Tell you what, Rick will have plenty of people on here to write a reference for him for the future!
Trying to stay out of this myself but finding it increasingly difficult the longer it goes on as some good posts and opinions are being drowned out by condescending over bearing repeated opinion, however, I tend to sit on the DRF/Addickted/RalphMilne side of opinion on things. (I think I've picked the right 3 people who have helped balance this 10 page epic thread which, rightly or wrongly, is a tribute to Rick Everitt!)
I dont think anyone is or can question the work that Rick has done for the club in the past, that can never be erased, but also, as I've mentioned before, a lot of the comments on here are based on opinion. We dont know what the office is like on a day to day basis and who does what and how things operate. Who is good at their job, and who isn't, we dont know the club's strategy and 3 year plan for the future, the plan for existing staff members, and the revised operation of the club under the new owners when they came in to the Club. I also dont believe that we 'deserve' to know. Yes, it would be nice, but we're kidding ourselves if we thought that under the old owners we knew. I recall not too long ago whinging and moaning fans wondering why the club never told us anything, why we were always last to find out about anything etc
We dont know why people left, we dont know who was sacked, who left of their own accord, who got booted. All we know is, people say they know people that know. And others are happy to go along with that. We dont know the plan for the future either, which I think is unsettling the majority, but like others have pointed out, we have never really known what our plan for the future is, when we were owned by 'those we trusted'.
These guys haven't done anything yet to prove that they cannot be trusted except for disrupt the structure of the club, which as yet, hasn't been detrimental in its effect (I know it's early days) but before we have the premature talk of ending support for the club, (really?!) I agree that everyone should stay on the side of caution and be aware that blowing hot air around amongst yourselves on this forum really isn't helping anyone, it is fuelling a hysteria. next time something happens at the club, opinions from this thread will be taken and turned into fact and repeated until people believe it and start losing the plot.
I guess if you want to do something constructive with your hot air and theories, go to the trust meetings and turn it into something positive for the future.
A thought provoking perspective from someone that has actually worked for the Club albeit under a different regime.
can you do that in the Knight Rider voice over type voice? I saw a Kit car driving up Upper Wickham Lane the other day, no sign of the Hoff though..
I take on board your view Suzi, which i think raises fair points.
What i don't like is that when someone (for example) like say myself, Prague, NLA etc gives a point of view suggesting they have certain concerns it gets interpreted as doom-mongering, creating 'hysteria' etc.
Its a discussion forum, an equal platform to discuss, debate put forward views and offer an opposing view.
That's not creating hysteria, that's good healthy debate. Any opposing view to what i believe i welcome as it makes my challenge my opinion. Questions are being put up and debated. This is how a community forum should work.
Amongst everything though, never get away from the key point: Everyone on this thread wants the best for the club. Where we all differ is how we think that can be achieved.
Managements change, the culture of an organisation changes and roles and relationships change with it. People find more conflicts develop in their working life and respond to that by resisting, then changing, being removed or leaving. There is clearly a culture change taking place now which began around 20 months ago, and the new culture is yet to be clear to us, the supporters of the club they control, but increasingly looks like a small/medium corporate model, with the opportunities for little men trying to look big that go along with that. Often the only way for little men to look big is to use coercive management models. That's when whole cohorts of staff begin to go. That's what this looks like to me.
fair enough but then just make them redundant instead of making their positions untenable or sacking them.
I have been a member for a while but never posted (except on one unrelated thread) but reading this thread and the previous ones on a similar topic I have decided to chip in my thoughts. The main reason being is I sold my business 2 and half years ago and agreed to carry on working for the new owners (kept a few shares in the new business) and feel my experience is probably similar to what is happening at board level inside CAFC.
During the DD and “getting to know you phase” of the purchase of my company the new owners where very open and convincing that they had the best interests of the business and staff and that we would be embarking on an exciting journey for everyone.
Since then, most of the senior managers at the time of purchase and also a fellow business partner have been removed and replaced with people either from the new regime or who had links to it.
Also the new owners were from a business background not directly linked to my old business so I have spent a lot of time trying to educate them to the various complications that working in my sector involves. Unfortunately they have doggedly refused to take these on board and over recent months have tried more and more to implement their ways of working.
