Appreciate Airman posting those videos, good to watch myself, agreed with a lot of the points made, all seemed very constructive.
Had a bit of a shock to suddenly see my Dad on the mic,he did not mention he spoke, he was the guy with the beard on the balcony who made the slightly rambling speech about the what makes us fans and the need for a creative way of showing our issues or protests(would rather use a better word) towards the current way the club is run.
A lot of those who attended last night were there out of sheer curiosity so don’t get carried away with numbers. The club is now being run as a business and those that had a say in the ‘old’ days are p....d off that they are no longer involved/party to the decision making process. The majority are only interested in team performance and not the politics. If RD is not interested in the Club he seems to be investing in it so get behind the team. As for the accolades, re Airman’s performance at the meeting, public speaking has always been his forte and has been beneficial in the past but some of us have moved on we are back at the Valley and things are a lot more positive than they used to be.
A lot of those who attended last night were there out of sheer curiosity so don’t get carried away with numbers. The club is now being run as a business and those that had a say in the ‘old’ days are p....d off that they are no longer involved/party to the decision making process. The majority are only interested in team performance and not the politics. If RD is not interested in the Club he seems to be investing in it so get behind the team. As for the accolades, re Airman’s performance at the meeting, public speaking has always been his forte and has been beneficial in the past but some of us have moved on we are back at the Valley and things are a lot more positive than they used to be.
"The club is now being run as a business." It always has been. This is a meaningless comment repeated frequently as if it contains some deep and persuasive truth. The point is that the business is now being run badly and in a way that will undermine itself.
A lot of those who attended last night were there out of sheer curiosity so don’t get carried away with numbers.
I don't think anyone is getting carried away. You act as if people are excited that things are going wrong.
It's undeniable that everyone who was there was there because they care about Charlton Athletic. Not everyone was anti-RD (having watched the video) but the online responses that were read out mid-meeting were a good sample of the general feeling: 29 people contacted the trust to say they were worried, while only 2 contacted to say that they were not.
Which is exactly what some people are worried about, "run as a business" is a by-phrase for running without heart. There is no real soul or affinity between the club and the supporters and as things stand running the club as a business isn't even bringing success on the pitch. And personally I've lost confidence that any of this will change with the current people in charge.
and those that had a say in the ‘old’ days are p....d off that they are no longer involved/party to the decision making process.
That's your personal opinion. Over the past 18-24 months I was - looking from the outside - inclined to agree at certain critical points. I do however now believe that "those that had a say in the old days" have only the best interests of the team and the club at heart.
The majority are only interested in team performance and not the politics. If RD is not interested in the Club he seems to be investing in it so get behind the team.
I completely agree that venting frustrations at the players does nothing to help. During the 90 minutes, there needs to be support in the stands for those who are trying to play for the shirt and for us.
As for being interested in team performance rather than the politics, I suggest you check the videos posted. When asked who would still like to take action even if the team avoided relegation this season, a large majority of those present raised their hand. This isn't going to go away with a few quick wins between now and May.
As for the accolades, re Airman’s performance at the meeting, public speaking has always been his forte and has been beneficial in the past but some of us have moved on we are back at the Valley and things are a lot more positive than they used to be.
Not sure why AB being a good public speaker should in some way discredit his message.
Your final point is an argument I've seen a lot over the past weeks. Of course, the club is in a better position than they have been in the past but that doesn't mean that what we are currently experiencing isn't worth our concern.
"The club is now being run as a business." It always has been. This is a meaningless comment repeated frequently as if it contains some deep and persuasive truth. The point is that the business is now being run badly and in a way that will undermine itself.
You and others believe (you state it as fact) that CAFC is currently being run badly - this is based on a lack of understanding/strategic transparency (RD fault I agree but he doesn't have to tell us). The secret of every successful business with any chance of longevity is gradual and sustainable growth with an eye on costs at all times.
I think he knows how to run a business, Rick - you, I or pretty much anyone on here could only dream of being as successful.
