Looks like I am invited to attend the meeting. My wife told me on Saturday that 'Paul' from Charlton called on Thursday asking if I was interested in attending the meeting. As I was out for the evening, she gave him my mobile and, sure enough, there is a missed call from the club. No message was left. I will call them today to see if my place has gone (which is probably the case) but fingers crossed. For what it is worth, I am not a member of any groups or forums - only a long standing season ticket holder and Valley Gold member. I just thought I'd share that with you as I see someone was querying the basis of who was invited by the club.
An excellent opportunity to use your famous catchphrase
Can I suggest that anyone going thinks very carefully about how they can get their question(s) out all in one hit. A lot of the ideas there have been so far have been along the lines of, 'ask this, then when they reply, ask this'. I suspect that they may try to break up this type of questioning by allowing people only one question and picking speakers at random. The justification for this will be that there's limited time and it gives everyone an opportunity to speak once - the reality will be that they can stop any investigative probing in its tracks.
Ok, just called the club to confirm my place at the meeting tomorrow and was told that it had been re-allocated because they needed names and numbers confirmed by the end of the week. Obviously not surprised but more than a little gutted that I cannot be there.
I think this questionnaire is barking down the wrong tree completely. I answered 6 and 7 but I'm not interested in any of those things now. My only and sole interest with regards to RD and KM is that they resign and sell the club. As a trust member, I would be disappointed and angered if those trust reps attending the meeting do so and start entertaining those sort of conversations about how to improve things and the relationship with current owners etc. I'm not interested in going forward in any way shape or form with the current owners even if he says he's going to spend 100m on the squad - I don't believe it and I want them out. The meeting should be very short -explain that supporters interests are only in them selling and the only discussions we are are willing to have is how that process can be expedited and anything we can do to assist it. If they don't agree we Simply say okay if that's your stance then expect further action from our side, and we leave the meeting immediately.
Is it going to be:-
"OK Paul if that's what you want I'll get on to Roland in the morning. Can you let Roland know who he should sell the club to and how much he should accept."
Or
"I see you got 4 likes for this suggestion on CL. Next question please".
The only action you are suggesting is "more action". Why is "more action" precluded by first exploring how far we can move Roland to either sell up, or delegate the running of the club to a proper CEO, a proper board and a proper manager?
It is an opportunity to get credibility for the fans being able to have a grown up conversation with the club, as well as passionate protest. Roland's attitude and refusal to engage might be explained in part by his experiences of fans bashing out diatribe on the keyboard and being forced to communicate with him through offensive slogans and personal attacks.
I'm not saying fans' actions are not justified, they are, just saying it's worth trying a different approach than be satisfied with simply venting anger.
Perhaps the survey might have included the following question to identify how much you represent the view of fans-
"Do you think fans should attempt to engage in formal dialogue with the club to address disaffection of support?
@Dippenhall - we asked something close to that question on the previous survey pre the Trust AGM (20th Oct), and did not wish to be too repetitive on this one. 80% of respondents said it was very (50%) or quite (30%) important for us to pursue ongoing communication with Katrien Meire.
Thanks to all who have completed this survey so far - we have well over 400 responses, but still time for more. If you have not done it yet, please spare a couple of mins:
I think this questionnaire is barking down the wrong tree completely. I answered 6 and 7 but I'm not interested in any of those things now. My only and sole interest with regards to RD and KM is that they resign and sell the club. As a trust member, I would be disappointed and angered if those trust reps attending the meeting do so and start entertaining those sort of conversations about how to improve things and the relationship with current owners etc. I'm not interested in going forward in any way shape or form with the current owners even if he says he's going to spend 100m on the squad - I don't believe it and I want them out. The meeting should be very short -explain that supporters interests are only in them selling and the only discussions we are are willing to have is how that process can be expedited and anything we can do to assist it. If they don't agree we Simply say okay if that's your stance then expect further action from our side, and we leave the meeting immediately.
Is it going to be:-
"OK Paul if that's what you want I'll get on to Roland in the morning. Can you let Roland know who he should sell the club to and how much he should accept."
Or
"I see you got 4 likes for this suggestion on CL. Next question please".
The only action you are suggesting is "more action". Why is "more action" precluded by first exploring how far we can move Roland to either sell up, or delegate the running of the club to a proper CEO, a proper board and a proper manager?
It is an opportunity to get credibility for the fans being able to have a grown up conversation with the club, as well as passionate protest. Roland's attitude and refusal to engage might be explained in part by his experiences of fans bashing out diatribe on the keyboard and being forced to communicate with him through offensive slogans and personal attacks.