Hopefully the parallels with CAFC are obvious but I am sure if you ask the new owners of my business they will have 100 reasons why they want to do things their way and that me being part of the previous regime is seen in their eyes as a block to improvement.
I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are on but to me it seems the new owners of CAFC followed the route above and now the honeymoon period is over and they have their feet fully under the table are imposing a management structure and working practises that they are more comfortable with.
Another thing to note when my business was sold is that an over estimation of the future earning potential of the business and underestimation of the problems the business had took place to get the maximum value. I would suggest this is pretty common practice and why purchasers carry out due diligence but it can lead to resentment if any of the old regime is left in place when these issues come to light.
I am sure people will point out that a football business is like no other and so the above is not relevant but to me it seemed worthwhile posting and I hope a few others on here agree.
I take on board your view Suzi, which i think raises fair points.
What i don't like is that when someone (for example) like say myself, Prague, NLA etc gives a point of view suggesting they have certain concerns it gets interpreted as doom-mongering, creating 'hysteria' etc.
Its a discussion forum, an equal platform to discuss, debate put forward views and offer an opposing view.
That's not creating hysteria, that's good healthy debate. Any opposing view to what i believe i welcome as it makes my challenge my opinion. Questions are being put up and debated. This is how a community forum should work.
Amongst everything though, never get away from the key point: Everyone on this thread wants the best for the club. Where we all differ is how we think that can be achieved.
I dont use the term doom-mongering as I dont believe that is fair and not what you are doing, but I do admit that I feel at times it creates a hysteria (which can be positive or negative). I feel like you personally are defensive and to some extent sensitive to those who offer an alternative stance on the debate and therefore generalise that all of those people who disagree with you therefore are accusing you of doom-mongering, which again, isn't true in every case, words used to describe opposing views are more varied than positive and negative, or head in the sand/ostrich or doom-mongoring. I do recall a flurry of posts further up about 'ostriches' so it isn't just one way name-calling if thats what you want to call it.
Also, whilst we're talking about it, I personally, don't feel that certain people are adding anything to this particular debate as everytime a different poster offers their own opinion, or questions something, the same person responds in a lengthy condescending manor quoting history in a higher standard of vocabulary that I (and perhaps some others) could only dream of, which has what has discouraged me from adding my opinion before.
The only reason I felt I had to pipe up was because I saw a window of opportunity to get a point across before it got shot down with long words. I know that may seem a little unfair, and I'm going to step back out of this debate again, as I've said my bit, dont want it to get personal, and have nothing different to add at this moment in time and dont feel I need to keep repeating myself.
Having read all this and the previous SK thread I still fail to understand where the conviction that the new owners have 'screwed up' the running of the club comes from? The only FACTS we seem to have are that they brought in a manger who got us promoted, strengthened the academy, put together a squad that would get promotion and provide a core for the following season; and "sack" two of the senior management team (the manner of leaving is still debatable but I shall go with the popular conception). Oh and "probably" suffered a cash flow crisis in July - the same as most other football clubs, and certainly the same as CAFC in prevous seasons.
Can someone point out what other FACTS I have missed?
And can someone also point out which of these things hasn't happened in previous seasons? As far as I can tell, the only negatives (the laying off of staff) has indeed happened very recently, so why are they the devils?
I dont use the term doom-mongering as I dont believe that is fair and not what you are doing, but I do admit that I feel at times it creates a hysteria (which can be positive or negative). I feel like you personally are defensive and to some extent sensitive to those who offer an alternative stance on the debate and therefore generalise that all of those people who disagree with you therefore are accusing you of doom-mongering, which again, isn't true in every case, words used to describe opposing views are more varied than positive and negative, or head in the sand/ostrich or doom-mongoring. I do recall a flurry of posts further up about 'ostriches' so it isn't just one way name-calling if thats what you want to call it.
Good first post Dexter and it has thrown some light on what happens when a business gets sold.
Welcome to the forum
Seconded, and while I think there are some specifics to a football business, everything you've described is potentially highly pertinent to any club takeover
I suppose a future 'fact' to look out for will be attendances, and if they improve. Would sustaining the present level of attendances justify actions within the club, or will the actions only be justified if there are improvements all round similar to the footballing improvements of last season?
Good post dexter, what you have just said is exactly what is happening at the moment, the new owners are changing the club to how they want it and what personnel they want in each role, out with the old in with the new. Like sorting through the wardrobe and clearing out what doesn't fit your new appearance.
