Cardiff City respond to Supporters' Trust rejection of re-br

Cardiff City respond to Supporters' Trust rejection of re-branding
By Aled Blake

CARDIFF City Supporters Trust members have voted against the club's controversial rebranding proposals in a poll conducted amongst themselves.
Only 265 Trust members participated in the vote - around 39 per cent of the 688-strong membership.
But Trust leaders still believe the figure is enough to call for talks with City's Malasyian owners about the decision to change the colour of the home shirts from blue to red.
The survey organised enabled Trust members to vote either by e-mail, or through a postal ballot with pre-paid envelopes provided.
Of those who did vote, 54.7% were against the move to red, with 43.8% backing the change of colours the Malaysians are introducing.
Around 90% of the members said supporters had not been consulted adequately over the proposals, while 80% said they wanted more information from the club on the investment proposals.
Chairman of the Supporters Trust, Tim Hartley, said: 'It is clear that our members believe that the club have failed to consult properly with our fans.
'The majority of our members are against the switch from blue to red, and the feedback we have had is that many of those willing to change to red do so reluctantly.
'The club needs to reflect very carefully on the views of some of its most loyal supporters. What is clear is that fans believe the club failed to consult them properly before such a radical change.
'We believe that, as a minimum, season ticket holders should have been consulted in advance.
'The results again highlight the need for elected supporter representation on the board of Cardiff City FC. The voice of the supporter needs to be heard loud and clear to avoid the alienation of some of the club's most loyal fans.
'There is supporter representation on the board of Swansea City and it works very well. We believe the owners and the board must look at this as an option in the future.
'Formal consultation would have avoided the embarrassing debacle over the last few weeks. While supporters are pleased at the proposed investment in the club, they have still not received a full explanation for the need to rebrand.'
Hartley welcomed the prospect of the Bluebirds appointing a supporter liaison officer before the start of next season, under new Uefa rules.
He said: 'This, and the fans' consultation announced by the club last week, are moves in the right direction and we look forward to a meaningful and constructive dialogue on behalf of our members.
'We are writing to the chairman, Dato Chan Tien Ghee and Mr Vincent Tan, to invite them to meet Trust members and other fans at the earliest opportunity.'
A Cardiff City spokesman said: 'From reading the results, 145 people, approximately 21% of the current 688 Supporters Trust members have voted against wanting to accept the investment and branding package, while when adding additional and much needed context, 145 votes represents around 0.5% of our average attendance figures for league matches at Cardiff City Stadium last season.
'It's unfortunate that the Supporters Trust statement elected against including details of 61% non voting members before making assertions of clarity, in particular to the assumed majority feelings and opinions of their membership. That said, as much as we would have welcomed consultation prior to these results being released, we thank the Supporters Trust for their views and remain committed to the ongoing consultation process through our long standing meetings and regular dialogue on many matters.'

Quite ironic the club are "dissapointed they were not consulted prior to the release of the results"

Quite funny they dismiss this vote as "only 0.5% of the home attendance" when they used a similair small vote by the supporters club to support the re-brand.

All that said this is all pretty pointless IMO. We are red for next season and it wont change.

