WST Board Minutes 2

[The Only Way Is Up]

The last Board meeting was held more than 5 weeks ago, on 29th January.

By now, they will have held their February meeting.

Members are now two months' worth of meetings short of discovering how the Board adressed the "minor" matter of how we are to avoid relegation this season, and how they are going to provide more exciting football for us all to watch.

It is sloppy management that we don't have these minutes.

To those who blame the current ownership model for our dire position, the WST is OUR model, and if WE don't tell OUR Board that we're not happy with their lack of performance, it will continue to remain as bad - or will become even worse.

It would be exactly the same if it was a Sugar Daddy owned club being run by people who ignore the advice given by their masters.

If you want there to be change, we all need to be demanding it. Now.

[crazywelsh]

Originally Posted by The Only Way Is Up

The last Board meeting was held more than 5 weeks ago, on 29th January.

By now, they will have held their February meeting.

Members are now two months' worth of meetings short of discovering how the Board adressed the "minor" matter of how we are to avoid relegation this season, and how they are going to provide more exciting football for us all to watch.

It is sloppy management that we don't have these minutes.

To those who blame the current ownership model for our dire position, the WST is OUR model, and if WE don't tell OUR Board that we're not happy with their lack of performance, it will continue to remain as bad - or will become even worse.

It would be exactly the same if it was a Sugar Daddy owned club being run by people who ignore the advice given by their masters.

If you want there to be change, we all need to be demanding it. Now.

Shall we just put it up for sale and get a sugar daddy, it can’t be ran any worse than it currently is.

The WST model is make as many mistakes as possible, often repeating previous mistakes year on year, pissing money up the wall by using it to pay for all of the mistakes. Block any interested party from buying wrexham fc at the beginning should of raised alarm bells on what to expect from the managerial ability. To have wst in power of just the club all interested parties scared off then the club, ground and training ground couldn’t be sold together as the wst didn’t have the money.

[Nibs]

Football results are not the priority for this “football club” I’m afraid.

Keep up the good works Wrexham board and WST.

[WrexhamO]

The WST Board met on 26th February, 2 weeks later there are no minutes up (for the January meeting).

[WrexhamO]

Here's what the Secretary told me on 10th February:

"Thank you for your email.

I can only apologize for the delay on this occasion which was as a
result of the transition period between the departing Independent Club
Secretary, Alan Fox, and me starting the role in December 2019.

Unfortunately, the position was vacant for the November meeting, which
meant that there was a delay in them being published. As for the
December minutes, these were approved at the January meeting and have
now been published. As you will know, the January minutes will be
approved in February and will be published then.

Now that I am up and running properly, there should be no future delays.

I hope that this answers your question."

[Inside Left]

Three if favour of the previous minutes and six abstained - but only eight present.

[The Only Way Is Up]

Originally Posted by Inside Left

Three if favour of the previous minutes and six abstained - but only eight present.

You have to wonder why only three people there were prepared to confirm that the Minutes were an accurate record of the previous month's meeting!

Or, putting it a different way, why the majority of those present wouldn't put their names to that accuracy?

Something stinks.

[WrexhamO]

Originally Posted by Inside Left

Three if favour of the previous minutes and six abstained - but only eight present.

Which minutes was this?

[The Only Way Is Up]

Originally Posted by Inside Left

Three if favour of the previous minutes and six abstained - but only eight present.

There were nine: you didn't count Peter Jones as meeting chairman - his name appears further down the page.