Trending Topics

      Next match: LFC v Brighton [Premier League] Sun 31st Mar @ 2:00 pm
      Anfield

      Today is the 29th of March and on this date LFC's match record is P24 W11 D6 L7

      Minutes from the Spirit Of Shankly EGM - Saturday 12th June 2010

      Read 2340 times
      0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
      yozz1982
      • Forum John Toshack
      • ***
      • Started Topic

      • 267 posts |
      • http://kitster29.deviantart.com/
      Minutes from the Spirit Of Shankly EGM - Saturday 12th June 2010
      Jun 15, 2010 05:07:51 pm
      These are the minutes of the SOS EGM provided via email

      12th June EGM Minutes
      Tuesday 15th June 2010

      EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING

      Saturday 12th June 2010 at 12noon
      Zelig’s, Liverpool One, Liverpool

      MINUTES OF MEETING

      The meeting commenced at 12.25pm after a short delay due to the numbers attending and a couple of speakers arriving slightly late.
      Fran Stanton, Chair of the Spirit of Shankly, opened the meeting by welcoming the approximate 500 people who had attended and by setting out the agenda items previously circulated that would be discussed at the meeting.
      He stated that much had happened in the last few weeks with Moores’ statement, Benitez leaving and the launch of the supporter ownership scheme by the Union.
      He indicated that various speakers would deal with the individual points on the agenda and that questions and debate would be welcomed at the end of each item.


      1. Supporters' Ownership and SOS/Share Liverpool - the current position and future


      Fran introduced Peter Furmedge as a member of Spirit of Shankly, and a former board member of Share Liverpool (as one of the Spirit of Shankly co-opted representatives), who would discuss the current position in relation to the Union’s supporter ownership model and the ongoing discussions with Share Liverpool.
      Peter stated that despite common misconceptions Share Liverpool and the Union had been quietly working together since the date that both had been created, which coincidentally had been the same date.

      This working together had seen some positive advantages, despite the generally held view of Share Liverpool by some members, such as the amendment of the Share Liverpool scheme in July 2009 to see the entry point reduced from £5000 to £500. This had arisen from Union pressure from within the organisation.

      The Union had become frustrated with the pace of progress from Share Liverpool and wanted to make certain that any scheme was as accessible as possible. This had resulted in the Credit Union model being established for which work had been ongoing for over a year.

      The Union had entered into talks with the “Partners” Credit Union based on Merseyside to act as the vehicle to accept supporters’ money and to hold it safe and secure while money was collected and the terms of any bid agreed among those seeking to invest.

      It is expected that those on Merseyside should be able to start subscribing into the Credit Union from July/August and an expected change in the rules required for Partners in August will see those from outside Merseyside able to subscribe shortly after. The staggered start will assist in getting the logistics and procedure right going forward.

      The difference in launch dates is that there are strict rules about credit unions and how they are organised. Members have to establish what is known as “communality” usually this will be by working for the same employer or living in the same location. The August change in rules should allow the Union Credit Union to be based upon the “communality” of all being members of the Union.

      It was also important to note that Supporters Direct had been involved in the development of the scheme since March 2009. In addition to Supporters Direct, MPs, the Minister for Sport and local politicians had also been approached to organise the launch of the Share Liverpool scheme in Autumn 2009 at a Parliamentary reception (and would have included the placing of an Early Day Motion in Parliament) but for various reasons this had not happened delaying the eventual launch.

      The delay with Share Liverpool moving forward resulted in the Union seeking merger discussions with Share Liverpool which began with a merger proposal going from the Union to Share Liverpool (which was slightly amended by Supporters Direct). Share Liverpool were not prepared to agree to the proposal so the Union saw no alternative but to launch the Union’s supporter ownership model.

      Subsequently, further meetings have taken place discussing an amended proposal, and on the basis of the current positive response from Share Liverpool, the Union is hopeful that a formal arrangement with Share Liverpool is going to happen and is agreed by the time of the Independence Day Rally on the 4th July.

      The Union supporter ownership proposal is based upon “the many and not the few” and will remain the focussed upon the membership’s needs. Credit Union interest is currently better than many banks and will supply other privileges to members and there will hopefully be more information and background at the Rally on the 4th July.

      Fran than asked if there were any questions from the floor. Steve Morris, a member, came forward and asked what had been the specific problems with Share Liverpool and suggested that some personalities had clashed. Peter replied by saying that everyone had tried to get away from the personalities involved and that the reality was that from the very beginning both organisations had different cultures.

