One Member One Vote

al_quaker - 5th May 2012 10:24:14

Sounds interesting. Was reading about Stenhousmuir FC, who are a CIC. Sounds exactly what we want:

http://www.stenhousemuirfc.com/cic/

I'm in for the new club. It will be interesting to see how many big investors we get with 1 member 1 vote. What happens if we try and get the Trust on board too? The available grants sound good.

poppyfield - 5th May 2012 10:25:22

This sounds like great news, very excited about this.

sacko_uk - 5th May 2012 10:27:22

Agreed...apply for grants, money goes back in the pot, every fan who invests has an equal say and most importantly...no greedy chairmen!

ted_do - 5th May 2012 10:32:40

Why not have a newly invigorated trust running the club which already is a community interest group and can apply for grants, with the added bonus of the back up of supporters direct. The model is already in place at loads of clubs, why are we always reinventing the wheel ....and it always comes out square, ah but this be Darlington`s wheel....

uncovered - 5th May 2012 10:51:30

agree, if we are going down this route then surely the best way forward is to get people onto the trust board asap (which maybe difficult) and move forward under the trust banner. What happened with the trust previously was a poor situation, but the actual structure of the trust is a great model and if run with passion and common sense then it will work. It opens you up to so much more support externally, grants etc.

poppyfield - 5th May 2012 11:09:11

This is why its important for all trust members to attend the trust meeting on the 14th

Darlo_G - 5th May 2012 11:30:14

Don't like the one member one vote. Why would I invest more money than everybody else to have the same share of the vote.

I personally liked the crowd cube idea in that you could have a maximum shareholding and voting rights of 15%.

How will we attract businesses to invest under this model?

craig_mckenna - 5th May 2012 12:22:22

In many ways it is easier to get businesses to invest under this model. There was an issue for some of them in owning actual shares in another limited company.

Quakerz - 5th May 2012 12:34:58

Yes, invigorate the trust by all means. Get the invigorated trust on board with us by all means. It is a community after all. Hell, maybe have a Trust board member or two on the board of the club. But why the obsession for the trust to run the club?

First thing the trust have to do is put their money into DFC1883, this is what the fans will want and the fans will vote for. We do not want two factions holding money - one for all and all for one. Then they can join with us.

On OUR terms.

MKDarlo - 5th May 2012 12:55:31

Very interesting and it seems a sensible way forward.

BTW who are these parts that keep commenting in relation to these stories? I think we need a concerted effort to defeat them as their comments could be taken to represent a consensus - which they do not!

wishmaster3211 - 5th May 2012 13:49:09

I am all for it though I understand there were reservations about getting larger amounts to be invested just for 1 share. There are I believe various models in use in Europe, halfway houses between the two. I am sitting waiting to put my money in though so pleased about whats happening, appreciate there must be a hell of a lot of work to do behind the scene and clearly decisions are bing taken to ensure there is as much momentum as possible .

I dont know who these people are that keep trolling the Echo site. I dont have a log in for it but I am sure someone can put him right, there are certainly clubs on this model that play at a high level or aspire to, using the Scottish League as an example is pointless, the whole structure in Scotland is a mess with even the big two in financial trouble. Not remotely comparable to England, and Stenny are probably equivalent to an NPL1 side anyway in terms of turnover, with hardly any hope of increasing their attendances or getting many promotions.

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 15:33:01

I nearly pissed myself laughing when i read this. i checked through the old stories and lo and behold this is EXACTLY what Supporters United were gonna do back in January. The plan was rejected by 1883, who then went with Crowd Cube, this fails, they then go back to one member one vote, I have to wonder if back in January if people didn't want to work with the trust. I can remember reading stuff relating to that on here, if that is actually the case then 1883 should hang their heads in shame, as Supporters United may have worked as according to posts I have read on here, they would have had help from Supporters Direct, the same organisation that helped Wrexham and saved them from what has happened to us. The more I read and hear from respected fans, (not the people on here) the more I'm convinced that the egos in 1883 didn't want to work with the trust. As a member of the trust I'll be going to the AGM as I have every year, I'm sure some light on this will be shed in the end of year report.

Also the story in today's paper re peacock is disturbing 'A lack of leadership' and 'Hidden agendas' doesn't make make good reading for potential investors; whether its true or not, mud sticks. Personally, I think Craig McKenna, Tori Gill and Laura Drew should go, we have no need for Crowd Cube, also Pinnegar, whose he? I have been going for years, and I have never seen him in my life.

From the outside looking in, 1883 have let the fans down, going back to the original plan and wasting 4 months in the process proves this.

Finally the FA still need to ratify the deal, I know of at least 2 creditors who have written to the FSA/FA expressing their anger at the deal. So if I were 1883, I Wouldn't be celebrating just yet!

olrad - 5th May 2012 15:46:44

Laura and Pinnegar are Darlo fans (and have credentials that we need) , Craig is involved due to his dealings with investment, and Tori also has skills deemed neccessary . it does not suprise me that you know a couple of dings that would complain about possibly getting a bite of something as oposed to absoluteley nothing . and i think you'll find that apart from a few ideas supporters direct bought nothing of any immediate use to the table where as 1883 and other supporters groups ACTED to save the club there and then as was required .

