Tekel Towers » When is the meeting between ST+Fed/Trust?

Tek · 14/6/2015 11:05 pm

stobievulture wrote:
good points mate well made....

i'm no entirely happy with things just now but i'm only sticking up for what i believe are the right reasons....i get the impression some aren't happy and won't give in until there's massive change....i'm only trying to simmer that down

I can only speak for myself Kenny but i just want to see a clear plan set-out and for our Chairman and BoD to get back to being transparent,ambitious and passionate.

I'm sorry mate i just don't sense that at the mo and haven't for awhile now.

Mr Thompson was never out the papers and telly when most of the fanbase thought he was the best thing since sliced bread.Where is he now?

Beharder made a comment that when the going gets tough some people sit in the house and cry and some come out fighting.

He's right,but it's McNamara+Thompson that i want to see come out fighting.And by that i don't mean having digs and being beligerent towards the support.

I don't sense any 'fire in the belly',and an ambitious streak being shown.We seem to be just happy to plod along and see what happens.

Without wishing to sound cheesy we need to get back to being 'United' and all take our anger and frustration out on the opposition.But that fighting spirit has to be seen to come from the top,and then the soldiers on the ground i'e (the fans) will most certainly rally behind the cause as one again.

Mon Utd

huntedbyafreak · 14/6/2015 11:22 pm

Tek wrote:
First time i've been on the thread since last night and i'm going to try and address all points to all people who replied to me (and one or two other points i want to make in regards to other posts),so here goes lol.

@Saint Obz.Thank you for your apology Sir.I was dissapointed and a wee bit hurt you felt i was trying to create some kind of shitstorm.FWIW i was genuinely trying to find out peoples opinions on the transfer cut issue.I thought the vast majority of our support were against it but judging by my Twitter findings the support are split almost 50/50 on the issue.The only thing i would say is that i noticed a good few of the people who were against Jmac getting a cut were some of our most ardent fans who spend hundreds of pounds a season following the club everywhere.If they're not happy i would suggest that's not a good thing,whether they're in the right or wrong.

Lastly,you are right we just fundamentaly disagree on this issue and no amount of hand wringing from either of us is probably gonna do any good or convince the other of our point.So probably best to just agree to disagree on this issue.Oh and maybe not reply to each other when we've had a bevvy would be an idea too

@Hunted Other than stand outside Tannadice with a clipboard and pen i'm not sure how else i can gauge opinion on this matter amongst our support lol.I have a few hundred Utd followers on Twitter of a large cross section of society (male,female,young,old,wealthy'poor,Dundonians,out of towners,ex-pats etc) so i thought it was a pretty fair way of assessing the opinion of a large demographic of our support.As i said to Saint Obz it would seem our support are completely split down the middle on this issue.

@Everyone.You have to remember one simple fact.Dundee Utd aren't just a football club.They are also a business.Now in any line of business if a large cross section of your loyal 'customers' are unhappy at the product or the way the company is being run then you have problems on your hands that you have to address.Football of course isn't like any other business as we have 'customers' who are blindly loyalty and will continue to fund the club despite the product on the park perhaps not being what they would want to see.This type of 'blind loyalty' cannot be taking for granted though.And as i said it is some of our most loyal supporters who heavily fund the club who are most dissilusioned at present.Whether you think they are in the right,the wrong,have a point or are behaving like spoiled brats you have to confess that this is a worry and one that must be addressed (it should have been months ago).

Some of the guys who are most vocal against Thompson at the moment probably did heavily back his Dad in the UFC days (i did myself btw),but that doesn't mean that you don't question anything anymore.

I'll tell you one thing if Rangers supporters had questioned more things about their club when the going was good their club might not have died.

By the same token see if the Scottish footballing public hadn't shown such anger and questioned the SPL/SFA at every turn in the Summer of 2012 i have absolutely no doubt in my mind they would have been allowed to 'reclaim' their place in the top flight without an eyelid batted.

Yes we are all supporters and as such we should all fundamentally support the club from top to bottom,but we should never be negligent in questioning something if we feel it's not quite right.

We will all be here long after most of the current incumbents are and will continue to support the club financially,emotionally+vocally.

Anyway sheesh...i'm away for a beer.

Good post

PatReilly · 14/6/2015 11:28 pm

I'm quite laid back about the 'split' between AT/Fed and ST.

As far as the Fed is concerned, I pay the dues and have been part of it for a number of years, but am not active in any way. I'd say they have many members like me (however I wish they'd pay attention to emails which have indicated changes in contact details, as potential new supporters/members can't get in touch due to these being ignored) who are relaxed about the club.