      Steve said that there needed to be some realism as well – the Union proposal was realistic while the Share Liverpool one was not. He said he thought that pledges were what was actually needed, not necessarily cash at first, and that from his financial background he saw a figure of £100m being raised as feasible and that this sum could be put together with a serious commercial partner, to secure the Club.

      Steve added that there were serious purchasers out there but one element that needed to be looked at was further pressure on RBS to force a sale at a realistic price.

      Fran agreed that the owner valuations were not right and that the view the Union had was the Club was worth its debt currently but no more. The Union was under no illusions that this could take a long time but that we were there for the long haul and the Credit Union was what was needed now to show we were serious. It was also clear that papers like the Daily Mirror had sources within the club, probably Christian Purslow, who were pushing the fact that the valuations were too high and that pressure needed to be brought on the Club from RBS to be more realistic.

      Len Ashworth, a member, asked the Committee to indicate what the role of Rogan Taylor and John Aldridge would be in any future organisation. Fran responded by saying that this was not about personalities but the fact that Rogan Taylor, nor any of the other Share Liverpool board members, were not elected was important to remember.

      Peter Furmedge added that Share Liverpool would still continue as an organisation after any merger and that they envisaged their own elections in due course to their board. In the interim it was up to Share Liverpool how they conducted themselves but they had a “democratic deficiency” that had to be addressed as the Share Liverpool board were still appointing members to their board without consultation with anyone other than themselves. This did concern the Union and it was hoped they would pause and hold elections as soon as possible.

      Fran added that Rogan Taylor had offered to stand aside at some point in the future if he was an obstacle, but the Union’s view was that the Credit Union was looking to build a foundation, everyone could and needed to be involved and we needed a large organisation of supporters to make this work.

      Fran then asked Peter Hooton (UK Supporters’ Officer) to address the meeting in relation to the Independence Day Rally on the 4th July.
       
      2. Independence Day 4th July
       
      Peter said that the idea for an event or action on the 4th July had started on supporters’ websites and had been picked up and adopted by the Union. It had been originally suggested that there should be another march but the union were strongly against this as it was felt there was “march fatigue” for many and something new needed to be considered to get attention.

      The Rally was to be at St Georges Hall on the 4th July starting at 12.00noon. It would probably last until about 3.00pm. It would take the format of a stage, speeches by the Union, politicians, former players and other supporters of the campaign. There would be entertainment from local bands between speeches and the aim would be to celebrate our “independence” from the owners and the start of a real push to see them gone once and for all. It would be a family day.

      It would also mark the official launch of the Credit Union and hopefully the formal merger between Share Liverpool and the Union. It would be a union event and it needed to be noted that anything adverse that happened on the day would reflect badly on the Union and as such all necessary safety issues would be considered and the Union would do all it could to avoid flag burning.

      Fran then indicated that the Union had received many emails from those that could not attend asking for the question of boycotts to be considered. He indicated that he would lead a discussion on this.
       
      3. Boycott Discussion and Debate
       
      Fran invited members to start the debate and John Dwyer, a member, came forward and said that he felt that a way forward that might suit many would be to start an Auto Cup Scheme boycott by asking all season ticket holders who were renewing their tickets not to join the scheme.

      The point of this type of boycott would be to show the Club the strength of the supporters, impact on cashflow and assist in downward pressure on general sale tickets for the cup games as the Club would not be able to gauge demand.

      This proposal received widespread endorsement from the meeting and Fran indicated that it was a proposal that the Union Committee intended to adopt but to assist a vote of those attending resulted in an ACS boycott being carried unanimously.

      Fran then extended the debate out in relation to suggestions that season ticket holder should do a combination of turning tickets back in or not attending (or leaving) a selected game. Fran mentioned this had been discussed many times and it was clear that season ticket holders would not give up their tickets that they had for years and the Union should not be asking them to do so.

      Kieth Culvin, Club Liaison Officer for the Union then said he had been a season ticket holder for many years and he did not feel that he should be forced by the owners to give it up and he would not support that level of boycott. A straw poll of the meeting was then taken with about 75% of those attending saying they had a season ticket and about 20% of that number saying they would follow any boycott by returning their tickets to the Club. It was clear, if the meeting represented season ticket holding members generally, that a season ticket boycott of this type would not receive support.