I think the "Cardiff City spokesman" must post on here. Perhaps a moderator

Cardiff City respond to Supporters' Trust rejection of re-branding
By Aled Blake

CARDIFF City Supporters Trust members have voted against the club's controversial rebranding proposals in a poll conducted amongst themselves.
Only 265 Trust members participated in the vote - around 39 per cent of the 688-strong membership.
But Trust leaders still believe the figure is enough to call for talks with City's Malasyian owners about the decision to change the colour of the home shirts from blue to red.
The survey organised enabled Trust members to vote either by e-mail, or through a postal ballot with pre-paid envelopes provided.
Of those who did vote, 54.7% were against the move to red, with 43.8% backing the change of colours the Malaysians are introducing.
Around 90% of the members said supporters had not been consulted adequately over the proposals, while 80% said they wanted more information from the club on the investment proposals.
Chairman of the Supporters Trust, Tim Hartley, said: 'It is clear that our members believe that the club have failed to consult properly with our fans.
'The majority of our members are against the switch from blue to red, and the feedback we have had is that many of those willing to change to red do so reluctantly.
'The club needs to reflect very carefully on the views of some of its most loyal supporters. What is clear is that fans believe the club failed to consult them properly before such a radical change.
'We believe that, as a minimum, season ticket holders should have been consulted in advance.
'The results again highlight the need for elected supporter representation on the board of Cardiff City FC. The voice of the supporter needs to be heard loud and clear to avoid the alienation of some of the club's most loyal fans.
'There is supporter representation on the board of Swansea City and it works very well. We believe the owners and the board must look at this as an option in the future.
'Formal consultation would have avoided the embarrassing debacle over the last few weeks. While supporters are pleased at the proposed investment in the club, they have still not received a full explanation for the need to rebrand.'
Hartley welcomed the prospect of the Bluebirds appointing a supporter liaison officer before the start of next season, under new Uefa rules.
He said: 'This, and the fans' consultation announced by the club last week, are moves in the right direction and we look forward to a meaningful and constructive dialogue on behalf of our members.
'We are writing to the chairman, Dato Chan Tien Ghee and Mr Vincent Tan, to invite them to meet Trust members and other fans at the earliest opportunity.'
A Cardiff City spokesman said: 'From reading the results, 145 people, approximately 21% of the current 688 Supporters Trust members have voted against wanting to accept the investment and branding package, while when adding additional and much needed context, 145 votes represents around 0.5% of our average attendance figures for league matches at Cardiff City Stadium last season.
'It's unfortunate that the Supporters Trust statement elected against including details of 61% non voting members before making assertions of clarity, in particular to the assumed majority feelings and opinions of their membership. That said, as much as we would have welcomed consultation prior to these results being released, we thank the Supporters Trust for their views and remain committed to the ongoing consultation process through our long standing meetings and regular dialogue on many matters.'

I'm sorry but the so called pro blue are massively outnumbered!?, pathetic.

The Trust are making fools of themselves, if you are going to put out such literature, make sure all or a good proportion of your membership votes - because if you allow for 50 being on holiday, working and sick - the rest you can guarantee can't be bothered.

I'm not anti- the Trust but this is a shocking own goal.

'It is clear that our members believe that the club have failed to consult properly with our fans.

Well its perfectly clear the trust failed to consult properly with its membership.

As for the Club? Well, pot, kettle, black.

Let's be honest, the club spokesman hasn't a leg to stand on with his comments.

I'm not anti- the Trust but this is a shocking own goal.

'It is clear that our members believe that the club have failed to consult properly with our fans.

Well its perfectly clear the trust failed to consult properly with its membership.

As for the Club? Well, pot, kettle, black.

Taff this is another load of Trust bollocks about having a seat on the board, makes my blood boil I tell you.

Spot on about both the club and the trust.

688-strong

lets be honest here , the club have got a bit of a cheek talking about polls and consultation after they ran this red thing over us ..........with out ANY CONSULTATION AT ALL !!!

sorry lads but thats my view

lets be honest here , the club have got a bit of a cheek talking about polls and consultation after they ran this red thing over us ..........with out ANY CONSULTATION AT ALL !!!

sorry lads but thats my view

My point exactly.

The Trust have just done exactly the same to their membership.

I think the "Cardiff City spokesman" must post on here. Perhaps a moderator

It couldn,t be a moderator off here, that story is balanced, mods off here would have deleted the comment from the club spokesman!!!!

I joined the Trust as soon as it was formed. Unfortunately I attended the meetings and discovered it's managed by idiots. Totally unstructured meetings with it's own agendas rather than addressing whole school issues. I withdrew my membership.

Football Supporter Trusts have become an integral part of the football club in recent times. Our one however is an embarrassment. Their latest actions just pour more fuel on their fire.