The Tuckman model (forming, norming, etc) is not about cultue change.
Its a very good model for getting teams up and working effectively and quickly while focusing them on corporate objectives.
Shame is CAFC snr team seems to be in the fifth stage - mourning.
Stick to the Health and Saftey Addickted and leave the management bollocks to me : - )
Corporate CAFC's senior management team is small enough to be considered subject to this model (which, from my distant memory, has little empirical evidence behind it) and I would guess that they're very much in the storming phase. Management theory suggests that teams should led through each of the stages as quickly as possible so as to get to the final, performing, stage. Whilst not greatly proven I agree with Henry that it's a good model to manage to.
Trouble is, all the great leadership in the world is unlikely to get us through the storming stage - more some herbert turning up with a lorry load of cash
I'm not convinced ... in fact I'm fairly certain ... that we will not get any detailed info about what has happened until at least October, if even then.
Are the board working against our best interests? I've no idea, but if they want to sell the club ... which ultimately they do ... then they will want a sustainable, attractive and profitable going concern in order to attract investors and buyers ... presumably that would be good for us in the short-term. Then, of course, we get new owners and 'Mysterons episode 2' starts.
I am concerned that Rick has gone ... but I would really like to know the full story before I get worried about the future of the club ... for the time being and as mentioned by others ... I will be joining the Trust and seeing what we can do as a fan base.
So to summarise with apologies in advance to the three persons named
Theory 1 or the NorthstandSteve "Comfort Blanket" Theory.
There is no problem. A few staff members are creating a storm in a teacup because the old managers they prefer working for have gone and they now have no protection/comfort blanket from the hard nosed business men who have come in and made and are making changes. All is OK, we went up so button it.
Theory 2 or the Brunello "it's not personal, it's business" theory
There may be or have been cash flow issues over the summer but that is common to many businesses of all kinds. Changes in ownership and management were expected and planned for. They have done well so far so let the new people get on with it, it's business.
Theory 3 or the Seth Plum "Armeggedon Time" Theory.
It's bad, very bad. The motives of the new board as suspect and without Cash's cash or Varney guidance we are up s*** creek without a paddle. Bills remain unpaid and tensions in the camp are only likely to increase. Varney and Kavanagh left on points of principal, unhappy with how Slater and Jimenez do business
Where a combination of some nous, some money, some juggling, mixed with some ballsy showboating, persuasive charm, a bit of money where your mouth is, poor judgement, brinkmanship, not wanting to lose face, lack of research, flying by the seat of the pants, distance management, hasty decision making, good luck and gambling, and the expectations of cargo cultists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult), leads to goodness knows where.
Comments
What i don't like is that when someone (for example) like say myself, Prague, NLA etc gives a point of view suggesting they have certain concerns it gets interpreted as doom-mongering, creating 'hysteria' etc.
Its a discussion forum, an equal platform to discuss, debate put forward views and offer an opposing view.
In this thread alone, yourself, DRF, RCT, Bankok Dave, Chrispy51, killerandflash, Off It, bertpalmer, Rob, eaststandmike, Morterician, queensland addick, Glasshalffull, southampton addick, Floyd Montana, Exiled Addick, Greenhithe Red, Bankok Addick, Southend Addick, charente addick, Ralphmilnesgut, wheresmyticket, boggsy.
That's not creating hysteria, that's good healthy debate. Any opposing view to what i believe i welcome as it makes my challenge my opinion. Questions are being put up and debated. This is how a community forum should work.
Amongst everything though, never get away from the key point: Everyone on this thread wants the best for the club. Where we all differ is how we think that can be achieved.
Its a very good model for getting teams up and working effectively and quickly while focusing them on corporate objectives.
Shame is CAFC snr team seems to be in the fifth stage - mourning.
Stick to the Health and Saftey Addickted and leave the management bollocks to me : - )
During the DD and “getting to know you phase” of the purchase of my company the new owners where very open and convincing that they had the best interests of the business and staff and that we would be embarking on an exciting journey for everyone.
Since then, most of the senior managers at the time of purchase and also a fellow business partner have been removed and replaced with people either from the new regime or who had links to it.
