Consistency

[Brahma Bull]

I have always welcomed constructive criticism of the committee and Trust. We try hard to engage and act on feedback/requests but it can be difficult when you have 30 people turn up at the Pre-Match meetings or only 100 reply to a questionnaire seeking views and approval. Unfortunately, there won't be an election at the AGM as not enough people put their hand up to join the committee. If people want change, they can have it. We need new blood, energy and enthusiasm and we do have it this coming year.

A lot of the posters on this board are OxVox members and it's good for them to make comment. We need more comment and we need to focus on some of our core objectives. One will be increasing the membership. We are considering ways to do this, then we will need to go to the members for approval. We need to improve on communication. We need to be a critical friend of the club. Then we will have a role to play in the stadium, once the club are ready.

[Snake]

We have also discussed the stadium again. Daryl Eales has gone on record and said it is one of his main priorities in the first half of 2015. He is having to learn and speak with all the main key stakeholders and that is not just Firoz. OxVox were given a remit to help with the Stadium following last years AGM and it has helped formulate a discussion about Water Eaton. It's now up to the club to take it forward.

Please tell me you don't include Ian Hudspeth in that list.

[GodalmingYellow]

What's the criticism then GY? (I like understanding others views and having a sensible debate) I have addressed the comment about the committee 'backing a bid' which is completely untrue. OxVox have never had a remit to go chasing a manager out of the club either (even if may have done so before) because you have so many different views.

OxVox have been questioning the club and asking for acknowledgement about the seriousness of its position for the past six weeks - see our OUFC meeting notes from Mid January - this past week the club have come out and addressed it. Daryl Eales is putting alot of his money into this and I feel, he should be seeing a better return. So there hasn't been any continued silence over woeful performances as those very notes make reference too. Those notes are in the public domain.

We have also discussed the stadium again. Daryl Eales has gone on record and said it is one of his main priorities in the first half of 2015. He is having to learn and speak with all the main key stakeholders and that is not just Firoz. OxVox were given a remit to help with the Stadium following last years AGM and it has helped formulate a discussion about Water Eaton. It's now up to the club to take it forward.

So with all that in mind, especially the stadium hard work and meetings the Trust have had in the past 12 months (which I might add started after the Trust got the RTB on the stadium), forgive me if I get offended at the 'lack of backbone' comment from a member of the Trust.

FWIW, I won't be an officer of the Trust moving forward so that will please some people

I wasn't posting a criticism BB, although I can if you like!

I was just trying to point out that where some say they don't understand why there isn't more gratitude instead of criticism of the committee, that it is in fact perfectly normal to expect both gratitude AND criticism, and that both are perfectly legitimate reflections of differing views of members.

[Brahma Bull]

You're right GY, you didn't say that. Apologises for the poorly worded opening reply. I was trying to garnish what the main criticisms were from others, including yourself if you had any (note: I am opening up a can of worms here inviting/encouraging this). I would like them known so we can rectify/address them.

I listed some criticisms I have. Communication is one. Membership numbers are another. Some will point to independence especially under Lenagan but I stick to my views of a week back or so on this forum where I think the relationship, the working relationship had with Ian and his sons, were the best relationship the Trust has ever had with any owners. I understand fully, how that could and was mis-understood or perceived though. Probably a refreshing shift change now, that we are more independent because we don't know the owners like we did the previous one and in turn they don't know us either.

We have spent lots of time on the Stadium over the last 24 months. We have had many tribunals we needed to attend. We struck (despite some of the choice descriptions used elsewhere on forums - notably Yellowsforum this week) a decent working relationship up with Kassam. We have met him several times when he has returned to the UK, we have had numerous conversations with him in between. It's all very easy to slag him off and be offensive towards him but he has certainly a realisation of the challenges this club has and he might be able to help with them, ridiculous as that may sound.

What do people think we could do to drive up membership numbers? Any initiatives you'd be in favour of? - of course this question will be asked soon to ALL members.

[ty cobb]

Surely the obvious one is don't charge a fee and make it easy for members to sign up, for example you have a sign up option on the website for occasional news on the website but that won't give access to the useful stuff.

