I've explained the situation countless times, and I couldn't really be more explicit about June than I have been. If June is in the second half of 2016 then yes it's still an option.
What do you mean still an option? Withholding any payment to the football club?
I am getting more and more pissed off with this thread. Why can't a simple question be answered with a simple answer. I wasn't going to stop my Valley Gold Subcription, but after reading the complete ambiguity, I might well do.
Basically, my understanding is that the next payment wouldn’t normally be expected until June, but Valley Gold have told the club they are withholding any payments until at least the second half of the month. Which is technically June being the 6th month out of 12. But Valley Gold may withhold the payment although they have received messages from contributors not wishing them to do so as well as having to factor in the legality of withholding money donated to a scheme which is designed to give that money. Without contributors being canvassed, we are unlikely to know what the ratios are. But those wanting the funds paid, aren't speaking for my money, in the same way that I wouldn't want to speak for theirs.
I have cancelled, so I won’t be so angry now when I am told that the committee weren’t happy about it but had to pay the funds into the club. This may not happen of course, but despite the apparent clarity I do feel I misinterpreted previous messages or I would have cancelled earlier. Happy to be corrected. But if the funds are paid in, I couldn't complain seeing as I know the purpose of Valley gold. I think asking fans to hold on is the poor part of all of this. If you are against the regime, the advice really should be to leave.
I've explained the situation countless times, and I couldn't really be more explicit about June than I have been. If June is in the second half of 2016 then yes it's still an option.
Up there with katriens "I thought I had explained this already" comment.
I understand you are in a tough spot but if a number of vg memebers are struggling to grasp your explanation it may be that the answer which you find clear is not coming across so.
I honestly don't know how I can say it any clearer. I guess there have been so many threads, but if I've said no donation before the second half of the 2016 and you think June is in the second half then I really can't help you.
best action for those who don't think it is clear is to withdraw. I think rikifold has made it clear. The money has to be paid to the club because that is the aim of the scheme.
Do they actually need to be given a reason. Isn't it bleedingly obvious? She will have cost Roland her salary in Valley Gold cancellations alone. It's a ridiculous situation that she remains in post as the clubs finances collapse around her. She's an acceleration factor on the losses but Duchatelet is a stubborn old goat who is prepared to pile more debt on the club and let her continue. It's not going to end well....
I think they need to be reminded with the reason (obvious or not) - I would think that it will probably be part of any MI that is captured to support the dwindling numbers.
Or put more simply, people cancel membership all the time for a variety of reasons. If you want the club to see in cold hard stats that people are leaving because of them, you need to let us know when you resign why you're doing so.
I honestly don't know how I can say it any clearer. I guess there have been so many threads, but if I've said no donation before the second half of the 2016 and you think June is in the second half then I really can't help you.
I have read all your comments and I am clearly thick because, although you have alluded to your view I still don't know under what circumstances my money will be handed over to Roland.
As a result, after the statement I chose to leave the scheme. Once again I urge everybody else to do the same if you oppose the regime.
best action for those who don't think it is clear is to withdraw. I think rikifold has made it clear. The money has to be paid to the club because that is the aim of the scheme.
That's not quite what I've said, although it's hardly uncommon for you to misquote me.
If the money isn't ever going to be available to the club there is no point them being in the scheme and for various reasons it will fold. I don't want that to happen (and it's jointly my responsibility to secure the success of Valley Gold).
It is also a fact that very few people have actually asked us to withhold funds, and we can't do so arbitrarily. Being accountable to the Gambling Act doesn't make things easier either. But we've said what we've said, we won't consider a donation until later in the year. This means that any request for funds in the meantime will be turned down. But we do need to canvass members.
I honestly don't know how I can say it any clearer. I guess there have been so many threads, but if I've said no donation before the second half of the 2016 and you think June is in the second half then I really can't help you.
I have read all your comments and I am clearly thick because, although you have alluded to your view I still don't know under what circumstances my money will be handed over to Roland.
As a result, after the statement I chose to leave the scheme. Once again I urge everybody else to do the same if you oppose the regime.
Regrettably I think I may now have to do just that. It's a shame because over the last 8 years I have been in vg I have really been proud of my little contribution to our club. Oh well another thing Roland has ruined
I've explained the situation countless times, and I couldn't really be more explicit about June than I have been. If June is in the second half of 2016 then yes it's still an option.