Also the new owners were from a business background not directly linked to my old business so I have spent a lot of time trying to educate them to the various complications that working in my sector involves. Unfortunately they have doggedly refused to take these on board and over recent months have tried more and more to implement their ways of working.
Hopefully the parallels with CAFC are obvious but I am sure if you ask the new owners of my business they will have 100 reasons why they want to do things their way and that me being part of the previous regime is seen in their eyes as a block to improvement.
I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are on but to me it seems the new owners of CAFC followed the route above and now the honeymoon period is over and they have their feet fully under the table are imposing a management structure and working practises that they are more comfortable with.
Another thing to note when my business was sold is that an over estimation of the future earning potential of the business and underestimation of the problems the business had took place to get the maximum value. I would suggest this is pretty common practice and why purchasers carry out due diligence but it can lead to resentment if any of the old regime is left in place when these issues come to light.
I am sure people will point out that a football business is like no other and so the above is not relevant but to me it seemed worthwhile posting and I hope a few others on here agree.
Welcome to the forum
Also, whilst we're talking about it, I personally, don't feel that certain people are adding anything to this particular debate as everytime a different poster offers their own opinion, or questions something, the same person responds in a lengthy condescending manor quoting history in a higher standard of vocabulary that I (and perhaps some others) could only dream of, which has what has discouraged me from adding my opinion before.
The only reason I felt I had to pipe up was because I saw a window of opportunity to get a point across before it got shot down with long words. I know that may seem a little unfair, and I'm going to step back out of this debate again, as I've said my bit, dont want it to get personal, and have nothing different to add at this moment in time and dont feel I need to keep repeating myself.
Having read all this and the previous SK thread I still fail to understand where the conviction that the new owners have 'screwed up' the running of the club comes from?
The only FACTS we seem to have are that they brought in a manger who got us promoted, strengthened the academy, put together a squad that would get promotion and provide a core for the following season; and "sack" two of the senior management team (the manner of leaving is still debatable but I shall go with the popular conception). Oh and "probably" suffered a cash flow crisis in July - the same as most other football clubs, and certainly the same as CAFC in prevous seasons.
Can someone point out what other FACTS I have missed?
And can someone also point out which of these things hasn't happened in previous seasons? As far as I can tell, the only negatives (the laying off of staff) has indeed happened very recently, so why are they the devils?
THIS.
Hopefully, everybody is wisening up a lot more now.
Trouble is, all the great leadership in the world is unlikely to get us through the storming stage - more some herbert turning up with a lorry load of cash
I'm not convinced ... in fact I'm fairly certain ... that we will not get any detailed info about what has happened until at least October, if even then.
Are the board working against our best interests? I've no idea, but if they want to sell the club ... which ultimately they do ... then they will want a sustainable, attractive and profitable going concern in order to attract investors and buyers ... presumably that would be good for us in the short-term. Then, of course, we get new owners and 'Mysterons episode 2' starts.
I am concerned that Rick has gone ... but I would really like to know the full story before I get worried about the future of the club ... for the time being and as mentioned by others ... I will be joining the Trust and seeing what we can do as a fan base.
Theory 1 or the NorthstandSteve "Comfort Blanket" Theory.
There is no problem. A few staff members are creating a storm in a teacup because the old managers they prefer working for have gone and they now have no protection/comfort blanket from the hard nosed business men who have come in and made and are making changes. All is OK, we went up so button it.
Theory 2 or the Brunello "it's not personal, it's business" theory
There may be or have been cash flow issues over the summer but that is common to many businesses of all kinds. Changes in ownership and management were expected and planned for. They have done well so far so let the new people get on with it, it's business.
Theory 3 or the Seth Plum "Armeggedon Time" Theory.
It's bad, very bad. The motives of the new board as suspect and without Cash's cash or Varney guidance we are up s*** creek without a paddle. Bills remain unpaid and tensions in the camp are only likely to increase. Varney and Kavanagh left on points of principal, unhappy with how Slater and Jimenez do business
You pay your money and you takes your pick.
LLL&BH
Where a combination of some nous, some money, some juggling, mixed with some ballsy showboating, persuasive charm, a bit of money where your mouth is, poor judgement, brinkmanship, not wanting to lose face, lack of research, flying by the seat of the pants, distance management, hasty decision making, good luck and gambling, and the expectations of cargo cultists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult), leads to goodness knows where.