Apologies for not saying anything sooner, but the Committee needed to release the statement first.
I'm not going to go into any detail about the discussion itself, because it was of a certain nature and the ability to speak freely without the fear of being reported was and remains vitally important. Please don't ask me to do that.
I will say that it was a long meeting and I don't think any of you would have been disappointed in how the supporter representatives carried your concerns in the meeting. The views expressed here and in the emails to Sharron were strongly and robustly presented to the meeting and fully discussed.
I understand why people have decided to cancel their membership, and it's individuals' own decisions of course. I will simply say that cancelling membership has a long term impact on a scheme that is intended to provide future benefit for the club. And of course the smaller the fund, the smaller the leverage we have.
Now I'm out tonight so please don't expect me to spend hours justifying the intricacies of the wording of the statement. I simply ask that you take time understand what @Weegie Addick hinted at: it is a Committee's statement and by definition it has to be agreed by all parties, including the club. Therefore it has a certain balance in the lines, but feel free to read between them a little to understand more fully what is actually being said.
All seems very unclear, I dont want to over react just yet and will hold on a bit longer but can see my membership being cancelled soon and will use the £10 a month to give to the protest fund instead.
Want to know what was actually said at the meeting, was KM comments in Dublin about the club being a farm for Premier League clubs challenged? and what was the answer?
Members are free to request the minutes of meeting.
Want to know what was actually said at the meeting, was KM comments in Dublin about the club being a farm for Premier League clubs challenged? and what was the answer?
Members are free to request the minutes of meeting.
So donations have now ceased because the football club couldn't give the two fans representatives decent answers on the questions asked ? That seems like the best position and if I'm right anyone who was considering quitting will surely be satisfied that they should stay in now ?
No, that isn't what has been said.
It says "until later in the year" but doesn't specify when that it.
It could be until June in which case nothing has changed. Not a criticism but it isn't specific.
I have asked Sharon to ask Matt and she has said that she will do so. I have to say that is very efficient of her.
Last comment for now, but just to reiterate that reading between the lines is the art when a statement is issued from two parties who may or may not agree on everything discussed. Ask yourself that if it was widely known that June was the next scheduled donation date would the supporters reps go on public record to say nothing's changed here?
Thanks @rikofold. I'll be holding off from cancelling for now, but can't promise anything long term. Hopefully, the message might actually start sinking in to the club now. I doubt it, but you and the committee have done right.
Some good arguments on both sides here but having thought about it, I have cancelled by VG subscription. Under the current ownership, I feel too little affinity with the club at the moment.
So donations have now ceased because the football club couldn't give the two fans representatives decent answers on the questions asked ? That seems like the best position and if I'm right anyone who was considering quitting will surely be satisfied that they should stay in now ?
No, that isn't what has been said.
It says "until later in the year" but doesn't specify when that it.
It could be until June in which case nothing has changed. Not a criticism but it isn't specific.
I have asked Sharon to ask Matt and she has said that she will do so. I have to say that is very efficient of her.
Last comment for now, but just to reiterate that reading between the lines is the art when a statement is issued from two parties who may or may not agree on everything discussed. Ask yourself that if it was widely known that June was the next scheduled donation date would the supporters reps go on public record to say nothing's changed here?
I appreciate you explaining as far as you can and understand that not everything can be divulged.
But I'd rather not read between the lines.
Have the supporters' reps gone on public record to say nothings changed or have they gone on record to say that something has changed? I can see neither in the VG statement.
I'm also aware that the CEO is a lawyer and so should be quite well versed in interpreting that statement in a way that suits her but perhaps does not suit members.
I can also not see any reference to the members meeting that was called for.
I have written to Sharon asking for clarification.
Yes, you have misunderstood. I am paying money now - if in June it is decided to pay money to the club, the money I am now paying will go to the club. The decision has to be made now, no farting about, no sitting on the fence explaining the scheme. We are at war with the owner or we are not. It may be a gesture, but gestures need to be made and they need to be made NOW.
You realise the people you're criticising for not updating you immediately aren't actually paid by Valley Gold ? Rich lives quite far from the Valley and has a very young family, getting home and seeing his folks is slightly more important than satisfying your insatiable desire for some comment from the committee meeting tonight (which lets be honest you only want so you can undermine it and then declare you're quitting VG anyway).
Completely unreasonable from you to be fair Muttley.
Isn't there 4 other people who can tell you, me,everyone what's going on ?
