Maybe it's because TJ and MS owned ONE CLUB and Roland owns a NETWORK OF CLUBS and therefore the concerns regarding where we fit in with this and what is deemed success for Charlton Athletic is a question that wasn't even required to be asked of the previous owners as they only owned ONE CLUB.
I don't understand why no-one seems to understand this. It has nothing to do with Chris Powell. The above question would still be of equal importance if he was still in the job.
I think the constant ignoring of the facts and endless innuendo that somehow this is by a pro-Powell group who are "hiding" information is exactly the reason why it was the right decision for the G21 to not engage in this discussion on here.
There are several Charlton related prominent websites, as well as blogs. Lots of different viewpoints are out there, and some of those internet presences would not sit easily together. It is accepted that such a phenomena exists as understandable, right and proper even. There are likely to be Charlton supporters who visit several Charlton internet sites, not just the one. The excellent Hub on the Charlton Trust website has easy access to loads of them across the spectrum.
The Trust includes those sites and blogs in their 'Hub' because it is recognised that what unites everybody is a care for and an interest in and a love for Charlton.
We accept the diversity.
It seems to be harder to accept aspects of the diversity amongst the organic Charlton 'activists' old and new. It is really quite impressive those number of people who will get off their arses and do something that is not so internet dependent
In no particular order we have the guys who do the commentary and Charlton live stuff, the groups who work on the memorial garden, who steward coaches, who organise the train travel, who run satellite branches for supporters with invited guests, who found museums, who work so hard for the Trust, who write print and sell publications, who raise funds, who create groupings when worried about what is going on, who work for Valley Gold, folk who work voluntarily within the community activities, even idiots like myself who will turn up to scrape ice in order to try to get a match on. I have probably not mentioned loads of other stuff too.
I reference all those people because I recognise that what unites everybody is a care for and an interest in and a love for Charlton.
I accept that kind of diversity amongst the activists, just as much as I accept the diversity on the internet. More (ought to?) unite us than divide us, and there is more to be gained not by seeking a common enemy, but by having a common aspiration.
I'm not surprised that the new 21 group only wants to announce its existence at the current time, and does not want to enter into a detailed debate on this or any other website. Any such debate would simply get bogged down in arguments with some fans who are unhappy because they feel that they are being excluded and others who fully support the activities of the new regime. This would be time consuming and pointless for everyone.
While a conflict of interest may develop (and so departures may be appropriate), for the time-being I would not wish to see member of G21 who is also involved with CAS Trust stand aside from either body. It is (hopefully) under their auspices that both parties (it seems that it is only one that needs persuading) may be brought to realise the benefits of co-operation and speaking with one voice.
Our previous owners did absolutely none of this over the past year or so yet i don't recall any groups being formed or demands for people to hold back on renewing season tickets at any point.
I think the fact one board kept Chris Powell, the other sacked him, has something to do with it.
Suspect it's more to do with who was employed by the club at that time, but not now. It's a question of pissing into the tent, rather than out of it.
I think the constant ignoring of the facts and endless innuendo that somehow this is by a pro-Powell group who are "hiding" information is exactly the reason why it was the right decision for the G21 to not engage in this discussion on here.
What 'facts' are these then?
Certainly not "the group is not intended to be exclusive. An invitation has been extended to Charlton Life, members of the Fans’ Forum and others with an Addicks internet presence and all concerned want to proceed without factionalism or internal politics. Any other supporters’ groups are welcome to participate too", as it met by invitation only.
As I understand it, katrin emailed Airman today. She has basically asked them to let them focus on the remainder of the season and the relegation battle and at the end of the season they will sit down with the G21 and discuss their issues. Not revealing my source but I'm sure any of the G21 can confirm this.
As I understand it, katrin emailed Airman today. She has basically asked them to let them focus on the remainder of the season and the relegation battle and at the end of the season they will sit down with the G21 and discuss their issues. Not revealing my source but I'm sure any of the G21 can confirm this.
Isn't that the response the trust have received? There must be a template floating about that any group can get a meet.
They must have done. Definitely said in the statement that they never wanted us to win again. Definitely said they didn't like Riga. Definitely said they wanted Duchatelet out. Yep, that's definitely what "constructive and positive dialogue with the owner" means.
They must have done. Definitely said in the statement that they never wanted us to win again. Definitely said they didn't like Riga. Definitely said they wanted Duchatelet out. Yep, that's definitely what "constructive and positive dialogue with the owner" means.
