Fans / Club meeting tonight
Comments
-
Alas, it was Craig Norris.PragueAddick said:
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?Addickforlife said:rikofold said:
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.PragueAddick said:
Correct.LeaburnForEngland said:
They're waiting to watch the videobobmunro said:Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
1 -
This content has been removed.
-
Ah, my mistake. Sorry, Craig.rikofold said:
Alas, it was Craig Norris.PragueAddick said:
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?Addickforlife said:rikofold said:
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.PragueAddick said:
Correct.LeaburnForEngland said:
They're waiting to watch the videobobmunro said:Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
0 -
Sounded very like him to me, and I've heard a lot of him lately.PragueAddick said:
Was it?Airman Brown said:
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?rikofold said:PragueAddick said:
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
Whom did you think it was?
It's Craig Norris, surely?0 -
Saying 'would consider investing for a push for promotion to the Prem if we were in a decent position near the top.' is a bit like saying I will pay for the taxi home if I pull that 10/10 at the bar. We won't be in that decent position.
I can speak for myself atleast...15 -
A thousand!0
-
Let me explain. Firstly I should say that I think it was intended to take the wind out of our sails. It meant I had to hurriedly rewrite my intro and made it difficult for the strategy and execution questions because the default answer was 'I just told you'.Addickforlife said:
I'm not having a go at Rikofold, as an aside it sounds like he did very well last night.PragueAddick said:
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?Addickforlife said:rikofold said:
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.PragueAddick said:
Correct.LeaburnForEngland said:
They're waiting to watch the videobobmunro said:Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
What I said, was IF the trust have the same view as that, then I'm out. Cannot for the life of me see how that presentation is a step forward.
However, to my knowledge it's the first time the club has presented anything remotely cogent that says - these are our objectives, these are some of the things we're doing to achieve them. I'm not saying it was the full story or even a great presentation, and I've outlined just two of its flaws, but I'd rather they were thinking 'how can we communicate this in a way people will start to understand' than tell themselves 'we've told them, are they deaf?' which seems to have been their previous position.
I'm certainly not defending the presentation, but I'm not going to reject a step in the right direction however small or flawed. Develop that, do it regularly, and maybe we might be on the right path.4 -
Knew Pardew would get involved somewhere..The Red Robin said:
7 -
It does nothing to prove that at all.colin1961 said:All the first bit proves is the club is moving in the right direction ....
5 -
The thing is Colin that people have issue with this regime. In many ways it was worse under the previous cowboys, but they're not here. RD and KM are, and it's those people who we've wanted to engage with us, and those who after 2 years are overseeing a club in another relegation battle. Frankly they made it much more difficult last night than it needed to be. They could have just said tell us where we're going wrong and kicked off the meeting on an open, receptive footing. Instead they tried to head us off at the pass, and far from convincingly.colin1961 said:All the first bit proves is the club is moving in the right direction .... Think people need to take a breathe and relise what a mess this club was in after Slater and TJ , today it's come out that they tired to loan money on the understanding we left the valley ......
Don't seen so bad after all !!!!12 -
Sponsored links:
-
Haven't watched the video, but if that digest is in any way representative of what went on I have absolutely no confidence in the people running this club. Let's keep the protests going...Dave2l said:http://www.london24.com/sport/football/clubs/charlton/katrien_meire_on_unacceptable_protests_english_managers_premier_league_ambition_and_roland_s_empire_1_4306231
She says the protest was "unacceptable".
So when the protest happens again against Ipswich how will they take action to prevent it? Considering it's plain unacceptable? Surely it's that bad and something must be done to stop it...
Any legal action you can take against the fans Katrien? The Lawyer....
0 -
That bar's not moved at all since earlier...razil said:8 -
I do see where you are coming from, and to a certain extent agree that it is at least a small step. But, it seems to have been designed to do exactly what it may have done to some people. Appease them without actually revealing or changing anything.rikofold said:
Let me explain. Firstly I should say that I think it was intended to take the wind out of our sails. It meant I had to hurriedly rewrite my intro and made it difficult for the strategy and execution questions because the default answer was 'I just told you'.Addickforlife said:
I'm not having a go at Rikofold, as an aside it sounds like he did very well last night.PragueAddick said:
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?Addickforlife said:rikofold said:
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.PragueAddick said:
Correct.LeaburnForEngland said:
They're waiting to watch the videobobmunro said:Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
What I said, was IF the trust have the same view as that, then I'm out. Cannot for the life of me see how that presentation is a step forward.