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 16:00:46

Typical head in the sand view- one of these 'dings' is owed a lot of money. he lost out last time and the time before to the tune of almost 40k in total he got around 400 quid back. I think he has every right to be pissed off, the other 'ding' is owed quite a bit as well.

I still don't think we need Drew, McKenna or Gill, who elected these people? they are self appointed and have failed the club and have kept the club going by ripping the creditors off and playing out their dream by using other people's money. They need to go and elections need to be held, rather than these people clinging to their seats on the board by hook or by crook!

al_quaker - 5th May 2012 16:06:08

Apparently, the new model is "significantly different" from the trust's model.

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=19484

I'm interested to see what they are, but one of the differences is that the old trust board aren't going to be in positions of power, which I know is a massive advantage for quite a few people!!

Wasn't the DSU plan rejected because we were running out of time?

Why should Craig, Laura and Tori go? Why not the rest of the 1883 board? Is it just because they are most active on here and you know nothing about the rest of the board? Personally, I think they are all doing a very good job in very difficult circumstances.

Why does your last sentence sound like you are delighted? Do you want the club to fold?

olrad - 5th May 2012 16:08:36

so the people who are to stand for "your election" threw themselves into the fray in our hour of need and where overlooked where they ? probably not...i can assume you where not a major player in 1883 for what reason?

Spyman - 5th May 2012 16:08:48

How did CrowdCube fail exactly? It raised nearly £400k, which would've been enough to move forward had it not been for roadblock.

I'd be amazed if we would have raised that amount if the original idea was one member one vote, and I believe if we raise that amount again it will be because some of the bigger investors had already written their money off.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Tapatalk 2

Darlogramps - 5th May 2012 16:12:07

The creditors would have got nothing from the CVA because Raj would have blocked it. In fact, aren't 1883 going to look at doing some sort of a deal with the creditors?



So wrong I don't where to begin. Firstly Laura, Craig and Tori put themselves forward. They helped out at a time when 1883 badly needed expertise.

Secondly, it is not "they" who've ripped off the creditors. Raj would have blocked any deal. To pay off the creditors we needed his backing. For his backing, we needed to agree to his conditions. We couldn't do that because the FA wouldn't let us.



They've stated all along that they want other fans to take over, and some elections will be held in the summer.

It strikes me you haven't got your facts right. Or you're just twisting them so you can have a good carp on.

uncovered - 5th May 2012 16:17:18

i was involved in the discussions at the stage you are talking about and I will give you the full story and reasons why the DSU route was not taken, I have no hidden agenda, i don't have an ego and I have no sides to take as I am not involved in either organisation.

I received an invite on the monday or tuesday to attend a meeting at Blackwell Grange to discuss the future of the club, the invite was sent by the Supporters Trust. Other people invited were Darlo Tykes, Supporters Club and the Rescue Group.

The meeting was to take place on the evening but on the morning Supporters Direct released a statement to say that we had all agreed to join forces under the DSU banner to try and save the club. To be honest I thought it was a bloody cheek, I knew nothing about DSU yet it had been stated I had agreed to join. I still attended the meeting, yet a 'pre-meeting' took place before the actual meeting. This pre meeting went on for about 30 minutes whilst I sat in another room with Geoff Thompson a couple from the supporters club and Shaun. The whole situation was bizarre, we were there for a united meeting yet there was a 'pre meeting' to which some were not invited too.

Anyway eventually they all arrived in the room and it became apparent that the DSU was starting from scratch. But if this was all we had then we had to all agree to join forces to try our best and save the club. Ironically after not being invited into this pre meeting it was suggested that myself and Karen Glencross would be the figureheads. I declined the offer as I felt that if this was to be launched and I was put in front of the press then I would need to know exactly what I was talking about and most of the things being discussed was just not sinking in.

Anyway by the end of the meeting we all agreed to join forces, release a press statement and get things moving. I left Blackwell and that was it. The next morning I received a telephone call to state that a further meeting had been called for the evening and this was with the Rescue Group. I am of the understanding the the trust were invited along with everybody else who were there the previous evening, but the trust did not attend the meeting.

We were told at this new meeting that Harvey was to close the club on the friday if he doesn't get an injection of cash. The DSU model was to see the Trust's money be transferred into DSU but this cash would not be available immediately. With the DUFF money, supporters club money and money invested by the Rescue Group we could pull together the £70k. It was the only option open. If we did not go down the 1883 route at that point then Darlington Football Club would have ceased trading on the friday. I found myself in Santander drawing out thousands of pounds in cash, only to turn to my right and see Pete Ashmore at the next cashier desk doing exactly the same, surreal.

I have no doubt there have been personality clashes and ego trips, but in this instance I felt the need to clarify once again that the DSU model was set up too late. In these types of situations you just do not have time to sit back and dawdle, you need to act quickly and be willing to change your views or be slightly flexible in your ideals.