So donations have now ceased because the football club couldn't give the two fans representatives decent answers on the questions asked ? That seems like the best position and if I'm right anyone who was considering quitting will surely be satisfied that they should stay in now ?
No, that isn't what has been said.
It says "until later in the year" but doesn't specify when that it.
It could be until June in which case nothing has changed. Not a criticism but it isn't specific.
I have asked Sharon to ask Matt and she has said that she will do so. I have to say that is very efficient of her.
Last comment for now, but just to reiterate that reading between the lines is the art when a statement is issued from two parties who may or may not agree on everything discussed. Ask yourself that if it was widely known that June was the next scheduled donation date would the supporters reps go on public record to say nothing's changed here?
I appreciate you explaining as far as you can and understand that not everything can be divulged.
But I'd rather not read between the lines.
Have the supporters' reps gone on public record to say nothings changed or have they gone on record to say that something has changed? I can see neither in the VG statement.
I'm also aware that the CEO is a lawyer and so should be quite well versed in interpreting that statement in a way that suits her but perhaps does not suit members.
I can also not see any reference to the members meeting that was called for.
I have written to Sharon asking for clarification.
I will also ask her for minutes of the meeting.
I think I'm at liberty to divulge that fewer than 2% of members requested a meeting.
So donations have now ceased because the football club couldn't give the two fans representatives decent answers on the questions asked ? That seems like the best position and if I'm right anyone who was considering quitting will surely be satisfied that they should stay in now ?
No, that isn't what has been said.
It says "until later in the year" but doesn't specify when that it.
It could be until June in which case nothing has changed. Not a criticism but it isn't specific.
I have asked Sharon to ask Matt and she has said that she will do so. I have to say that is very efficient of her.
Last comment for now, but just to reiterate that reading between the lines is the art when a statement is issued from two parties who may or may not agree on everything discussed. Ask yourself that if it was widely known that June was the next scheduled donation date would the supporters reps go on public record to say nothing's changed here?
I appreciate you explaining as far as you can and understand that not everything can be divulged.
But I'd rather not read between the lines.
Have the supporters' reps gone on public record to say nothings changed or have they gone on record to say that something has changed? I can see neither in the VG statement.
I'm also aware that the CEO is a lawyer and so should be quite well versed in interpreting that statement in a way that suits her but perhaps does not suit members.
I can also not see any reference to the members meeting that was called for.
I have written to Sharon asking for clarification.
I will also ask her for minutes of the meeting.
When you get them can you stick them on here please.
So donations have now ceased because the football club couldn't give the two fans representatives decent answers on the questions asked ? That seems like the best position and if I'm right anyone who was considering quitting will surely be satisfied that they should stay in now ?
No, that isn't what has been said.
It says "until later in the year" but doesn't specify when that it.
It could be until June in which case nothing has changed. Not a criticism but it isn't specific.
I have asked Sharon to ask Matt and she has said that she will do so. I have to say that is very efficient of her.
Last comment for now, but just to reiterate that reading between the lines is the art when a statement is issued from two parties who may or may not agree on everything discussed. Ask yourself that if it was widely known that June was the next scheduled donation date would the supporters reps go on public record to say nothing's changed here?
I appreciate you explaining as far as you can and understand that not everything can be divulged.
But I'd rather not read between the lines.
Have the supporters' reps gone on public record to say nothings changed or have they gone on record to say that something has changed? I can see neither in the VG statement.
I'm also aware that the CEO is a lawyer and so should be quite well versed in interpreting that statement in a way that suits her but perhaps does not suit members.
I can also not see any reference to the members meeting that was called for.
I have written to Sharon asking for clarification.
I will also ask her for minutes of the meeting.
I think I'm at liberty to divulge that fewer than 2% of members requested a meeting.
Is that a real 2% or a Katrien 2%? ; - )
Still, only another 8% to get. Just need to publicise it more.
One of the biggest things that has pissed me off about the circus that is CAFC is the use of "look how many guys are coming through the academy, isn't it great....."
The amount of debuts from these kids is a sign of the clubs FAILINGS not their success.
Really irked me when KM said it in her year 4 PowerPoint presentation and it's irked me in that statement too.
Agreed - was it raised that a number of our academy products are being fast tracked into the first team when they are clearly not ready? This is not fair on them, their development or the team. The strategy of playing them too soon does not benefit anyone. KAG is a perfect example of this.
