Jump to content

RamsTrust


RamsfanJim

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Archied said:

I was a member at the start and went to a meeting , I found myself very much at odds with the line taken on Pickering and the whole coop ,three amigos debacle and left , I don’t hold a grudge but found I had very different views on stuff and couldn’t be part of it , not had much interest in it over the years since then and from what I can see it’s still got the same people at the top and a very small membership ,, interesting that it seems once you’ve joined you are always counted as a member as there no renewal fee? 
is there a list of members ? 

OK, that is your personal view. I wasn't a member at the start (joined a few months later - and joined the board a few years after that). I am not certain but I believe there is only 1 - or possibly 2 members of the board who have been there since the start. We have had a lot of other board members during the past 19 years.

Not true that you are always counted as a member, we do maintain the list of members which includes if people leave (or sadly in some cases, die).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, tinman said:

I have been and get hit with a wall of resistance. Much like those on here. 

Can you DM me to give an example where you feel you hit a 'wall of resistance'?

If people disagreed with you that is one thing, but if you don't feel you are being listened to then I apologise - that is not what we are trying to achieve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been a bit challenging in this thread, but certainly don't want to be critical of the efforts put in by the members that are trying to do something, just trying to suggest the odd idea of how it might appeal to a wider audience of supporters.

It's OK having a boilerplate list of objectives and strongly agree those are needed to measure success, but you look at some of those and you have to wonder whether they have achieved any level of success at all (I'm talking about specific objectives not all of them). Again, it's difficult against the backdrop of an owner who decides its his way or no way but then it's listed as an objective so quite rightly should be open to scrutiny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RamsfanJim said:

OK, that is your personal view. I wasn't a member at the start (joined a few months later - and joined the board a few years after that). I am not certain but I believe there is only 1 - or possibly 2 members of the board who have been there since the start. We have had a lot of other board members during the past 19 years.

Not true that you are always counted as a member, we do maintain the list of members which includes if people leave (or sadly in some cases, die).

What’s the criteria for membership list / numbers ? Was just with your earlier post it seemed that maybe members who drifted away and no longer actually considered themselves members could be being counted as members , although there is no annual renewal fee surely it would make sense to have members renew each year through email , website , snail mail ? That way you could actually give real figures of the numbers you represent ??‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Archied said:

What’s the criteria for membership list / numbers ? Was just with your earlier post it seemed that maybe members who drifted away and no longer actually considered themselves members could be being counted as members , although there is no annual renewal fee surely it would make sense to have members renew each year through email , website , snail mail ? That way you could actually give real figures of the numbers you represent ??‍♂️

Criteria is people who hold a share in the Trust (which they bought on joining). If they have never renounced that share, we have to assume they are still members (not sure legally we can just remove them). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RamsfanJim said:

Criteria is people who hold a share in the Trust (which they bought on joining). If they have never renounced that share, we have to assume they are still members (not sure legally we can just remove them). 

Pretty sure you can't so agree..but it might mean your active membership is a tiny fraction of the 1200 who once bought a share so seems sensible to try and engage like you are and bring in some new active members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yani P said:

Pretty sure you can't so agree..but it might mean your active membership is a tiny fraction of the 1200 who once bought a share so seems sensible to try and engage like you are and bring in some new active members.

I don't think it is a 'tiny fraction' as we have had over 300 new members over the past few months, and there are many more who have remained active throughout - but I absolutely accept all 1200 are not 'active'. They don't need to be - if they are supportive of what the Trust is doing and joined to show that support, then it is up to them how involved they want to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, RamsfanJim said:

Exposing the 3 amigos and helping to bring in the 'League of Gentlemen' to take over the club rather than SISU - in my opinion.

Some would say it was the RPG who exposed the "3 amigos" and RT clung onto thier coat tails looking to claim the spoils.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Some would say it was the RPG who exposed the "3 amigos" and RT clung onto thier coat tails looking to claim the spoils.

 

 

I know how that started, with Lionel employing an ex-DCI from Derbyshire Police who had previously worked for the FA on the Chesterfield fraud, his company did all the pre-investigation and compiling evidence that enabled the Police to actually take it as a job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mick Harford said:

 

I know how that started, with Lionel employing an ex-DCI from Derbyshire Police who had previously worked for the FA on the Chesterfield fraud, his company did all the pre-investigation and compiling evidence that enabled the Police to actually take it as a job.

Jeremy Keith was interviewed on Radio Derby at the time, He admitted to paying himself circa £60k a year with a very lucrative expense account, A family member was paid very well for the sound system, Keith complained about the method of interview as he had his Children in the car outside...bless him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Jeremy Keith was interviewed on Radio Derby at the time, He admitted to paying himself circa £60k a year with a very lucrative expense account, A family member was paid very well for the sound system, Keith complained about the method of interview as he had his Children in the car outside...bless him.

 

I know, I've seen the invoices submitted by all of them to the club. Best one was MM having an invoice in for expenses for scouting at the African Cup of Nations, whilst also having 2 stays at Breadsall priory during the same time period invoiced, when questioned the DCFC staff member was told to pay it and not ask questions. That was symptomatic of how it was run.

The ex-coppers company also repossessed the DCFC cars from Keith et al, which was nice for a team of all Derby fans!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mick Harford said:

 

I know, I've seen the invoices submitted by all of them to the club. Best one was MM having an invoice in for expenses for scouting at the African Cup of Nations, whilst also having 2 stays at Breadsall priory during the same time period invoiced, when questioned the DCFC staff member was told to pay it and not ask questions. That was symptomatic of how it was run.

The ex-coppers company also repossessed the DCFC cars from Keith et al, which was nice for a team of all Derby fans!

I had the good fortune to see Jeremy Keith on the subway in London not long after his release, I was on the same carriage, I shouted to him you "theiving Bas***d" I'm DCFC, The Ex Wife told me to be quiet, A good job for him that she was there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Some would say it was the RPG who exposed the "3 amigos" and RT clung onto thier coat tails looking to claim the spoils.

 

You should read Pride by Ryan Hills. Ramstrust put a comprehensive 100,000 word dossier together which exposed Mackay and Keith to be the dodgy individuals they were. @RamsfanJim was personally involved in putting it together. Credit where it's due...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...