This is the one Club in the Network than can deliver enormous success for the owner. With the supporters behind you the sky is the limit. If you ignore what this group of supporters are attempting to do to achieve the same aims as you and the owner then you are doing nothing but heading for failure.
I don't think ignoring us will head the club into failure at all - we're on a good run now aren't we? Also I know running a football club seems simple and that aims are obvious but its probably not easy at all. Although I disagree with some things that have happened I think we're best off leaving it to them... We have enough of a voice as has been quite evident. And we know very little about running a football club and any of you that think you do are morons. Lastly, I think Katrien or RD having a CL account is really stupid, they'll be abused (before anyone says that we'll be nice to them I can assure you most people will be VERY abusive) and if they say something stupid there is no turning back.
In the last few weeks KM has hinted about Prem ambition, after being strongly questioned.
Up to then, their stated aim has been to acquire, develop and sell players in order to break even.
I generally agree with the thrust of your post but re the bits I have left in above, has RD even said that clearly, specifically regarding CAFC? I have not heard/read him to say that, other than as a general almost philosophical remark. In order to understand better his plans, I think we would want these clarifications
1. Is break even itself the objective? If so, what is the point, and to whom do you (Mr Duchatelet) want to make the point, and why? If it is break even while improving the position of the clubs, that's a different matter, but it needs to be stated.
2. What should break even? Each individual club P&L, or Staprix NV?
3. When break even? This season or over a longer period
4. Does RD accept your point, that break even in this league is impossible, whereas Swansea and bloody West Ham are trading profitably in the FAPL? In which case, promotion is the most likely route to CAFC break even?
5.If each club is to break even, then how does the network valuation of players work in a way which is transparent? After all, we've apparently "paid" a lot of money for some dross from the network. That is the most puzzling aspect of the network model for me, if indeed each club is expected to stand on its own feet.
They are my personal burning questions for RD but I don't think I'm speaking out of turn if I said that most of the Trust board are equally interested. And I still haven't ruled out the possibility that there are some very good answers, if only RD would believe we are adult enough to accept them.
A lot of fans "knew" that Kevin Cash was the money man & that their intentions were to try and get us to The Prem.
Whilst we may not have greatly admired Jimenez and Slater, if they wanted to get us to The Prem, with Cash's money and then sell up, we can't be protesting about that.
Cash stopped putting in the money and it was pretty obvious to many fans, that Jimenez and Slater needed to sell.
There's no point in protesting about your owners lack of money, especially when you know they want to sell.
"We" are upset now, because the current owner, whilst being a very rich man, has never said anything about ambition for Charlton and wanting to get them to The Prem or at the very least, ensure that we remain in The Championship.
In the last few weeks KM has hinted about Prem ambition, after being strongly questioned.
Up to then, their stated aim has been to acquire, develop and sell players in order to break even.
The Championship clubs that break even, do not remain Championship clubs. They are relegated.
Therefore, you have to question, the viability of the plan, especially now that FFP means we will be competing with other clubs, that may be prepared to lose £45M over the next 3 seasons.
This, together with the incompetent signings last year and the lack of adequate signings this year, the constant merry go round of coaches as well as players are some of the reasons for the discontent.
Things are looking much rosier in the last few weeks. They did at Liege last season, when they finished top of their league.
RD then sold their top players in the summer and they were down to 12th in October when RD sacked Luzon.
The new coach got them up to 5th, unbeaten in 10 games and was promptly sacked.
I could go on ..........
No doubt you could.
So, in a nutshell, we had no communication from the previous (unconfirmed at the time) owner to the fans which was OK, because one of his minions said we would be off to the Prem. By the time we were in League 1, it was OK because the guy we didnt hear from, had no direct communications with, but who was rumoured to be our owner had gone and we didnt have a pot to piss in and brought in a stream of failed signings. It was OK though because it was our Charlton.
But now.....