No offence, but that's not a straight answer and the sort of statement you would hear from one of the many members of parliament in this country.
best action for those who don't think it is clear is to withdraw. I think rikifold has made it clear. The money has to be paid to the club because that is the aim of the scheme.
That's not quite what I've said, although it's hardly uncommon for you to misquote me.
If the money isn't ever going to be available to the club there is no point them being in the scheme and for various reasons it will fold. I don't want that to happen (and it's jointly my responsibility to secure the success of Valley Gold).
It is also a fact that very few people have actually asked us to withhold funds, and we can't do so arbitrarily. Being accountable to the Gambling Act doesn't make things easier either. But we've said what we've said, we won't consider a donation until later in the year. This means that any request for funds in the meantime will be turned down. But we do need to canvass members.
When do the VG committee intend to canvass its members?
best action for those who don't think it is clear is to withdraw. I think rikifold has made it clear. The money has to be paid to the club because that is the aim of the scheme.
That's not quite what I've said, although it's hardly uncommon for you to misquote me.
If the money isn't ever going to be available to the club there is no point them being in the scheme and for various reasons it will fold. I don't want that to happen (and it's jointly my responsibility to secure the success of Valley Gold).
It is also a fact that very few people have actually asked us to withhold funds, and we can't do so arbitrarily. Being accountable to the Gambling Act doesn't make things easier either. But we've said what we've said, we won't consider a donation until later in the year. This means that any request for funds in the meantime will be turned down. But we do need to canvass members.
When do the VG committee intend to canvass its members?
Or how do they canvass members without holding a meeting of members where different opinions can be voiced & perhaps a decision reached after listening to all opinions ?
best action for those who don't think it is clear is to withdraw. I think rikifold has made it clear. The money has to be paid to the club because that is the aim of the scheme.
That's not quite what I've said, although it's hardly uncommon for you to misquote me.
If the money isn't ever going to be available to the club there is no point them being in the scheme and for various reasons it will fold. I don't want that to happen (and it's jointly my responsibility to secure the success of Valley Gold).
It is also a fact that very few people have actually asked us to withhold funds, and we can't do so arbitrarily. Being accountable to the Gambling Act doesn't make things easier either. But we've said what we've said, we won't consider a donation until later in the year. This means that any request for funds in the meantime will be turned down. But we do need to canvass members.
When do the VG committee intend to canvass its members?
Or how do they canvass members without holding a meeting of members where different opinions can be voiced & perhaps a decision reached after listening to all opinions ?
It seems to me, that the committee are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They will just try to ride it out with a few drop outs during the first half of the year. I will wait and see what happens in the July, if a payment is made to the club, I'm out.
I honestly don't know how I can say it any clearer. I guess there have been so many threads, but if I've said no donation before the second half of the 2016 and you think June is in the second half then I really can't help you.
Do they actually need to be given a reason. Isn't it bleedingly obvious? She will have cost Roland her salary in Valley Gold cancellations alone. It's a ridiculous situation that she remains in post as the clubs finances collapse around her. She's an acceleration factor on the losses but Duchatelet is a stubborn old goat who is prepared to pile more debt on the club and let her continue. It's not going to end well....
I think they need to be reminded with the reason (obvious or not) - I would think that it will probably be part of any MI that is captured to support the dwindling numbers.
You think Katrien's going to present a huge decline in VG subscriptions under "incompetent CEO" or "not subsidising a half-billionaire who is under-investing in our first team" or simply "flawed strategy."
Basically, my understanding is that the next payment wouldn’t normally be expected until June, but Valley Gold have told the club they are withholding any payments until at least the second half of the month. Which is technically June being the 6th month out of 12.
@rikofold has said no donation before second half of year and donations are normally June and December. June is the 6th month so is in the first half of 2016. The payment to the club for the second half of 2016 is December.
So if the statement and what has been said on various threads says second half of 2016 then surely we can assume that June is going to pass without payment and the next normal date for it would be December. That gives the club a fair amount of time to show what us, as Valley Gold members, want to see. Change. That is my understanding from everything that has been said but understand donation can be done at anytime.
Just FYI, I was a Valley Gold member but haven't renewed. No-one contacted me when my subscription ran out end of Feb and with everything else going on at the club I don't think I will. Just thought renewals would be an important part of the 2 VG staff?