Unfortunately the crowdcube route didn't work out due to the fact of our failure to secure a cva. and you cannot blame 1883 for that as the goalposts were moved just as they were about to boot the ball over the line. Going forward we now can use a different route and this is the one they have chosen. I am not keen on this route but the football club is not about me.

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 16:23:18

I'm a fan, I go to games, have raised money for the club in the past, would Craig McKenna have got onboard but for Crowd Cube and the thought of getting his percentage? probably not, Mckenna wouldn't have come any where near, but for the thought of ling his pockets with his percentage, I don't trust him and I never will, my choice

Olrad, you didn't respond to my reply re the 'Dings' not surprised though

loan_star - 5th May 2012 16:23:50

According to Singh there was no debt (other than his) up to December. If that was true then why has your friend allowed a club in difficuties to run up a debt? I have dealt with the club for a number of years and as soon as I heard that there could be problems I made sure that all money owed was paid and that any further work was done after payment or as a goodwill gesture from me for smaller jobs.

As for who elected Drew, McKenna and Gill, do you really expect a vote to take place so that we can pick and choose who did the work? I'm sure they would rather be doing other things that actually guarantee a return without abuse from some people who insist on knowing the ins and outs of everything. If you are that keen to know everything then why didnt you put yourself forward at the time to help out with your wisdom? People like you find it so easy to sit on the sidelines picking faults and yet are nowhere to be seen when it comes to the crunch.

Darlogramps - 5th May 2012 16:25:55

And are you going to respond to the point raised that the DSU would have been too late for our club? No, not surprised though.

Quakerz - 5th May 2012 16:27:34

And as for the "unelected" crap...these people were the people that stepped forward and said "look, we're going to die. We're going to try and save the club"

Unbelievable.

loan_star - 5th May 2012 16:30:19

Must be a thing with some football fans, no matter what they always find fault somewhere. You could win 4-0 and they will complain because it could have been 5 or 6.

uncovered - 5th May 2012 16:32:41

and to comment on laura and craig.

laura has provided alot of knowledge on the legal and finance side and has invested heavily financially and massively time wise. Her experience and input has been invaluable.

Craig came on board more recently to provide some direction to 1883. He is the project manager, he doesn't work for crowdcube, his business is the growth academy and I think he normally charges £600 a day consultancy giving out advice on how to build up businesses. He works as an advisor to crowdcube I think.

we will all get our chance to vote on a board, here's hoping there are people out there willing to give up their own time to help us out and take us forward. for those who have helped out so far then we must be grateful.

olrad - 5th May 2012 16:38:44

f50y reply regards dings? what do you want me to say...i'll get next to nothing i'd have prefered nothing = ding

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 16:39:23

The fact remains that decent creditors have lost money, avoiding the CVA was wrong - before a penny was raised a written agreement should have been got from Raj, a deadline given, then if no such agreement was got then the club should have been liquidated. That would have left 3 months to sort a new club, get in the Evostik North for next season, instead, it was allowed to drag on, leaving us where we are now,

To be fair, I'm frustrated at the prospect of play in the Northern League, this could easily happen, i have read Scott's account but have read different ones on here - I believe that Scott, etc have done a great job, but I have reservations about McKenna. Thinking about it it wouldn't be easy to have elections now, I appreciate that

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 16:42:11

I can't as I don't know the fact, but the current plan and the DSU plan look similar - I wasn't involved so can't comment on timescales

al_quaker - 5th May 2012 16:44:01

Whose fault is it that decent creditors have lost money?! Not 1883

It's terrible that creditors have lost money. Hopefully they can be sorted out. If the club had been liquidated they would have got next to nothing. At least this way there's a chance of getting something back. However, the CVA would have been agreed if somebody had stuck to their word!

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 16:44:50

I thought Craig was involved with Crowd Cube, Scott you are saying different?

loan_star - 5th May 2012 16:48:45

Singh would never have signed an agreement. 1883 did their best to raise the funds to do the CVA but failed, probably due to Singh and his unreasonable demands, so its back to the beginning.
Doing it your way, your friends still wouldnt have got anything. Its not nice for them but hopefully the new club can do their bit to help these people who lost out get some money back somehow.

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 16:50:11

Yes, I take your point

Darlogramps - 5th May 2012 16:52:59

You don't know the ins and outs of the DSU plan, but you're certain it was the right thing to do anyway?

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 17:06:07

i read the DSU web site, and yes they do look the same to me

m62exile - 5th May 2012 17:06:34

Simple solution old boy. Put your name forward and step up to the plate. Any coward can sit behind their keyboard and criticise. Scott's account above is bang on accurate and I've now heard it identically told by two others who were involved too.

Spyman - 5th May 2012 17:09:54

I bet you're one of those who didn't like Penney because he wasn't Darlo through and through.

Sent from my HTC Desire HD A9191 using Tapatalk 2

Darlogramps - 5th May 2012 17:10:18

But you refuse to comment on the point raised by several people, both on and off this forum, that Darlington FC would have folded had the we gone with the DSU plan.

The DSU plan wasn't viable. And it is unacceptable of you to be accusing the 1883 of planning to cling on when you have no evidence to suggest so.