(I wont go on)
as much as the previous owners were useless they were in charge when SCP was given the backing to gather a team that would lead us OUT of League One with a record points tally and then backed him albeit for just that one season in The Championship before the Cash man left the building and wanted out of his trade I don't believe they put pressure on SCP who to play
A lot of fans "knew" that Kevin Cash was the money man & that their intentions were to try and get us to The Prem.
Whilst we may not have greatly admired Jimenez and Slater, if they wanted to get us to The Prem, with Cash's money and then sell up, we can't be protesting about that.
Cash stopped putting in the money and it was pretty obvious to many fans, that Jimenez and Slater needed to sell.
There's no point in protesting about your owners lack of money, especially when you know they want to sell.
"We" are upset now, because the current owner, whilst being a very rich man, has never said anything about ambition for Charlton and wanting to get them to The Prem or at the very least, ensure that we remain in The Championship.
In the last few weeks KM has hinted about Prem ambition, after being strongly questioned.
Up to then, their stated aim has been to acquire, develop and sell players in order to break even.
The Championship clubs that break even, do not remain Championship clubs. They are relegated.
Therefore, you have to question, the viability of the plan, especially now that FFP means we will be competing with other clubs, that may be prepared to lose £45M over the next 3 seasons.
This, together with the incompetent signings last year and the lack of adequate signings this year, the constant merry go round of coaches as well as players are some of the reasons for the discontent.
Things are looking much rosier in the last few weeks. They did at Liege last season, when they finished top of their league.
RD then sold their top players in the summer and they were down to 12th in October when RD sacked Luzon.
The new coach got them up to 5th, unbeaten in 10 games and was promptly sacked.
I could go on ..........
No doubt you could.
So, in a nutshell, we had no communication from the previous (unconfirmed at the time) owner to the fans which was OK, because one of his minions said we would be off to the Prem. By the time we were in League 1, it was OK because the guy we didnt hear from, had no direct communications with, but who was rumoured to be our owner had gone and we didnt have a pot to piss in and brought in a stream of failed signings. It was OK though because it was our Charlton.
But now.....
(I wont go on)
as much as the previous owners were useless they were in charge when SCP was given the backing to gather a team that would lead us OUT of League One with a record points tally and then backed him albeit for just that one season in The Championship before the Cash man left the building and wanted out of his trade I don't believe they put pressure on SCP who to play
Totally agree. But I'm focusing on communication.
The Woolwich meeting resulted in a target, I believe, which was to demand more direct communication from the owner. One of the (many) sticks being used to beat the new owners is that they didn't meet with the relatively new supporters trust. This is portrayed as a terrible snub and another straw breaking the 'our Carlton' back.
The point I was questioning was that we didn't even know for sure who the last one was, and for sure he never spoke to me or any other supporters! So, why is it a demand now? Cant we leave him be and communicate with KM as we used to with Slaterminez?
(BTW I am amused that the last lot's success is quoted as dragging us out of the third tier, having stated their aim was the Prem!)
Arthur, you make a fair point. However, Jimenez and Slater were the official owners. So we could hardly demand to talk to someone that didn't officially exist and his existence was denied by Slater, although I know it was Kevin Cash in reality and I won't put on here how I know.
Arthur, you make a fair point. However, Jimenez and Slater were the official owners. So we could hardly demand to talk to someone that didn't officially exist and his existence was denied by Slater, although I know it was Kevin Cash in reality and I won't put on here how I know.
A lot of fans "knew" that Kevin Cash was the money man & that their intentions were to try and get us to The Prem.
Whilst we may not have greatly admired Jimenez and Slater, if they wanted to get us to The Prem, with Cash's money and then sell up, we can't be protesting about that.
Cash stopped putting in the money and it was pretty obvious to many fans, that Jimenez and Slater needed to sell.
There's no point in protesting about your owners lack of money, especially when you know they want to sell.
