Supporters Board Election Update

B'std HJ, I'd vote yes, just to put you in your box

mind you, I am disenfranchised and not able to vote

I see the voting procedure details have now been announced by our President.

Well, not the actual procedure, just the method for obtaining different options of voting procedure options from a variety of experts in the field.

Unbelievable.

I would take the results with a pinch of salt anyway.

Now it's been turned into an anonymous poll, there is the opportunity for people to make Hairy J look like a total cnut, and he has been warned about his constant put downs of the Pasoti mods already this week.

Greenjock wrote:

there is the opportunity for people to make Hairy J look like a total cnut

I can do that quite easily myself thanks - ask my Dad.

I think it's going to be a postal vote by the look of it. This would entail providing the cost of postage for returned voting slips. Per unit, currently, that's 31p for 2nd class. The slip if it's personalised will probably cost around 5p per unit. There will probably be a standard sheet explaining the terms and conditions included, that's an additional 1p and the envelope it all comes in through your door will be around 1 1/2p if it's a bog standard envelope with nothing printed on it. If it's printed, it'll be around 5p a unit (I suspect it will be) and the return envelope would cost around 1 1/2p. The cost of postage - it'll probably go by business mail as it's too small to hit the bigger Royal Mail discounts - would be 27p to post. They have to enclose it all too - probably around £200 for all of that.

The printing will come in at around 14p per unit x 4,000 = £560 in total
Packing - £200
Postage - £1080

Total would be in the region of £1900

If all 4000 are returned, it'll cost an additional £1240

Potential cost of just getting people to vote would be £3140

Then you've got the counting/recording cost - whoever is doing that.

I might do a proper estimate tomorrow at work during my lunch break as I've very much gone for the cheapest option without any profit margins (in print, put at least 40% on top of what I've quoted for the print and packing).



Then... we have the meetings, the stationery, the expenses (I'd expect if the club are paying for the PASB, they'll be giving these 6 people an expense account) over a course of a year.

It's going to cost a bit - don't the Trust cost the club nothing?

Of course its going to cost the club and it's the expectation of at least one nominee that the club pay for secretarial services ( oo-er missus) etc. Also it was muted that some of the meetings would take place away from Plymouth. Now anyone financially challenge might find that a bit much. I wonder if that thought has put anyone off standing.

I wouldn't be surprised if this cost the club £20k a year minimum to run. Not massive but essentially money wasted considering we already have a Trust. I'm sure they don't cost the club anything in terms of actual cash.

I've asked El Pres
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The vote thread is getting a bit too busy to work out but I'll try.... erm, 6 yes, 4 no votes and 1 not decided

EDIT it is up to 8 votes for yes and 4 for no and 2 undecided.

One person I've not seen debating with the candidates or putting his large tuppence worth in over the PASB election is one Mr Leigh Rapson. Where is that little weasel?

Brief update from the president about the election being independent from the club. Anyone any idea when the election will be?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Nope.

Morning all

For what it's worth, I gave the club an assessment of the costs presented by Electoral Reform Services, to make sure that they were getting the most competitive rate.

This (for my sins) is my area of expertise - and my company currently works closely with ERS on a number of projects, so we know them well.

Their independence, experience and suitability in postal elections is second to none - there can be no doubt that the election will be executed fairly and without concern, if their services are utilised.

Their initial price for a 5k mailing was competitively priced, apart from a few areas where I was able to suggest that a "minimum charge" approach had been taken.

As a result, the club was able to negotiate a small discount from the overall price for printing, production and outward postage - the new cost is well below the estimate quoted above.

The only unknown is the level of response, with a cost per unit for Royal Mail to handle the replies.

The club has done the right thing here - selecting an expert company that is "best in class" for the work.

As a result of this choice, there should be no concerns about the postal election process.

I would have gone with the fella on the other side who said pick the names out of a hat.

John_Lloyd wrote:

Morning all

For what it's worth, I gave the club an assessment of the costs presented by Electoral Reform Services, to make sure that they were getting the most competitive rate.

This (for my sins) is my area of expertise - and my company currently works closely with ERS on a number of projects, so we know them well.

Their independence, experience and suitability in postal elections is second to none - there can be no doubt that the election will be executed fairly and without concern, if their services are utilised.

Their initial price for a 5k mailing was competitively priced, apart from a few areas where I was able to suggest that a "minimum charge" approach had been taken.

As a result, the club was able to negotiate a small discount from the overall price for printing, production and outward postage - the new cost is well below the estimate quoted above.

