Wrexham AFC agm

[Haruki]

Originally Posted by wafc1926

Thought there was an obligation to name ALL Directors? If not then how do you stop the crooks who have plagued football clubs and other Limited Companies for years? " We couldn't ban Mr Vaughan ( say ) because we never knew he was a Director. "
Are Spencer and the others legally allowed to act as Directors if they are not registered at Companies House?

Business can be run by people not named at companies house. The rest of our board will be shadow directors

[oswestryred]

Originally Posted by pagl

Any reason you’re not a member?
I believe you can withdraw your money.

It's hyperthetical, season ticket holder and wst member. Just wondered as the club don't seem to recognise the the old share scheme anymore

[wafc1926]

Originally Posted by Haruki

Business can be run by people not named at companies house. The rest of our board will be shadow directors

Thanks again. Whatever the titles of those involved I think most of us agree that changes in approach are needed. Communication is poor and many fans I speak to are complaining about a lack of respect and disregard bordering on contempt. It is one thing saying " we are all in this together " but meaningless when people feel alienated.

[Haruki]

Originally Posted by wafc1926

Thanks again. Whatever the titles of those involved I think most of us agree that changes in approach are needed. Communication is poor and many fans I speak to are complaining about a lack of respect and disregard bordering on contempt. It is one thing saying " we are all in this together " but meaningless when people feel alienated.

Totally agree with you. Personally I feel like the directors treat the fan base with contempt.

We used to be told we were the first to be told of any club news and received emails regarding transfer business, contract news etc. Now the board have decided not to inform fans first and instead hold information back until they feel a "good news day" is required. Examples of this are Pearson signing a new contract, info held back and released at the boards timing of choice. Likewise Barrow, he signed as assistant weeks before we were told but the board held it back until such a time as there was distress over the Ricketts affair. I have been informed that Manny signed when Pearson did but we were never told. When the managers released list was announced last May we were told a handful of players had already signed, I doubt that happened over night.

January was a disgrace, a sequence of very poor decisions from the top which we haven't recovered from and wasted God knows how much money. The "leaks" wasn't the key issue but was disguised as such. Under any criticism Spencer answered questions with "we have seven years experience in running the club". But on the pitch that is seven years of failure.

The accounts displays a club who are financially in a good position thanks to the generosity and loyalty of the fan base but we are being short changed by poor decisions on managers, contract lengths and a general lack of a winning mentality. No doubt the board will tell us it was a great success to finish seventh this year and in the playoffs. I'm sorry but that will be a catastrophic failure again. One play off every 6 years is not acceptable.

Why are the current trust board and club board both adamant that the current incumbent directors are the best for the job? What other great candidates sit in our fan base but can't get past the closed door?

Change is needed, if any of the current board are standing for re election to the WST board this year then with the exception of Mark Williams who is an excellent accountant, I won't vote for them, it's the only way to make our voices heard that change is required.

[Always The Kop]

Originally Posted by Haruki

Totally agree with you. Personally I feel like the directors treat the fan base with contempt.

We used to be told we were the first to be told of any club news and received emails regarding transfer business, contract news etc. Now the board have decided not to inform fans first and instead hold information back until they feel a "good news day" is required. Examples of this are Pearson signing a new contract, info held back and released at the boards timing of choice. Likewise Barrow, he signed as assistant weeks before we were told but the board held it back until such a time as there was distress over the Ricketts affair. I have been informed that Manny signed when Pearson did but we were never told. When the managers released list was announced last May we were told a handful of players had already signed, I doubt that happened over night.

January was a disgrace, a sequence of very poor decisions from the top which we haven't recovered from and wasted God knows how much money. The "leaks" wasn't the key issue but was disguised as such. Under any criticism Spencer answered questions with "we have seven years experience in running the club". But on the pitch that is seven years of failure.

The accounts displays a club who are financially in a good position thanks to the generosity and loyalty of the fan base but we are being short changed by poor decisions on managers, contract lengths and a general lack of a winning mentality. No doubt the board will tell us it was a great success to finish seventh this year and in the playoffs. I'm sorry but that will be a catastrophic failure again. One play off every 6 years is not acceptable.

Why are the current trust board and club board both adamant that the current incumbent directors are the best for the job? What other great candidates sit in our fan base but can't get past the closed door?

Change is needed, if any of the current board are standing for re election to the WST board this year then with the exception of Mark Williams who is an excellent accountant, I won't vote for them, it's the only way to make our voices heard that change is required.

Mark Williams was voted on for a further 3 years last year, both myself and Mark had to stand down to seek re-election if we so wished to as per the rules.

[Ruabon Red]

Originally Posted by Haruki

Business can be run by people not named at companies house. The rest of our board will be shadow directors

I would describe them as de facto rather than shadow

https://www.iod.com/news/news/articl...ir-liabilities

[Bagger Vance]

Originally Posted by Ruabon Red

I would describe them as de facto rather than shadow

https://www.iod.com/news/news/articl...ir-liabilities

There are only two registered Directors on Companies House for Wrexham AFC Limited.

Mark Williams and Gavin Jones hence why they are the only two mentioned.

Legally i think you are correct, they do seem to fit de facto.

[Ruabon Red]

Originally Posted by Bagger Vance

There are only two registered Directors on Companies House for Wrexham AFC Limited.

Mark Williams and Gavin Jones hence why they are the only two mentioned.

Legally i think you are correct, they do seem to fit de facto.

Earlier in my career I understood (wrongly it seems now) that it was illegal to purport to be a director if you weren't one as you mislead others into thinking you have legal responsibilities

It appears from the IoD advice that in fact the reverse applies, i.e. if you have control but are not a registered director you effectively become one.