"We" are upset now, because the current owner, whilst being a very rich man, has never said anything about ambition for Charlton and wanting to get them to The Prem or at the very least, ensure that we remain in The Championship.
In the last few weeks KM has hinted about Prem ambition, after being strongly questioned.
Up to then, their stated aim has been to acquire, develop and sell players in order to break even.
The Championship clubs that break even, do not remain Championship clubs. They are relegated.
Therefore, you have to question, the viability of the plan, especially now that FFP means we will be competing with other clubs, that may be prepared to lose £45M over the next 3 seasons.
This, together with the incompetent signings last year and the lack of adequate signings this year, the constant merry go round of coaches as well as players are some of the reasons for the discontent.
Things are looking much rosier in the last few weeks. They did at Liege last season, when they finished top of their league.
RD then sold their top players in the summer and they were down to 12th in October when RD sacked Luzon.
The new coach got them up to 5th, unbeaten in 10 games and was promptly sacked.
I could go on ..........
No doubt you could.
So, in a nutshell, we had no communication from the previous (unconfirmed at the time) owner to the fans which was OK, because one of his minions said we would be off to the Prem. By the time we were in League 1, it was OK because the guy we didnt hear from, had no direct communications with, but who was rumoured to be our owner had gone and we didnt have a pot to piss in and brought in a stream of failed signings. It was OK though because it was our Charlton.
But now.....
(I wont go on)
as much as the previous owners were useless they were in charge when SCP was given the backing to gather a team that would lead us OUT of League One with a record points tally and then backed him albeit for just that one season in The Championship before the Cash man left the building and wanted out of his trade I don't believe they put pressure on SCP who to play
Useless!!! Let's be honest, we would have gone into admin if they had stayed.
Maybe this "we" also includes most of the 400 who came to the open meeting on February 18th and raised the same questions.
Wrong ... These were not the questions that the '400' left with you.
Either way, are those questions of no interest to you?
I'm just curious...
The answers to those questions would be very useful and of great interest. With the industry I work in I would very much like to know William Hill's marketing strategy for Cheltenham next week - but I don't expect them to make it public before the event due to the commercially sensitive nature of such information! Similarly I wouldn't divulge to my company's customers what our strategy is for Cheltenham before the event. Likewise I would not anticipate RD sharing his strategy with anyone other than his close business associates and expecting him to do so, or want to do so is, as I've said on previous threads, naive. I'm not sure any football club in the country, and in particular in the top two divisions, would openly share that level of detail.
Let him be judged by his actions - and so far, albeit with hiccups along the way as part of a learning curve, the evidence is that he doesn't want the club to fail.
Here's another question - who picks the team? I really don't care if it's the manager, the head coach, the chairman or the bloody car park attendant in between filling in the potholes - as long as we are successful.
Maybe this "we" also includes most of the 400 who came to the open meeting on February 18th and raised the same questions.
Wrong ... These were not the questions that the '400' left with you.
Either way, are those questions of no interest to you?
I'm just curious...
Absolutely, but I am just clarifying the issue here
And what is the issue?
You don't think many if not most, of the people at the meeting have some of those questions in their minds?
I kind of hoped that by raising these questions here, some other people who are also interested might offer their own views on what the answers might be. I might learn something from their thoughts.
Instead the focus seems to be an aggressive interrogation by you and @Addickted of my use of the word "we".
OK, maybe its better if such discussions are better confined to the Trust website. Pity, because there are people on here whose views on such matters I find really instructive and helpful.
Not sure if you are being deliberately provocative but you need to step back. All I said was that this was not the question raised at the meeting, not that it wasn't in their mind which is very different. I dislike history being re-written.
I had thought we were all on the same side but obviously not ...i said a few weeks ago that I feared some had their own agenda. Beginning to think I was right after all ...such a pity.
Aggressive ...you have a very strange interpretation of that word when all I was doing was providing clarification.
Maybe this "we" also includes most of the 400 who came to the open meeting on February 18th and raised the same questions.