As said previously, some people are never happy.

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 17:14:44

I'm not a coward, but I'll admit I haven't the time to spend, I buy a season ticket, donated a lot of cash in the buckets, bought shares, signed those shirts for the players, donated to DUFF so I have done more than my bit, therefore I have the right to comment, just because people don't agree with me, that doesn't mean I'm a coward like I said, fair play to Scott and co for giving their time, just because I have doubts about certain aspects of 1883 also doesn't make me a coward.

m62exile - 5th May 2012 17:15:50

The DSU plan may well have been viable if it had been designed earlier. Don't think anyone is too critical of the thinking, but it was too late. Harvey Madden didn't have time to wait and see, he needed cash flow in the next day or two or else it was liquidation.

m62exile - 5th May 2012 17:19:19

Look, things have changed around here. In the past it's been good sport to have a pop at the rich bloke in charge, we've all done it. Now when we spout off we are criticising ordinary blokes and girls like us, in it for love, putting huge efforts in on our behalf.

So, when you have a pop at them, especially when it's inaccurate, you have a pop at all of us and you can expect to be put right.

loan_star - 5th May 2012 17:20:23

Thats where the trust have let the side down badly. It took Ian and Pauls return to the committee to get their fingers out of their backsides and heads out of the sand. The trust should have had all of this planned as soon as it became apparent that administration was a possibility, but didnt. 1883 was the only option because of this.

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 17:21:44

We'll never know because, the DSU model was ditched, it worked for Wrexham, didn't it? Do you have evidence they don't want to cling on? Mckenna said the other night on the radio he wanted to stay on the board, he won't get my vote that's for sure

m62exile - 5th May 2012 17:25:52

What bit of "it was too late" do you not understand?

loan_star - 5th May 2012 17:26:55

Wrexham had a proactive trust whereas our was comatose.
And what is your problem with Craig McKenna?

Quakerz - 5th May 2012 17:29:08

"Cling on"?

Yes one or two of them will want to "cling on" after the huge work put in (though not all). I fucking doubt I'd just walk away having given 4 months of my life to save the club for everybody, I'd want to see it through for a while, and damn right too!

"Cling on" what an awful negative term, you make it sound like they want to hang on for egos and perks. What bloody perks are there? Fuck all, that's what. Only satisfaction if they succeed. And you should NEVER deny any member of 1883 that.

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 17:30:35

OK then Craig McKenna is great, lets make a statue and put it outside Shildon, W Auckland or Bp Auckland to mark his time at the club

This board is all about opinions, people should be free to give those opinions without been called 'dings' and 'cowards'. This site is getting like Yemen!

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 17:35:24

Fair comment re the trust, re McKenna, I'm no sure yet, 1st impressions and all that, remember people loved Raj when he first came on the scene, if people said said anything against him, they were shouted down, time will tell if I'm right

loan_star - 5th May 2012 17:37:24

Do you think McKenna is picking up £600 a day like he could if he just stuck to his normal day job? Do you think that slagging him off is justified when he doesnt even need to bother with what hes doing for us?
I for one, thank Craig and all of those involved in 1883 for doing what they have done. I know I wouldnt have had the time to put in like they have so I am glad that these people have stepped up to the plate and given their time freely to save our club.

Darlogramps - 5th May 2012 17:38:39

Stop playing the "woe is me" card and get a grip. You've made factually incorrect points and controversial accusations towards people who've spent the last 4 months working their backsides off to save the club.

Yes you can express your opinion, but me and everyone else has the right to challenge your opinion, particularly when your opinion is based on conspiracy and inaccuracy.

If you don't like that, then you shouldn't be posting on this forum.

Darlogramps - 5th May 2012 17:45:43

It was "ditched" because there wasn't enough time to get it off the ground - a point that's been made by people who were there. Why don't you understand this?

Hilly - 5th May 2012 17:49:57

Nobody is saying it couldn't have possibly worked.

There. Wasn't. Enough. Time.

How many times does it need to be said. I think the fact that DFC1883 are reworking things slightly to make it similar to the DSU way of doing things speaks volumes. Your criticism of certain fans whose intentions are merely to help save the club angers me. Only Darlington fans could have a go at the only people who have tried to save the club.

loan_star - 5th May 2012 17:55:22

THERE WASNT ENOUGH TIME

Does that make it any clearer??

quakersam - 5th May 2012 18:34:27

I despair at some people, I really do. What the hell is your problem really. Another numpty off the Echo site

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 19:03:55

like I said, I couldn't comment on timescales, as I wasn't there.

Re having a go at 1883, what about Ian Peacock's comments, he was involved and has commented on 'a lack of leadership' and 'Personal agendas' that is from someone who WAS heavily involved, that worries me as a fan. or shall we simply wall paper over those comments as well - Shaun Campbell has also expressed his concerns, he WAS heavily involved as well, personally I think SOME Of 1883 do have their own agendas. I have no doubt that some people like Scott, Karen, Tony, etc have worked hard and credit to them, where some of the others are concerned, I'll reserve judgement.