How on earth could the supporters reps agree on that wording! Just spin on clubs desire to farm young players and keeping down costs whilst they are in shop window. Oh and it would be good if the fans pay towards it to keep their costs even lower.
The statement is very ominous & written in a way that seemingly suits the Club more than the members, not expressing our concerns but mentioning the Clubs 'positives' in the investment in the academy etc. Later in the year could mean June anywho, I'd like to know when exactly that means and what this is based on.. If it's going to hold it a bit longer and then just release the funds to the Club there will be uproar.
I understand why people have decided to cancel their membership, and it's individuals' own decisions of course. I will simply say that cancelling membership has a long term impact on a scheme that is intended to provide future benefit for the club.
Would that be the future benefit of our club or to quote "the shareholders club" or would that be weird.
" The football club also highlighted their £12million investment into the training ground in support of the Academy, but stressed that the realities of the professional game mean players will sometimes be sold. This will include, on occasion, players who have progressed through the Academy."
On the face of it a reasonable paragraph but KM is lying because she has already said that the plan is to farm the players on.
" However, the supporters’ representatives felt that they could not overlook the concerns raised, and indicated that they would not consider any further major donations to the football club until later on in the year."
This is not different to what we already knew to be the case from rik.
Nothing else has been said.
No mention of a members group meeting. If they were honest in their dealings with us, they would have offered to make the meeting possible. OK, I am being naive here.
I did hold off to see if there was a chance that KM would be prepared to listen but she clearly isn't. She continues to treat us with contempt.
It is with sadness that I have just cancelled my VG membership and will not return until the regime has gone.
" The football club also highlighted their £12million investment into the training ground in support of the Academy, but stressed that the realities of the professional game mean players will sometimes be sold. This will include, on occasion, players who have progressed through the Academy."
On the face of it a reasonable paragraph but KM is lying because she has already said that the plan is to farm the players on.
" However, the supporters’ representatives felt that they could not overlook the concerns raised, and indicated that they would not consider any further major donations to the football club until later on in the year."
This is not different to what we already knew to be the case from rik.
Nothing else has been said.
No mention of a members group meeting. If they were honest in their dealings with us, they would have offered to make the meeting possible. OK, I am being naive here.
I did hold off to see if there was a chance that KM would be prepared to listen but she clearly isn't. She continues to treat us with contempt.
It is with sadness that I have just cancelled my VG membership and will not return until the regime has gone.
Although it might be observed what you've done there is read the lines, not between them. Ask yourself what might have happened to make the club issue such a defence of their approach to the Academy, and whether the supporters reps really concluded the conversation by saying, well everything carries on as normal then. If that's what happened, why the need to say anything on the statement?
As for the members' meeting, I've been honest all the way along: I don't believe that's the best way forward. Nonetheless until there's more than a handful of people actually asking for a meeting then there's nothing to act on. And if you're all now resigning...
If you were waiting for us to say we're withholding funds until the regime are gone I think you were always going to be disappointed. We'd be hard to justify that amongst the myriad of regulations in the Gambling Act that govern the use of funds.
I do wonder if people forget that we're not the enemy here. Anyway, out now. Love you all xx
The realities are the costs of keeping the whole shebang of Charlton Athletic on the road. The discretion(s) are about everything else, like who to have as manager and coaches, who to sign or not to sign, what to support and what to cut back. These decisions are taken entirely by the club, and we know how bad they are, to repeat what I have said before, don't cut off Valley Gold so much as have a begging bowl approach. The club approaches VG with a costed project which is approved and funded, and then the club provides the receipts or other evidence. Otherwise it will all be spent on Roger Johnson's wages.
Over what period is the £12m being invested? Beyond June? Roland won't need my £10 then. The protest fund is likely to be £10 a month better off from next month.
Perhaps this has died a death but I wanted to pursue this subject a little more as I believe that it is important.
There were a few threads on this subject, not sure which would be best but I thought that there might be some interest in an email exchange I had with Matt Baker, Chair of VG. Matt has agreed that I can make his emails public BTW.
To: Matt Baker
Subject: Re: Valley Gold
Many thanks for getting back to me Matt.
Until very recently my wife and I paid into Valley Gold. We had done from day one being number 271.
We were disappointed with the public support we have received from the fans representatives from the Management Committee as we had hoped that they would facilitate a member's meeting and encourage all of the Management Committee to attend. Failing that, we feel that the public announcement about the next funding rounds were far too woolly and we're not enough to keep us from cancelling. Under no circumstances would we financially support a player farm to help fund Rolands business plan as revealed by Katrien in Dublin.