Wrong ... These were not the questions that the '400' left with you.
Either way, are those questions of no interest to you?
I'm just curious...
The answers to those questions would be very useful and of great interest. With the industry I work in I would very much like to know William Hill's marketing strategy for Cheltenham next week - but I don't expect them to make it public before the event due to the commercially sensitive nature of such information! Similarly I wouldn't divulge to my company's customers what our strategy is for Cheltenham before the event. Likewise I would not anticipate RD sharing his strategy with anyone other than his close business associates and expecting him to do so, or want to do so is, as I've said on previous threads, naive. I'm not sure any football club in the country, and in particular in the top two divisions, would openly share that level of detail.
Let him be judged by his actions - and so far, albeit with hiccups along the way as part of a learning curve, the evidence is that he doesn't want the club to fail.
Here's another question - who picks the team? I really don't care if it's the manager, the head coach, the chairman or the bloody car park attendant in between filling in the potholes - as long as we are successful.
From the early 90s until the mid 2000s Richard Murray and other directors felt it sensible to explain their business strategy for the club to a similar level to that which I'm asking about now. I confess that I'm not very clear about your horse racing analogy, but RM and co. considered that the committed fans were not punters but stakeholders and deserved to be treated as such.
Not sure if you are being deliberately provocative but you need to step back. All I said was that this was not the question raised at the meeting, not that it wasn't in their mind which is very different. I dislike history being re-written.
I had thought we were all on the same side but obviously not ...i said a few weeks ago that I feared some had their own agenda. Beginning to think I was right after all ...such a pity.
Aggressive ...you have a very strange interpretation of that word when all I was doing was providing clarification.
To be honest, I think your line of questioning is not only unrealistic, but also arrogant, if you really think the owner would provide such sensitive information over specific details and timings of how he intends to drive the Club forward.
Are these really the key questions being asked of the Executive? If so, then no wonder they're not getting back to you.
One things for sure, RD's not pissed £40m of his own money up the wall to see us fail. Despite his obvious mistakes on the way. And I'm damn sure he can get better than a 3% return on his money elsewhere.
Maybe this "we" also includes most of the 400 who came to the open meeting on February 18th and raised the same questions.
Wrong ... These were not the questions that the '400' left with you.
Either way, are those questions of no interest to you?
I'm just curious...
The answers to those questions would be very useful and of great interest. With the industry I work in I would very much like to know William Hill's marketing strategy for Cheltenham next week - but I don't expect them to make it public before the event due to the commercially sensitive nature of such information! Similarly I wouldn't divulge to my company's customers what our strategy is for Cheltenham before the event. Likewise I would not anticipate RD sharing his strategy with anyone other than his close business associates and expecting him to do so, or want to do so is, as I've said on previous threads, naive. I'm not sure any football club in the country, and in particular in the top two divisions, would openly share that level of detail.
Let him be judged by his actions - and so far, albeit with hiccups along the way as part of a learning curve, the evidence is that he doesn't want the club to fail.
Here's another question - who picks the team? I really don't care if it's the manager, the head coach, the chairman or the bloody car park attendant in between filling in the potholes - as long as we are successful.
Excellent idea, I'd love to pick the team for Saturday, might even put myself on the bench for a cameo 10 minute performance.
Maybe this "we" also includes most of the 400 who came to the open meeting on February 18th and raised the same questions.
Wrong ... These were not the questions that the '400' left with you.
Either way, are those questions of no interest to you?
I'm just curious...
The answers to those questions would be very useful and of great interest. With the industry I work in I would very much like to know William Hill's marketing strategy for Cheltenham next week - but I don't expect them to make it public before the event due to the commercially sensitive nature of such information! Similarly I wouldn't divulge to my company's customers what our strategy is for Cheltenham before the event. Likewise I would not anticipate RD sharing his strategy with anyone other than his close business associates and expecting him to do so, or want to do so is, as I've said on previous threads, naive. I'm not sure any football club in the country, and in particular in the top two divisions, would openly share that level of detail.