Like i've said before, the Trust have to have radical reform, they need to reach out to fans. Now is the perfect time and even then the red v blue issue should not be used as a carrot. This won't happen however because of the idiots that currently run it.

I joined the Trust as soon as it was formed. Unfortunately I attended the meetings and discovered it's managed by idiots. Totally unstructured meetings with it's own agendas rather than addressing whole school issues. I withdrew my membership.

Football Supporter Trusts have become an integral part of the football club in recent times. Our one however is an embarrassment. Their latest actions just pour more fuel on their fire.

Like i've said before, the Trust have to have radical reform, they need to reach out to fans. Now is the perfect time and even then the red v blue issue should not be used as a carrot. This won't happen however because of the idiots that currently run it.

This post sums it all up really, and sums up what my impression is of "the trust" sound like a bunch of plums.
This anti red thing is going on way too long now it's boring and about time people saw a bit of sense imo

I am a member of the Supporters Trust and voted against the rebranding but although i suppoprt the aims of the trust. They really have to do a lot more to open up and make fans aware of the trust. The trust needs to increase it's membership so that it represents a far bigger selection of our fan base than it does at the moment.

I believe it needs to hold regional meetings with supporters to explain the aims and ambitions of the trust and use these meetings to recruit new members. I have suggested this on a number of cccasions directly to the trust and even offered our local club free of charge to hold a meeting or trust event but to no avail.

A strong trust with representation on the board at City could only be a good thing but until they reach out to supporters to significantly increase their membership they will remain weak and the Club will walk all over them

I am a member of the Supporters Trust and voted against the rebranding but although i suppoprt the aims of the trust. They really have to do a lot more to open up and make fans aware of the trust. The trust needs to increase it's membership so that it represents a far bigger selection of our fan base than it does at the moment.

I believe it needs to hold regional meetings with supporters to explain the aims and ambitions of the trust and use these meetings to recruit new members. I have suggested this on a number of cccasions directly to the trust and even offered our local club free of charge to hold a meeting or trust event but to no avail.

A strong trust with representation on the board at City could only be a good thing but until they reach out to supporters to significantly increase their membership they will remain weak and the Club will walk all over them

top post

I'm not anti- the Trust but this is a shocking own goal.

'It is clear that our members believe that the club have failed to consult properly with our fans.

Well its perfectly clear the trust failed to consult properly with its membership.

As for the Club? Well, pot, kettle, black.

I was going to post a longer view but your reply is much better than anything I could think of TA.

However, I would just add that the only thing that the poll figures prove is that apathy is the biggest winner.

I am a member of the Supporters Trust and voted against the rebranding but although i suppoprt the aims of the trust. They really have to do a lot more to open up and make fans aware of the trust. The trust needs to increase it's membership so that it represents a far bigger selection of our fan base than it does at the moment.

I believe it needs to hold regional meetings with supporters to explain the aims and ambitions of the trust and use these meetings to recruit new members. I have suggested this on a number of cccasions directly to the trust and even offered our local club free of charge to hold a meeting or trust event but to no avail.

A strong trust with representation on the board at City could only be a good thing but until they reach out to supporters to significantly increase their membership they will remain weak and the Club will walk all over them

top post

I agree with lot's of this, we need a Trust and I really came close to getting involved, but the whole concept of how it is set up and run is self harming and they are bogged down with their hands tied behind their back due to their own rule book so to speak.

It needs to be run democratically, but sometime when you need to be pro active or instantly reactive to a situation, having to ballot for every simple decision is so self defeating.

You can't go responding to situations two months after they happen and expect support.

It's an awkward one, and I haven't got the solutions, lot's of ideas and opinions but not the perfect answers, would just like to see a strong trust that represents all fans from wannabe hooligans to company directors, we should be a broad church, just like our fan base is in truth.

I am a member of the Supporters Trust and voted against the rebranding but although i suppoprt the aims of the trust. They really have to do a lot more to open up and make fans aware of the trust. The trust needs to increase it's membership so that it represents a far bigger selection of our fan base than it does at the moment.

