it's a real mess isn't it. I can see why the Trust want dialogue and I understand why some want to protest. I just don't see the dialogue leading anywhere, I just see it as lip service by the Club so it appears they are listening/willing to change but ultimately nothing will change except some loyal fans will be used to do the work the Club should be doing. I hope I'm wrong but won't hold my breath unless by some miracle they invite Airman Brown and Wendy Perfect to the table and then I may change my view.
it's a real mess isn't it. I can see why the Trust want dialogue and I understand why some want to protest. I just don't see the dialogue leading anywhere, I just see it as lip service by the Club so it appears they are listening/willing to change but ultimately nothing will change
So in that case you are only really protesting for them to leave if you see no improvement value whatsoever in dialogue. Is that right?
The two aspects, protest / dialogue do not have to be mutually joined, and nor do the individuals group leading / supporting imo
For people that think it's a step in the right direction, that's an opinion that others will differ from. I personally think it's holding hands with KM in a time we quite desperately need to pile pressure on her and the regime she is working for. If you base the entire 'friendship' type agreements etc., then that is what it will be kept as. Building attendances, she is not suddenly one week going to say "You guys are nice, let me fire Roland a text and we can increase our budget tenfold, and change the entire game plan"
Way too intent on having some kind of conversation with her, that it's got one that helps her and her job safety out massively; hence why she has agreed to it.
it's a real mess isn't it. I can see why the Trust want dialogue and I understand why some want to protest. I just don't see the dialogue leading anywhere, I just see it as lip service by the Club so it appears they are listening/willing to change but ultimately nothing will change except some loyal fans will be used to do the work the Club should be doing. I hope I'm wrong but won't hold my breath unless by some miracle they invite Airman Brown and Wendy Perfect to the table and then I may change my view.
hi Large. Both Airman and Wendy are active members of the Trust, and the rest of us know just how much knowledge they have of the sales and operational side of the club. We'd be nuts not to make the very most of that knowledge.
Has anyone actually told them if they brought enough decent players and a decent manager and worked on making the club successful on the pitch then all their target 20000, their hospitality, and other crap they are trying to get us to buy into will actually be a success then and not before.
Is it only me that sees this as the clubs way to try to water down planned protests for the live televised game.
Isn't it a coincidence that after months of trying to force the club to respond to our fears, we get a load of waffle at a hastily called fans meeting and then this. Is KM that worried it might not turn out well for her on T.V. and the impact it may have on her CV.
Some people can't seem to see the wood for the trees imho.
Jesus H Christ, give the Trust guys a bit of credit and support. This is a step forward.
However, for me, a key issue would be the sprit and tone of the meeting. Was it agreed to reluctantly by RM/KM as a result of feedback from the broader meeting, or did they pursue the dialogue with more enthusiasm? Was their demeanour defensive or truly open and exploratory? Were they proposing inclusive methods of working or just agreeing to it? Not necessarily expecting the Trust to give us a blow by blow account but IF there does seem to be a genuine desire on the part of the Board to engage with us, a sense that they have perhaps (without rubbing their noses in it) leaned a lesson, then great news. IF it is throwing the dogs a bone to try to stave off further and wider protests, then its a different matter. If the Trust guys are able to give us a flavour of that, as things progress, that would be helpful in enabling us to sense whether this is real change or otherwise.
For people that think it's a step in the right direction, that's an opinion that others will differ from.
Would be really interested in your thoughts on what the alternative should be mate.
Seems like protests are going to continue in the short term, alongside the increase in dialogue and putting structures and plans in place which will make things more connected. So if that is not right, what should be the approach? No dialogue at all? Rejecting the suggestions for any of these mixed fans / clubs groups?
But isn't that exactly what a lot of people wanted to see as improvements?
If we win the next two games, Vas Te bangs in a couple of goals, 80% of the vocal discontent will go away, I can promise you that and there will be no more protests. If it goes the other way, the protests will intensify. In the meantime, dialogue is occurring and structures seem to becoming agreed that should tie a few things up better. That can only be a good thing, can't it?
And I was shouted down for daring to reveal that just such a meeting was scheduled before the Trust AGM.
Great that the dialogue is taking place, great that target 20k is happening, shame that the fact that such a meeting had already been arranged had to be kept from not only trust members not at the AGM but those fans who attended the Q and A meeting week before last.
It wasn't even scheduled before the fans' meeting last week Henry, but don't let the facts spoil a good story now.
Not scheduled? In the sense of no date set
Or not discussed/provisionally arranged?