Markg2004 - you are right but let's see if VG withholds money in June. I don't believe they can under the current set-up of VG unless Meire agrees. The only way she is likely to do that is if she understands that a decision to hand over more money will lead to a further collapse in revenues. She may agree on that basis but on the understanding that Duchatelet will see more cash in December than if paid in June and December.
The valley gold scheme has many members some, but not a high proportion, have requested that the money is withheld from the club due to the way it's run, however the majority of members that have paid into the scheme have not, this could mean that they still believe in the scheme and want to keep on supporting the club. It would be illegal and immoral to say categorically that they will permanently withhold the funds from the club because the scheme specifically states that the funds are used to support the club, so the leaders of the scheme have to tread carefully. The best they can do to appease the members that want the money withheld is to withhold for now but due to the high proportion of members that were paying into the scheme expecting their money to be used by the club they can't say never. Technically it's not their money to keep. The relevance of the gambling laws is that when taking money off of people that know there is a chance they could win some back, it is perceived as a gamble, so again to the gambling bodies they need to set out their whole stategdy and financial gains and losses and intentions, they could be in trouble if they do not follow their own guidelines set out in legal documents.
Because they are in this difficult position they know they need to canvass the members because it is possible that the ones that haven't contacted them asking them to withhold could want them to but just haven't been forthcoming with it, however it is highly possible that they are simply happy to continue to donate to the club and then VG would have no other option but to pay the club because that was the intention of the donators.
@rikofold has explained that he is in this difficult position and has advised that if you want your money permanently withheld from the club, he can't guarantee due to differing views and legal guidelines but can only make the club wait as long as legally possible, then you need to leave the scheme and he has given the email address for you to resign. He has also requested that you clearly state that you are leaving because of the current owners, this is so he can round up all of the emails of discontent and send them on to the club as another nail in their coffin.
Advice/info please. The (extended) family have 11 VG memberships, 5 from the early days and the remaining 6 in more recent years. We have fully embraced the protests, i.e. not renewing season tickets (held 20+ years), boycotting programme, match day draw etc, leaving at the 74 minute, going to car park protest etc. and making contributions to funds. However have kept valley gold going. Have had email today as 3 of the VG subs are due for renewal on June 7th. My inclination is to not renew . Any suggestions?
I think you ought to canvass the membership as a matter of urgency - then that will give you a mandate to do the right thing in June - whatever that might be.
Advice/info please. The (extended) family have 11 VG memberships, 5 from the early days and the remaining 6 in more recent years. We have fully embraced the protests, i.e. not renewing season tickets (held 20+ years), boycotting programme, match day draw etc, leaving at the 74 minute, going to car park protest etc. and making contributions to funds. However have kept valley gold going. Have had email today as 3 of the VG subs are due for renewal on June 7th. My inclination is to not renew . Any suggestions?
As @stonemuse say await the news from the Valley Gold payment due in June.
I haven't renewed my annual subscription and won't until it is confirmed that the June payment will not be made and the promised consultation with members, and I hope recently lapsed members, take place.
Did so with a heavy heart but felt I had no other option.
Advice/info please. The (extended) family have 11 VG memberships, 5 from the early days and the remaining 6 in more recent years. We have fully embraced the protests, i.e. not renewing season tickets (held 20+ years), boycotting programme, match day draw etc, leaving at the 74 minute, going to car park protest etc. and making contributions to funds. However have kept valley gold going. Have had email today as 3 of the VG subs are due for renewal on June 7th. My inclination is to not renew . Any suggestions?
As @stonemuse say await the news from the Valley Gold payment due in June.
I haven't renewed my annual subscription and won't until it is confirmed that the June payment will not be made and the promised consultation with members, and I hope recently lapsed members, take place.
Did so with a heavy heart but felt I had no other option.
My sentiments exactly. I will hold off and see what happens. Wonder if I will get another email when due date goes by? Spent much less time on deciding how to vote in EU Referendum!
When are we going to hear whether the June payment has been made or not? June is a week away.
We know that Meire and Joyes will vote for the payment to be made so that leaves the other three having to vote against.
Matt Baker is the chair and also the club Chaplin
@rikofold is a Trust board member and is clearly anti-regime
The other member is still Paul Nottage even though he hasn't been a fans representative for something like a decade and is answerable to no one.
Nottage is not someone I would trust to act in the best interests of members, especially if him making a stand would put his place on the VG committee at risk.