"The club is now being run as a business." It always has been. This is a meaningless comment repeated frequently as if it contains some deep and persuasive truth. The point is that the business is now being run badly and in a way that will undermine itself.
You and others believe (you state it as fact) that CAFC is currently being run badly - this is based on a lack of understanding/strategic transparency (RD fault I agree but he doesn't have to tell us). The secret of every successful business with any chance of longevity is gradual and sustainable growth with an eye on costs at all times.
I think he knows how to run a business, Rick - you, I or pretty much anyone on here could only dream of being as successful.
It may have been a business but, with a few exceptions, most did not appear to have the acumen, nor the interest, to run it as such. I would suggest that, maybe, your statement that it is being run badly is based on hearsay rather than fact or do you possess factual evidence. If so you may wish to challenge the figures shared by the Board at the VIP meeting.
I am behind setting a deadline for some meaningful communication with RD himself
I think the word meaningful is important here. As I said last night you can have a 'dialogue' where one party asks for information and the other replies 'I hear what you're saying........' In other words just paying lip-service.
IMO we need to agree on what kind of dialogue would be 'meaningful' and a deadline for reaching this as to date we have got nowhere with requests for dialogue and I fear we could be strung along for a long time to come.
I am behind setting a deadline for some meaningful communication with RD himself
I think the word meaningful is important here. As I said last night you can have a 'dialogue' where one party asks for information and the other replies 'I hear what you're saying........' In other words just paying lip-service.
IMO we need to agree on what kind of dialogue would be 'meaningful' and a deadline for reaching this as to date we have got nowhere with requests for dialogue and I fear we could be strung along for a long time to come.
Setting deadlines is tantamount to saying 'by then or else' - what is the 'or else' ffs?
We need to try as many different avenues as possible to engage the man - none of which should involve any threats because at that point the argument is lost.
It would be nice to think the club would find dialogue helpful, but it will need a complete change of heart by our CEO. When one fan at the VIP meeting tried to pass on the concerns of the many fans who are simply voting with their feet he was met with an aggressive response, totally at odds with the point he was trying to make. Although there was the suggestion of involving Richard Murray, I can't see him having any influence of Roland's thinking. As things stand it all has to go through Katrien, who has lost all credibility. The hope must be that when ST's go on sale Roland will act on what will surely be a sharp drop in renewals. And I'm not talking about a boycott, just fans losing interest and drifting away. Of course if there is a sharp increase in sales it will be doubles all round, and a bonus for Katrien, but if the opposite happens, well who knows?
It may have been a business but, with a few exceptions, most did not appear to have the acumen, nor the interest, to run it as such. I would suggest that, maybe, your statement that it is being run badly is based on hearsay rather than fact or do you possess factual evidence. If so you may wish to challenge the figures shared by the Board at the VIP meeting.
I did, last night. It's frankly laughable to suggest people have been brought in with greater interest or greater ability, without even making any particular claims for anyone employed in the past. The chief executive has no experience of running anything, while nearly all the experienced staff have left or are trying to leave.
If you want evidence of bad business decisions, Duchatelet has signed eight players on long-term contracts and had to lend four of them out in short order because they are not good enough. We have six goalkeepers on the books, only one of whom has significant experience and two of whom arrived in January in quick succession.
We're told that the training ground development will now cost £10m plus instead of the £5.5m fully funded scheme that has planning consent. In the meantime, the funding has been unpicked to offset the lack of another shirt sponsor and they have failed to secure the Premier League element, so a higher cost and and a share of the existing will fall to the owner. Let's see what the scheme is, but it's nailed on that he won't get £6-7-8m worth of extra value from the changes, which makes it a bad business decision, even if they can get planning, which is doubtful.