AT/Fed might represent a few thousand fans, but they aren't really canvased for opinion, are they?

I'm, however, undemanding of the club, as I reckon there's a big element of luck involved in football management at our level (management of the team and the business to some degree....... which directly relates to the luck the team manager carries).

And I'm nonchalant about football anyway, as there are many more important aspects of life.

Tek · 14/6/2015 11:34 pm

PatReilly wrote:
I'm quite laid back about the 'split' between AT/Fed and ST.

As far as the Fed is concerned, I pay the dues and have been part of it for a number of years, but am not active in any way. I'd say they have many members like me (however I wish they'd pay attention to emails which have indicated changes in contact details, as potential new supporters/members can't get in touch due to these being ignored) who are relaxed about the club.

AT/Fed might represent a few thousand fans, but they aren't really canvased for opinion, are they?

I'm, however, undemanding of the club, as I reckon there's a big element of luck involved in football management at our level (management of the team and the business to some degree....... which directly relates to the luck the team manager carries).

And I'm nonchalant about football anyway, as there are many more important aspects of life.

I agree with your last line Patrick.

The rest total pish though ( just kidding)!

huntedbyafreak · 14/6/2015 11:50 pm

PatReilly wrote:
I'm quite laid back about the 'split' between AT/Fed and ST.

As far as the Fed is concerned, I pay the dues and have been part of it for a number of years, but am not active in any way. I'd say they have many members like me (however I wish they'd pay attention to emails which have indicated changes in contact details, as potential new supporters/members can't get in touch due to these being ignored) who are relaxed about the club.

AT/Fed might represent a few thousand fans, but they aren't really canvased for opinion, are they?

I'm, however, undemanding of the club, as I reckon there's a big element of luck involved in football management at our level (management of the team and the business to some degree....... which directly relates to the luck the team manager carries).

And I'm nonchalant about football anyway, as there are many more important aspects of life.

I'm a member of fuck all but agree with this post

stobievulture · 15/6/2015 7:01 am

PatReilly wrote:
I'm quite laid back about the 'split' between AT/Fed and ST.

As far as the Fed is concerned, I pay the dues and have been part of it for a number of years, but am not active in any way. I'd say they have many members like me (however I wish they'd pay attention to emails which have indicated changes in contact details, as potential new supporters/members can't get in touch due to these being ignored) who are relaxed about the club.

AT/Fed might represent a few thousand fans, but they aren't really canvased for opinion, are they?

I'm, however, undemanding of the club, as I reckon there's a big element of luck involved in football management at our level (management of the team and the business to some degree....... which directly relates to the luck the team manager carries).

And I'm nonchalant about football anyway, as there are many more important aspects of life.

spot on, great post

Affshore · 15/6/2015 7:14 am

stobievulture wrote:
Affshore wrote:
stobievulture wrote:
Think this is where the break down is...the fed and trust are without doubt made up of true supporters...people who follow the club home and away...BUT to those that aren't in either, it almost smacks of We're better supporters...we care more than you, cause we spend more and follow the club more
...so imho the fed can voice their opinion without question...even though it might be right...it might be wrong...it might be ill timed...it might be perfectly timed.....they're not representing the support imo..they're representing themselves....bet most in both were a huge part of the UFC....this is what amuses me now

Do the fed and the trust no represent a good few thousand members ? Surely that's representing a 'support' wether it be a majority or a minority it's still a big representation with a lot of members.
do they though? eh ken plenty utd fans not in either...and none are ever questioned about things discussed and put forward to the club....your either in it or no....its the reason there's a split in the support....the fed and trust got wind of something, took the club on, right or wrong they went public and the rest of the support went ..what the fucks going on

thats no representing everyone now is it?

im not taking sides...ALWAYS mearly pointing out there's two sides and it should be one...ALL behind the club or this happens....now you've got fans argueing with fans and fans reps being shut out the club cause they've went to town with those at the top

its not good is it

Maybe someone can tell us how many members are in both ?

How many fed clubs is there ? There always seems to be thousands oh tickets issued for semis and finals for the fed, no saying that's how many members but that's some amount usually

bowers · 15/6/2015 7:45 am

Pat do you mean you(or someone you know) has contcted fed with updated details and they havent been saved?

