I remember Ravi started working for the club as a fresh baby face serving at the ticket office window aged about 18/19 and I think it was in the last year in the Prem which shows how long he has been at the club.
As a member of CAST, and would like to thank the
volunteers who run it, giving up their own time to run surveys, read & write
emails, stand outside The Valley talking to fans and trying to grow the
membership, writing articles, and, yes, attending the Fans Forum which must be one of the most
frustrating activities known to mankind, considering the never-ending stream of
half-truths & lies they appear to have been fed by this regime over the
years.
Other representatives on FF may gauge the mood of those
they represent in less formal ways – and if the members of those groups are
unhappy with the way they are represented, it is down to them to act. It is not helpful for outsiders to carp from
the side-lines.
Those of you who feel you are not represented have the
solution in your own hands – participate in CAST’s surveys, join CAST or one of
the other groups and make your opinions known to the committee. If your circumstances permit, why not volunteer
to help?
The FF will never fulfil its potential while dealing with
the current regime – especially when no-one of appropriate seniority attends –
but if the structure is maintained from the fans side, there is a hope it may
be more effective under a competent owner.
If fans walk away now, it may not be so easy to walk back when we are
taken over.
The FF will never fulfil its potential while dealing with
the current regime – especially when no-one of appropriate seniority attends –
but if the structure is maintained from the fans side, there is a hope it may
be more effective under a competent owner.
If fans walk away now, it may not be so easy to walk back when we are
taken over.
Sorry, but that's just not right. If it can never fulfil its potential under the current regime then what is the point? They don't listen. It just ticks a box for them.
So why continue to go along, particularly now after all that has gone on over the years. When will enough be enough? Ever?
And a new owner is a new owner. They will do their own thing, regardless of what the current shower do. If they are competent then I would think they would welcome the involvement and engagement of their customer base.
The FF will never fulfil its potential while dealing with
the current regime – especially when no-one of appropriate seniority attends –
but if the structure is maintained from the fans side, there is a hope it may
be more effective under a competent owner.
If fans walk away now, it may not be so easy to walk back when we are
taken over.
Sorry, but that's just not right. If it can never fulfil its potential under the current regime then what is the point? They don't listen. It just ticks a box for them.
So why continue to go along, particularly now after all that has gone on over the years. When will enough be enough? Ever?
And a new owner is a new owner. They will do their own thing, regardless of what the current shower do. If they are competent then I would think they would welcome the involvement and engagement of their customer base.
IMO you are 100% right, what is the point of going along, but by the same token the FF not turning up would play into his hands. He would just say we want to meet the fans but they don’t want to meet. Personally I wouldn’t be able to keep my mouth shut about being sprung the same old shite so I have more diplomatic people representing me, do they ask the questions I want answering? Not always, but they do questions that I’ve not thought of so it’s swings and roundabouts for me. As for the next lot, we will deal with whatever comes along whenever it happens.
I remember Ravi started working for the club as a fresh baby face serving at the ticket office window aged about 18/19 and I think it was in the last year in the Prem which shows how long he has been at the club.
Ravi has always done his best for the club and it's fans. That makes him a Charlton fan irrespective of who he might support away from.work. He has been a loyal employee and a good servant. Shame on anyone who thinks differently.
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
What have you achieved?
How do you define 'achievement' for a Supporters' Trust?
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
And you know this how?
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
The dwindling thousands at The Valley would suggest you are not correct.
However, with 4,000 more fans buying a season ticket for next season would suggest what you say has some substance.
But surely fans will realise that things are not right behind the scenes and with a 'normal' board running the club things would be a lot rosier.
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
And you know this how?
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
Did you just make that all up?
Because it's the same as any other hobby. There are many levels of involvement. You know this as I would imagine you have other, non Charlton related hobbies?
This is an internet forum about a hobby, in essence. We are invested in this hobby to the extent that we sign up to a forum to discuss, scroll through pages of drival on the take over thread. Some of us are members of groups that meet up and discuss the goings on, some of us organise said groups, some of us don't.
Some of us would, or have, choose Charlton over partners. To others its not the most important thing in their life, maybe not even there main hobby.
But the point I am making is this tiny subsection of fans isn't a reflection of the majority of fans only the more engaged and fanatical. That's why it is an echo chamber.
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
And you know this how?
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
Did you just make that all up?
Because it's the same as any other hobby. There are many levels of involvement. You know this as I would imagine you have other, non Charlton related hobbies?
This is an internet forum about a hobby, in essence. We are invested in this hobby to the extent that we sign up to a forum to discuss, stroll through pages of drival on the take over thread. Some of us are members of groups that meet up and discuss the goings on, some of us organise said groups, some of us don't.