I know that we are not alone judging by the comments of cancellations on social media.
I have no idea how many members called for the meeting and how many are aware of the attempt to garner support for one. The problem is that as VG members we are (were in our case) totally in the hands of the Committee to make things happen. As members are in the dark many people will continue to feel even more disenfranchised from the club and VG.
You are in a better position than me to know the facts and this is one of the major problems, as a member's organisation the members should be better informed and have influence. In the current toxic situation we have I am amazed that VG is still viable.
I know that the VG database is unlikely to give an instant exact number of individual members as it will not easily put multiple contributions by the same person together. This means that it is impossible to know what the 10 percent figure is that is required to call for the meeting without a bit of effort.
Myself and perhaps lapsed members would consider rejoining VG if we were to get a general meeting in the hope that we would get what we see as a positive outcome.
Sorry for the ramble. To summarise, I what would like to know what circumstances will money be paid to the club in June and beyond. Will it be paid? I cancelled after the statement was made. Would you contact Paul and Richard with the aim of getting a member's meeting called please?
Thanks for your time to read my email and the time you have put in to VG.
Regards Mr & Mrs Telly Tubby
Hi Mr & Mrs Telly Tubby
Thanks for your email.
Firstly, thanks for all your support of Valley Gold in the past for so many years and I’m sorry to hear that you have now cancelled. However, I do fully respect your reasons for doing so and understand your concerns. Let me try to address some of the points you raise.
· As you know the Charlton Club committee (responsible for Valley Gold & Jackpot) is made up of 2 supporters’ reps and 2 CAFC reps with me as the independent Chair. At the January meeting I raised as an agenda item the fact that a number of members had concerns, that we had seen some cancellations, and that the unrest seemed to stem from Katrien’s remarks in Dublin. There was then an open discussion in the Committee. Let me assure you that the supporters’ reps were very forthright in putting the case of the members and their fears. We agreed to issue a statement to try to clarify the operation of Charlton Club/Valley Gold (as some on social media seemed to misunderstand how it worked) and to address the concerns. I’m sorry that you found the statement woolly, all I can say is it is very difficult to agree a statement between conflicting parties so it will always end up as a compromise, or perhaps woolly as you term it.
· Katrien made the Dublin comments in early November. Since then, earlier this month, Roland has addressed the very point on plans for the academy, presumably because he is aware of fans concerns, maybe the club have fed back to him the issue raised by Valley Gold members, who knows. I’ve watched the video on the CAFC website several times and he does seem to be saying something different to Katrien’s earlier comments, different or expanding perhaps. He refers to academy players coming into the first team and staying there for a few years, and that we believe the academy is the future of the club. He acknowledges that some players will generate interest from the Premier League but the aim is that they play at Charlton as long as they possibly can. Of course time will tell whether this comes to pass but I did find that more encouraging from an academy perspective. Please do watch the video if you haven’t done already and see what you think.
· In terms of members and cancellations. We had 1881 members of Valley Gold at the end of January, which had hit a recent high of 1958 in October. However, the 1958 figure was somewhat inflated by the fact that a number joined for 3 months purely to get priority for Crystal Palace tickets and then cancelled after 3 months.
· Some members have suggested a members’ meeting but nowhere near the amount needed, sorry if this sounds a familiar figure but it genuinely is less than 2%!
· As regards your specific question you ask what circumstances there will need to be for more money to be paid to the club in June or beyond. I’m not avoiding the answer but can’t answer that because the committee hasn’t discussed or drawn up conditions when a payment will or will not be paid. However, the supporters’ reps have been very clear in saying they could not overlook members’ concerns and would not consider any further major donations to the football club until later in the year. Read in to that what you will and what evidence they might require of intention in order to support a donation.
· In trying to be fair I would point out that we do have to be true to the Charlton Club scheme itself. The rules do state in the objects that there is specific focus on the academy and whilst I hear the members concerns already raised we have also received comments from members stating that they give to Valley Gold in order for money to go to the academy and therefore payments shouldn’t be withheld.
I will of course pass on to Richard and Paul your comments regarding a members’ meeting.
I do completely respect members’ decisions to cancel and as I said at the start I understand your concerns. It would be a shame if a scheme that has put so much into the academy over a number of years should collapse, particularly as I know how much the likes of Steve Avory and others at the academy continue to appreciate it. However, we are not in that position at present and I hope it doesn’t come to that.