Affshore think around 30 member clubs this season

bowers · 15/6/2015 7:45 am

Double post

Last edited by bowers (15/6/2015 7:45 am)

geegee · 15/6/2015 9:18 am

Tek wrote:
First time i've been on the thread since last night and i'm going to try and address all points to all people who replied to me (and one or two other points i want to make in regards to other posts),so here goes lol.

@Saint Obz.Thank you for your apology Sir.I was dissapointed and a wee bit hurt you felt i was trying to create some kind of shitstorm.FWIW i was genuinely trying to find out peoples opinions on the transfer cut issue.I thought the vast majority of our support were against it but judging by my Twitter findings the support are split almost 50/50 on the issue.The only thing i would say is that i noticed a good few of the people who were against Jmac getting a cut were some of our most ardent fans who spend hundreds of pounds a season following the club everywhere.If they're not happy i would suggest that's not a good thing,whether they're in the right or wrong.

Lastly,you are right we just fundamentaly disagree on this issue and no amount of hand wringing from either of us is probably gonna do any good or convince the other of our point.So probably best to just agree to disagree on this issue.Oh and maybe not reply to each other when we've had a bevvy would be an idea too

@Hunted Other than stand outside Tannadice with a clipboard and pen i'm not sure how else i can gauge opinion on this matter amongst our support lol.I have a few hundred Utd followers on Twitter across a large cross section of society (male,female,young,old,wealthy,poor,Dundonians,out of towners,ex-pats etc) so i thought it was a pretty fair way of assessing the opinion of a large demographic of our support.As i said to Saint Obz it would seem our support are completely split down the middle on this issue.

@Everyone.You have to remember one simple fact.Dundee Utd aren't just a football club.They are also a business.Now in any line of business if a large cross section of your loyal 'customers' are unhappy at the product or the way the company is being run then you have problems on your hands that you have to address.Football of course isn't like any other business as we have 'customers' who are blindly loyal and will continue to fund the club despite the product on the park perhaps not being what they would want to see.This type of 'blind loyalty' cannot be taking for granted however.

As i said it is some of our most loyal supporters who heavily fund the club who are most dissilusioned at present.Whether you think they are in the right,the wrong,have a point or are behaving like spoiled brats you have to confess that this is a worry and one that must be addressed (it should have been months ago).

Some of the guys who are most vocal against Thompson at the moment probably did heavily back his Dad in the UFC days (i did myself btw),but that doesn't mean that you don't question anything anymore.

I'll tell you one thing if Rangers supporters had questioned more things about their club when the going was good their club might not have died.

By the same token see if the Scottish footballing public hadn't shown such anger and questioned the SPL/SFA at every turn in the Summer of 2012 i have absolutely no doubt in my mind they would have been allowed to 'reclaim' their place in the top flight without an eyelid batted.

Yes we are all supporters and as such we should all fundamentally support the club from top to bottom,but we should never be negligent in questioning something if we feel it's not quite right.

Afterall ,we will all be here long after most of the current incumbents are and will continue to support the club financially,emotionally+vocally.

Anyway sheesh...i'm away for a cold beer.

TEK, unfortunately in conversations like these there is a tendancy that if you repeat something often enough it starts to take on a life of its own...likewise the old trick of casually inserting something into the discussion as an irrefutable fact, trying to tie together with a scare story...like "If Rangers fans etc..." tends to get used.

I am not having a go at you specifically but it is part of the Rhetoric which gets used to justify what was IMO a incredibly stupid move....both methods take something which is a concern and blow it into a Drama. The fact is it was NOT like Rangers, it was NOT like Dundee...we were not 80M in debt run by a fantasist, we were not 26M in debt run by a couple of night club owners and a friend to war criminals whilst spunking money on Ex World cup players looking for a last pay day...this constant comparison to these situations does the argument no favours and leads a lot of people to think the Fed and AT are grasping at straws to justify what they did...

If, and I totally believe they did otherwise why would this have happened, they believed there were important issues, they were correct to raise them, but they went around it in totally the wrong way and at the wrong time and now seem desparate to justify what they did, by using "doomsday" rhetoric...

Contrary to what Affshore is trying to insinuate I have absolutely nothing against either the Fed or AT I have had no dealings with either and have absolutely no axe to grind, and having no links to the club I am not defending anybody either...I say it as I see it. I have listened to the FED's and AT's arguments and have witnessed the fallout...I have made my views clear, I think they made a mistake...if i was them I would say that maybe they could have played it better...instead they continue to make "We are doomed" statements when we clearly are not.