      A discussion started from the floor then started about whether selecting a match for a “stand” boycott might work. The Centenary Stand was suggested as a place that could be targeted initially with ticket holders asked not to attend. Responses to this ranged from the fact that the Centenary had corporate ticket holders in there so any boycott would not be complete and also that fact that many overseas or out of town supporters will have booked travel and accommodation and as such are unlikely to join any boycott.

      This was deferred as an idea for further consideration although Fran used this as an example to the meeting of how the Committee wished to hear of ideas going forward.

      A merchandise boycott was also raised and Fran responded by saying that any boycott needed to be deliverable, successful and measurable. It was clear that boycotting the store at Anfield and Liverpool One was impractical as it had to be sustained and continuous to have impact – even then it would be difficult to judge how successful it had been.

      However, what could be pushed was to ask people not to spend money and on what they save to lodge it with the Credit Union so they could establish a share in the Club going forward.

      It was said that it was important to pick the boycotts carefully and to make certain that any boycott idea could be indentified as being successful as without this it would impact and damage the Union.

      The question of action against RBS was discussed and James McKenna (Secretary and Media Spokesperson for the Union) said that it was clear that Hicks and Gillett knew they were not wanted. The Union had established this pressure and the Club was now up for sale but the timing and value of any sale could be influenced by putting pressure upon those who controlled any sale.

      RBS had put Broughton and Purslow into position but RBS were not applying any discernible pressure for them to sell in the short term. Jay asked for how many people present had some sort of relationship with RBS and the straw poll suggested that about 20% of people present did. Although a boycott of RBS had been mooted, including the coordinated withdrawal of funds from everyone’s RBS accounts on the same day, it was suggested that action against RBS and their affiliates might be the way forward.

      This would include World Cup events in London, Wimbledon or anywhere that RBS had a presence or sponsorship – this would be to embarrass them to putting pressure on to the owners and telling RBS to withdraw their support for them. Jay said that plans would be published in due course that would lead on from the 4th July Rally.

      Steve Morris spoke again from the floor and said the Union should also seek a dialogue with RBS, Jay responded by saying that this had been attempted and while some response had been received it was clear that the bank would always sit behind confidentiality issues.

      A vote was called on action to target RBS and this was unanimously carried.

      Fran then said that a few of the Committee wanted to mention about membership issues.
       
      4. Membership
       
      Paul Gardner (Community and Youth Officer for the Union) stated that it was hoped to launch a Junior Section for the Union before he end of the summer. This would be free membership for two separate blocks of members based upon junior and senior school age.

      There were some legal and child protection issues to be sorted out but the expansion of membership would see younger people involved and hopefully see them advance through to full membership in due course.

      Graham Smith (Assistant Secretary) stated that since the Moores and Benitez issues not only had membership rocketed but there had also been requests from far and wide to set up branches.

      These included the Scouser Tommy website, London, South West England, Sweden, Dubai, the Midlands and Skelmersdale (greeted by applause). Graham stressed that this could assist in new members being found and also a development in the democracy of the Union and urged anyone interested in setting a branch up to contact him via secretary@spiritofshankly.com

      Tommy Keiner (Overseas’ Supporters Officer) then spoke about overseas members and the fact that the website was shortly to start carrying translations of some of its pages and that following a successful visit to the Euro Fans’ Congress last year the Union would be represented there again this year. He thanks all overseas members for their feedback and support during the season.

      Fran called for any other business.

      5. Any Other Business

      Billy Parry came forward and said that it was rumoured that the English Defence League were due to meet and possible march in Liverpool this afternoon. He stressed that they were not welcome and asked the meeting to support and recognise this. This was acknowledged through a round of applause for him.

      Finally, John van Alwon proposed on the basis that the venue today was significantly hotter than the venue for the winter meetings that we should reverse the venues for next year. To general laughter and applause this was acknowledged.

      Fran closed the meeting by reflecting on the great numbers who had attended and thanked everyone for their contributions.

      The meeting closed at 1.45pm
      JD
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 39,529 posts | 6887 
      Re: Minutes from the Spirit Of Shankly EGM - Saturday 12th June 2010
      Reply #1: Jun 15, 2010 05:28:18 pm
      I'm amazed that 20% of season ticket holders would be willing to hand in their season tickets.

      That's astonishing.

