Sam Hammam

[lisvaneblue]

From what I can gather from Keith, the invite was out of the blue at short notice. He went along out of curiosity. The meeting was informal. He left the meeting wondering if it was worth it but happy that any formal link between Hammam and the club is now severed. It’s useful to know he is no longer a shareholder . The description of Hammam being just a fan, apparently are his words. In terms of who was there apparently it was only 3 and it does not take much imagination who one of the other 2 might be.

The 'report' from the Trust lacks detail. Reports of meetings usually contain details of venue, attendees, agenda, Q&A etc. It sounds typical Hammam smoke and mirrors and the vagueness of details does nothing for the Trust's credit

[Tuerto]

The 'report' from the Trust lacks detail. Reports of meetings usually contain details of venue, attendees, agenda, Q&A etc. It sounds typical Hammam smoke and mirrors and the vagueness of details does nothing for the Trust's credit

I tend to agree with you, although i don't think that it discredits the trust. I can remember when England sacked Roy Hodgson, and the FA made him do a press conference the day after his sacking. Hodgson commented by saying 'I don't know why i am here' Very true i thought, he was yesterdays news, no longer relevant, same as Hammam. I'm certain that whatever was said could've been conducted over the phone, or preferably not at all. It's no big deal in the scheme of things, but putting out a message of an informal meeting with someone to tell us that he is no longer involved is a bit odd. Just send a text message and save on the fuel.

[the other bob wilson]

The 'report' from the Trust lacks detail. Reports of meetings usually contain details of venue, attendees, agenda, Q&A etc. It sounds typical Hammam smoke and mirrors and the vagueness of details does nothing for the Trust's credit

I genuinely don't get the fuss about this. Now, if Keith had gone to the meeting and had not informed Trust members about it, that would be a different matter, but maybe the reason why there's not a great deal of detail was that it was just an informal get together in which the club was discussed in the way so many of us do when we meet?

I'm surprised by the degree of apparent paranoia Sam Hamman can still provoke among City fans considering that he is now very much yesterday's man.

[stan butler]

I genuinely don't get the fuss about this. Now, if Keith had gone to the meeting and had not informed Trust members about it, that would be a different matter, but maybe the reason why there's not a great deal of detail was that it was just an informal get together in which the club was discussed in the way so many of us do when we meet?

I'm surprised by the degree of apparent paranoia Sam Hamman can still provoke among City fans considering that he is now very much yesterday's man.

There was no need to meet for what has been quoted.
I believe there was more to it. No doubt thinks the trust is another way for him and his minions to get at the club.
Sam was thought to be a yesterdays man in the past only for him to pop up and to demand cash from my club..
I don't think this vague meeting will have done Keith and the trust any favours with the club.
Formal get together? Yeah right

[The Lone Gunman]

There was no need to meet for what has been quoted. I believe there was more to it. No doubt thinks the trust is another way for him and his minions to get at the club.

I think that's nonsense. I doubt Sam Hammam knows much about the Trust or cares about it either. He's known Keith Morgan for something like 16 or 17 years, and knew him long before the Trust existed. He always enjoyed Keith's company, particularly as Keith is a knowledgeable individual and would give him a good grilling regarding the club's financial dealings. The fact that Keith is now Chairman of the Trust is almost certainly of no interest to Sam Hammam.

[lisvaneblue]

I think that's nonsense. I doubt Sam Hammam knows much about the Trust or cares about it either. He's known Keith Morgan for something like 16 or 17 years, and knew him long before the Trust existed. He always enjoyed Keith's company, particularly as Keith is a knowledgeable individual and would give him a good grilling regarding the club's financial dealings. The fact that Keith is now Chairman of the Trust is almost certainly of no interest to Sam Hammam.

If Keith had gone to the meeting as an individual and long time friend of SH that's fine and no one needs to know about. However he went along in his capacity as chair of the Trust and also informed CCFC that he would be going ( that would have gone down well after their payout to Sam).

[The Lone Gunman]

If Keith had gone to the meeting as an individual and long time friend of SH that's fine and no one needs to know about. However he went along in his capacity as chair of the Trust and also informed CCFC that he would be going ( that would have gone down well after their payout to Sam).

Is that a fact? Was Keith invited because he was Chair of the Trust? Was he actually invited in that capacity? Or did he just feel obliged to contact the club and reveal that he was going because he currently holds that position?

[OurManFlint II]

If Keith had gone to the meeting as an individual and long time friend of SH that's fine and no one needs to know about. However he went along in his capacity as chair of the Trust and also informed CCFC that he would be going ( that would have gone down well after their payout to Sam).

You should raise your concerns at the next Trust meeting, have the secretary put it on the agenda and we can then push for a vote of no confidence and how the chair brought the trust in to disrepute. There seems to a few trust members in this thread that will back you, I'm sure as member you will get the necessary signatures.

[cyril evans awaydays]

You should raise your concerns at the next Trust meeting, have the secretary put it on the agenda and we can then push for a vote of no confidence and how the chair brought the trust in to disrepute. There seems to a few trust members in this thread that will back you, I'm sure as member you will get the necessary signatures.

I guess this is a reaction to Lisvane Blues suggestion that the meeting should have been performed like an AGM, which I agree is a little over the top. Nevertheless there is nothing wrong in raising a view in a thread he didn't start that falls a long way short of a vote of confidence.

As a Trust Member, for my part, it is a little disquieting that Hammam is still trying to haunt the battlements like Banquo's ghost. Given his track record his motivation for asking for a meeting is likely to be not totally pure. Even if it was to catch up with an old acquaintance then there would likely be some element of intelligence gathering on his part.

I have no truck with the way this was handled and disclosed. It would be good from the Trust perspective that this is the end rather than a beginning of the relationship.

[lisvaneblue]

You should raise your concerns at the next Trust meeting, have the secretary put it on the agenda and we can then push for a vote of no confidence and how the chair brought the trust in to disrepute. There seems to a few trust members in this thread that will back you, I'm sure as member you will get the necessary signatures.

That suggestion is a bit OTT to be honest. I and others are making the point that the Chair attended the meeting on behalf of the Trust and then published a vague report about it without the usual detail contained in Trust feedback.
It's proving to be another example of the sort of dissent and chaos that SH can cause amongst supporters, then walk away while we try to sort it out.