This stand off is not helping anyone, to get back to the point of my original post...the club are clearly shutting up shop as a response to what they see as a breach of trust, and the other side keep firing potshots at ST whenever they can...it is time to put this to bed and move on as a club...I doubt however the fans reps will ever get as much access to information in future as a result of this, and I think they too know this, however I think its time both sides "manned up" and put this argument behind them

Beharder · 15/6/2015 10:07 am

Well said geegee
Linking Uniteds situation to The demise of Rangers 1872 or the double admin dees is a nonsensical comparison, Utd are in the healthiest financial position we have been for years.

Affshore · 15/6/2015 11:33 am

Beharder wrote:
Utd are in the healthiest financial position we have been for years.

And what happens when the transfers dry up and we are still operating at a loss of high end 6 figures with no overdraft facility ???

Beharder · 15/6/2015 11:48 am

Transfer fees are paid in instalments therefore The chairman and Directors can set a player budget for forthcoming seasons. If there is to be no transfer income coming in in Season 2016-17 the playing budget will be reduced accordingly, with roughly a third of contracts up every year its a fairly simple task. Panic over.

stobievulture · 15/6/2015 11:56 am

Is right ^ this we've nae players to sell so we're up shit creek is the part i thinks nonsense....we've invested in areas which have worked for years....we've driven down debt massively in a era where that's near impossible....but we canna trust those in charge to have a change of direction if need be?

Affshore · 15/6/2015 12:05 pm

stobievulture wrote:
Is right ^ this we've nae players to sell so we're up shit creek is the part i thinks nonsense

Never said we've 'nae players to sell' I said what happens when the transfers dry up ? Which may or may not happen., It was a genuine question K.

blackandtangerine · 15/6/2015 12:12 pm

After all these transfer dealings we're still in debt. This year we'll make a profit in main to the transfers happening. There will also be a massive operating loss. Next season what happens if we make very little thru transfer income but still record massive operating losses. How do the club cover that? The club has to address costs, it's as simple as that. We are spending far too much and budgets need to be cut.

The club spent 250k on gussie. They didn't have to do that. United for all could have got it paid for from grants etc

stobievulture · 15/6/2015 12:26 pm

the lad beharder explained that pretty well imo...you take in, you reinvest if its working...the minute it stops working you make plans to re-adjust accordinly....id say their record stands up does it no?

there seems to be an agenda looking fae slightly outside looking in though, reading stuff and knowing what people are saying....lets not beat about the bush here...those that seem to be argueing with the more postive on here, or deluded ...do you think the people running the club are totally untrustworthy...not good for the club and on the take?.....

Last edited by stobievulture (15/6/2015 12:28 pm)

Tek · 15/6/2015 12:33 pm

geegee wrote:
Tek wrote:
First time i've been on the thread since last night and i'm going to try and address all points to all people who replied to me (and one or two other points i want to make in regards to other posts),so here goes lol.

@Saint Obz.Thank you for your apology Sir.I was dissapointed and a wee bit hurt you felt i was trying to create some kind of shitstorm.FWIW i was genuinely trying to find out peoples opinions on the transfer cut issue.I thought the vast majority of our support were against it but judging by my Twitter findings the support are split almost 50/50 on the issue.The only thing i would say is that i noticed a good few of the people who were against Jmac getting a cut were some of our most ardent fans who spend hundreds of pounds a season following the club everywhere.If they're not happy i would suggest that's not a good thing,whether they're in the right or wrong.

Lastly,you are right we just fundamentaly disagree on this issue and no amount of hand wringing from either of us is probably gonna do any good or convince the other of our point.So probably best to just agree to disagree on this issue.Oh and maybe not reply to each other when we've had a bevvy would be an idea too

@Hunted Other than stand outside Tannadice with a clipboard and pen i'm not sure how else i can gauge opinion on this matter amongst our support lol.I have a few hundred Utd followers on Twitter across a large cross section of society (male,female,young,old,wealthy,poor,Dundonians,out of towners,ex-pats etc) so i thought it was a pretty fair way of assessing the opinion of a large demographic of our support.As i said to Saint Obz it would seem our support are completely split down the middle on this issue.

@Everyone.You have to remember one simple fact.Dundee Utd aren't just a football club.They are also a business.Now in any line of business if a large cross section of your loyal 'customers' are unhappy at the product or the way the company is being run then you have problems on your hands that you have to address.Football of course isn't like any other business as we have 'customers' who are blindly loyal and will continue to fund the club despite the product on the park perhaps not being what they would want to see.This type of 'blind loyalty' cannot be taking for granted however.