I believe it needs to hold regional meetings with supporters to explain the aims and ambitions of the trust and use these meetings to recruit new members. I have suggested this on a number of cccasions directly to the trust and even offered our local club free of charge to hold a meeting or trust event but to no avail.

A strong trust with representation on the board at City could only be a good thing but until they reach out to supporters to significantly increase their membership they will remain weak and the Club will walk all over them

I have to agree BH and that is a fine post BTW. Honestly the biggest problem with the Trust is the Trust Board who is absolutely deluded that they are doing a 'great' job.

Another great example is that you send them a great opportunity to hold an open meeting free of charge and they run away from it. They are just so insular that they are now making a complete joke of the Trust in the eyes of the club. They only have 600 odd members nearly 4 years after their inception. That is failure on a grand scheme and even Newport County have a much bigger Trust membership which provides direct funding to the team.

My advice (which I’m sure they are not interested in) is to use the small pro-Blue mandate they have as a drive towards gaining a bigger membership. The aim being that this issue can be revisited in the future with a much bigger clout behind it.

I am a member of the Supporters Trust and voted against the rebranding but although i suppoprt the aims of the trust. They really have to do a lot more to open up and make fans aware of the trust. The trust needs to increase it's membership so that it represents a far bigger selection of our fan base than it does at the moment.

I believe it needs to hold regional meetings with supporters to explain the aims and ambitions of the trust and use these meetings to recruit new members. I have suggested this on a number of cccasions directly to the trust and even offered our local club free of charge to hold a meeting or trust event but to no avail.

A strong trust with representation on the board at City could only be a good thing but until they reach out to supporters to significantly increase their membership they will remain weak and the Club will walk all over them

top post

I agree with lot's of this, we need a Trust and I really came close to getting involved, but the whole concept of how it is set up and run is self harming and they are bogged down with their hands tied behind their back due to their own rule book so to speak.

It needs to be run democratically, but sometime when you need to be pro active or instantly reactive to a situation, having to ballot for every simple decision is so self defeating.

You can't go responding to situations two months after they happen and expect support.

It's an awkward one, and I haven't got the solutions, lot's of ideas and opinions but not the perfect answers, would just like to see a strong trust that represents all fans from wannabe hooligans to company directors, we should be a broad church, just like our fan base is in truth.

Gwyn I sometimes wonder if the 'rule book' is a convienent excuse for non-action. The Trust could make an impact if it wanted to, it just needs stronger charactures, like a Big Gwyn may be?

Theres too many different factions in Cardiff City to have a decent Supporters Trust.

What have the current trust ever done for the supporters?

I am a member of the Supporters Trust and voted against the rebranding but although i suppoprt the aims of the trust. They really have to do a lot more to open up and make fans aware of the trust. The trust needs to increase it's membership so that it represents a far bigger selection of our fan base than it does at the moment.

I believe it needs to hold regional meetings with supporters to explain the aims and ambitions of the trust and use these meetings to recruit new members. I have suggested this on a number of cccasions directly to the trust and even offered our local club free of charge to hold a meeting or trust event but to no avail.

A strong trust with representation on the board at City could only be a good thing but until they reach out to supporters to significantly increase their membership they will remain weak and the Club will walk all over them

top post

I agree with lot's of this, we need a Trust and I really came close to getting involved, but the whole concept of how it is set up and run is self harming and they are bogged down with their hands tied behind their back due to their own rule book so to speak.

It needs to be run democratically, but sometime when you need to be pro active or instantly reactive to a situation, having to ballot for every simple decision is so self defeating.

You can't go responding to situations two months after they happen and expect support.

It's an awkward one, and I haven't got the solutions, lot's of ideas and opinions but not the perfect answers, would just like to see a strong trust that represents all fans from wannabe hooligans to company directors, we should be a broad church, just like our fan base is in truth.

Gwyn I sometimes wonder if the 'rule book' is a convienent excuse for non-action. The Trust could make an impact if it wanted to, it just needs stronger charactures, like a Big Gwyn may be?