The retail operation is hamstrung by the demographics of the support. I think it could be run better than it was or ever has been, but given it wasn't very profitable even in the Premier League it is not going to be more profitable to a lower customer base in the Football League. It was outsourced because it was barely breaking even, if not making a loss. At present the club gets a six-figure risk-free payment from the franchisee. I support bringing it back, but it will not deliver significant additional income over and above the existing whatever you do with it and it's only lack of understanding the market that allows them to believe it will.
The club is not responsible for the increase in central revenue via the PL, in fact it voted against the changes to FFP that provided additional solidarity payments, but in any event all experience suggests that if the income of all Championship clubs goes up, so will average player costs. To argue therefore that the extra money will reduce the operating loss is naive. If you use it to do so then you will fall further behind rival clubs in terms of competitiveness, with knock-on effects on ticket revenue, etc, and increased risk of relegation.
If you want an example of how badly managed the club is, the handling of programme sales and consequent loss of net revenue is a textbook example of how to make a mistake and aggravate it by failing to rectify it over many months despite it being one of the simpler problems to resolve since it presents anew every matchday.
A lot of those who attended last night were there out of sheer curiosity so don’t get carried away with numbers. The club is now being run as a business and those that had a say in the ‘old’ days are p....d off that they are no longer involved/party to the decision making process. The majority are only interested in team performance and not the politics. If RD is not interested in the Club he seems to be investing in it so get behind the team. As for the accolades, re Airman’s performance at the meeting, public speaking has always been his forte and has been beneficial in the past but some of us have moved on we are back at the Valley and things are a lot more positive than they used to be.
Did you ask everyone there for their reason of being there? You are guessing. I'm sure most had a vested interest if not a very passionate interest in what was going on.
Getting a dialogue with the network is the minimum aim that should come out of last night.
For me though any such dialogue should be underpinned by the what if. What if the network continues as it is. So protest should be in parallel so that it knows.
For me that means continuing my boycott; except for the Huddersfield game where for just £5 in the networks pockets I can join in any protest with a bigger than normal audience.
I am behind setting a deadline for some meaningful communication with RD himself
I think the word meaningful is important here. As I said last night you can have a 'dialogue' where one party asks for information and the other replies 'I hear what you're saying........' In other words just paying lip-service.
IMO we need to agree on what kind of dialogue would be 'meaningful' and a deadline for reaching this as to date we have got nowhere with requests for dialogue and I fear we could be strung along for a long time to come.
Setting deadlines is tantamount to saying 'by then or else' - what is the 'or else' ffs?
We need to try as many different avenues as possible to engage the man - none of which should involve any threats because at that point the argument is lost.
I'm not suggesting an 'or else' approach and I do think it's worth trying various routes to dialogue but I think we have to be realistic and ask ourselves how long we go down that route (as we have had no success so far). The 'or else' is just a plan B if plan A doesn't work.
I am behind setting a deadline for some meaningful communication with RD himself
I think the word meaningful is important here. As I said last night you can have a 'dialogue' where one party asks for information and the other replies 'I hear what you're saying........' In other words just paying lip-service.
IMO we need to agree on what kind of dialogue would be 'meaningful' and a deadline for reaching this as to date we have got nowhere with requests for dialogue and I fear we could be strung along for a long time to come.
Setting deadlines is tantamount to saying 'by then or else' - what is the 'or else' ffs?
We need to try as many different avenues as possible to engage the man - none of which should involve any threats because at that point the argument is lost.
I'm not suggesting an 'or else' approach and I do think it's worth trying various routes to dialogue but I think we have to be realistic and ask ourselves how long we go down that route (as we have had no success so far). The 'or else' is just a plan B if plan A doesn't work.
And therein lies the problem ...with FFP out of play, RD needs a plan B and at this stage there does not appear to be one ...or is there?
Getting a dialogue with the network is the minimum aim that should come out of last night.
For me though any such dialogue should be underpinned by the what if. What if the network continues as it is. So protest should be in parallel so that it knows.
For me that means continuing my boycott; except for the Huddersfield game where for just £5 in the networks pockets I can join in any protest with a bigger than normal audience.