As i said it is some of our most loyal supporters who heavily fund the club who are most dissilusioned at present.Whether you think they are in the right,the wrong,have a point or are behaving like spoiled brats you have to confess that this is a worry and one that must be addressed (it should have been months ago).

Some of the guys who are most vocal against Thompson at the moment probably did heavily back his Dad in the UFC days (i did myself btw),but that doesn't mean that you don't question anything anymore.

I'll tell you one thing if Rangers supporters had questioned more things about their club when the going was good their club might not have died.

By the same token see if the Scottish footballing public hadn't shown such anger and questioned the SPL/SFA at every turn in the Summer of 2012 i have absolutely no doubt in my mind they would have been allowed to 'reclaim' their place in the top flight without an eyelid batted.

Yes we are all supporters and as such we should all fundamentally support the club from top to bottom,but we should never be negligent in questioning something if we feel it's not quite right.

Afterall ,we will all be here long after most of the current incumbents are and will continue to support the club financially,emotionally+vocally.

Anyway sheesh...i'm away for a cold beer.
TEK, unfortunately in conversations like these there is a tendancy that if you repeat something often enough it starts to take on a life of its own...likewise the old trick of casually inserting something into the discussion as an irrefutable fact, trying to tie together with a scare story...like "If Rangers fans etc..." tends to get used.

I am not having a go at you specifically but it is part of the Rhetoric which gets used to justify what was IMO a incredibly stupid move....both methods take something which is a concern and blow it into a Drama. The fact is it was NOT like Rangers, it was NOT like Dundee...we were not 80M in debt run by a fantasist, we were not 26M in debt run by a couple of night club owners and a friend to war criminals whilst spunking money on Ex World cup players looking for a last pay day...this constant comparison to these situations does the argument no favours and leads a lot of people to think the Fed and AT are grasping at straws to justify what they did...

If, and I totally believe they did otherwise why would this have happened, they believed there were important issues, they were correct to raise them, but they went around it in totally the wrong way and at the wrong time and now seem desparate to justify what they did, by using "doomsday" rhetoric...

Contrary to what Affshore is trying to insinuate I have absolutely nothing against either the Fed or AT I have had no dealings with either and have absolutely no axe to grind, and having no links to the club I am not defending anybody either...I say it as I see it. I have listened to the FED's and AT's arguments and have witnessed the fallout...I have made my views clear, I think they made a mistake...if i was them I would say that maybe they could have played it better...instead they continue to make "We are doomed" statements when we clearly are not.

This stand off is not helping anyone, to get back to the point of my original post...the club are clearly shutting up shop as a response to what they see as a breach of trust, and the other side keep firing potshots at ST whenever they can...it is time to put this to bed and move on as a club...I doubt however the fans reps will ever get as much access to information in future as a result of this, and I think they too know this, however I think its time both sides "manned up" and put this argument behind them

I must have missed the 'We are doomed' statement from the Fed/AT.They released one joint statement back in February and there's been no official correspondance from them since to my knowledge.

"This stand off is not helping anyone"

I agree with that point which is why i was keen to know when this upcoming meeting was taking place.

Tek · 15/6/2015 12:42 pm

Beharder wrote:
Well said geegee
Linking Uniteds situation to The demise of Rangers 1872 or the double admin dees is a nonsensical comparison, Utd are in the healthiest financial position we have been for years.

Usual patronising post from you tbh.

I never for one minute compared our financial situation to Rangers and well you know it.

I merely used them as an example to point out how foolhardy it is to take the 'head in the sand' approach when things in the background of your club appear not to be as they should be.

To give you a better example look at Hibs.

5 years ago if you were a Hibs fan and you criticised Rod Petrie you would have no doubt had other Hibees arguing back 'we are a selling club/we are now debt free/look at the great stadium we now have/put your faith in the Chairman and management' etc etc.Meanwhile the whole while the clubs slowly going down the shitter and the majority of fans only woke upto this fact when it was to late and their subsequent protests just seemed hollow and belated.

And that's my main gripe.

I fear all the hard work put in since 2007 from Levein,Houston and Thompson (yes i do believe he done some good too) is pretty quickly going backwards and the ambitious and winning mentality that was coursing through the club for awhile is gradually evaporating.

Tek · 15/6/2015 12:44 pm

Going to lock this thread lads.Not because i want the last word but because it's turning into absolute tit-for-tat nonsense.

Very few people on here are willing to try and see where the other person is coming from and some of the posts are taking on a bit of a personal tone imo (deeming posters not a proper supporter etc).