What i don't understand is the fact that they have to ballot members before making decisions i am on the committee of our local Rugby Club (Cue the abuse ) In fact i am one of 3 Officers of the Club and we are elected by the members to make decisions on behalf of the members.

Any member can stand for committee and if they don't like what the committee are doing the can vote against them at the AGM and stand for election themselves.

However if we had to ballot our members before making every decision we would never get anything done

Just another example of the failings of the so called trust. how can you be representative of a club with only 600 odd members.i hate it when the unions say "80% of our members voted for action" , when in reality its only 80% of those who actually bothered to vote. that could mean that out of say 1000 members 200 vote and 80% vote for action. thats not representative at all.
The trust just look like mugs.
Suggestion. first home game trust members hand out leaflets explaining their aims and get members to join. then have a proper ballot and see what happens. needs to be more unity. not just agendas of the chosen few.
democracy. like f**k. smells like a dictatorship to me.
Then again what do i know , nevet been asked.

Just another example of the failings of the so called trust. how can you be representative of a club with only 600 odd members.i hate it when the unions say "80% of our members voted for action" , when in reality its only 80% of those who actually bothered to vote. that could mean that out of say 1000 members 200 vote and 80% vote for action. thats not representative at all.
The trust just look like mugs.
Suggestion. first home game trust members hand out leaflets explaining their aims and get members to join. then have a proper ballot and see what happens. needs to be more unity. not just agendas of the chosen few.
democracy. like f**k. smells like a dictatorship to me.
Then again what do i know , nevet been asked.

I spent two hours freezing my ass off handing out leaflets for the trust season before last

but I agree they dont do enough to promote themselves

I am a member of the trust and think its a good idea but its got its failings and things it needs to work on thats for sure

but I think being honest this club has akways been divided ever since I followed it and its one of our worst downfalls ......we all love city but blimey do we argue !

for my part I want us to stay blue and my " protest " will be to do what I always do ....wear my blue top and support the team ....unless its cold then its a coat lol

no intimidation of others with a different point of view is acepttable , offensive banners , its gone too far and the situation is far too serious

its as simple as that

Just another example of the failings of the so called trust. how can you be representative of a club with only 600 odd members.i hate it when the unions say "80% of our members voted for action" , when in reality its only 80% of those who actually bothered to vote. that could mean that out of say 1000 members 200 vote and 80% vote for action. thats not representative at all.
The trust just look like mugs.
Suggestion. first home game trust members hand out leaflets explaining their aims and get members to join. then have a proper ballot and see what happens. needs to be more unity. not just agendas of the chosen few.
democracy. like f**k. smells like a dictatorship to me.
Then again what do i know , nevet been asked.

I spent two hours freezing my ass off handing out leaflets for the trust season before last

but I agree they dont do enough to promote themselves

I am a member of the trust and think its a good idea but its got its failings and things it needs to work on thats for sure

but I think being honest this club has akways been divided ever since I followed it and its one of our worst downfalls ......we all love city but blimey do we argue !

for my part I want us to stay blue and my " protest " will be to do what I always do ....wear my blue top and support the team ....unless its cold then its a coat lol

no intimidation of others with a different point of view is acepttable , offensive banners , its gone too far and the situation is far too serious

its as simple as that

Great post and i hope everybody takes your lead on it Sludge

It's all a bit embarrassing, 265 votes

Fair play to you sludge i admire that. the profile of the trust needs to be raised. we as fans need a mouthpiece but one that can function effectively and with no hidden agenda. personally i hate the rebrand and would get behind a cohesive well planed non aggressive protest. i fear though and i hope to be proved wrong on this that the divide is now to great amongst fans.
I know one thing i will wear blue but i will never look down upon, berate or attack a fellow cardiff city fan should they choose to wear red.
We can achieve our aim without this "them and us " attitude. we need unity.
UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL.

Sludge, I've the utmost respect for you and your views, but this isn't a good day for the Trust.