If I've got the facts wrong you seem very reluctant to spell them out.
it's a real mess isn't it. I can see why the Trust want dialogue and I understand why some want to protest. I just don't see the dialogue leading anywhere, I just see it as lip service by the Club so it appears they are listening/willing to change but ultimately nothing will change except some loyal fans will be used to do the work the Club should be doing. I hope I'm wrong but won't hold my breath unless by some miracle they invite Airman Brown and Wendy Perfect to the table and then I may change my view.
hi Large. Both Airman and Wendy are active members of the Trust, and the rest of us know just how much knowledge they have of the sales and operational side of the club. We'd be nuts not to make the very most of that knowledge.
I meant them actually engaging with the Club, face to face.
it's a real mess isn't it. I can see why the Trust want dialogue and I understand why some want to protest. I just don't see the dialogue leading anywhere, I just see it as lip service by the Club so it appears they are listening/willing to change but ultimately nothing will change except some loyal fans will be used to do the work the Club should be doing. I hope I'm wrong but won't hold my breath unless by some miracle they invite Airman Brown and Wendy Perfect to the table and then I may change my view.
hi Large. Both Airman and Wendy are active members of the Trust, and the rest of us know just how much knowledge they have of the sales and operational side of the club. We'd be nuts not to make the very most of that knowledge.
Sorry to split further hairs, but to clear neither Wendy nor I are involved in the trust's activities or active as members of the trust. Neither am I criticising what the trust is doing, which is what it is mandated to do, but it would be wrong to see anythng we do as trust activity and vice versa.
it's a real mess isn't it. I can see why the Trust want dialogue and I understand why some want to protest. I just don't see the dialogue leading anywhere, I just see it as lip service by the Club so it appears they are listening/willing to change but ultimately nothing will change except some loyal fans will be used to do the work the Club should be doing. I hope I'm wrong but won't hold my breath unless by some miracle they invite Airman Brown and Wendy Perfect to the table and then I may change my view.
hi Large. Both Airman and Wendy are active members of the Trust, and the rest of us know just how much knowledge they have of the sales and operational side of the club. We'd be nuts not to make the very most of that knowledge.
I meant them actually engaging with the Club, face to face.
Has anyone actually told them if they brought enough decent players and a decent manager and worked on making the club successful on the pitch then all their target 20000, their hospitality, and other crap they are trying to get us to buy into will actually be a success then and not before.
Has anyone actually told them if they brought enough decent players and a decent manager and worked on making the club successful on the pitch then all their target 20000, their hospitality, and other crap they are trying to get us to buy into will actually be a success then and not before.
it's a real mess isn't it. I can see why the Trust want dialogue and I understand why some want to protest. I just don't see the dialogue leading anywhere, I just see it as lip service by the Club so it appears they are listening/willing to change but ultimately nothing will change except some loyal fans will be used to do the work the Club should be doing. I hope I'm wrong but won't hold my breath unless by some miracle they invite Airman Brown and Wendy Perfect to the table and then I may change my view.
hi Large. Both Airman and Wendy are active members of the Trust, and the rest of us know just how much knowledge they have of the sales and operational side of the club. We'd be nuts not to make the very most of that knowledge.
Sorry to split further hairs, but to clear neither Wendy nor I are involved in the trust's activities or active as members of the trust. Neither am I criticising what the trust is doing, which is what it is mandated to do, but it would be wrong to see anythng we do as trust activity and vice versa.
Sure, to clarify, what I meant is that because you know and are friendly with, sit alongside Trust board members, you both are able to tell Trust board members exactly what you think, and do so. You both sent apologies for non attendance at AGM due to other engagements. All in all that makes you one of the, I dunno 50 or so members whom we don't have to survey because we already know your views in some detail.
And we hope that we can indeed give a voice to your ideas ( possibly adopt them) about what the club should be doing, if you feel able to co-operate in that respect.
And I was shouted down for daring to reveal that just such a meeting was scheduled before the Trust AGM.
Great that the dialogue is taking place, great that target 20k is happening, shame that the fact that such a meeting had already been arranged had to be kept from not only trust members not at the AGM but those fans who attended the Q and A meeting week before last.
It wasn't even scheduled before the fans' meeting last week Henry, but don't let the facts spoil a good story now.
Not scheduled? In the sense of no date set
Or not discussed/provisionally arranged?
If I've got the facts wrong you seem very reluctant to spell them out.
It's a good step forward. I do worry that the club will just see it as a way of getting the fans do their bidding for them. I hope they are fully aware that it's a two-way street, because in order to succeed with Target 20k there needs to be a quality product on offer. That means proper investment in the playing squad must be a priority and a manager that can lead that squad competently and succesfully. If the campaign does start to attract fans, they aren't going to stay around long if they are watching a team that isn't good enough and can see all the same glaring issues from the club that we've been complaining about these past couple of years.
it's a real mess isn't it. I can see why the Trust want dialogue and I understand why some want to protest. I just don't see the dialogue leading anywhere, I just see it as lip service by the Club so it appears they are listening/willing to change but ultimately nothing will change except some loyal fans will be used to do the work the Club should be doing. I hope I'm wrong but won't hold my breath unless by some miracle they invite Airman Brown and Wendy Perfect to the table and then I may change my view.
hi Large. Both Airman and Wendy are active members of the Trust, and the rest of us know just how much knowledge they have of the sales and operational side of the club. We'd be nuts not to make the very most of that knowledge.