I'm not saying fans' actions are not justified, they are, just saying it's worth trying a different approach than be satisfied with simply venting anger.
Perhaps the survey might have included the following question to identify how much you represent the view of fans-
"Do you think fans should attempt to engage in formal dialogue with the club to address disaffection of support?
The Trust has a responsibility to represent all of its members views. Whilst many supporters (Trust members or otherwise) might be satisfied with KM and RD agreeing to make wholesale changes to the way they run the club, there are plenty of other supporters, myself included, who consider the situation to now be irretrievable.
The club has been woefully mismanaged throughout RD's ownership and has declined numerous previous requests for constructive dialogue, not to mention completely ignoring any and all correspondence from individual supporters and consequently acting in breach of its own charter. I won't even start on the various examples of dishonesty and incompetence throughout RD's ownership, as they are too numerous to mention. For me, this meeting is a case of too little, too late, as any confidence or trust in RD and KM disappeared long ago, and therefore the only fully satisfactory solution for me is for the club to be put up for sale
That is not "simply venting anger". That is a valid and fair position to take. I don't agree that the Trust representative should walk out of the meeting if KM doesn't immediately agree, on behalf of Roland, to put the club up for sale. However, I do think that the Trust should state that a number of its members feel that we have now reached an untenable situation in regard to KM's position and RD's ownership.
The survey is useful, and I have completed it. However, I think it would have been better if it had allowed more scope to capture the views of those supporters who feel that all the bridges have already been burnt.
Stability - we need a 'Manager' who's going to be around for more than a few months
Communication - just let us know what the big picture is
Fan engagement - we have dwindling support. We need initiatives - Target 20,000 - football for a fiver
No gimmicks
Charlton Live - no disrespect to Louis but we need a Mark Mansfield or Peter Finch
Charlton people running the club - Rick n Mick, Ian Carwright, Steve Dixon. They're the passion, the heartbeat and people we, the supporters, can relate to
I hope KM understand the amount of distain there is towards her as CEO.
Please may someone make it clear that 'A large amount of your customers, do not want you in the position of CEO. Due to your insulting comments and behaviours. If anyone needs to be replaced in this club. You are at the top of that list'.
I hope KM understand the amount of distain there is towards her as CEO.
Please may someone make it clear that 'A large amount of your customers, do not want you in the position of CEO. Due to your insulting comments and behaviours. If anyone needs to be replaced in this club. You are at the top of that list'.
Duchatelet should be having a strong word in her earhole over Saturday, very unprofessional.
Wouldn't it make sense to arrange a protest outside the fans meeting. Keep the pressure on.
Could not agree more.Plus live link to meeting so everone who wants to follow this meeting can .IE LIVE STEAM.
You'll be lucky if they don't get everyone in attendance to agree that nothing goes out of the room and they have to Swear allegiance to The Queen and The Official Secrets Act.
The Trust has a responsibility to represent all of its members views.
Exactly, that's why one of the things it is doing is attempting dialogue.
Why assume the Trust will not make it clear that many just want RD to go? Given the protests and media coverage, why assume it is even necessary and what does it add?
I don't know what will be said by the Trust, but reference to the strength of feeling of fans and desire to see new owners can hardly be avoided, so what is your concern?
Sorry, I don't see the point of your carping, apart from you can't dictate that the only thing it should do is arrange official protests.
I think this questionnaire is barking down the wrong tree completely. I answered 6 and 7 but I'm not interested in any of those things now. My only and sole interest with regards to RD and KM is that they resign and sell the club. As a trust member, I would be disappointed and angered if those trust reps attending the meeting do so and start entertaining those sort of conversations about how to improve things and the relationship with current owners etc. I'm not interested in going forward in any way shape or form with the current owners even if he says he's going to spend 100m on the squad - I don't believe it and I want them out. The meeting should be very short -explain that supporters interests are only in them selling and the only discussions we are are willing to have is how that process can be expedited and anything we can do to assist it. If they don't agree we Simply say okay if that's your stance then expect further action from our side, and we leave the meeting immediately.
You know that's what a survey is for, right? Exploring different views?
Well its gone about it in a strange way then. Up to Q 6 Why only provide a list which MUST be selected from? And why must we select our agreement with three of someone elses ideas before we can progress? Without even the option to modify them.
That's not asking for different views. It certainly isnt exploring different views. Its telling people what they must think are priorities among a few ideas someone else has thrown together. I admire the aim but sadly there's no openness to other ideas until Q7.