Thanks again for your email, I hope I’ve addressed the issues a bit, even if I can’t give complete definitive answers to what you want to hear.
Comments
I'm not going to go into any detail about the discussion itself, because it was of a certain nature and the ability to speak freely without the fear of being reported was and remains vitally important. Please don't ask me to do that.
I will say that it was a long meeting and I don't think any of you would have been disappointed in how the supporter representatives carried your concerns in the meeting. The views expressed here and in the emails to Sharron were strongly and robustly presented to the meeting and fully discussed.
I understand why people have decided to cancel their membership, and it's individuals' own decisions of course. I will simply say that cancelling membership has a long term impact on a scheme that is intended to provide future benefit for the club. And of course the smaller the fund, the smaller the leverage we have.
Now I'm out tonight so please don't expect me to spend hours justifying the intricacies of the wording of the statement. I simply ask that you take time understand what @Weegie Addick hinted at: it is a Committee's statement and by definition it has to be agreed by all parties, including the club. Therefore it has a certain balance in the lines, but feel free to read between them a little to understand more fully what is actually being said.
Rich
But I'd rather not read between the lines.
Have the supporters' reps gone on public record to say nothings changed or have they gone on record to say that something has changed? I can see neither in the VG statement.
I'm also aware that the CEO is a lawyer and so should be quite well versed in interpreting that statement in a way that suits her but perhaps does not suit members.
I can also not see any reference to the members meeting that was called for.
I have written to Sharon asking for clarification.
I will also ask her for minutes of the meeting.
Still, only another 8% to get. Just need to publicise it more.
Okay, if true, thank you.
How can I get a copy of the minutes ?
Thank you.
Would that be the future benefit of our club or to quote "the shareholders club" or would that be weird.
" The football club also highlighted their £12million investment into the training ground in support of the Academy, but stressed that the realities of the professional game mean players will sometimes be sold. This will include, on occasion, players who have progressed through the Academy."
On the face of it a reasonable paragraph but KM is lying because she has already said that the plan is to farm the players on.
" However, the supporters’ representatives felt that they could not overlook the concerns raised, and indicated that they would not consider any further major donations to the football club until later on in the year."
This is not different to what we already knew to be the case from rik.
Nothing else has been said.
No mention of a members group meeting. If they were honest in their dealings with us, they would have offered to make the meeting possible. OK, I am being naive here.
I did hold off to see if there was a chance that KM would be prepared to listen but she clearly isn't. She continues to treat us with contempt.
It is with sadness that I have just cancelled my VG membership and will not return until the regime has gone.
As for the members' meeting, I've been honest all the way along: I don't believe that's the best way forward. Nonetheless until there's more than a handful of people actually asking for a meeting then there's nothing to act on. And if you're all now resigning...
If you were waiting for us to say we're withholding funds until the regime are gone I think you were always going to be disappointed. We'd be hard to justify that amongst the myriad of regulations in the Gambling Act that govern the use of funds.
I do wonder if people forget that we're not the enemy here. Anyway, out now. Love you all xx
These decisions are taken entirely by the club, and we know how bad they are, to repeat what I have said before, don't cut off Valley Gold so much as have a begging bowl approach. The club approaches VG with a costed project which is approved and funded, and then the club provides the receipts or other evidence.
Otherwise it will all be spent on Roger Johnson's wages.
Will this payment be made in June 2016?
If not when is the next payment scheduled?
If there any review timescale or required action for payments to be resumed?
A lack of information will only result in more members leaving the scheme as seen by tellytubby's statement above
There were a few threads on this subject, not sure which would be best but I thought that there might be some interest in an email exchange I had with Matt Baker, Chair of VG. Matt has agreed that I can make his emails public BTW.
To: Matt Baker
Subject: Re: Valley Gold
Many thanks for getting back to me Matt.
Until very recently my wife and I paid into Valley Gold. We had done from day one being number 271.
We were disappointed with the public support we have received from the fans representatives from the Management Committee as we had hoped that they would facilitate a member's meeting and encourage all of the Management Committee to attend. Failing that, we feel that the public announcement about the next funding rounds were far too woolly and we're not enough to keep us from cancelling. Under no circumstances would we financially support a player farm to help fund Rolands business plan as revealed by Katrien in Dublin.
I know that we are not alone judging by the comments of cancellations on social media.