Sorry to split further hairs, but to clear neither Wendy nor I are involved in the trust's activities or active as members of the trust. Neither am I criticising what the trust is doing, which is what it is mandated to do, but it would be wrong to see anythng we do as trust activity and vice versa.
Sure, to clarify, what I meant is that because you know and are friendly with, sit alongside Trust board members, you both are able to tell Trust board members exactly what you think, and do so. You both sent apologies for non attendance at AGM due to other engagements. All in all that makes you one of the, I dunno 50 or so members whom we don't have to survey because we already know your views in some detail.
And we hope that we can indeed give a voice to your ideas ( possibly adopt them) about what the club should be doing, if you feel able to co-operate in that respect.
Why can Airman not be in attendance to air his views for HIMSELF? Assuming he wants to of course.
it's a real mess isn't it. I can see why the Trust want dialogue and I understand why some want to protest. I just don't see the dialogue leading anywhere, I just see it as lip service by the Club so it appears they are listening/willing to change but ultimately nothing will change except some loyal fans will be used to do the work the Club should be doing. I hope I'm wrong but won't hold my breath unless by some miracle they invite Airman Brown and Wendy Perfect to the table and then I may change my view.
hi Large. Both Airman and Wendy are active members of the Trust, and the rest of us know just how much knowledge they have of the sales and operational side of the club. We'd be nuts not to make the very most of that knowledge.
apparently not, really surprised you would assert that they are when in fact they are not.
Why does it matter Henry? Seriously, I don't get it.
It's actually a pretty important question.
If the meeting was in the pipeline but not yet scheduled before the fans meeting, I would have an issue with that.
I learnt a lesson pretty early on in an advertising agency that you do not count on anything, be it a meeting, an approval, delivery of campaign proposal, whatever, until you have rock solid, incontrovertible evidence that it is actually happening. Failure to be prudent in that way results in, at minimum, you ending up looking bloody stupid, and possibly worse, making bad decisions because you counted on something happening that did not happen.
Comments
The two aspects, protest / dialogue do not have to be mutually joined, and nor do the individuals group leading / supporting imo
Way too intent on having some kind of conversation with her, that it's got one that helps her and her job safety out massively; hence why she has agreed to it.
Isn't it a coincidence that after months of trying to force the club to respond to our fears, we get a load of waffle at a hastily called fans meeting and then this. Is KM that worried it might not turn out well for her on T.V. and the impact it may have on her CV.
Some people can't seem to see the wood for the trees imho.
We know who the prominent fans are, the ones who were fantastic in enabling us to get back to The Valley, and ones who have worked for the club.
These people need to be in meetings with Meire but that I'm afraid will not happen. Why? Perhaps Meire should be asked this.
However, for me, a key issue would be the sprit and tone of the meeting. Was it agreed to reluctantly by RM/KM as a result of feedback from the broader meeting, or did they pursue the dialogue with more enthusiasm? Was their demeanour defensive or truly open and exploratory? Were they proposing inclusive methods of working or just agreeing to it? Not necessarily expecting the Trust to give us a blow by blow account but IF there does seem to be a genuine desire on the part of the Board to engage with us, a sense that they have perhaps (without rubbing their noses in it) leaned a lesson, then great news. IF it is throwing the dogs a bone to try to stave off further and wider protests, then its a different matter. If the Trust guys are able to give us a flavour of that, as things progress, that would be helpful in enabling us to sense whether this is real change or otherwise.
Seems like protests are going to continue in the short term, alongside the increase in dialogue and putting structures and plans in place which will make things more connected. So if that is not right, what should be the approach? No dialogue at all? Rejecting the suggestions for any of these mixed fans / clubs groups?
But isn't that exactly what a lot of people wanted to see as improvements?
If we win the next two games, Vas Te bangs in a couple of goals, 80% of the vocal discontent will go away, I can promise you that and there will be no more protests. If it goes the other way, the protests will intensify. In the meantime, dialogue is occurring and structures seem to becoming agreed that should tie a few things up better. That can only be a good thing, can't it?
Not scheduled? In the sense of no date set
Or not discussed/provisionally arranged?
If I've got the facts wrong you seem very reluctant to spell them out.
He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy!
And we hope that we can indeed give a voice to your ideas ( possibly adopt them) about what the club should be doing, if you feel able to co-operate in that respect.
If the meeting was in the pipeline but not yet scheduled before the fans meeting, I would have an issue with that.
edited : since seen your 'explanation'.