I'm not pro or anti so don't have to like one side over another it means i'm free to ask questions,
Do you hope Cafc Lose matches so they get relegated and maybe Roland would then sell up, with some of the network players last season, it looked like we were trying to get relegated. The players are so much better this season but were playing with the shackles on. The squad has been unbalanced all season, and our tactics were found out in the second half at Rotherham, when the panto villian put pressure on the the last defender TBH on one occasion and we shot ourselves in the foot. plus Evans was the 1st manager to put 2 markers on Igor and take turns in giving him a kick.
My choice would be the German model(dortmund) but not sure if the British way of doing things would allow ? a smaller scale than Dortmund as we don't have 80K fans at the moment !
Were the fans who got behind the team for 90 minutes against Brentford in which helped lift the team according to JJ wrong in your opinion and also this question isn't just for you Kentred but Tango, Dick Plumb and all you guys who have stayed away. it's not my way but you must want thinks to get worse on the field ?
You all have made some valid points but this question needs to be answered ?
This all sounds very credible to the uninitiated but, surely, you are not suggesting that RD has made his money from being financially naive or stupid! I would assume he is aware of the problems he has encountered this year and has made allowances in his business plan. With regard to the programme sellers Katrien did explain the situation at the VIP meeting and what actions are being taken to address this. I would add that I am not a great fan of RD - I don't have sufficient knowledge of his intentions to form an opinion - but I am opposed to anyone stirring up discontent against the man who, so far, appears to be sufficiently interested to invest in the stadium and the team - surely such progress should be welcomed not denigrated.
It would be nice to think the club would find dialogue helpful, but it will need a complete change of heart by our CEO. When one fan at the VIP meeting tried to pass on the concerns of the many fans who are simply voting with their feet he was met with an aggressive response, totally at odds with the point he was trying to make. Although there was the suggestion of involving Richard Murray, I can't see him having any influence of Roland's thinking. As things stand it all has to go through Katrien, who has lost all credibility. The hope must be that when ST's go on sale Roland will act on what will surely be a sharp drop in renewals. And I'm not talking about a boycott, just fans losing interest and drifting away. Of course if there is a sharp increase in sales it will be doubles all round, and a bonus for Katrien, but if the opposite happens, well who knows?
I must say that, having watched the VIP video all the way through, I do not recognise that happening at all. I thought that Katrien was very composed and polite with her answers, even when a couple of the questions were a little abrupt (no more than that). None of the people there at the time seem to make any suggestion that they felt she was aggressive, nor have they since.
Roland didn't become a successful businessman by tolerating failure in his subordinates, and I imagine Katrien will get a bit nervous towards the end of the season.
"The club is now being run as a business." It always has been. This is a meaningless comment repeated frequently as if it contains some deep and persuasive truth. The point is that the business is now being run badly and in a way that will undermine itself.
You and others believe (you state it as fact) that CAFC is currently being run badly - this is based on a lack of understanding/strategic transparency (RD fault I agree but he doesn't have to tell us). The secret of every successful business with any chance of longevity is gradual and sustainable growth with an eye on costs at all times.
I think he knows how to run a business, Rick - you, I or pretty much anyone on here could only dream of being as successful.
A business, no doubt. This business, not on the evidence.
I think this is key. Plenty of smart operators have found running a football business to be a very different proposition.
I very much doubt that RD would have 4 different people in a key role within a year in any of his other businesses. At some point a trusted hand would be given time. If Riga had stayed then I would accept the parallels, but at present RD gives the impression of someone playing Football Manager for real,;not running a business
I am behind setting a deadline for some meaningful communication with RD himself
I think the word meaningful is important here. As I said last night you can have a 'dialogue' where one party asks for information and the other replies 'I hear what you're saying........' In other words just paying lip-service.
IMO we need to agree on what kind of dialogue would be 'meaningful' and a deadline for reaching this as to date we have got nowhere with requests for dialogue and I fear we could be strung along for a long time to come.
