The supporters group that met prior to the home match against Huddersfield Town last week has received a response to its initial contact with Charlton director Katrien Meire.
In her reply, Ms Meire acknowledged the current situation and said that the club was aware that there were concerns among fans and referred to the video released earlier this week.
She indicated a willingness to meet representatives of the group, as well as the supporters' trust, but said that this would not be possible at present because the club's focus is on avoiding relegation.
We welcome Ms Meire’s response and acknowledge that this is a very busy period, with so many games in such a short time. We were also pleased to see M. Duchatelet addressing supporters in his latest video and, although a number of the most relevant topics were not covered in great detail, we believe this kind of communication is extremely important and we hope it will prove to be a regular event.
We agree that the overwhelming priority this season is for Charlton to remain in the Championship and that this will not be affected by the timing of any meeting. However, we hope to open up a positive and constructive dialogue with the new administration at the club in due course and will seek to do so in partnership with all interested parties.
In the meantime, it should go without saying that we will all be supporting the team in their efforts to stay up and we encourage others to do the same!
In the meantime, it should go without saying that we will all be supporting the team in their efforts to stay up and we encourage others to do the same!
Apologies for the tone, Steve - I know you are a Charlton man through and through, but ...
I find this statement incredibly patronising. I don't need yours or any of the G21's encouragement to support the team I've supported through thick and thin for 50 years. I didn't issue veiled threats to RD if he doesn't play ball, I didn't suggest a ST boycott - now softened to a 'strike' (sic).
So you've got the same response from KM as the Trust did - you must be so proud of the progress you've made.
Steve is simply emphasising that the "Oak group" are supporting the team/club and in case they had given any mixed messages, they want everyone to do the same.
ie support the team, the manager and the club & renew your S/Ts etc.
I agree Covered End, I thought Steve was just pointing out that which unites us. It's been, and still is, a difficult time for all of us, but I would suggest that the emphasis and energies should now be concentrated on drawing up a list of questions that supporters would like to see answered. I'm personally not bothered by who asks the questions, it's the answers that interest me
AB why though are you more concerned about RD than TJ and MS and why was there not the need to rally a group as strong as the G21 back then
Firstly, I think there's an assumption that I brought the group together. In fact, I was asked by some other names on the list to take a lead. I said I would only be involved if there was a broad-based group that was so wide it could not reasonably be accused of pursuing a narrow agenda, wanting to damage the club
Rick, do you not in hindsight think that advocating a boycott on season tickets is a direct way of damaging the club?
What I was suggesting, on the morning we learned Powell had been sacked, was a strike - not a boycott. That is, don't buy until we find out more. That would have had no immediate practical damage to the club, because most season tickets are sold in the week leading up to the initial deadline, in this case immediately prior to April 9th. Even if circumstances had meant it commanded widespread support - say Riga had fielded all the January signings and we'd been thrashed by Millwall - it would have done no damage, because people would have signed up later if they wished to buy.
While the season-ticket revenue is important, it only amounts to about £2m, which is less than a fifth of the turnover. Deferring part of that would make very little difference to someone with RD's resources, but it may have got his attention. However, we felt on reflection and as events moved on that it wasn't necessary or appropriate action.
The part of the jigsaw that you are missing is that as far as we were concerned the statement was drawn up in conjunction with the chair of the trust. He was at the meeting and at that stage our assumption was that the trust would sign up to it. In the event he withdrew his name 24 hours later because the trust board as a whole took a different view, which may have been right or wrong, but that's why the idea that it was an attempt to usurp the trust is not a valid one.
What was left was a position where the majority of the trust board, who did not attend the meeting, would have vetoed the views agreed by the group as a whole, including those who are not members of the trust. In my view that would have been daft.
@Airman Brown I'm wondering how this ties in with the Trust's own statement: "...we raised the question with the Oak group as to whether the attempt to get the required dialogue wouldn’t be best pursued under the Trust banner. To our regret, the majority of people at the meeting didn’t agree with that proposal."
It strikes me that the Trust were indeed sympathetic with the need for dialogue on the issues being raised, but felt that the conduit for communication with the owner would be most appropriate through them, rather than through a group 2% the size of its paid membership. Did your group expect the Trust to sign up to it without leading the initiative and/or the comms?
Just thought I would bring this across from the Varney thread as it is nice to have things in the right place
The thing is the questions have already been asked.
Who picks the team ? - The manager.
Are we a feeder club to SL - no. etc etc.
I've asked the questions to Meire and Powell once and Murray twice.
I'm not sure why anyone thinks that they will change the answers already given ?
Anyway, we're going round in circles :-)
I think there are more questions than that, related to how the Staprix business and it's network is supposed to function, and with what objectives. Personally I think that unless we have a better understanding of that, all the answers above will constantly be revisited. There is conflict of interest among parties to this network, everywhere you look.
I'm not the only one who wants to ask that kind of question, however the next step for the Trust is to open up the discussion to the fan base, to hear from them what they think the important questions are. Right now we are discussing among ourselves how best to do it. Personally I would like to see CL directly involved, but that is a decision for the boys, and it would not be the only place, because there are many Trust members who don't read CL. But we will get it going.
Beds, I doubt it makes very much, but imagine anything it does goes into Rick's pocket, which is fair enough considering it takes a lot of hard work to publish it.