If you sign up, we'll send you occasional emails giving you information about the trust, meeting announcements etc. You won't receive the members' ezines produced by the trust, or any of the membership benefits - and we hope we'll persuade you of the value of joining the trust once you hear a bit more about us!

I would have thought it would be more important to get a bulk of fans signed up and I think most fans can be persuaded to put an e-mail address in rather than make a payment every year. Still ask for donations and a suggested joining fee but look to get everyone involved not just those who will pay for it. You will get more engagement and a better response rate to surveys and be able to say you truly represent the fan base.

You also need to sing your praises a bit more. There seems to be a lot of good stuff going on with the stadium in the background but on the surface there seems to be painfully slow progress in getting a stadium that is our home. All very well having nice chats with Firoz but he underinvests in the stadium and results in a poor match day experience and a poor pitch. You may well do this in your internal e-mails to members but if no-one else sees this they won’t be aware of it.

I also echo other comments on here, anyone who gives up their free time to try and help the cause is doing a lot more good than those who moan from their keyboards.

[GodalmingYellow]

Surely the obvious one is don't charge a fee and make it easy for members to sign up, for example you have a sign up option on the website for occasional news on the website but that won't give access to the useful stuff.

If you sign up, we'll send you occasional emails giving you information about the trust, meeting announcements etc. You won't receive the members' ezines produced by the trust, or any of the membership benefits - and we hope we'll persuade you of the value of joining the trust once you hear a bit more about us!

I would have thought it would be more important to get a bulk of fans signed up and I think most fans can be persuaded to put an e-mail address in rather than make a payment every year. Still ask for donations and a suggested joining fee but look to get everyone involved not just those who will pay for it. You will get more engagement and a better response rate to surveys and be able to say you truly represent the fan base.

You also need to sing your praises a bit more. There seems to be a lot of good stuff going on with the stadium in the background but on the surface there seems to be painfully slow progress in getting a stadium that is our home. All very well having nice chats with Firoz but he underinvests in the stadium and results in a poor match day experience and a poor pitch. You may well do this in your internal e-mails to members but if no-one else sees this they won’t be aware of it.

I also echo other comments on here, anyone who gives up their free time to try and help the cause is doing a lot more good than those who moan from their keyboards.

I think Ty is correct. Given where the club is at present, OxVox needs to have a serious membership drive, with an ultra low membership fee (I think free may be going too far given the nature of trusts, but certainly just a quid would be a good idea now), and also ask for donations. And OxVox needs to try to make sure there are absolutely the minimum costs to the trust of providing memberships. Perhaps just a membership card would suffice.

We need to get the membership up to a level that is serious and that would make the majority shareholders take notice. Certainly in excess of 1,000 and preferably double that.

[Brahma Bull]

Surely the obvious one is don't charge a fee and make it easy for members to sign up, for example you have a sign up option on the website for occasional news on the website but that won't give access to the useful stuff.

If you sign up, we'll send you occasional emails giving you information about the trust, meeting announcements etc. You won't receive the members' ezines produced by the trust, or any of the membership benefits - and we hope we'll persuade you of the value of joining the trust once you hear a bit more about us!

I would have thought it would be more important to get a bulk of fans signed up and I think most fans can be persuaded to put an e-mail address in rather than make a payment every year. Still ask for donations and a suggested joining fee but look to get everyone involved not just those who will pay for it. You will get more engagement and a better response rate to surveys and be able to say you truly represent the fan base.

You also need to sing your praises a bit more. There seems to be a lot of good stuff going on with the stadium in the background but on the surface there seems to be painfully slow progress in getting a stadium that is our home. All very well having nice chats with Firoz but he underinvests in the stadium and results in a poor match day experience and a poor pitch. You may well do this in your internal e-mails to members but if no-one else sees this they won’t be aware of it.

I also echo other comments on here, anyone who gives up their free time to try and help the cause is doing a lot more good than those who moan from their keyboards.

Thanks Ty. There has been some good work on the stadium and our involvement in contributing heavily to the Water Eaton proposals but at present, it isn't public which is frustrating.