Setting deadlines is tantamount to saying 'by then or else' - what is the 'or else' ffs?
We need to try as many different avenues as possible to engage the man - none of which should involve any threats because at that point the argument is lost.
Ditto. Without knowing the exact lengths the Trust and its individual members have gone too to initiate a dialogue (although I know they have tried a number of times), I suggested we try again. For me, I think the consensus coming from the meeting (or at least that is what I am picking up) is that we do try to engage RD again.
I think the difficulty is that people like RD have been successful in his life doing it his way, and although they may take advice from trusted sources, they'll do what they want at the end of the day. It appears that RD isn't too fussed about how he is perceived by us at the moment. That may change, and I hope that maybe, just maybe we can engage him more and have a dialogue with him.
I basically put myself in the anti RD camp after the BP sacking and GL appointment. Upon reflection, I am all in favour of seeing if he is up for communicating and opening up a bit more of a dialogue about the long term plan etc, but I don't hold out much hope. My support won't drop because of this and I will always turn up to home games, the odd away game. What I am worried about, is the mass protests and people turning their back on the club. I understand it's everyone's individual choice, and I'm not judging anyone for doing it. Yet if we suffer a drop in attendances, it affects the team, the results get shitter, we suffer a couple of back to back relegations, and RD finally says 'enough', there's no guarantee we can halt the slide.
Take Pompey, FA Cup winners in 2008, right back down at the bottom of the football league. There's no prospective buyer there. Yes they are run by the fans which is a good thing, but as football is a business, businesses need capital. We've got to be very careful we don't get what we wish for as they say.
... but I am opposed to anyone stirring up discontent against the man who, so far, appears to be sufficiently interested to invest in the stadium and the team - surely such progress should be welcomed not denigrated.
But equally you're quite happy to stir up discontent against many longstanding supporters who have offered their time and expertise free to the club?
Btw Tommy = 6 comments in almost a year on here, all of them in the last two days? There's been plenty of opportunities to support the status quo over numerous threads but you've only chosen now to start..?
Getting a dialogue with the network is the minimum aim that should come out of last night.
For me though any such dialogue should be underpinned by the what if. What if the network continues as it is. So protest should be in parallel so that it knows.
For me that means continuing my boycott; except for the Huddersfield game where for just £5 in the networks pockets I can join in any protest with a bigger than normal audience.
I'm not pro or anti so don't have to like one side over another it means i'm free to ask questions,
Do you hope Cafc Lose matches so they get relegated and maybe Roland would then sell up, with some of the network players last season, it looked like we were trying to get relegated. The players are so much better this season but were playing with the shackles on. The squad has been unbalanced all season, and our tactics were found out in the second half at Rotherham, when the panto villian put pressure on the the last defender TBH on one occasion and we shot ourselves in the foot. plus Evans was the 1st manager to put 2 markers on Igor and take turns in giving him a kick.
My choice would be the German model(dortmund) but not sure if the British way of doing things would allow ? a smaller scale than Dortmund as we don't have 80K fans at the moment !
Were the fans who got behind the team for 90 minutes against Brentford in which helped lift the team according to JJ wrong in your opinion and also this question isn't just for you Kentred but Tango, Dick Plumb and all you guys who have stayed away. it's not my way but you must want thinks to get worse on the field ?
You all have made some valid points but this question needs to be answered ?
Good question.
Yes I believe relegation would be one way to bring a change of owner closer (and of course brings another opportunity for promotion, which are the most enjoyable seasons and you can't get promotion without relegation!). Attendances dropping would of course be another.
But in all honesty do I still get a kick from Charlton winning? Of course.
This all sounds very credible to the uninitiated but, surely, you are not suggesting that RD has made his money from being financially naive or stupid! I would assume he is aware of the problems he has encountered this year and has made allowances in his business plan. With regard to the programme sellers Katrien did explain the situation at the VIP meeting and what actions are being taken to address this. I would add that I am not a great fan of RD - I don't have sufficient knowledge of his intentions to form an opinion - but I am opposed to anyone stirring up discontent against the man who, so far, appears to be sufficiently interested to invest in the stadium and the team - surely such progress should be welcomed not denigrated.