I really hope this works, but there are still obstacles to overcome (none bigger than the FA).

I'm not a numpty from the Echo site, I have been a fan for over 30 years, I can remember the 5-0 win over Doncaster in 80-81 with 5 second half goals, and many other games, I have seen people rape and pillage this club, friends have lost a fortune through been creditors, I still think it was wrong to simply transfer the assets from one company to another to avoid the CVA. That's my opinion and all the opinion of many other people I have spoken to. But it's done now, like I say, hopefully it works and we still have a club come next season

Santino - 5th May 2012 19:14:48

But you can comment on everything else, despite being not there?

You're just avoiding the subject because you know you've got no answer.

Now fuck off, bellend.

quakersam - 5th May 2012 19:25:12

To avoid the CVA? And what else do you propose we did? Raj blocked the CVA, we did not avoid it. Get your facts right and people might entertain your opinions

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 20:00:03

Of course I can comment on what Ive read, Peacock must be concerned to express those comments in the Echo, Shaun Campbell was concerned enough to comment on here.

I'll reiterate, I CAN'T comment on whether it was too late to implement DSU as I wasn't privvy to the meeting.

I don't need 'to be there' to comment on newspaper articles are stuff I have read on here do I.

Finally it's surprising how many posters on here resort to abuse, rather than respond to comments. not one person has commented on Peacock's remarks., I'm not surprised by that as people on here only see what they want to see, you were the same with GH/Raj when they first came on the scene, just because I express doubts about SOME of the 1883 board, some of which have been echoed by Ian Peacock (hidden agendas) I get slated. Unfortunately, guys, Uncovered isn't the real world, what the FA thinks of what has happened is!

Quakerz - 5th May 2012 20:04:15

How do you know Ian Peacock hasn't got an agenda?

Darlogramps - 5th May 2012 20:13:35

Had 1883 not done that, we'd have been liquidated on Thursday, simple as that.

We couldn't submit to Raj's conditions because the FA wouldn't allow us.

Therefore Raj would have blocked the CVA, so your friends would have got no money back anyway.

Transferring the assets was the only avenue that could have been taken in order to save the club in its current form. If you're against this, then it indicates you would have rather seen the club liquidated on Thursday.

Yes, it's awful that creditors have lost out, but believe it or not, given the position the club was in on Thursday, this is the best outcome. This way, there's still the possibility of the outstanding creditors being helped by the club.

You go on about the FA needing to approve the asset transfer to a new company, but had we just carried on with a CVA that included Raj's conditions, the consequences would have been more severe.

The situation we've ended up in isn't ideal, but given the situation on Thursday, it's lesser of two evils. Now we have to make the best of it, start again and make sure 2012 is the last time we're in administration.





But Scott was there, he has commented and what he's said earlier in this thread has been backed up by what others have heard, also from people who were there.

herts_darlo - 5th May 2012 20:37:05

I know I probably shouldn't bite, but seeing as I've been mentioned several times by name now...

I'm quite happy to take on board valid or constructive criticism but I'm not sure what hidden agendas either me, or any of the rest of the Board are supposed to have. Quite frankly, this kind of baseless insinuation and allegation is personally offensive, inaccurate and unhelpful.

It should be pointed out that, prior to me contacting Scott in January to offer my skills, I was just an ordinary fan. My life has been turned upside down by this project over the last four months.

As for Board members wanting to "cling on" - I don't think anyone actually *wants* to stay on, but we recognise the need for a period of stability and transition between the interim and the voted Board.

I'm not asking people to blindly back 1883 - I accept that this has not turned out how we'd have wanted at the outset of the project. However, I am asking that personal comments are kept to a minimum, and that people remember that we are all volunteers doing a pretty complicated and difficult job.

we_8_poolie - 5th May 2012 20:43:12

Laura there will always be 1 or 2 who criticise whatever you do. 99% of us appreciate what you and the gang are doing ...so carry on we're right behind you.

Hilly - 5th May 2012 20:45:55

Not wanting to appear as a 'brown noser' but I hope you appreciate that this is the view of a very small minority and certainly not the majority, Laura.

I've seen first hand the amount of work you've put into trying to save this club, and for your role to be doubted, angers me quite frankly.

Last thing we want is to piss the people off who have effectively given us the chance of redemption. Like I've said previously, only in Darlo could this happen.... only in Darlo.

ted_do - 5th May 2012 20:56:39

Thanks to everyone who has worked their socks off trying to rescue DFC, 1883 did their best in what looks now to be an impossible situation we were never going to win. I said earlier that we should look at a newly invigorated trust to run the club, but this would only work with the help of Laura and the long standing people behind 1883. I would say we need a change of organisation but keep (if they are willing) the main players like Laura. We are all fans and whilst we may not always agree (Im not happy about leaving Darlo) we must stick together and support each other.
Thanks for all your efforts Laura they are appreciated

fergies50yarder - 5th May 2012 22:41:14

Laura, so you are saying that Ian Peacock's comments are totally wrong re the lack of leadership and the agendas comment? Am I right that he offered to pay for the coaches? that to me seems a big sponsor to lose?