The only unknown is the level of response, with a cost per unit for Royal Mail to handle the replies.

The club has done the right thing here - selecting an expert company that is "best in class" for the work.

As a result of this choice, there should be no concerns about the postal election process.

What does the ERS say on election spending? We have Tony merrily producing printed election news to advance his cause whereas that cost might be prohibitive to others. Notwithstanding having the time and wherewithall to travel to meaningless friendlies to hand them out.

On a general point and not for you John shouldnt the club at there own volition provide for a level playing field.

Twas ever thus in electioneering.

Look at the US presidential process, which is largely dictated by huge spending on TV and print advertising. The more money you throw at the process, the better your chance of victory.

In this country, the Government will pay the mailing costs for one postal process for any recognised political party - that ensures that minor parties are able to get their message out, even if they are not well-resourced.

We pay for that, through taxation. We should approve of that, for the sake of democracy.

In my view, if a PASB candidate wants to spend money on electioneering, that is their choice. The club should not feel obliged to support each candidate to campaign on an equable basis, or the costs could exceed any perceived benefit to us all.

Further, in my view, there should be no need for such electioneering anyway.

Each PASB candidate should focus their energies on showing how they intend to canvass opinions from the fanbase, how they would seek to collate that into an intelligible perspective, how they would then present that to the club and then, most importantly, report back to the fans that they represent with coherent and meaningful results.

I see little purpose in each candidate setting out their own policy positions on specific topics - beginning their time in the role with a pre-set perspective on such issues is counter-productive and potentially unhelpful.

What is needed, if the PASB is going to be a worthwhile body, is for the representatives to be clear-minded and free of bias - to listen to the facts presented by the club, to garner the opinions presented by the fans and to attempt to develop a synthesis of the two, for the benefit of both.

Almost an empty vessel, if you like, transferring views back and forth.

Otherwise, you may end up with a set of candidates who are divided by policy differentials (of a minor nature, no doubt) who are unable to form a consensus view for the club to respond to - and for nonsense to be the most likely product.

I saw a chart showing the Dartmoor National Park the other day, with a name and a mobile number for about ten Park officers, whose role was to be the first point of contact for any questions or queries about the Park.

That kind of approach would be more welcome and more productive, in my opinion.

I don't see the need for TCH to electioneer? He's a shoe in as he'll have the pasoti vote. I doubt many non-internet fans will vote anyway as there's not a lot of interest in the PASB even on the internet.

I would have thought there'd be an election date by now. It all seems a bit ass about face with the election process only being decided now, weeks after candidates have put themselves forward.

All the delays in establishing the PASB have allowed the club to put forward their recent poor ideas with no fan interaction,so maybe the drawn out process is intentional?

I still think it's a completely daft idea but cannot but feel slighty irked that after 50 years supporting the club I am disenfranchised by not choosing to be a "member" considering Brenty's raison de etre for the whole mish mash was to provide a facility for the 20000 sleeping troops of the Green Army to have their voice represented.

No taxation without representation says I, yet a portion (tiny I hope) of my POTD twenty quid will be used to support something I've had no say in.

Quote :

I saw a chart showing the Dartmoor National Park the other day, with a name and a mobile number for about ten Park officers, whose role was to be the first point of contact for any questions or queries about the Park.

That kind of approach would be more welcome and more productive, in my opinion.

Sounds like John Majors cones hotline. If only someone could think of an appropriate name you could be onto a winner. Set it up with a premium phone line and the club would have the price of a decent strikers little toe in no time at all.

jimmys janner line

John_Lloyd wrote:

Morning all

For what it's worth, I gave the club an assessment of the costs presented by Electoral Reform Services, to make sure that they were getting the most competitive rate.

This (for my sins) is my area of expertise - and my company currently works closely with ERS on a number of projects, so we know them well.

Their independence, experience and suitability in postal elections is second to none - there can be no doubt that the election will be executed fairly and without concern, if their services are utilised.

Their initial price for a 5k mailing was competitively priced, apart from a few areas where I was able to suggest that a "minimum charge" approach had been taken.

As a result, the club was able to negotiate a small discount from the overall price for printing, production and outward postage - the new cost is well below the estimate quoted above.

The only unknown is the level of response, with a cost per unit for Royal Mail to handle the replies.

The club has done the right thing here - selecting an expert company that is "best in class" for the work.

As a result of this choice, there should be no concerns about the postal election process.