However, to my knowledge it's the first time the club has presented anything remotely cogent that says - these are our objectives, these are some of the things we're doing to achieve them. I'm not saying it was the full story or even a great presentation, and I've outlined just two of its flaws, but I'd rather they were thinking 'how can we communicate this in a way people will start to understand' than tell themselves 'we've told them, are they deaf?' which seems to have been their previous position.
I'm certainly not defending the presentation, but I'm not going to reject a step in the right direction however small or flawed. Develop that, do it regularly, and maybe we might be on the right path.
@ken_shabby puts it really well above. She can aim for whatever she wants, but we are currently going down the league table, our attendances are falling and we have more manager changes than Colin makes stupid posts, I want to know how this is going to change, not what the objectives are as such.
It should be a given for any sports club to aim to be a competitive team in your league, grow attendances and make the supporters feel engaged etc. Surely you don't need a presentation to say that.4 -
No, I won't have that.Addickforlife said:
I do see where you are coming from, and to a certain extent agree that it is at least a small step. But, it seems to have been designed to do exactly what it may have done to some people. Appease them without actually revealing or changing anything.rikofold said:
Let me explain. Firstly I should say that I think it was intended to take the wind out of our sails. It meant I had to hurriedly rewrite my intro and made it difficult for the strategy and execution questions because the default answer was 'I just told you'.Addickforlife said:
I'm not having a go at Rikofold, as an aside it sounds like he did very well last night.PragueAddick said:
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?Addickforlife said:rikofold said:
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.PragueAddick said:
Correct.LeaburnForEngland said:
They're waiting to watch the videobobmunro said:Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
What I said, was IF the trust have the same view as that, then I'm out. Cannot for the life of me see how that presentation is a step forward.
However, to my knowledge it's the first time the club has presented anything remotely cogent that says - these are our objectives, these are some of the things we're doing to achieve them. I'm not saying it was the full story or even a great presentation, and I've outlined just two of its flaws, but I'd rather they were thinking 'how can we communicate this in a way people will start to understand' than tell themselves 'we've told them, are they deaf?' which seems to have been their previous position.
I'm certainly not defending the presentation, but I'm not going to reject a step in the right direction however small or flawed. Develop that, do it regularly, and maybe we might be on the right path.
@ken_shabby puts it really well above. She can aim for whatever she wants, but we are currently going down the league table, our attendances are falling and we have more manager changes than Colin makes stupid posts, I want to know how this is going to change, not what the objectives are as such.
It should be a given for any sports club to aim to be a competitive team in your league, grow attendances and make the supporters feel engaged etc. Surely you don't need a presentation to say that.
Every post Colin's made has been a big success...4 -
Sorry, Meldrew - too much to take in at the moment! Hmmm...strategy of breakeven - I think it was one of the more esteemed posters on here who pointed out that breaking even is a business measurement, not a strategy.meldrew66 said:Weegie - I took from last night that the strategy is, indeed, to break even in the Championship and that this would be possible through TV money, target 20k and, probably most significantly, sales of home grown Academy players. I think it was RM who said that the owner reviews the position every January and would consider investing for a push for promotion to the Prem if we were in a decent position near the top. It would be great if true. The problem is that CAFC is notoriously appalling in the final third of most seasons!
My head hurts...and haven't even got the whole video to watch yet...
2 -
0
-
OK - I read it in a different context, my mistake.Hartleypete said:@rikofold
Don't get to upset I said IF, please read before making silly remarks.0 -
Today I visited a self made Man, some one who supplies something I need and want and on his wall was a phrase from Churchill that struck a cord with me as a valuable consideration when times get tough and I need to step back and make calls in my business direction,
All of you that are rightly angry with what you perceive to be important to you and insulting
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak
It's also what's required to sit down and listen
But more than that this one hot home the most
To improve is to change to be perfect is to change often
May be RD thinks the same as the last one
Myself I think that the fury and anger here will lose the opportunity to sit back and listen to everything all cafc fans (not the club necessarily are saying) and find your battle plans from there3 -
Re. the infamous L'Echo article, I can assure you as one of the people that translated from the French to English, I checked my translation over and over, word by word, to make sure I didn't misrepresent it or add anything to make it inflammatory. I actually softened the tone of the comments attributed to her in the Belgian media article, and the raw Google translate reflected the tone quite well, too.PL54 said:Interesting to compare the reaction to the tweet about her hatred of older fans versus what was actually said.
KM: Yes I know the interview was translated twice and badly. I was talking about bringing in different things for the younger fans, like family zone etc. Older fans are upset but I wasn't discriminating against the elderly. It is bad business if you don't value your customers, a [%] of our fans are over 50.