Also Shaun Campbell's comments?

If you volunteer and put your head above the parapit, you can expect personal comments, it happens in football, only the other day I was reading old threads, the abuse some individuals have taken is far worse.

Like I said I wasn't privvy to the meetings but I have spoken to people who were and in addition I have read the Supporters Trust website, stuff on here, I've even spoken to ex 1883 members in the Ron Greener as well as reading comments on FB some from well known fans, to be fair, I don't know what to think - but I know one thing in fighting kills clubs, i'm not on about squabbles on here but look at the comments today from Ian Peacock, he must have had his reasons for saying what he did, either way, it is damaging for 1883.

I apologise for any offence caused, that wasn't my intention, reading that article today - together with talking to those 2 creditors really pissed me off.

To be fair, I haven't got anything further to add to this thread. Time will tell, whether or not this club survives, I for one, hope it does

botrash - 5th May 2012 22:45:50

There's a subtle irony in a Trust-sympathiser accusing any organisation of lacking leadership...

charlie - 6th May 2012 01:17:32

Unbelievable that is the only words I can use to describe some of the comments and accusations in this thread.
1883 are made up Darlington Football club supporters folk that go to the games and sit with you week in and week out.
What these guys have achieved from a seemingly impossible situation is remarkable.
I`ve volunteered my time and helped out in any way I could and I know what an impact that made on my life and it was nowhere near what these guys have done.
Because of doing this I`ve met many of the interim board and found them to be passionate about the club, there sole reason for doing this. One of them went out of there way to pick me up for a match because I wasnt well and brought me home too for which I am thankful.
I have sensed no hidden agendas, power trips or ego trips from the folk I have met.
Scott has provided a detailed account of why the 1883 model was used and not the supporters trust model and I can also verify that it is the same information I have heard before from more than one source.
The likes of Craig and Tori were brought in because of the skills they have and Ive found both to be open and again with no hidden agendas, both have a heavy presence on twitter and can be contacted easily.
These guys have given everything for OUR club, and I`d also like to say that its the minority complaining not the majority. I`m proud to be a Darlo supporter even if I am a newbie.

princes town - 6th May 2012 09:07:29

I am a Trust member and passionate about the principles of Supporters direct. However, sadly democracy takes time and idealists should realise that 1883 was the only option. I'm incredibly sad that local traders have lost money on this deal but you can only do what you can do. One member one vote is the purest form of community ownership. i had my reservations about the 15% option as it left the potential for some members to form a cartel. Not saying they would but the potential was there. Great news one member one vote, politically, although it is an infringement on economic share rights as has already been mentioned by one board member..

AnthonyP - 6th May 2012 15:57:47

Just going back to the original topic for this thread, has anyone who is unhappy with the one vote proposal, who may want to invest more than the 'standard' £100 contacted 1883 to find out if there is another way of doing so.

Or, are we all hysterically reading the words and not looking into the detail ?

I wonder if the community CLICK idea may not be the only way of investing ?! Just a thought ......

craig_mckenna - 6th May 2012 18:33:29

Will I be getting a chance to respond to the news that you don't trust me?
On what basis?

I have never once said I would be looking to stay on the board once the purchase and transition period were completed. I have a day job which is being somewhat neglected as well as family wouldn't mind getting some of my time and those factors along with the fact that I have no desire to run a football club mean I won't even be standing for a seat on the board, even though I have had a number of emails from supportive fans asking me to do so.

I have never once pretended that I got involved initially in this project for any other reason than I saw a commercial opportunity. That is what I do and I brought Crowdcube to the table because at that stage it was an excellent route forward.

To date, I haven't earned a penny out of this project, and I have been unable to get involved in work worth over 20k to me due to the commitment I made to this project. I can't afford to turn away that kind of work but I have done so because I made the decision to get involved and help and just because it got harder than I had envisaged I wasn't going to jump ship. The people at 1883 are a great bunch of people who are sweating blood to take this club forward, the accusation of hidden agendas is just laughable.
I won't be defending myself again, nor am I above criticism but at least try and base your comments on something you can support.

Ash - 6th May 2012 18:46:38

The only people that have failed the club through this whole sorry affair is Raj and the Trust which from the tone of your unwarranted sniping against 1883 I'd say you are quite possibly connected to the Trust in some way (other than being a member).

Also if you are blaming 1883 for companies not getting money back then you clearly know nothing again - they had a CVA to offer that was blocked, not by them but by Raj.

Please explain exactly how the Trust or supporters Direct model would have given anybody any money back? even if it had got off the ground in time I doubt we would have raised as much money and even then it would still have been blocked and still not been very much.

You're clearly bitter for some reason but don't come on here spouting your bile when you're clearly a know-nowt or letting your bitterness get in the way of your common sense.

Pipe down.

shawry - 6th May 2012 19:11:13

I would say the trust haven't failed the club, because in all honesty, we would of ended up at exactly this point regardless due to RS.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

Ash - 6th May 2012 19:30:05

Are you nuts? How would we have ended up at this point? We are 5 months down the line from the point we would have been extinct were it not for the rescue group and 1883 and the Trust STILL have not got their act together.