Let him be judged by his actions - and so far, albeit with hiccups along the way as part of a learning curve, the evidence is that he doesn't want the club to fail.
Here's another question - who picks the team? I really don't care if it's the manager, the head coach, the chairman or the bloody car park attendant in between filling in the potholes - as long as we are successful.
From the early 90s until the mid 2000s Richard Murray and other directors felt it sensible to explain their business strategy for the club to a similar level to that which I'm asking about now. I confess that I'm not very clear about your horse racing analogy, but RM and co. considered that the committed fans were not punters but stakeholders and deserved to be treated as such.
That's because we were Stakeholders.
Murray never consulted with us when he removed that stakeholding overnight.
The days of the Chairman 'phoning you for a cozy chat are over Prague.
Maybe this "we" also includes most of the 400 who came to the open meeting on February 18th and raised the same questions.
Wrong ... These were not the questions that the '400' left with you.
Either way, are those questions of no interest to you?
I'm just curious...
The answers to those questions would be very useful and of great interest. With the industry I work in I would very much like to know William Hill's marketing strategy for Cheltenham next week - but I don't expect them to make it public before the event due to the commercially sensitive nature of such information! Similarly I wouldn't divulge to my company's customers what our strategy is for Cheltenham before the event. Likewise I would not anticipate RD sharing his strategy with anyone other than his close business associates and expecting him to do so, or want to do so is, as I've said on previous threads, naive. I'm not sure any football club in the country, and in particular in the top two divisions, would openly share that level of detail.
Let him be judged by his actions - and so far, albeit with hiccups along the way as part of a learning curve, the evidence is that he doesn't want the club to fail.
Here's another question - who picks the team? I really don't care if it's the manager, the head coach, the chairman or the bloody car park attendant in between filling in the potholes - as long as we are successful.
From the early 90s until the mid 2000s Richard Murray and other directors felt it sensible to explain their business strategy for the club to a similar level to that which I'm asking about now. I confess that I'm not very clear about your horse racing analogy, but RM and co. considered that the committed fans were not punters but stakeholders and deserved to be treated as such.
That's because it was an undeniable fact, it was also RM and co. who removed the fans from such a position.
Our of interest, PA, how much information about the direction and strategy of your business do you share with your competitors? Would you be happy to divulge all the answers that you seek? How about if the strategy you are trying is a new, untested system, would you still be happy to tell the world?
Maybe this "we" also includes most of the 400 who came to the open meeting on February 18th and raised the same questions.
Wrong ... These were not the questions that the '400' left with you.
Either way, are those questions of no interest to you?
I'm just curious...
Here's another question - who picks the team? I really don't care if it's the manager, the head coach, the chairman or the bloody car park attendant in between filling in the potholes - as long as we are successful.
Out of interest @bobmunro (and most people think the same), is it still no issue for you who picks the team if / when we are not successful?
To be honest, I think your line of questioning is not only unrealistic, but also arrogant, if you really think the owner would provide such sensitive information over specific details and timings of how he intends to drive the Club forward.
Are these really the key questions being asked of the Executive? If so, then no wonder they're not getting back to you.
One things for sure, RD's not pissed £40m of his own money up the wall to see us fail. Despite his obvious mistakes on the way. And I'm damn sure he can get better than a 3% return on his money elsewhere.
As I made perfectly clear, they are my own personal wish list of questions I would like to put to RD. Similar questions were freely asked and answered by what you call the Executive in our most successful period, and as a result fans poured their money as well as support into the project, because they had confidence in it and felt some ownership of it.
BTW, £40m? Where on earth did you pull that figure from?
Maybe this "we" also includes most of the 400 who came to the open meeting on February 18th and raised the same questions.
Wrong ... These were not the questions that the '400' left with you.