I have no idea how many members called for the meeting and how many are aware of the attempt to garner support for one. The problem is that as VG members we are (were in our case) totally in the hands of the Committee to make things happen. As members are in the dark many people will continue to feel even more disenfranchised from the club and VG.
You are in a better position than me to know the facts and this is one of the major problems, as a member's organisation the members should be better informed and have influence. In the current toxic situation we have I am amazed that VG is still viable.
I know that the VG database is unlikely to give an instant exact number of individual members as it will not easily put multiple contributions by the same person together. This means that it is impossible to know what the 10 percent figure is that is required to call for the meeting without a bit of
effort.
Myself and perhaps lapsed members would consider rejoining VG if we were to get a general meeting in the hope that we would get what we see as a positive outcome.
Sorry for the ramble. To summarise, I what would like to know what circumstances will money be paid to the club in June and beyond. Will it be paid? I cancelled after the statement was made. Would you contact Paul and Richard with the aim of getting a member's meeting called please?
Thanks for your time to read my email and the time you have put in to VG.
Regards
Mr & Mrs Telly Tubby
Hi Mr & Mrs Telly Tubby
Thanks for your email.
Firstly, thanks for all your support of Valley Gold in the past for so many years and I’m sorry to hear that you have now cancelled. However, I do fully respect your reasons for doing so and understand your concerns. Let me try to address some of the points you raise.
· As you know the Charlton Club committee (responsible for Valley Gold & Jackpot) is made up of 2 supporters’ reps and 2 CAFC reps with me as the independent Chair. At the January meeting I raised as an agenda item the fact that a number of members had concerns, that we had seen some cancellations, and that the unrest seemed to stem from Katrien’s remarks in Dublin. There was then an open discussion in the Committee. Let me assure you that the supporters’ reps were very forthright in putting the case of the members and their fears. We agreed to issue a statement to try to clarify the operation of Charlton Club/Valley Gold (as some on social media seemed to misunderstand how it worked) and to address the concerns. I’m sorry that you found the statement woolly, all I can say is it is very difficult to agree a statement between conflicting parties so it will always end up as a compromise, or perhaps woolly as you term it.
· Katrien made the Dublin comments in early November. Since then, earlier this month, Roland has addressed the very point on plans for the academy, presumably because he is aware of fans concerns, maybe the club have fed back to him the issue raised by Valley Gold members, who knows. I’ve watched the video on the CAFC website several times and he does seem to be saying something different to Katrien’s earlier comments, different or expanding perhaps. He refers to academy players coming into the first team and staying there for a few years, and that we believe the academy is the future of the club. He acknowledges that some players will generate interest from the Premier League but the aim is that they play at Charlton as long as they possibly can. Of course time will tell whether this comes to pass but I did find that more encouraging from an academy perspective. Please do watch the video if you haven’t done already and see what you think.
· In terms of members and cancellations. We had 1881 members of Valley Gold at the end of January, which had hit a recent high of 1958 in October. However, the 1958 figure was somewhat inflated by the fact that a number joined for 3 months purely to get priority for Crystal Palace tickets and then cancelled after 3 months.
· Some members have suggested a members’ meeting but nowhere near the amount needed, sorry if this sounds a familiar figure but it genuinely is less than 2%!
· As regards your specific question you ask what circumstances there will need to be for more money to be paid to the club in June or beyond. I’m not avoiding the answer but can’t answer that because the committee hasn’t discussed or drawn up conditions when a payment will or will not be paid. However, the supporters’ reps have been very clear in saying they could not overlook members’ concerns and would not consider any further major donations to the football club until later in the year. Read in to that what you will and what evidence they might require of intention in order to support a donation.
· In trying to be fair I would point out that we do have to be true to the Charlton Club scheme itself. The rules do state in the objects that there is specific focus on the academy and whilst I hear the members concerns already raised we have also received comments from members stating that they give to Valley Gold in order for money to go to the academy and therefore payments shouldn’t be withheld.
I will of course pass on to Richard and Paul your comments regarding a members’ meeting.
I do completely respect members’ decisions to cancel and as I said at the start I understand your concerns. It would be a shame if a scheme that has put so much into the academy over a number of years should collapse, particularly as I know how much the likes of Steve Avory and others at the academy continue to appreciate it. However, we are not in that position at present and I hope it doesn’t come to that.
Thanks again for your email, I hope I’ve addressed the issues a bit, even if I can’t give complete definitive answers to what you want to hear.
Regards
Matt Baker