Some of us would, or have, choose Charlton over partners. To others its not the most important thing in their life, maybe not even there main hobby.
But the point I am making is this tiny subsection of fans isn't a reflection of the majority of fans only the more engaged and fanatical. That's why it is an echo chamber.
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
And you know this how?
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
Did you just make that all up?
Because it's the same as any other hobby. There are many levels of involvement. You know this as I would imagine you have other, non Charlton related hobbies?
This is an internet forum about a hobby, in essence. We are invested in this hobby to the extent that we sign up to a forum to discuss, stroll through pages of drival on the take over thread. Some of us are members of groups that meet up and discuss the goings on, some of us organise said groups, some of us don't.
Some of us would, or have, choose Charlton over partners. To others its not the most important thing in their life, maybe not even there main hobby.
But the point I am making is this tiny subsection of fans isn't a reflection of the majority of fans only the more engaged and fanatical. That's why it is an echo chamber.
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
And you know this how?
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
Did you just make that all up?
Because it's the same as any other hobby. There are many levels of involvement. You know this as I would imagine you have other, non Charlton related hobbies?
This is an internet forum about a hobby, in essence. We are invested in this hobby to the extent that we sign up to a forum to discuss, stroll through pages of drival on the take over thread. Some of us are members of groups that meet up and discuss the goings on, some of us organise said groups, some of us don't.
Some of us would, or have, choose Charlton over partners. To others its not the most important thing in their life, maybe not even there main hobby.
But the point I am making is this tiny subsection of fans isn't a reflection of the majority of fans only the more engaged and fanatical. That's why it is an echo chamber.
No, that wasn't the point you were making at all. You never mentioned any "levels of involvement" just a mythical 6 o'clock majority.
You've now moved to another point which essentially a forum with 20k+ members is "tiny" and isn't a reflection of the "majority of fans". Again you claim to know how this "majority" thinks with absolutely nothing to back that up.
If YOU have an opinion, own it and express it. Don't claim that YOUR opinion is shared with others without evidence or the reverse that others' opinions are invalid as they aren't held by a made up "majority".
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
And you know this how?
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
Did you just make that all up?
Because it's the same as any other hobby. There are many levels of involvement. You know this as I would imagine you have other, non Charlton related hobbies?
This is an internet forum about a hobby, in essence. We are invested in this hobby to the extent that we sign up to a forum to discuss, stroll through pages of drival on the take over thread. Some of us are members of groups that meet up and discuss the goings on, some of us organise said groups, some of us don't.
Some of us would, or have, choose Charlton over partners. To others its not the most important thing in their life, maybe not even there main hobby.
But the point I am making is this tiny subsection of fans isn't a reflection of the majority of fans only the more engaged and fanatical. That's why it is an echo chamber.
No, that wasn't the point you were making at all. You never mentioned any "levels of involvement" just a mythical 6 o'clock majority.
You've now moved to another point which essentially a forum with 20k+ members is "tiny" and isn't a reflection of the "majority of fans". Again you claim to know how this "majority" thinks with absolutely nothing to back that up.
If YOU have an opinion, own it and express it. Don't claim that YOUR opinion is shared with others without evidence or the reverse that others' opinions are invalid as they aren't held by a made up "majority".
If you read my posts on other threeds you will will see that I care about the way the club is run. I said the protests should never have stopped. I am saying MY opinions AREN'T shared by the the majority.
I am saying I AM overly involved on an emotional level. If MY opinion was shared by the majority there would have still been protests.
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
And you know this how?
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
Did you just make that all up?
Because it's the same as any other hobby. There are many levels of involvement. You know this as I would imagine you have other, non Charlton related hobbies?
This is an internet forum about a hobby, in essence. We are invested in this hobby to the extent that we sign up to a forum to discuss, stroll through pages of drival on the take over thread. Some of us are members of groups that meet up and discuss the goings on, some of us organise said groups, some of us don't.
Some of us would, or have, choose Charlton over partners. To others its not the most important thing in their life, maybe not even there main hobby.
But the point I am making is this tiny subsection of fans isn't a reflection of the majority of fans only the more engaged and fanatical. That's why it is an echo chamber.
No, that wasn't the point you were making at all. You never mentioned any "levels of involvement" just a mythical 6 o'clock majority.
You've now moved to another point which essentially a forum with 20k+ members is "tiny" and isn't a reflection of the "majority of fans". Again you claim to know how this "majority" thinks with absolutely nothing to back that up.
If YOU have an opinion, own it and express it. Don't claim that YOUR opinion is shared with others without evidence or the reverse that others' opinions are invalid as they aren't held by a made up "majority".