Either way, are those questions of no interest to you?
I'm just curious...
The answers to those questions would be very useful and of great interest. With the industry I work in I would very much like to know William Hill's marketing strategy for Cheltenham next week - but I don't expect them to make it public before the event due to the commercially sensitive nature of such information! Similarly I wouldn't divulge to my company's customers what our strategy is for Cheltenham before the event. Likewise I would not anticipate RD sharing his strategy with anyone other than his close business associates and expecting him to do so, or want to do so is, as I've said on previous threads, naive. I'm not sure any football club in the country, and in particular in the top two divisions, would openly share that level of detail.
Let him be judged by his actions - and so far, albeit with hiccups along the way as part of a learning curve, the evidence is that he doesn't want the club to fail.
Here's another question - who picks the team? I really don't care if it's the manager, the head coach, the chairman or the bloody car park attendant in between filling in the potholes - as long as we are successful.
The comparison with William Hill is a bit meaningless, since football clubs don't compete for customers in the same way, therefore there is less need for secrecy, and the relationship between bookies and punters is utterly different to that between clubs and fans.
I think we are entitled to know if the main object of his ownership is to progress the club or some kind of network experiment in proving how clever he is (or some combination of both), because if he isn't focused on success for Charlton then essentially the club becomes a con on the fans. I do accept the evidence he wants to avoid relegation.
Some people take the view that he must want promotion because of the money at stake and therefore no other explanation is necessary, which I understand. Nevertheless he managed to lose a tranche of season ticket holders and a chunk of revenue last summer and is perilously close to losing another lot. It's unnecessary..
Maybe this "we" also includes most of the 400 who came to the open meeting on February 18th and raised the same questions.
Wrong ... These were not the questions that the '400' left with you.
Either way, are those questions of no interest to you?
I'm just curious...
The answers to those questions would be very useful and of great interest. With the industry I work in I would very much like to know William Hill's marketing strategy for Cheltenham next week - but I don't expect them to make it public before the event due to the commercially sensitive nature of such information! Similarly I wouldn't divulge to my company's customers what our strategy is for Cheltenham before the event. Likewise I would not anticipate RD sharing his strategy with anyone other than his close business associates and expecting him to do so, or want to do so is, as I've said on previous threads, naive. I'm not sure any football club in the country, and in particular in the top two divisions, would openly share that level of detail.
Let him be judged by his actions - and so far, albeit with hiccups along the way as part of a learning curve, the evidence is that he doesn't want the club to fail.
Here's another question - who picks the team? I really don't care if it's the manager, the head coach, the chairman or the bloody car park attendant in between filling in the potholes - as long as we are successful.
From the early 90s until the mid 2000s Richard Murray and other directors felt it sensible to explain their business strategy for the club to a similar level to that which I'm asking about now. I confess that I'm not very clear about your horse racing analogy, but RM and co. considered that the committed fans were not punters but stakeholders and deserved to be treated as such.
I thought you were demanding an audience with RD? Why? Did you demand the same from Cash? Have I, as is often the case, got that wrong? Would you be happy with more communications just with KM?
Comments
Also I know running a football club seems simple and that aims are obvious but its probably not easy at all.
Although I disagree with some things that have happened I think we're best off leaving it to them... We have enough of a voice as has been quite evident. And we know very little about running a football club and any of you that think you do are morons.
Lastly, I think Katrien or RD having a CL account is really stupid, they'll be abused (before anyone says that we'll be nice to them I can assure you most people will be VERY abusive) and if they say something stupid there is no turning back.
1. Is break even itself the objective? If so, what is the point, and to whom do you (Mr Duchatelet) want to make the point, and why? If it is break even while improving the position of the clubs, that's a different matter, but it needs to be stated.
2. What should break even? Each individual club P&L, or Staprix NV?
3. When break even? This season or over a longer period
4. Does RD accept your point, that break even in this league is impossible, whereas Swansea and bloody West Ham are trading profitably in the FAPL? In which case, promotion is the most likely route to CAFC break even?