If there was any misrepresentation, it was in the Belgian article, which she may be saying was a French language translation of an interview or dialogue carried out in English. For example, the article contained nothing about family zone.
She really is a slippery customer...6 -
Can you put NLA back on now? ;-)nth london addick said:Today I visited a self made Man, some one who supplies something I need and want and on his wall was a phrase from Churchill that struck a cord with me as a valuable consideration when times get tough and I need to step back and make calls in my business direction,
All of you that are rightly angry with what you perceive to be important to you and insulting
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak
It's also what's required to sit down and listen
But more than that this one hot home the most
To improve is to change to be perfect is to change often
May be RD thinks the same as the last one
Myself I think that the fury and anger here will lose the opportunity to sit back and listen to everything all cafc fans (not the club necessarily are saying) and find your battle plans from there2 -
Sponsored links:
-
On the evening she said the interview was given in Dutch and then translated into Belgian for the article, and then translated into English for us. I'm led to believe it was supposed to be about football business/finance but the journo wrote a different piece, as is their wont.MountsfieldPark said:
Re. the infamous L'Echo article, I can assure you as one of the people that translated from the French to English, I checked my translation over and over, word by word, to make sure I didn't misrepresent it or add anything to make it inflammatory. I actually softened the tone of the comments attributed to her in the Belgian media article, and the raw Google translate reflected the tone quite well, too.PL54 said:Interesting to compare the reaction to the tweet about her hatred of older fans versus what was actually said.
KM: Yes I know the interview was translated twice and badly. I was talking about bringing in different things for the younger fans, like family zone etc. Older fans are upset but I wasn't discriminating against the elderly. It is bad business if you don't value your customers, a [%] of our fans are over 50.
If there was any misrepresentation, it was in the Belgian article, which she may be saying was a French language translation of an interview or dialogue carried out in English. For example, the article contained nothing about family zone.
She really is a slippery customer...0 -
The full version of last night's fans' meeting is currently processing in @YouTube and will be available to watch this evening #cafc
— Charlton Athletic FC (@CAFCofficial) November 11, 20150 -
I wish I had took life as seriously ten years ago as I do now, I quite like the new me, I have to admit being away from the club and the emotion may make me seem condescending and I don't mean to be, I just have learnt there is a time for fighting full on and a time for planning that attack and right now cafc doesn't need the full on furious attack that some believe it does, once you have used that card what do you have left, you will be rebuilding trust to get infront of them where as save it till the last push and you can get it over the line as a final phase and be in front of them already
3 -
No condescension detected here, bless your little heart ;-)0
-
NLA.
Are you also considering becoming a vegetarian
? 5 -
Ok, thanks. That gives her some latitude for being misrepresented, but I doubt he invented the comment about season ticket holders of 60 years thinking they know everything, for example, because that was consistent with everything attributed to her. So he went with the bits that were supposed to be off the record and ignored the boring stuff about balance sheets, etc. I wonder what the journo would say to that.rikofold said:
On the evening she said the interview was given in Dutch and then translated into Belgian for the article, and then translated into English for us. I'm led to believe it was supposed to be about football business/finance but the journo wrote a different piece, as is their wont.MountsfieldPark said:
Re. the infamous L'Echo article, I can assure you as one of the people that translated from the French to English, I checked my translation over and over, word by word, to make sure I didn't misrepresent it or add anything to make it inflammatory. I actually softened the tone of the comments attributed to her in the Belgian media article, and the raw Google translate reflected the tone quite well, too.PL54 said:Interesting to compare the reaction to the tweet about her hatred of older fans versus what was actually said.
KM: Yes I know the interview was translated twice and badly. I was talking about bringing in different things for the younger fans, like family zone etc. Older fans are upset but I wasn't discriminating against the elderly. It is bad business if you don't value your customers, a [%] of our fans are over 50.
If there was any misrepresentation, it was in the Belgian article, which she may be saying was a French language translation of an interview or dialogue carried out in English. For example, the article contained nothing about family zone.
She really is a slippery customer...0 -
Never meat feeds the anger and suppresses bad thoughts0
-
I think his famous balls have shrunk ;-)seth plum said:NLA.
Are you also considering becoming a vegetarian ?1 -
More ballsy that ever0
-
Upper field first, might be why it took an age to render. If it's shot progressive you're basically asking the computer to come up with the same amount of frames in the video again.The Red Robin said:
Bloody joke our comms department
Edit: just seen the timeline is upper first... Comms need a new camera. And a new faster computer!1