Figures were, I believed quoted with regards to membership which seemed to be higher than 688 - apologies if it's the case only that number were eligible to vote.

it's pretty clear those at the top of the Trust are anti-change. So, consult your members.

During the time of the vote, the Trust, via twitter, linked to several articles about the rebranding.

Things like :-

http://www.sabotagetimes.com/football-s ... l-be-next/

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/other-s ... 6bgs.email

Not a single article was tweeted to provide balance. If you want your members to vote, don't poison the well.

So, let's be blunt. The aim was to get mandate to campaign against the change. Instead that didn't happen and Tim Hartley is in full spin mode.

The majority of members within the Trust do not necessarily rail against the change. The low turnout with regards to voting can't be counted as either being a yes or a no. What it shows is pretty worrying for the Trust if it wants to be taken seriously - namely that people generally aren't interested in engaging even within the Trust.

In a lot of ways the trust has shot itself in it's foot, the Malaysians had all the ammunition they needed to shoot the crucial point of the vote down.

Personally, all ST holders should have been consulted. The Trust aren't special, no better than any other fan. Consultation is just that, consultation.

You seem a pretty level headed guy for a Labour supporter Sludge, are you going to stand for election? It wouldn't be enough to make me join it, but if it has aims to be anywhere close to relevant, it needs more people like you and Keith involved at the top level, imo.

Just another example of the failings of the so called trust. how can you be representative of a club with only 600 odd members.i hate it when the unions say "80% of our members voted for action" , when in reality its only 80% of those who actually bothered to vote. that could mean that out of say 1000 members 200 vote and 80% vote for action. thats not representative at all.
The trust just look like mugs.
Suggestion. first home game trust members hand out leaflets explaining their aims and get members to join. then have a proper ballot and see what happens. needs to be more unity. not just agendas of the chosen few.
democracy. like f**k. smells like a dictatorship to me.
Then again what do i know , nevet been asked.

I spent two hours freezing my ass off handing out leaflets for the trust season before last

but I agree they dont do enough to promote themselves

I am a member of the trust and think its a good idea but its got its failings and things it needs to work on thats for sure

but I think being honest this club has akways been divided ever since I followed it and its one of our worst downfalls ......we all love city but blimey do we argue !

for my part I want us to stay blue and my " protest " will be to do what I always do ....wear my blue top and support the team ....unless its cold then its a coat lol

no intimidation of others with a different point of view is acepttable , offensive banners , its gone too far and the situation is far too serious

its as simple as that

Well said Sludge.

Sludge, I've the utmost respect for you and your views, but this isn't a good day for the Trust.

Figures were, I believed quoted with regards to membership which seemed to be higher than 688 - apologies if it's the case only that number were eligible to vote.

it's pretty clear those at the top of the Trust are anti-change. So, consult your members.

During the time of the vote, the Trust, via twitter, linked to several articles about the rebranding.

Things like :-

http://www.sabotagetimes.com/football-s ... l-be-next/

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/other-s ... 6bgs.email

Not a single article was tweeted to provide balance. If you want your members to vote, don't poison the well.

So, let's be blunt. The aim was to get mandate to campaign against the change. Instead that didn't happen and Tim Hartley is in full spin mode.

The majority of members within the Trust do not necessarily rail against the change. The low turnout with regards to voting can't be counted as either being a yes or a no. What it shows is pretty worrying for the Trust if it wants to be taken seriously - namely that people generally aren't interested in engaging even within the Trust.

In a lot of ways the trust has shot itself in it's foot, the Malaysians had all the ammunition they needed to shoot the crucial point of the vote down.

Personally, all ST holders should have been consulted. The Trust aren't special, no better than any other fan. Consultation is just that, consultation.

You seem a pretty level headed guy for a Labour supporter Sludge, are you going to stand for election? It wouldn't be enough to make me join it, but if it has aims to be anywhere close to relevant, it needs more people like you and Keith involved at the top level, imo.

As a trust member that's why I didn't vote because I only received anti rebranding post .I probably won't rejoin next season