Comments field?
Actually it's not a "few ideas someone else has thrown together" - these are the common things being received in the feedback requested.
I presume you can only get to that after selecting the three statements you are forced to rank?
Fair enough, but it's only intended as a flash survey.
OK. I hope it goes well.
It is good to see the trust coming into its own as time progresses and has an important role to play.
What is most important is that Meire, not Murray, answer the questions honestly and that the fans come away being happy with the outcome of the meeting.
Then we can wait to see if Meire backs up the answers that she gives.
I still think that tomorrow is going to be an eventful evening, best of luck all that are attending.
I think it's important to try and make the meeting constructive.
If the first questioner just slags off KM and RD, and says they should "go away" asap, then the meeting will go nowhere. Until RD gets a good offer, he won't be selling, so we need to persuade them to do things a bit differently in the mean time.
Having seen KM talk at a Bromley Addicks meeting, she came across as being approachable and willing to listen. My views on her have since changed but still believe she's clever and capable of avoiding the most basic questions. I've got faith in those attending will ask decent questions and hopefully provide evidence of systematic failures. Good luck to the lucky few.
I think it's important to try and make the meeting constructive.
If the first questioner just slags off KM and RD, and says they should "go away" asap, then the meeting will go nowhere. Until RD gets a good offer, he won't be selling, so we need to persuade them to do things a bit differently in the mean time.
I think it's important to try and make the meeting constructive.
If the first questioner just slags off KM and RD, and says they should "go away" asap, then the meeting will go nowhere. Until RD gets a good offer, he won't be selling, so we need to persuade them to do things a bit differently in the mean time.
Spot on.
Yes, this this and this again. There is no point in doing anything other than allowing the club to have their say. It needs to be a meeting that is driven by mutual respect so that the club and particularly Katrienfeels comfortable enough to be able to trust supporters with what she needs to say.
Becoming unnecessarily adversarial will be counter-productive, but I had opportunity today to make clear to Katrien that we the fans have got ourselves organised in order that the best opportunity for a dialogue is available to all, and that we expect the club to play their part in that. What we will be asking will be direct and to the point, but will give opportunity for the club to communicate with us.
I think realistically we also probably need to accept that we may need to exhibit a little patience as RM and particularly KM may need to overcome some initial nervousness and defensiveness in light of the weekend's protests. That doesn't mean letting them off the hook, but being forbearing with our objectives for outcomes from the meeting to the fore.
I think it's important to try and make the meeting constructive.
If the first questioner just slags off KM and RD, and says they should "go away" asap, then the meeting will go nowhere. Until RD gets a good offer, he won't be selling, so we need to persuade them to do things a bit differently in the mean time.
Spot on.
Yes, this this and this again. There is no point in doing anything other than allowing the club to have their say. It needs to be a meeting that is driven by mutual respect so that the club and particularly Katrienfeels comfortable enough to be able to trust supporters with what she needs to say.
Becoming unnecessarily adversarial will be counter-productive, but I had opportunity today to make clear to Katrien that we the fans have got ourselves organised in order that the best opportunity for a dialogue is available to all, and that we expect the club to play their part in that. What we will be asking will be direct and to the point, but will give opportunity for the club to communicate with us.
I think realistically we also probably need to accept that we may need to exhibit a little patience as RM and particularly KM may need to overcome some initial nervousness and defensiveness in light of the weekend's protests. That doesn't mean letting them off the hook, but being forbearing with our objectives for outcomes from the meeting to the fore.
I think it's important to try and make the meeting constructive.
If the first questioner just slags off KM and RD, and says they should "go away" asap, then the meeting will go nowhere. Until RD gets a good offer, he won't be selling, so we need to persuade them to do things a bit differently in the mean time.
Spot on.
Yes, this this and this again. There is no point in doing anything other than allowing the club to have their say. It needs to be a meeting that is driven by mutual respect so that the club and particularly Katrienfeels comfortable enough to be able to trust supporters with what she needs to say.
Becoming unnecessarily adversarial will be counter-productive, but I had opportunity today to make clear to Katrien that we the fans have got ourselves organised in order that the best opportunity for a dialogue is available to all, and that we expect the club to play their part in that. What we will be asking will be direct and to the point, but will give opportunity for the club to communicate with us.
I think realistically we also probably need to accept that we may need to exhibit a little patience as RM and particularly KM may need to overcome some initial nervousness and defensiveness in light of the weekend's protests. That doesn't mean letting them off the hook, but being forbearing with our objectives for outcomes from the meeting to the fore.