Definitely said they would demand a meeting with the board, definitely said there would be a public meeting in April if there wasn't
I've been out of it for a while so have only just ploughed through this thread.
I speak only as a fiver paid Trust member (second time around).
There are are a number of supporters' groups and the Trust quite properly liaises with those groups. This 'Group of 21/ Oak Group is just another new group albeit one with an extremely distinguished cast list in Charlton's recent history! The fact that 2 or 3 Trust Board members are signed up in their own personal capacity is neither here nor there at this stage. If in the fullness of time a conflict of interest arises between The Trust and the agenda of the 'Oak Group' then those individual Board members will have a choice to make but that is not yet.
Is it not possible for 'Oak Group' members to also be members of the Trust? How do we know they are not? I'm a Trust member but would that preclude me from joining, say, Bromley Addicks? What's the difference in principle other than the distinguished nature of the personalities involved?
There are legitimate concerns about the future direction of our beloved Club and this 'Oak Group' with the contacts it has could help the Trust represent us even better than it is doing already if the main players are willing to work together and communicate.
Two or three Trust board members involved in a personal capacity is a promising start.
I don't know any of the people involved personally but I sense this is a final throw of the dice (for them).
For the past 20 years or so, a small subset of fans have 'had the ear' of important people at the club, from Boardroom to bench.
Many earned that right through their valuable work with the Valley Party or VOTV. Some even worked for the club and no doubt did some positive things.
However over the past few years, the incumbents have gradually made way for new faces.
With Powell now gone, only Murray clings on from the 'old guard' and he may well not have long left.
So in short these fans no longer have access and with it goes any influence.
I think Duchatelet can safely and politely ignore them.
With today's media Roland Duchatelet appears to be sending a monthly message direct to the fans - the first was pay per view FFS and the next was edited by the BBC so he has gone direct today as per another thread. With the signing of Obika and tonight's result I doubt he sees the need to spend time talking to a group with no mandate nor membership. I have followed this thread with interest and this latest post can be added to a long line of considered posts giving insight. I wonder what to make of the situation including the allegations on this site that there might be person or persons unknown orchestrating a media campaign against our club? (please note that these views are not necessarily those of the Trust board)
I don't know any of the people involved personally but I sense this is a final throw of the dice (for them).
For the past 20 years or so, a small subset of fans have 'had the ear' of important people at the club, from Boardroom to bench.
Many earned that right through their valuable work with the Valley Party or VOTV. Some even worked for the club and no doubt did some positive things.
However over the past few years, the incumbents have gradually made way for new faces.
With Powell now gone, only Murray clings on from the 'old guard' and he may well not have long left.
So in short these fans no longer have access and with it goes any influence.
I think Duchatelet can safely and politely ignore them.
This is how I see it as well. Changing of the guard and loss of influence. Not saying they do not have genuine concerns but the timing of this statement is bizarre and if they actually listened to what was coming out of the club (which is so much more than the previous owners) then maybe they will find their answers. Not that some will believe either way. For me right now the focus should be on togetherness and pulling our club away form the relegation zone. Give them time in the same way that Powell was given time before the title winning season. Let us see what the summer brings.
I don't know any of the people involved personally but I sense this is a final throw of the dice (for them).
For the past 20 years or so, a small subset of fans have 'had the ear' of important people at the club, from Boardroom to bench.
Many earned that right through their valuable work with the Valley Party or VOTV. Some even worked for the club and no doubt did some positive things.
However over the past few years, the incumbents have gradually made way for new faces.
With Powell now gone, only Murray clings on from the 'old guard' and he may well not have long left.
So in short these fans no longer have access and with it goes any influence.
I think Duchatelet can safely and politely ignore them.
Maybe so, and change is not always a bad thing - I'm with you there.
But if this group are have been so closely connected to the club, surely there's some value to be found in their input? Especially if there's not many left with any longstanding connections to Charlton!
I don't think either his or Matt's commitment and passion for the club can be underestimated though?
(I don't know Matt Wright by the way).
Let's not resort to tabloid style smears, this is pathetic ("he's not even a Charlton fan!!!!")
Not a smear at all......just a fact, unlike a lot of the unfounded tripe and hysterics in the last week. I have met him and he supports Leeds.....can't see why he would be vaguely interested in Charlton since his employment ceased.