I could build a more detailed case than the above, but I'm not sure it would serve much purpose. I am sure there are counter-arguments, but just asserting that it's being "run as a business" doesn't really mean anything. You suggested I challenge what was said at the VIP meeting, so I have.
In terms of the programme sellers, what did she "explain"? This is a problem created entirely by her and exacerbated by the fact that she did not understand the decision she was making because she didn't realise when she made it that the former sales company owned the equipment. Stating that it has been a "roller coaster" or some such is not an explanation. It wasn't an act of god, it was a bad business decision by her that she has failed to repair over four months, no doubt costing far more than any saving made.
And to repeat I am using it as an example. I am not saying that it is a matter of life and death to the club. It is just an indication of the quality of decision making at the top of the club that is transparent to the fans and completely at odds with your assertion that it has improved.
As suggested by @razil, I have emailed the CAST secretary with further thoughts. Thought I would post on here for wider information and/or debate:
So, what are the next steps as a result of last night's meeting?
There were some interesting thoughts put forward but I'm sure that many present will have thoughts to add. Nor was there the time or indeed the necessary process to debate and evaluate options.
My thoughts are as follows. Some of them were mentioned by others last night:
1. Vocalise dissatisfaction with the regime - before and after the game, but NOT during it, when we should get behind the team like never before. The contrast would be very clear.
2. Start a media campaign - which must make very clear what we are dissatisfied about and what we actually want to happen.
3. Visual protest - the young guy who had the banner saying "Made in Charlton, Destroyed in Belgium" confiscated has, I believe been threatened with a stadium ban. Get T shirts made with that slogan on, and sell them, and reveal them at a game. They can't ban that many people.
4. Prepare a business case for supporter engagement and inclusion - which says, in hard business as well as emotional terms why RD should engage with us. Include a specific proposal for a different type of Fans Forum where regular meetings are held with representatives of supporters groups on jointly proposed agenda items.
5. Liaise with other network clubs supporters groups - for sharing of best practice, shared learning, mutual support and co-ordinated protests.
6. Explore the possibility of challenging RD's network model through the FA, UEFA and FIFA - looking specifically at the issues associated with intra-network loans and transfers (fairness and financial transparency), shared resources, impact on the competitiveness of individual network components (clubs).
7. Engage with Richard Murray - to potentially act as an initial means of approaching RD and as a facilitator.
8. Communicate with fans - to explain what is being done and why, seek to assure those who are concerned at protests/actions. It is important to avoid personal insults and denigrating comments about RD, KM and GL, which will only alienate those who are positive about the regime.
I would take objection to many of these proposed protests. If protests follow a path that supporters (other supporters) feel may be dangerously damaging to the club then you may find that the silent majority/minority are forced into action with protests of their own against their own.
This all sounds very credible to the uninitiated but, surely, you are not suggesting that RD has made his money from being financially naive or stupid! I would assume he is aware of the problems he has encountered this year and has made allowances in his business plan. With regard to the programme sellers Katrien did explain the situation at the VIP meeting and what actions are being taken to address this. I would add that I am not a great fan of RD - I don't have sufficient knowledge of his intentions to form an opinion - but I am opposed to anyone stirring up discontent against the man who, so far, appears to be sufficiently interested to invest in the stadium and the team - surely such progress should be welcomed not denigrated.
... but I am opposed to anyone stirring up discontent against the man who, so far, appears to be sufficiently interested to invest in the stadium and the team - surely such progress should be welcomed not denigrated.
But equally your quite happy to stir up discontent against many longstanding supporters who have offered their time and expertise free to the club?
Btw Tommy = 6 comments in almost a year on here, all of them in the last two days? There's been plenty of opportunities to support the status quo over numerous threads but you've only chosen now to start..?
