Sorry I didn't see this thread when I started one on this subject today rlhttps://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?f here's my post from there - I'm willing to get involved in legwork to really get this off the ground. Please PM if you are too. Probably the most important issue for the Fans' Forum on Saturday - club ownership and supporter involvement - was only touched on briefly at the end. To his credit Gus said he wanted to see an independent voice of the supporters, and was considering how this could be best achieved. Well simply an independent voice must be established by US, and I'm happy to work with anyone else interested in this to do whatever groundwork necessary to perhaps start the process of setting a Trust up on the day of the first home game next season. From my own perspective, I agree with the comment that was made that we are a club not a brand. In my idealistic world I would see the club being owned by supporters and not one person. David has really delivered for Rugby League in London, and he enjoys the support of us all I'm sure, but for every David Hughes there's ten Des Johnstons! I would see the organisation being setup under the Supporters Direct (www.supporters-direct.org/home.asp) model (this enjoys funding from the RFL) with goals set by the membership when established. These could range from just a voice, board membership, part ownership, or whatever. If you think this is a good idea, and would like to contribute, please fell free to PM me and see if we can get this thing off the ground. One comment at the Forum said that the old Supporters Club still exists because they couldn't get a quorum to wind it up! Let's see if we can start from scratch and make this a success.

Sorry I didn't see this thread when I started one on this subject today rlhttps://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?f here's my post from there - I'm willing to get involved in legwork to really get this off the ground. Please PM if you are too. Probably the most important issue for the Fans' Forum on Saturday - club ownership and supporter involvement - was only touched on briefly at the end. To his credit Gus said he wanted to see an independent voice of the supporters, and was considering how this could be best achieved. Well simply an independent voice must be established by US, and I'm happy to work with anyone else interested in this to do whatever groundwork necessary to perhaps start the process of setting a Trust up on the day of the first home game next season. From my own perspective, I agree with the comment that was made that we are a club not a brand. In my idealistic world I would see the club being owned by supporters and not one person. David has really delivered for Rugby League in London, and he enjoys the support of us all I'm sure, but for every David Hughes there's ten Des Johnstons! I would see the organisation being setup under the Supporters Direct (www.supporters-direct.org/home.asp) model (this enjoys funding from the RFL) with goals set by the membership when established. These could range from just a voice, board membership, part ownership, or whatever. If you think this is a good idea, and would like to contribute, please fell free to PM me and see if we can get this thing off the ground. One comment at the Forum said that the old Supporters Club still exists because they couldn't get a quorum to wind it up! Let's see if we can start from scratch and make this a success.

My view would be that you need to have clear guidelines to start with in terms of what the club [Gus] is requesting that a supporters club/direct/trust have the remit to do and at what level of interaction within the club that organisation would have [if any].

We tried to go down the supporters direct route way back in 2001 with Cliff Spracklen and Sadfish assisting, but ultimately apathy coupled with a healthy distrust of supporters being anywhere near the board [at that time] killed the project before it got started, times have changed perhaps perceptions and supporters buy in have as well, but you need to have the scope set at the outset from the club, before you can then set the model up to work with.

The biggest danger apart from apathy is the perception of supporters not in the trust/SC for whatever reason, as you stand the danger of just being viewed as a mouthpiece for the club [see trust SC threads aplenty on all clubs boards] especially when times are hard either on the playing field or internally financially.

Wish you all the best of luck but would just advise to go in with your eyes wide open and with the agenda being crystal clear, before the natural enthusiasm takes over.

Got to be careful to not create some sort of elitist clique - i.e. look at us, we are part of the supporters club, we are better than you, have more rights etc. All supporters should have the same influence and right to a say in how they think their club is ran.

What is this me agreeing with Dave Lister, we have witnessed this before.

It still concerns me as on the other thread the Trust take over from David Hughes, part of board and have voting rights yes, but then again voting would have to be on a majority of members.

Is the purpose of the group not to pass on the thoughts of the supporters to the club management? Ie formalise a communication medium from the terrace to the boardroom. That’s not exactly a coup is it?

It is for management to decide if they want to action anything or not.

How could that possibly be elitist?

Not really the case for the old SC if anything they bore the brunt of supporters ire [and I wasn't a member] if the club made a decision [plenty of times] that the general supporter base didn't agree with, and then the SC were viewed as being aligned with the clubs ideas, whether consulted upon, or in most cases, not.

I have never met anybody who used to be in the old SC who displayed such an attitude tbh.

As I have already said, get the ground rules and the scope set out clearly from the start, work out what happens if X or Y happens, and most inportantly get the club to define exactly what they want to happen as a result, then it could work for both the club and the general supporters.

It was amoeba celled supporters in the past calling for seats on the board and voting rights while bringing de nada to the table financially which caused some of the previous board members to view "some" supporters as not being the full happy meal.

If supporters wanted to go the supporters direct route, then it's a differerent proposition altogether from a supporters club.

From the thread started this morning Homer I got the impression was not an Independent Supporters Club which I have no problem with, but a Supporters Trust to take over the running of the club and Financing from David Hughes?

This latter option it would surprise me how many fans it would take and monies put in to run the club as David Hughes has and had committed to do over the next few seasons, that is just my personal opinion,perhaps their are some multi millionaires who have been hiding behind a bush here who want to through in millions?

Ideal world and all sports clubs would be owned directly by the fans but the truth is we just don't have enough. We'd need ten times as many as we currently have, and tbf if he had that many then the club wouldn't be struggling so badly. Put that sort of idea to one side and focus on what we, and David Hughes and the club, need in order to push forward.

The heart of it is a way for the fans to put a consensus view to the club with regards to their marketing, their venue, kick of times, merchandising, etc, etc. These are the things it is important for them to know our opinion on. And it seems as if the club, specifically Gus McKay, want this information exchange to improve greatly. Which is a good thing and should be supported.

For me, a Supporters Trusts sets out a much clearer and legally defined process than an old-fashioned supporters club. Trusts need to be very carefully structured - and there is a awful lot of help on offer from the RFL and Supporters Direct (who have their own RL specific officer) - for example it has to be one member one vote, officers are legally elected by members, membership fees are usually set quite low, and various other things too. Quite a lot of supporters clubs have actually switched over to become Trusts in recent years.

I don't really know how many people would be interested in joining, but 1,100 season ticket holders would be a good place to start. Membership fees set at £10 a year would mean £10,000 a year. Perhaps that could be used to sponsor the Academy and age-group teams?

would happily get involved if needed

Good debate so far. I've had one PM but there are people here who have expressed an interest in getting involved. There's no rush on this - merely an opportunity from the discussion at the Fans Forum to start talking about it. Unless there are real objections, I'll kick something off in the next week or so and see where we go from here. Might PM people who've expressed an interest here, if thats OK.
On the wider point of what the body is for - that's for the body to decide! It is not my intention to be involved in an organisation that would undermine the club or sour relationships within the supporters - ultimately I'm sure we'll get the voice we earn and deserve.

The idea that the club asks supporters to establish some sort of committee so it can understand their views seems a bit old fashioned in the age of social media.

.....it would do normally, but given about 40% of the friends of Harlequins RL on facebook are from huddersfield (if we get to 1,000 everyone gets in free.......genius from Carly.....pure genius ) then you're not going to get a correct result.

I would also point out that not EVERYONE is on facebook, twitter, myspace etc...regardless of what you are being told.

Thats not strictly true- isnt it for the club to decide given that is who the body is trying to influence

In the past the volunteers at times seemed to run independantly of what the club direction was which was never going to work