The membership point will be key. We intended to focus on that and the Stadium as opposed to doing lots of nice things with little long term benefit, the logo's on the side of the Stadium as an example. Albeit, it was worthwhile.

Regarding membership, you have to amend the rules in order to be able to implement free membership. As it is a constitution and a provident society which has a one adult, one share model which does have a minimal £1 cost per annum. As a result, unless you get the rules amended, that would have to be the min cost. Each member attracts a cost, roughly about £1, so a reduction in membership is an option. So the question to members on this board would be, would you be opposed to a small membership fee....bearing in mind.....most of you have either paid £15 for 3 years or even paid for lifetime membership?

1000 members has to be the aim, as GY states. That in my opinion would be a successful 2015 for the Trust if achieved.

[Brahma Bull]

Please note we are nearly concluding on a report on membership and solutions to address it. These will be sent to members for consultation before decisions are made.

[Kernow Yellow]

We have also discussed the stadium again. Daryl Eales has gone on record and said it is one of his main priorities in the first half of 2015. He is having to learn and speak with all the main key stakeholders and that is not just Firoz. OxVox were given a remit to help with the Stadium following last years AGM and it has helped formulate a discussion about Water Eaton. It's now up to the club to take it forward.

Please tell me you don't include Ian Hudspeth in that list.

What's your problem with Hudspeth, Snake? I'm sure last year you were saying how encouraging it was that the Council leader seemed to be on board re the proposed new stadium, and only last month you were telling us of your personal dealings with him and offering to put OxVox's views across when you next met him. Has he recently upset you or something?

[Kernow Yellow]

So the question to members on this board would be, would you be opposed to a small membership fee....bearing in mind.....most of you have either paid £15 for 3 years or even paid for lifetime membership?

Interesting one. When OxVox was set up I was very keen to join but put off by what I perceived as high membership fees. Trevor (and GY as I recall) took the time to explain where the money went and why it was necessary, so I stumped up (a considerable amount of money) for life membership. It would therefore be rather galling to be told that actually admin costs come to about £1 per head per annum. But if that is the case then I don't see why membership should cost substantially more - the only point in building up reserves would be with the aim of buying equity in the club, but a) that should probably be funded separately and b) it's pretty pointless at the moment.

I'm also not sure why building up the membership numbers is seen as so vital. The reason interest is generally low is that things are pretty settled and healthy off the pitch at the moment. If things change and a strong OxVox voice /fundraising is needed then people will get involved - look how quickly FOUL garnered members and cash back in the day, and that was before mass email and internet use.

But if that's what's deemed important and cheap membership is seen as the way to do it I'm not going to object.

In terms of greater supporter engagement, how about informal social meet-ups? If I lived in Oxford I'd enjoy regular(ish) pub nights with fellow members and fans, just to chat about OUFC and feel more involved with the Trust in general. Not on a matchday and not at the stadium - somewhere central and easily accessible by public transport. Just an idea.

[Snake]

We have also discussed the stadium again. Daryl Eales has gone on record and said it is one of his main priorities in the first half of 2015. He is having to learn and speak with all the main key stakeholders and that is not just Firoz. OxVox were given a remit to help with the Stadium following last years AGM and it has helped formulate a discussion about Water Eaton. It's now up to the club to take it forward.

Please tell me you don't include Ian Hudspeth in that list.

What's your problem with Hudspeth, Snake? I'm sure last year you were saying how encouraging it was that the Council leader seemed to be on board re the proposed new stadium, and only last month you were telling us of your personal dealings with him and offering to put OxVox's views across when you next met him. Has he recently upset you or something?

'No comment' (on a public internet board).

[GodalmingYellow]

So the question to members on this board would be, would you be opposed to a small membership fee....bearing in mind.....most of you have either paid £15 for 3 years or even paid for lifetime membership?

Interesting one. When OxVox was set up I was very keen to join but put off by what I perceived as high membership fees. Trevor (and GY as I recall) took the time to explain where the money went and why it was necessary, so I stumped up (a considerable amount of money) for life membership. It would therefore be rather galling to be told that actually admin costs come to about £1 per head per annum. But if that is the case then I don't see why membership should cost substantially more - the only point in building up reserves would be with the aim of buying equity in the club, but a) that should probably be funded separately and b) it's pretty pointless at the moment.