Beds, I doubt it makes very much, but imagine anything it does goes into Rick's pocket, which is fair enough considering it takes a lot of hard work to publish it.
I wasn't being critical . Just asking the question.
I think great credit should be handed to the club for their response. If such an approach had been made to TJ and MS or even the Murray ownership, not forgetting the Alwen era we would have been ignored - well done Katriene. Hopefully we can get off the clubs back and focus on all of us supporting the club with the aim of avoiding relegation, before a summer release of the Dogs of war and and a denigrating issue of "Bitter of The Valley"
At £2 a go and selling c. 2,000 copies and the print run costing less than a grand I expect VOTV makes a significant profit. On the other hand the Trust publications and website are free and Trust board members do not get paid. It takes a lot of hard work to run a Trust...1,000 fans pay their fiver to keep it going and a few donations have helped it grow.
But VOTV makes for more varied and enjoyable reading. I also happen to like the longer in depth articles. Good value at £2 and if Rick makes a profit, what's your beef with that?
No problem with people running fanzines - what happened to that recent new launch? The more the merrier! Just saying that some fans have put their efforts into a collective which is owned by fans and retains its profits for more activities and promotion.
Haven't seen it advertised or mentioned on here for the first time since its relaunch so I guess not
Which is the right thing In the current situation
I'd like to know more about the last regime more than the current as it would explain a lot more as to why we find ourselves in the current predicament
Also the guys who had another consortium that was close to getting to meet muzzy and co I'd like to know where they got too and if they are still watching
Maybe the VOTV and the new journo friends who seem to be paying attention to us now could find out
No problem with people running fanzines - what happened to that recent new launch? The more the merrier! Just saying that some fans have put their efforts into a collective which is owned by fans and retains its profits for more activities and promotion.
I'm not sure what this has to do with anything being discussed here, no one forces you to give up your time, just like no one is forced to buy votv.
Haven't seen it advertised or mentioned on here for the first time since its relaunch so I guess not
Which is the right thing In the current situation
I'd like to know more about the last regime more than the current as it would explain a lot more as to why we find ourselves in the current predicament
Also the guys who had another consortium that was close to getting to meet muzzy and co I'd like to know where they got too and if they are still watching
Maybe the VOTV and the new journo friends who seem to be paying attention to us now could find out
But the editor of the VOTV has stated here on another thread that the media arent interested in us :-)
Comments
So does some poor soul have to make tea/ coffee for everyone at once?!
In her reply, Ms Meire acknowledged the current situation and said that the club was aware that there were concerns among fans and referred to the video released earlier this week.
She indicated a willingness to meet representatives of the group, as well as the supporters' trust, but said that this would not be possible at present because the club's focus is on avoiding relegation.
We welcome Ms Meire’s response and acknowledge that this is a very busy period, with so many games in such a short time. We were also pleased to see M. Duchatelet addressing supporters in his latest video and, although a number of the most relevant topics were not covered in great detail, we believe this kind of communication is extremely important and we hope it will prove to be a regular event.
We agree that the overwhelming priority this season is for Charlton to remain in the Championship and that this will not be affected by the timing of any meeting. However, we hope to open up a positive and constructive dialogue with the new administration at the club in due course and will seek to do so in partnership with all interested parties.
In the meantime, it should go without saying that we will all be supporting the team in their efforts to stay up and we encourage others to do the same!
castrust.org/2014/03/charlton-director-miere-dialogue-fans-essential-cafc/
100% CAFC tomorrow and onwards
COYA
It's good to see that KM wasn't having to write two responses and just added names to the email
I find this statement incredibly patronising. I don't need yours or any of the G21's encouragement to support the team I've supported through thick and thin for 50 years. I didn't issue veiled threats to RD if he doesn't play ball, I didn't suggest a ST boycott - now softened to a 'strike' (sic).
So you've got the same response from KM as the Trust did - you must be so proud of the progress you've made.
Steve is simply emphasising that the "Oak group" are supporting the team/club and in case they had given any mixed messages, they want everyone to do the same.
ie support the team, the manager and the club & renew your S/Ts etc.
Spot on imo.
Who picks the team ? - The manager.
Are we a feeder club to SL - no. etc etc.
I've asked the questions to Meire and Powell once and Murray twice.
I'm not sure why anyone thinks that they will change the answers already given ?
Anyway, we're going round in circles :-)
I'm not the only one who wants to ask that kind of question, however the next step for the Trust is to open up the discussion to the fan base, to hear from them what they think the important questions are. Right now we are discussing among ourselves how best to do it. Personally I would like to see CL directly involved, but that is a decision for the boys, and it would not be the only place, because there are many Trust members who don't read CL. But we will get it going.
On the other hand the Trust publications and website are free and Trust board members do not get paid. It takes a lot of hard work to run a Trust...1,000 fans pay their fiver to keep it going and a few donations have helped it grow.
The more the merrier!
Just saying that some fans have put their efforts into a collective which is owned by fans and retains its profits for more activities and promotion.
Haven't seen it advertised or mentioned on here for the first time since its relaunch so I guess not
Which is the right thing In the current situation
I'd like to know more about the last regime more than the current as it would explain a lot more as to why we find ourselves in the current predicament
Also the guys who had another consortium that was close to getting to meet muzzy and co I'd like to know where they got too and if they are still watching
Maybe the VOTV and the new journo friends who seem to be paying attention to us now could find out