Not sure what Murray has got to do with all this.
We're invited to meet him and KM. Have you been under a rock all this time?
I think it's important to try and make the meeting constructive.
If the first questioner just slags off KM and RD, and says they should "go away" asap, then the meeting will go nowhere. Until RD gets a good offer, he won't be selling, so we need to persuade them to do things a bit differently in the mean time.
Spot on.
Yes, this this and this again. There is no point in doing anything other than allowing the club to have their say. It needs to be a meeting that is driven by mutual respect so that the club and particularly Katrienfeels comfortable enough to be able to trust supporters with what she needs to say.
Becoming unnecessarily adversarial will be counter-productive, but I had opportunity today to make clear to Katrien that we the fans have got ourselves organised in order that the best opportunity for a dialogue is available to all, and that we expect the club to play their part in that. What we will be asking will be direct and to the point, but will give opportunity for the club to communicate with us.
I think realistically we also probably need to accept that we may need to exhibit a little patience as RM and particularly KM may need to overcome some initial nervousness and defensiveness in light of the weekend's protests. That doesn't mean letting them off the hook, but being forbearing with our objectives for outcomes from the meeting to the fore.
Not sure what Murray has got to do with all this.
We're invited to meet him and KM. Have you been under a rock all this time?
Obviously not, the questions only need to be given to Meire, Murray is the minder for her.
I think it's important to try and make the meeting constructive.
If the first questioner just slags off KM and RD, and says they should "go away" asap, then the meeting will go nowhere. Until RD gets a good offer, he won't be selling, so we need to persuade them to do things a bit differently in the mean time.
Spot on.
Yes, this this and this again. There is no point in doing anything other than allowing the club to have their say. It needs to be a meeting that is driven by mutual respect so that the club and particularly Katrienfeels comfortable enough to be able to trust supporters with what she needs to say.
Becoming unnecessarily adversarial will be counter-productive, but I had opportunity today to make clear to Katrien that we the fans have got ourselves organised in order that the best opportunity for a dialogue is available to all, and that we expect the club to play their part in that. What we will be asking will be direct and to the point, but will give opportunity for the club to communicate with us.
I think realistically we also probably need to accept that we may need to exhibit a little patience as RM and particularly KM may need to overcome some initial nervousness and defensiveness in light of the weekend's protests. That doesn't mean letting them off the hook, but being forbearing with our objectives for outcomes from the meeting to the fore.
I imagine that they'll be a little less nervous after Saturday's result. Can you imagine the atmosphere if we had got tonked 5-0 as many were expecting...
What the meeting probably needs a someone independent and trusted to chair it, a Dimbleby figure. Someone to stop unhelpful abuse or repetitious ramblings from Charlton fans, but also to stop KM giving 15 minute prepared, irrelevant speeches.
The first isuue is the squad, and spending the required money to have a squad that is big enough and has players of the appropriate quality to compete in the championship. Also the stability of the squad so that we do not end up every season releasing are best players and not replaceing them, leading to the team fighting off relegation every season.
The Trust has a responsibility to represent all of its members views.
Exactly, that's why one of the things it is doing is attempting dialogue.
Why assume the Trust will not make it clear that many just want RD to go? Given the protests and media coverage, why assume it is even necessary and what does it add?
I don't know what will be said by the Trust, but reference to the strength of feeling of fans and desire to see new owners can hardly be avoided, so what is your concern?
Sorry, I don't see the point of your carping, apart from you can't dictate that the only thing it should do is arrange official protests.
Sorry, where have I said that, or anything remotely like that? Not understanding the hostile and misguided response.
Do we have any idea how this meeting is going to be relayed to the fans afterwards? Is there going to be a video of the whole event, or a statement from the club, or do we just rely on posters on here letting us know what happened?
You are on the weakest ground telling an owner what he should be spending. No owner will say here's my chequebook, write the numbers in and I will sign the cheques.
All sorts of reasons can be given for not spending that you don't have the facts to challenge, and that will end the debate. It's got to be about HOW money is spent, HOW the squad is managed, HOW decisions are made and HOW they intend to build/keep the fan base in the absence of promotion.
Comments
So the club continues to send out invitations, even on Saturday? They're trying hard, I'll give them that.
"OK Paul if that's what you want I'll get on to Roland in the morning. Can you let Roland know who he should sell the club to and how much he should accept."