Yes I know they put some money in that day but that is it. Everything else they have done has been negative, counter productive sniping.

fergies50yarder - 6th May 2012 20:07:12

i know i said i wouldnt add to this thread, but I have to respond

firstly, apart from been a member of the trust, and a firm believer in the ethos of a Community based club, I have nothing to do with them, as I havent got the time.

Secondly, I have seen many people come and go GH/Raj were God like on here when they first appeared on the scene as was George Reynolds. My Doubts regarding Craig stem from various comments he has made in the press especially when Crowd cube were desperate for the cash, he turned on the Trust in the press, I commented on it on here at the time, also, Ian Peacock's and Shaun Campbell's comments worry me, The Crowd Cube plan wasn't a Community Club in the real sense, the fact that Craig 'saw a commercial opportunity' suggests that he was initially here for the money, like I have said, people like Scott, Karen, Tony, and Peter Ashmore and many others deserve credit, because they have done it for the love of the club, Craig has openly admitted that he saw 'a commercial opportunity' therefore his first thought mustve been getting his percentage out of Darlo's plight. I voiced doubts about Raj and the land issues in the press, etc and was shouted down, I had a go at GR (George Reynolds) at Carlisle and again was shouted down if I turn out to be wron wrong about Craig then I apologise, I listened to BBC Tees Sport - Craig stated that he'd like to stay on the board, I checked i player, so whats changed?

People on here want the club to be saved at any cost, and will follow anyone they think can achieve this, like I said yesterday, unfortunately Uncovered isn't the real world, the members on here chanted 'In Raj we trust' Raj said the club was 'debt free' when he left, we have since learned this not to be the case. GH lead the fans to believe he was spending wads of his own cash when in reality he was using a loan, which wasn't repaid and he club ended up losing the Arena to S & S. again GH couldn't be wronged on here. Raj/GH both said they had the club at heart, and were putting lots of time in (and money in their case) or words to that effect. I see the scenerio repeating itself again, I'm worried for the club I have supported for over thirty years, after the last couple of people I think I have every right to be sceptical. I'm not spreading bile, I'm simply stating my opinion based on past experiences and what I have read, maybe not trusting Craig was the wrong way of putting it, but I certainly have my doubts.

Mazz Javerick - 6th May 2012 20:15:06

You've backed yourself into a corner and are waffling mate.

Admit you've been shown up as a silly bollocks and move on.

fergies50yarder - 6th May 2012 20:18:41

Fine I take it all back - I can't be arsed any more

Ash - 6th May 2012 20:36:37

I don't think anybody here is hero worshipping it's simply credit where it is due - which even with your misgivings you should be able to manage. 1883 have done their best which so far I am very happy with. They may go on to be a bunch of corrupt wasters but so far there is absolutely no evidence of anything other than a committed bunch doing a good job.

As for Craig, he seems to be a very capable project manager, he's been on here answering questions regularly and so what if he gets paid - he's doing a job, they should all be getting paid in an ideal world. We have a guy here doing a good job who should be lauded for being good enough to defer his payment until we can afford it, he is taking a risk and the fact that he is doing it not as a massive Darlo fan is even more to his credit.

You can stay silent now if you like - I hope it is because you realise you are out of line. An opinion is fine, having misgivings is fine but all those connected with 1883 have so far given nobody any reason to mistrust them or bad mouth them. Criticism is fine - in my view undeserved but you're entitled. Just don't get personal - they don't deserve it - in fact they deserve much better.

cjwatson - 7th May 2012 09:11:43

all i can say is unbelieveable if only people had gone with the trust model in the first place
and its a good job the trust didnt give the money away as it would have gone in to a black hole such as the 70k has
people should have listened to very good advice
i know i will be slated for saying this

Hilly - 7th May 2012 09:14:53

How many more times does this need to be said...

THERE. WASN'T. ENOUGH. TIME.

Here I'll say it one more time for you so that you can understand...

THERE. WASN'T. ENOUGH. TIME

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Darlogramps - 7th May 2012 09:36:51

Dear me, are you being thick deliberately? Read through the thread. You'll find the reasons why some people's beloved DSU/ Trust model wasn't viable.

Once more: THERE WASN'T ENOUGH TIME

AnthonyP - 7th May 2012 09:38:20

Pillock.

The 70K has not gone into a black hole. It bought the assets of darlington football club last week so that we have a team for next season. Are you really that slow ?

al_quaker - 7th May 2012 09:38:43

You will be slated for a very good reason.

There wasn't enough time

uncovered - 7th May 2012 09:41:40

I think we have to realise that their are hidden agendas in some of these posts.

We are all one thing, fans of Darlington football club. I have categorically told everybody that there was not enough time for the dsu to try and save the club. I was in the actual meeting, if any other posters on this thread were in that meeting then please be honest enough and tell is who you are. My name is Scott Thornberry and I was in the dsu meeting at the Blackwell garbage and also the rescue group meeting at Blackwell grange. I hope that is clear.

I backed the dsu model, but it was too late.