Never felt as strongly before and it is certainly not my intention to stir up discontent. I am entitled to my opinion and ultimately to help those anti network fans, who I feel are slightly misguided, to consider the positives.
Comments
Had a bit of a shock to suddenly see my Dad on the mic,he did not mention he spoke, he was the guy with the beard on the balcony who made the slightly rambling speech about the what makes us fans and the need for a creative way of showing our issues or protests(would rather use a better word) towards the current way the club is run.
It's undeniable that everyone who was there was there because they care about Charlton Athletic. Not everyone was anti-RD (having watched the video) but the online responses that were read out mid-meeting were a good sample of the general feeling: 29 people contacted the trust to say they were worried, while only 2 contacted to say that they were not. Which is exactly what some people are worried about, "run as a business" is a by-phrase for running without heart. There is no real soul or affinity between the club and the supporters and as things stand running the club as a business isn't even bringing success on the pitch. And personally I've lost confidence that any of this will change with the current people in charge. That's your personal opinion. Over the past 18-24 months I was - looking from the outside - inclined to agree at certain critical points. I do however now believe that "those that had a say in the old days" have only the best interests of the team and the club at heart. I completely agree that venting frustrations at the players does nothing to help. During the 90 minutes, there needs to be support in the stands for those who are trying to play for the shirt and for us.
As for being interested in team performance rather than the politics, I suggest you check the videos posted. When asked who would still like to take action even if the team avoided relegation this season, a large majority of those present raised their hand. This isn't going to go away with a few quick wins between now and May. Not sure why AB being a good public speaker should in some way discredit his message.
Your final point is an argument I've seen a lot over the past weeks. Of course, the club is in a better position than they have been in the past but that doesn't mean that what we are currently experiencing isn't worth our concern.
I think he knows how to run a business, Rick - you, I or pretty much anyone on here could only dream of being as successful.
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?ticker=MELE:BB
postriposte Callum.IMO we need to agree on what kind of dialogue would be 'meaningful' and a deadline for reaching this as to date we have got nowhere with requests for dialogue and I fear we could be strung along for a long time to come.
We need to try as many different avenues as possible to engage the man - none of which should involve any threats because at that point the argument is lost.
If you want evidence of bad business decisions, Duchatelet has signed eight players on long-term contracts and had to lend four of them out in short order because they are not good enough. We have six goalkeepers on the books, only one of whom has significant experience and two of whom arrived in January in quick succession.
We're told that the training ground development will now cost £10m plus instead of the £5.5m fully funded scheme that has planning consent. In the meantime, the funding has been unpicked to offset the lack of another shirt sponsor and they have failed to secure the Premier League element, so a higher cost and and a share of the existing will fall to the owner. Let's see what the scheme is, but it's nailed on that he won't get £6-7-8m worth of extra value from the changes, which makes it a bad business decision, even if they can get planning, which is doubtful.
The retail operation is hamstrung by the demographics of the support. I think it could be run better than it was or ever has been, but given it wasn't very profitable even in the Premier League it is not going to be more profitable to a lower customer base in the Football League. It was outsourced because it was barely breaking even, if not making a loss. At present the club gets a six-figure risk-free payment from the franchisee. I support bringing it back, but it will not deliver significant additional income over and above the existing whatever you do with it and it's only lack of understanding the market that allows them to believe it will.
The club is not responsible for the increase in central revenue via the PL, in fact it voted against the changes to FFP that provided additional solidarity payments, but in any event all experience suggests that if the income of all Championship clubs goes up, so will average player costs. To argue therefore that the extra money will reduce the operating loss is naive. If you use it to do so then you will fall further behind rival clubs in terms of competitiveness, with knock-on effects on ticket revenue, etc, and increased risk of relegation.