That's why getting a firm Yes or No is important because I don't think you can rely on the likes of Nottage to resist pressure from Joyes and Meire to vote with them.
I'm sure @rikofold will gladly talk you all through it again, but if I was you I'd get him to make you all a PowerPoint - everything's clearer and rosier after one of them innit
Comments
I have cancelled, so I won’t be so angry now when I am told that the committee weren’t happy about it but had to pay the funds into the club. This may not happen of course, but despite the apparent clarity I do feel I misinterpreted previous messages or I would have cancelled earlier. Happy to be corrected. But if the funds are paid in, I couldn't complain seeing as I know the purpose of Valley gold. I think asking fans to hold on is the poor part of all of this. If you are against the regime, the advice really should be to leave.
I understand you are in a tough spot but if a number of vg memebers are struggling to grasp your explanation it may be that the answer which you find clear is not coming across so.
Try this from another thread.
As a result, after the statement I chose to leave the scheme. Once again I urge everybody else to do the same if you oppose the regime.
If the money isn't ever going to be available to the club there is no point them being in the scheme and for various reasons it will fold. I don't want that to happen (and it's jointly my responsibility to secure the success of Valley Gold).
It is also a fact that very few people have actually asked us to withhold funds, and we can't do so arbitrarily. Being accountable to the Gambling Act doesn't make things easier either. But we've said what we've said, we won't consider a donation until later in the year. This means that any request for funds in the meantime will be turned down. But we do need to canvass members.
So if the statement and what has been said on various threads says second half of 2016 then surely we can assume that June is going to pass without payment and the next normal date for it would be December. That gives the club a fair amount of time to show what us, as Valley Gold members, want to see. Change. That is my understanding from everything that has been said but understand donation can be done at anytime.
Just FYI, I was a Valley Gold member but haven't renewed. No-one contacted me when my subscription ran out end of Feb and with everything else going on at the club I don't think I will. Just thought renewals would be an important part of the 2 VG staff?
The valley gold scheme has many members some, but not a high proportion, have requested that the money is withheld from the club due to the way it's run, however the majority of members that have paid into the scheme have not, this could mean that they still believe in the scheme and want to keep on supporting the club. It would be illegal and immoral to say categorically that they will permanently withhold the funds from the club because the scheme specifically states that the funds are used to support the club, so the leaders of the scheme have to tread carefully. The best they can do to appease the members that want the money withheld is to withhold for now but due to the high proportion of members that were paying into the scheme expecting their money to be used by the club they can't say never. Technically it's not their money to keep. The relevance of the gambling laws is that when taking money off of people that know there is a chance they could win some back, it is perceived as a gamble, so again to the gambling bodies they need to set out their whole stategdy and financial gains and losses and intentions, they could be in trouble if they do not follow their own guidelines set out in legal documents.
Because they are in this difficult position they know they need to canvass the members because it is possible that the ones that haven't contacted them asking them to withhold could want them to but just haven't been forthcoming with it, however it is highly possible that they are simply happy to continue to donate to the club and then VG would have no other option but to pay the club because that was the intention of the donators.
@rikofold has explained that he is in this difficult position and has advised that if you want your money permanently withheld from the club, he can't guarantee due to differing views and legal guidelines but can only make the club wait as long as legally possible, then you need to leave the scheme and he has given the email address for you to resign. He has also requested that you clearly state that you are leaving because of the current owners, this is so he can round up all of the emails of discontent and send them on to the club as another nail in their coffin.
Is that any clearer?
I haven't renewed my annual subscription and won't until it is confirmed that the June payment will not be made and the promised consultation with members, and I hope recently lapsed members, take place.
Did so with a heavy heart but felt I had no other option.
Spent much less time on deciding how to vote in EU Referendum!
We know that Meire and Joyes will vote for the payment to be made so that leaves the other three having to vote against.
Matt Baker is the chair and also the club Chaplin
@rikofold is a Trust board member and is clearly anti-regime
The other member is still Paul Nottage even though he hasn't been a fans representative for something like a decade and is answerable to no one.
Nottage is not someone I would trust to act in the best interests of members, especially if him making a stand would put his place on the VG committee at risk.
That's why getting a firm Yes or No is important because I don't think you can rely on the likes of Nottage to resist pressure from Joyes and Meire to vote with them.