with their glossy reports and disregard for the match going fan.

In a sense new fan engagement initiatives have been needed to engage younger people because the older ones haven't been further developed. 

[A Load of Squit 5,130]

6 minutes ago, essex canary said:

 

In a sense new fan engagement initiatives have been needed to engage younger people because the older ones haven't been further developed. 

You should never start a sentence with the phrase 'In a sense'.

Nothing you post makes any sense.

[TIL 1010 4,722]

It must be a terrible burden to be walking around with a chip on both shoulders.

Edited November 7, 2022 by TIL 1010