5.If each club is to break even, then how does the network valuation of players work in a way which is transparent? After all, we've apparently "paid" a lot of money for some dross from the network. That is the most puzzling aspect of the network model for me, if indeed each club is expected to stand on its own feet.
They are my personal burning questions for RD but I don't think I'm speaking out of turn if I said that most of the Trust board are equally interested. And I still haven't ruled out the possibility that there are some very good answers, if only RD would believe we are adult enough to accept them.
I don't believe they put pressure on SCP who to play
Ah, I see now.
The Woolwich meeting resulted in a target, I believe, which was to demand more direct communication from the owner.
One of the (many) sticks being used to beat the new owners is that they didn't meet with the relatively new supporters trust. This is portrayed as a terrible snub and another straw breaking the 'our Carlton' back.
The point I was questioning was that we didn't even know for sure who the last one was, and for sure he never spoke to me or any other supporters!
So, why is it a demand now?
Cant we leave him be and communicate with KM as we used to with Slaterminez?
(BTW I am amused that the last lot's success is quoted as dragging us out of the third tier, having stated their aim was the Prem!)
So we could hardly demand to talk to someone that didn't officially exist and his existence was denied by Slater, although I know it was Kevin Cash in reality and I won't put on here how I know.
I'm just curious...
Lets apply it to the new regime!
Let him be judged by his actions - and so far, albeit with hiccups along the way as part of a learning curve, the evidence is that he doesn't want the club to fail.
Here's another question - who picks the team? I really don't care if it's the manager, the head coach, the chairman or the bloody car park attendant in between filling in the potholes - as long as we are successful.
You don't think many if not most, of the people at the meeting have some of those questions in their minds?
I kind of hoped that by raising these questions here, some other people who are also interested might offer their own views on what the answers might be. I might learn something from their thoughts.
Instead the focus seems to be an aggressive interrogation by you and @Addickted of my use of the word "we".
OK, maybe its better if such discussions are better confined to the Trust website. Pity, because there are people on here whose views on such matters I find really instructive and helpful.
I had thought we were all on the same side but obviously not ...i said a few weeks ago that I feared some had their own agenda. Beginning to think I was right after all ...such a pity.
Aggressive ...you have a very strange interpretation of that word when all I was doing was providing clarification.
So disappointed in this approach ...good night.
To be honest, I think your line of questioning is not only unrealistic, but also arrogant, if you really think the owner would provide such sensitive information over specific details and timings of how he intends to drive the Club forward.
Are these really the key questions being asked of the Executive? If so, then no wonder they're not getting back to you.
One things for sure, RD's not pissed £40m of his own money up the wall to see us fail. Despite his obvious mistakes on the way. And I'm damn sure he can get better than a 3% return on his money elsewhere.
Murray never consulted with us when he removed that stakeholding overnight.
The days of the Chairman 'phoning you for a cozy chat are over Prague.
Our of interest, PA, how much information about the direction and strategy of your business do you share with your competitors? Would you be happy to divulge all the answers that you seek? How about if the strategy you are trying is a new, untested system, would you still be happy to tell the world?
BTW, £40m? Where on earth did you pull that figure from?
I think we are entitled to know if the main object of his ownership is to progress the club or some kind of network experiment in proving how clever he is (or some combination of both), because if he isn't focused on success for Charlton then essentially the club becomes a con on the fans. I do accept the evidence he wants to avoid relegation.
Some people take the view that he must want promotion because of the money at stake and therefore no other explanation is necessary, which I understand. Nevertheless he managed to lose a tranche of season ticket holders and a chunk of revenue last summer and is perilously close to losing another lot. It's unnecessary..
Why? Did you demand the same from Cash?
Have I, as is often the case, got that wrong?
Would you be happy with more communications just with KM?