I'm also not sure why building up the membership numbers is seen as so vital. The reason interest is generally low is that things are pretty settled and healthy off the pitch at the moment. If things change and a strong OxVox voice /fundraising is needed then people will get involved - look how quickly FOUL garnered members and cash back in the day, and that was before mass email and internet use.

But if that's what's deemed important and cheap membership is seen as the way to do it I'm not going to object.

In terms of greater supporter engagement, how about informal social meet-ups? If I lived in Oxford I'd enjoy regular(ish) pub nights with fellow members and fans, just to chat about OUFC and feel more involved with the Trust in general. Not on a matchday and not at the stadium - somewhere central and easily accessible by public transport. Just an idea.

Yes you are correct KY. Not sure if you are seeking justification of the early years costs but times were different then. Costs of web pages and internet access were much higher than now. Also we gave out membership certificates as well as badges (which in retrospect was a little excessive). There were regular printed newsletters. There was cost of room hire. The accountancy fees were higher. Everything cost more to deliver in the early days. Internet access is now much more widespread and much cheaper and so communication via virtually free means is now possible to the vast majority of members, so stationery costs are almost eliminated. And the membership level was fledgling, so any costs were spread between fewer people. All the set up costs of OxVox have been incurred and so running the trust is now much cheaper and spread between more people.

To answer BBs question, I bought Life memberships for myself, my wife and each of my two kids, and I would have no problem at all with a minimal membership fee now.

[Brahma Bull]

We're pretty good on expenditure these days. GY has covered most of the reasons as to why there is now a difference. Room Hire is now free at both the ground on a Matchday when we have our pre-match meetings (kindly sorted by the club/stadco) and our monthly committee meetings are now held at Jordon Hill Business Park again at no cost. The website is a small annual cost and the e-zines are obviously free. We are building up on Twitter particularly and Facebook, again free methods to communicate. We now send out smaller membership packs or get them collected from the Programme Stall to save postage.

The membership fees have to be accrued if I recall anyway to cover future years and then we get the accounts independently audited. But the cost per member is quite low nowadays.

As for why we should aim for 1000 as a target, I think that it is a significant proportion of home gates, it makes the voice both stronger and more influential. It enables the only recognised democratic and Independent supporters group to have more say and for it to be listened too better. We have looked at a two-tier membership system, where one could enrol and just get e-zines but no voting but again (MATT D needs to confirm this) I think it entails significant rule changes - although I could be wrong on that point. Matt will clarify.

[GodalmingYellow]

We're pretty good on expenditure these days. GY has covered most of the reasons as to why there is now a difference. Room Hire is now free at both the ground on a Matchday when we have our pre-match meetings (kindly sorted by the club/stadco) and our monthly committee meetings are now held at Jordon Hill Business Park again at no cost. The website is a small annual cost and the e-zines are obviously free. We are building up on Twitter particularly and Facebook, again free methods to communicate. We now send out smaller membership packs or get them collected from the Programme Stall to save postage.

The membership fees have to be accrued if I recall anyway to cover future years and then we get the accounts independently audited. But the cost per member is quite low nowadays.

As for why we should aim for 1000 as a target, I think that it is a significant proportion of home gates, it makes the voice both stronger and more influential. It enables the only recognised democratic and Independent supporters group to have more say and for it to be listened too better. We have looked at a two-tier membership system, where one could enrol and just get e-zines but no voting but again (MATT D needs to confirm this) I think it entails significant rule changes - although I could be wrong on that point. Matt will clarify.

My advice would be, don't complicate things. Members who are "second class" members won't feel like members at all and you would end up restricting the number who would sign up.

Keep it simple. £1 gets you an annual membership.

[ty cobb]

I'd go for free - make it as easy as possible to get people to sign up, and keep being signed up. Put a fee in it's an extra step and you'll have to remind them again after a year. Would have thought it would be more effort than not to take a nominal fee anyway.

And if you need a vote to change this then so be it.