Or
"I see you got 4 likes for this suggestion on CL. Next question please".
The only action you are suggesting is "more action". Why is "more action" precluded by first exploring how far we can move Roland to either sell up, or delegate the running of the club to a proper CEO, a proper board and a proper manager?
It is an opportunity to get credibility for the fans being able to have a grown up conversation with the club, as well as passionate protest. Roland's attitude and refusal to engage might be explained in part by his experiences of fans bashing out diatribe on the keyboard and being forced to communicate with him through offensive slogans and personal attacks.
I'm not saying fans' actions are not justified, they are, just saying it's worth trying a different approach than be satisfied with simply venting anger.
Perhaps the survey might have included the following question to identify how much you represent the view of fans-
"Do you think fans should attempt to engage in formal dialogue with the club to address disaffection of support?
Thanks to all who have completed this survey so far - we have well over 400 responses, but still time for more. If you have not done it yet, please spare a couple of mins:
https://surveymonkey.com/r/NDJP3ZJ
The club has been woefully mismanaged throughout RD's ownership and has declined numerous previous requests for constructive dialogue, not to mention completely ignoring any and all correspondence from individual supporters and consequently acting in breach of its own charter. I won't even start on the various examples of dishonesty and incompetence throughout RD's ownership, as they are too numerous to mention. For me, this meeting is a case of too little, too late, as any confidence or trust in RD and KM disappeared long ago, and therefore the only fully satisfactory solution for me is for the club to be put up for sale
That is not "simply venting anger". That is a valid and fair position to take. I don't agree that the Trust representative should walk out of the meeting if KM doesn't immediately agree, on behalf of Roland, to put the club up for sale. However, I do think that the Trust should state that a number of its members feel that we have now reached an untenable situation in regard to KM's position and RD's ownership.
The survey is useful, and I have completed it. However, I think it would have been better if it had allowed more scope to capture the views of those supporters who feel that all the bridges have already been burnt.
Stability - we need a 'Manager' who's going to be around for more than a few months
Communication - just let us know what the big picture is
Fan engagement - we have dwindling support. We need initiatives - Target 20,000 - football for a fiver
No gimmicks
Charlton Live - no disrespect to Louis but we need a Mark Mansfield or Peter Finch
Charlton people running the club - Rick n Mick, Ian Carwright, Steve Dixon. They're the passion, the heartbeat and people we, the supporters, can relate to
Please may someone make it clear that 'A large amount of your customers, do not want you in the position of CEO. Due to your insulting comments and behaviours. If anyone needs to be replaced in this club. You are at the top of that list'.
Why assume the Trust will not make it clear that many just want RD to go? Given the protests and media coverage, why assume it is even necessary and what does it add?
I don't know what will be said by the Trust, but reference to the strength of feeling of fans and desire to see new owners can hardly be avoided, so what is your concern?
Sorry, I don't see the point of your carping, apart from you can't dictate that the only thing it should do is arrange official protests.
It is good to see the trust coming into its own as time progresses and has an important role to play.
Then we can wait to see if Meire backs up the answers that she gives.
I still think that tomorrow is going to be an eventful evening, best of luck all that are attending.
If the first questioner just slags off KM and RD, and says they should "go away" asap, then the meeting will go nowhere. Until RD gets a good offer, he won't be selling, so we need to persuade them to do things a bit differently in the mean time.
Good luck to the lucky few.
Becoming unnecessarily adversarial will be counter-productive, but I had opportunity today to make clear to Katrien that we the fans have got ourselves organised in order that the best opportunity for a dialogue is available to all, and that we expect the club to play their part in that. What we will be asking will be direct and to the point, but will give opportunity for the club to communicate with us.
I think realistically we also probably need to accept that we may need to exhibit a little patience as RM and particularly KM may need to overcome some initial nervousness and defensiveness in light of the weekend's protests. That doesn't mean letting them off the hook, but being forbearing with our objectives for outcomes from the meeting to the fore.
By the way, I don't think the club are in any doubt that there is a fair section of the crowd prepared to protest...
What the meeting probably needs a someone independent and trusted to chair it, a Dimbleby figure. Someone to stop unhelpful abuse or repetitious ramblings from Charlton fans, but also to stop KM giving 15 minute prepared, irrelevant speeches.
All sorts of reasons can be given for not spending that you don't have the facts to challenge, and that will end the debate. It's got to be about HOW money is spent, HOW the squad is managed, HOW decisions are made and HOW they intend to build/keep the fan base in the absence of promotion.