Now we can move forward as one and channel all of our energies into one project, or we can stupidly and childishly continue this trust versus 1883 argument which has been quite frankly an embarrassment and caused great harm to our efforts.

It is pathetic that some users on here treat our situation like a petty playground argument. Let's crack on and pull together, if anybody thinks members of 1883 shouldn't be there then fine, there will be elections soon and we can vote for who we want, it's democracy at it's best.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

AnthonyP - 7th May 2012 09:56:01

well said Scott.

AIDO - 7th May 2012 10:03:20

Well said Scott ... she knows she will be slated ..... so she got something right at least!

cjwatson - 7th May 2012 10:13:03

all the comments just show what you didnt know and how narrow minded people are on here and how quick people change their minds
again people need to listen to advice instead of slating the trust and yes the part of 70k has gone to pay bills HM bill for one

and yes there was plenty of time and the trust had funding etc organised already

Hilly - 7th May 2012 10:32:13

Sorry but you're talking out of your arse.

They couldn't put the money in place in time. HM was prepared to close the club on the Friday - he needed money and fast.

The Trust had too much red tape to fight to have the money in time.

The_Ponderer - 7th May 2012 11:50:38

I have lost count of the times I read press reports stating "...the Trust could not be contacted..." or "...the Trust were unavailable...".

Time has been as big a problem as finances over these recent months.
Companies in Administration have very short timescales to either be rescued/bought out or liquidated.
A small number of hard working people gave up their own time and money to save the club back in January and since then a larger number of people have been helping out both financially or with sheer hard graft.

This proves that the recent succession of egotistical chairmen have not broken the spirit of the genuine fans who want the club to survive.
I say this to all fans who are genuine about wanting the club to stay in existence:
Get behind Darlo 1883, if you are concerned about their plans or agendas, ask them those tough questions - either on line or at Friday's meeting.
Anyone with anything to offer them, either practically or with good ideas should get involved ASAP.

It cannot be stressed enough how much time pressure we are under.
In about a month the FA will make their decision and we need to have as good a plan in place as possible to avoid being relegated even further down the pyramid.

To the "Let's just start again lot", I say this: How exactly do you think it would be easier to start a new club from nothing? What plans do you have for such an eventuality?

Quakerz - 7th May 2012 11:57:11

The 70k never went into a black hole, the 70k went into "fund the club so it can complete it's fixtures" and THEN we raised money to go forward, without your damn money - and we ARE going to TAKE IT from you next month.

What you are saying effectively is that the trust wouldn't have dared put their money into the club in February to keep it going and allowed the club to fold, and not been able to raise the money that 1883 would have done afterwards? Is that what you are saying?

I thought the trust were dead against folding.

Quakerz - 7th May 2012 12:03:59

I tell you what, it's just as well that I'm not a trust member and eligible for election on May 14th.

Because I tell you what, if I was, I'd be elected on the 14th, emptying the bank accounts on the 15th, and dissolving the fucker on the 16th.

Had enough of this 1883 v trust nitpicking now! The trust BLEW IT!

strangetown - 7th May 2012 13:15:44

I think Scott has just about covered most things about that meeting. I would also like to correct things that have been mentioned in previous threads about this meeting that was supposed to have happened after the meeting. Tom Hall from Supporters Direct who had been at the meeting had to leave around 9.30 to catch a train and while some people were saying thre goodbyes to him, I went for a drink and others followed.
On returning back into the room to carry on the meeting it became apparent that the Trust members,of whom seven has been available to attend that meeting, had gone.I never heard anyone say the meeting had finished and considering everyone around that table knew we need to find a lawyer,accountant and to sort administration out for the follwing day, everyone's help would have been appreciated,especially as the Trust had come up with the model.
The following morning I was invited by the Rescue Group to attend a meeting that was chaired by Jenny Chapman and set out the RG proposed plan. In attendance were representatives from the Supporters Club,Dafts,Uncovered and the Tykes,the Trust had been invited but they sent a e-mail saying no one from the Trust was available to attend that evening. The RG set out there proposed model for a community club and after questions,we then asked them to leave the room while it was discussed further. Every person in that room wanted the Trust to be involved. We then asked a member of the RG to ring the Trust to see if they would be interested in joining and they were told to ring Supporters Direct for answers, which they did.
The rest of the members of the RG came back into the room and it was then that we were made aware that Harvey Madden had indicated he was considering closing the club that friday,information that the Trust did not know of at the time.
I have seen the hard work and effort that the RG and 1883 have put in, and I know it's not the perfect ending but due to there persistence and not giving up we have still got a football club.

Geoff Thompson

The_Ponderer - 7th May 2012 13:25:10

Well said Geoff and well done for selling huge amounts of matchday tickets!

For the Darlo of the future, owned by the fans, may I propose this new club slogan, slightly plagiarised from Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address:

Per Populus Pro Populus

"By The People, For The People"

Christophano - 7th May 2012 14:17:04

The £70k went to purchase the assets from DFC2009. What they (or rather the administrators running it) do with that cash is none of our business.

charlie - 7th May 2012 23:16:27

This is getting embarrassing now, can we put this to bed please