Fair enough "best in class" but that's over the odds for me. I could easily produce this job for under £2,800. They really don't need that kind of data integrity for an 'election' such as this. It's very much an insular election and it doesn't have any real effect upon anything other than a football club supported (i.e. people put cash into the club) by 4,000ish people. £5k is pretty steep and there might have been a reduction but it won't be that large a reduction at all - all companies charge too much so they have room to negotiate - it's what we do. All we're talking about here is a mail merge from the data they already have (membership data), numbering of ballot sheets to ensure some form of integrity (this would stop people photocopying them and posting them off in copied envelopes) and printing them on a stock of paper that isn't readily available to the average man on the street. It's hardly the general election is it?

They don't even need to post them. They could simply hand them out at the ground over the first five home games - you take your card up to a booth, they tick your number off, they give you a card and you put your X on it and put it in a secure box. It really doesn't need this kind of massive security.

I can see the PASB costing the club around £25,000 a year to run once they receive a budget - that's not a lot but it would pay for a few trainees. I know what I'd rather have.

In addition, this is going to be done every year while James Brent is around - once they go for the most expensive method of conducting a vote, they can't go back and do something different next year.

All this crap about the club being in good hands isn't true here - this is idiotic.

Hairy

5k is the mailing volume, not the cost.

The ERS cost is lower than your estimate.

The value of having this process carried out by an external organisation with proven experience and integrity - given the prevalence of conspiracy theories and social-media driven suspicions over in-house processes - is priceless.

Are we really even considering an annual budget of £25k for this pointless shambles. Look how many muriels, drums, hats, free lollies and whistles we could get for that!

Looking back to the trust election, I seem to remember receiving the statement from the candidates and rules of election as well as the ballot paper and return envelope - quite a substantial packet.

As for the idea of using booths at home games to distribute voting papers - although cheap I'm afraid it just wouldn't work.

John_Lloyd wrote:

Hairy

5k is the mailing volume, not the cost.

The ERS cost is lower than your estimate.

The value of having this process carried out by an external organisation with proven experience and integrity - given the prevalence of conspiracy theories and social-media driven suspicions over in-house processes - is priceless.

Ahhhh, fair enough. I've re-read your post and I've completely misunderstood. Apologies as you are pretty clear and I'm an idiot. How much cash are we talking?

You'll still get internet conspiracy theories though as Greenjock is still alive.

It still seems massively over inflated for something that only seems of interest to about 25 people.

hairy j wrote:

John_Lloyd wrote:

Hairy

5k is the mailing volume, not the cost.

The ERS cost is lower than your estimate.

The value of having this process carried out by an external organisation with proven experience and integrity - given the prevalence of conspiracy theories and social-media driven suspicions over in-house processes - is priceless.

Ahhhh, fair enough. I've re-read your post and I've completely misunderstood. Apologies as you are pretty clear and I'm an idiot. How much cash are we talking?

You'll still get internet conspiracy theories though as Greenjock is still alive.

It still seems massively over inflated for something that only seems of interest to about 25 people.

I hear on the grapevine that you are actually an alien lizard disguised as an ugly hairy human.

It might bring some integrity to the process which could easily be undone if the supporters groups 'nominate' rather than vote. Though how these groups can scrutinise without publishing membership numbers and rules together with a statement of their financial health is anyone guess.

What is the ERS view on one man five votes?

Greenjock wrote:

hairy j wrote:

John_Lloyd wrote:

Hairy

5k is the mailing volume, not the cost.

The ERS cost is lower than your estimate.

The value of having this process carried out by an external organisation with proven experience and integrity - given the prevalence of conspiracy theories and social-media driven suspicions over in-house processes - is priceless.

Ahhhh, fair enough. I've re-read your post and I've completely misunderstood. Apologies as you are pretty clear and I'm an idiot. How much cash are we talking?

You'll still get internet conspiracy theories though as Greenjock is still alive.

It still seems massively over inflated for something that only seems of interest to about 25 people.

I hear on the grapevine that you are actually an alien lizard disguised as an ugly hairy human.

I take human as a compliment.

I think this whole thing is, to use a massive cliche, a sledgehammer to crack a nut. What are they going to do when they've got just 250 votes to count?

I think there would be a fair bit of arm twisting behind the scenes to make sure at least a few people bother casting a vote.

Then at least it wouldn't be quite so embarrassing, but do the number of votes have to be revealed, or could the winning candidates be named and their share of the vote?