      Anyway, what does strike me as odd is that 10% of the membership are allowed to vote and dictate the policy of SOS. Is that democratic? What about the other 5,500 who have paid a tenner.  Does their opinion count?

      Reading between the lines it appears that the 4th July looks more likely to be a campaigning day to get new members for the Union, which I don't believe was it's original intention when someone first posted the idea on a forum.

      When I see statements about the Union avoiding decisions to protect it's reputation then I think I realise it is not going to represent my views. 
      kelvo
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 3,207 posts | 52 
      Re: Minutes from the Spirit Of Shankly EGM - Saturday 12th June 2010
      Reply #2: Jun 15, 2010 07:38:13 pm
      Seems that SOS have taken it upon themselves to arrange the day and set the agenda. With the arrangments changing seemingly weekly wonder what the actual day will hold come 4th July.
      redkenny
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 24,912 posts | 1058 
      • 97 - Always Remembered
      Re: Minutes from the Spirit Of Shankly EGM - Saturday 12th June 2010
      Reply #3: Jun 15, 2010 07:56:06 pm
      I attended the meeting but had to shoot off before it finished. At the time I thought the 4th July Rally was a cracking idea and I still do - I'm sick and tired of marching (and quite frankly, walking alone). So an open air event sounds ace.

      But after reading the minutes, I can't help but get the impression this 4th July Rally has evolved from a march because of the stupid F***ing flag burning, the day after Rafa got fu**ed off.

      Anyway, as much as I like Zeligs as a place to go eat and spend a fortune in, I would have preferred a different venue like the Olympia. Couldn't really hear what was getting said.

      One thing is for sure, there will still be thousands of people spending money at Anfield next season. I think the union should be a bit more tougher concerning boycotts. There is more fans than season ticket holders.

      Well I'm not spending another F***ing penny near Anfield or any official outlets. Them cu*ts aren't getting anything from me. And I would urge fellow reds to do the same.
      CRK
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 13,604 posts | 361 
      • JFT96 YNWA
      Re: Minutes from the Spirit Of Shankly EGM - Saturday 12th June 2010
      Reply #4: Jun 15, 2010 08:29:01 pm
      One thing is for sure, there will still be thousands of people spending money at Anfield next season. I think the union should be a bit more tougher concerning boycotts. There is more fans than season ticket holders.

      Well I'm not spending another f**king penny near Anfield or any official outlets. Them cu*ts aren't getting anything from me. And I would urge fellow reds to do the same.

      Yes and yes.

      With regards to the July 4th thing, aside from the flag burning sh*te, I think it is better as a rally than a march. I'm sincerely hoping it isn't going to be an 'SOS day' though. It's all well and good taking idea on, but then claiming it for your own benefits is out of order.

      I'm also liking the sound of the World Cup events RBS will be sponsoring. I'd be well up for a little mini-bus trip down to London to embarrass them in front of their own punters, in a similar manner to us getting pissed all over by them and the Yanks.
      Reprobate
      • Forum Legend - Paisley
      • *****

      • 11,055 posts | 436 
      • Avatar by Kitster29@Deviantart.com
      Re: Minutes from the Spirit Of Shankly EGM - Saturday 12th June 2010
      Reply #5: Jun 21, 2010 09:39:36 pm
      I'm amazed that 20% of season ticket holders would be willing to hand in their season tickets.
      Same here but even then, I doubt 20% would actually go through with it. I suspect it was more a case of all mouth, no trousers.
      As for the rest of the minutes.... waffle.
      CRK
      • LFC Reds Subscriber
      • ******
      • 13,604 posts | 361 
      • JFT96 YNWA
      Re: Minutes from the Spirit Of Shankly EGM - Saturday 12th June 2010
      Reply #6: Jun 23, 2010 09:09:05 am
      At the meeting, I would say it was far less than 20% who said they'd hand in their season ticket. I only saw one hand up. And there were certainly more than five season ticket holders in there.
      RedRoy
      • Forum Legend - Fagan
      • *****

      • 3,483 posts | 88 
      Re: Minutes from the Spirit Of Shankly EGM - Saturday 12th June 2010
      Reply #7: Jun 29, 2010 01:58:04 am
      We have created a "political Wing",whose only interest is self interest.This organisation needs to be outed now.We may be simple scousers,but gullible we ain't.Now we have to take control.I'm too far away.Joey and John,down to you mates,if your.e good enough,your'e old enough.Time for the internet to make a difference.

      Quick Reply