If you want an example of how badly managed the club is, the handling of programme sales and consequent loss of net revenue is a textbook example of how to make a mistake and aggravate it by failing to rectify it over many months despite it being one of the simpler problems to resolve since it presents anew every matchday.
For me though any such dialogue should be underpinned by the what if. What if the network continues as it is. So protest should be in parallel so that it knows.
For me that means continuing my boycott; except for the Huddersfield game where for just £5 in the networks pockets I can join in any protest with a bigger than normal audience.
And if you look at my posts I am not necessarily anti-RD and definitely not anti-network.
Do you hope Cafc Lose matches so they get relegated and maybe Roland would then sell up, with some of the network players last season, it looked like we were trying to get relegated. The players are so much better this season but were playing with the shackles on. The squad has been unbalanced all season,
and our tactics were found out in the second half at Rotherham, when the panto villian put pressure on the the last defender TBH on one occasion and we shot ourselves in the foot. plus Evans was the 1st manager to put 2 markers on Igor and take turns in giving him a kick.
My choice would be the German model(dortmund) but not sure if the British way of doing things would allow ? a smaller scale than Dortmund as we don't have 80K
fans at the moment !
Were the fans who got behind the team for 90 minutes against Brentford in which helped lift the team according to JJ wrong in your opinion and also this question isn't just for you Kentred but Tango, Dick Plumb and all you guys who have stayed away. it's not my way but you must want thinks to get worse on the field ?
You all have made some valid points but this question needs to be answered ?
I very much doubt that RD would have 4 different people in a key role within a year in any of his other businesses. At some point a trusted hand would be given time. If Riga had stayed then I would accept the parallels, but at present RD gives the impression of someone playing Football Manager for real,;not running a business
I think the difficulty is that people like RD have been successful in his life doing it his way, and although they may take advice from trusted sources, they'll do what they want at the end of the day. It appears that RD isn't too fussed about how he is perceived by us at the moment. That may change, and I hope that maybe, just maybe we can engage him more and have a dialogue with him.
I basically put myself in the anti RD camp after the BP sacking and GL appointment. Upon reflection, I am all in favour of seeing if he is up for communicating and opening up a bit more of a dialogue about the long term plan etc, but I don't hold out much hope. My support won't drop because of this and I will always turn up to home games, the odd away game. What I am worried about, is the mass protests and people turning their back on the club. I understand it's everyone's individual choice, and I'm not judging anyone for doing it. Yet if we suffer a drop in attendances, it affects the team, the results get shitter, we suffer a couple of back to back relegations, and RD finally says 'enough', there's no guarantee we can halt the slide.
Take Pompey, FA Cup winners in 2008, right back down at the bottom of the football league. There's no prospective buyer there. Yes they are run by the fans which is a good thing, but as football is a business, businesses need capital. We've got to be very careful we don't get what we wish for as they say.
Btw Tommy = 6 comments in almost a year on here, all of them in the last two days? There's been plenty of opportunities to support the status quo over numerous threads but you've only chosen now to start..?
Yes I believe relegation would be one way to bring a change of owner closer (and of course brings another opportunity for promotion, which are the most enjoyable seasons and you can't get promotion without relegation!). Attendances dropping would of course be another.
But in all honesty do I still get a kick from Charlton winning? Of course.
In terms of the programme sellers, what did she "explain"? This is a problem created entirely by her and exacerbated by the fact that she did not understand the decision she was making because she didn't realise when she made it that the former sales company owned the equipment. Stating that it has been a "roller coaster" or some such is not an explanation. It wasn't an act of god, it was a bad business decision by her that she has failed to repair over four months, no doubt costing far more than any saving made.
And to repeat I am using it as an example. I am not saying that it is a matter of life and death to the club. It is just an indication of the quality of decision making at the top of the club that is transparent to the fans and completely at odds with your assertion that it has improved.
I would take objection to many of these proposed protests. If protests follow a path that supporters (other supporters) feel may be dangerously damaging to the club then you may find that the silent majority/minority are forced into action with protests of their own against their own.