The response from Katrien to both the Trust and the 'Oak' group has been the same as far as I know. It goes along the lines of we're busy now with the fight against relegation, the video release yesterday will face some of the fans concerns, but will talk at some unspecified time in the future.
Comments
I don't understand why no-one seems to understand this. It has nothing to do with Chris Powell. The above question would still be of equal importance if he was still in the job.
I think the constant ignoring of the facts and endless innuendo that somehow this is by a pro-Powell group who are "hiding" information is exactly the reason why it was the right decision for the G21 to not engage in this discussion on here.
The Trust includes those sites and blogs in their 'Hub' because it is recognised that what unites everybody is a care for and an interest in and a love for Charlton.
We accept the diversity.
It seems to be harder to accept aspects of the diversity amongst the organic Charlton 'activists' old and new. It is really quite impressive those number of people who will get off their arses and do something that is not so internet dependent
In no particular order we have the guys who do the commentary and Charlton live stuff, the groups who work on the memorial garden, who steward coaches, who organise the train travel, who run satellite branches for supporters with invited guests, who found museums, who work so hard for the Trust, who write print and sell publications, who raise funds, who create groupings when worried about what is going on, who work for Valley Gold, folk who work voluntarily within the community activities, even idiots like myself who will turn up to scrape ice in order to try to get a match on. I have probably not mentioned loads of other stuff too.
I reference all those people because I recognise that what unites everybody is a care for and an interest in and a love for Charlton.
I accept that kind of diversity amongst the activists, just as much as I accept the diversity on the internet. More (ought to?) unite us than divide us, and there is more to be gained not by seeking a common enemy, but by having a common aspiration.
Certainly not "the group is not intended to be exclusive. An invitation has been extended to Charlton Life, members of the Fans’ Forum and others with an Addicks internet presence and all concerned want to proceed without factionalism or internal politics. Any other supporters’ groups are welcome to participate too", as it met by invitation only.
There must be a template floating about that any group can get a meet.
No point holding our breath really is there
But you'll get a teaser for free
Most of it will be based on varneys press release
Katrien should have ignored them like they've ignored this thread.
For the past 20 years or so, a small subset of fans have 'had the ear' of important people at the club, from Boardroom to bench.
Many earned that right through their valuable work with the Valley Party or VOTV. Some even worked for the club and no doubt did some positive things.
However over the past few years, the incumbents have gradually made way for new faces.
With Powell now gone, only Murray clings on from the 'old guard' and he may well not have long left.
So in short these fans no longer have access and with it goes any influence.
I think Duchatelet can safely and politely ignore them.
I speak only as a fiver paid Trust member (second time around).
There are are a number of supporters' groups and the Trust quite properly liaises with those groups. This 'Group of 21/ Oak Group is just another new group albeit one with an extremely distinguished cast list in Charlton's recent history! The fact that 2 or 3 Trust Board members are signed up in their own personal capacity is neither here nor there at this stage. If in the fullness of time a conflict of interest arises between The Trust and the agenda of the 'Oak Group' then those individual Board members will have a choice to make but that is not yet.
Is it not possible for 'Oak Group' members to also be members of the Trust? How do we know they are not? I'm a Trust member but would that preclude me from joining, say, Bromley Addicks? What's the difference in principle other than the distinguished nature of the personalities involved?
There are legitimate concerns about the future direction of our beloved Club and this 'Oak Group' with the contacts it has could help the Trust represent us even better than it is doing already if the main players are willing to work together and communicate.
Two or three Trust board members involved in a personal capacity is a promising start.
With the signing of Obika and tonight's result I doubt he sees the need to spend time talking to a group with no mandate nor membership.
I have followed this thread with interest and this latest post can be added to a long line of considered posts giving insight.
I wonder what to make of the situation including the allegations on this site that there might be person or persons unknown orchestrating a media campaign against our club?
(please note that these views are not necessarily those of the Trust board)
But if this group are have been so closely connected to the club, surely there's some value to be found in their input? Especially if there's not many left with any longstanding connections to Charlton!
I don't think either his or Matt's commitment and passion for the club can be underestimated though?
(I don't know Matt Wright by the way).
Let's not resort to tabloid style smears, this is pathetic ("he's not even a Charlton fan!!!!")
Shouts to secretary. "Get me Peter and the squilionares on the phone.NOW!"