If you read my posts on other threeds you will will see that I care about the way the club is run. I said the protests should never have stopped. I am saying MY opinions AREN'T shared by the the majority.
I am saying I AM overly involved on an emotional level. If MY opinion was shared by the majority there would have still been protests.
Either way you are why keep going on about a made up majority.
Not protesting and not caring beyond the "results on the pitch" are not the same thing or mutually exclusive
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
And you know this how?
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
Did you just make that all up?
Because it's the same as any other hobby. There are many levels of involvement. You know this as I would imagine you have other, non Charlton related hobbies?
This is an internet forum about a hobby, in essence. We are invested in this hobby to the extent that we sign up to a forum to discuss, stroll through pages of drival on the take over thread. Some of us are members of groups that meet up and discuss the goings on, some of us organise said groups, some of us don't.
Some of us would, or have, choose Charlton over partners. To others its not the most important thing in their life, maybe not even there main hobby.
But the point I am making is this tiny subsection of fans isn't a reflection of the majority of fans only the more engaged and fanatical. That's why it is an echo chamber.
No, that wasn't the point you were making at all. You never mentioned any "levels of involvement" just a mythical 6 o'clock majority.
You've now moved to another point which essentially a forum with 20k+ members is "tiny" and isn't a reflection of the "majority of fans". Again you claim to know how this "majority" thinks with absolutely nothing to back that up.
If YOU have an opinion, own it and express it. Don't claim that YOUR opinion is shared with others without evidence or the reverse that others' opinions are invalid as they aren't held by a made up "majority".
If you read my posts on other threeds you will will see that I care about the way the club is run. I said the protests should never have stopped. I am saying MY opinions AREN'T shared by the the majority.
I am saying I AM overly involved on an emotional level. If MY opinion was shared by the majority there would have still been protests.
Either way you are why keep going on about a made up majority.
Not protesting and not caring beyond the "results on the pitch" are not the same thing or mutually exclusive
Sorry the first time, I think, I used the word majority was when Airman questioned what "only care about the football" ment.
I stand by MY opionon that most people who go to Charlton games care more about the results on the pitch than anything else. Almost anything else is irrelevant, to them, if the on pitch performances are good. That is not an opionon I share but I believe it to be true. Maybe I should have said this 2 days ago.
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
And you know this how?
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
Did you just make that all up?
Because it's the same as any other hobby. There are many levels of involvement. You know this as I would imagine you have other, non Charlton related hobbies?
This is an internet forum about a hobby, in essence. We are invested in this hobby to the extent that we sign up to a forum to discuss, stroll through pages of drival on the take over thread. Some of us are members of groups that meet up and discuss the goings on, some of us organise said groups, some of us don't.
Some of us would, or have, choose Charlton over partners. To others its not the most important thing in their life, maybe not even there main hobby.
But the point I am making is this tiny subsection of fans isn't a reflection of the majority of fans only the more engaged and fanatical. That's why it is an echo chamber.
No, that wasn't the point you were making at all. You never mentioned any "levels of involvement" just a mythical 6 o'clock majority.
You've now moved to another point which essentially a forum with 20k+ members is "tiny" and isn't a reflection of the "majority of fans". Again you claim to know how this "majority" thinks with absolutely nothing to back that up.
If YOU have an opinion, own it and express it. Don't claim that YOUR opinion is shared with others without evidence or the reverse that others' opinions are invalid as they aren't held by a made up "majority".
If you read my posts on other threeds you will will see that I care about the way the club is run. I said the protests should never have stopped. I am saying MY opinions AREN'T shared by the the majority.
I am saying I AM overly involved on an emotional level. If MY opinion was shared by the majority there would have still been protests.
Either way you are why keep going on about a made up majority.
Not protesting and not caring beyond the "results on the pitch" are not the same thing or mutually exclusive
Sorry the first time, I think, I used the word majority was when Airman questioned what "only care about the football" ment.
I stand by MY opionon that most people who go to Charlton games care more about the results on the pitch than anything else. Almost anything else is irrelevant, to them, if the on pitch performances are good. That is not an opionon I share but I believe it to be true. Maybe I should have said this 2 days ago.
Now you've changed your opinion again.
You are now saying most people who go to Charlton care MORE about the results than anything else.
That is hardly a surprise.
I'd think that would apply at just about every club, everywhere. It applies to me.
That almost anything else is irrelevant to most fans is not true, in my opinion.
A lot of people care about who the manager is, the image of the club, the style of football that is played, where it is played, what kit we wear, who the players are, what the club does in the community, internationals who play for the club, former players, the history of the club, ticket prices, away followings, the academy and youth teams, I could go on and on. Each person will care more or less about each of these as each person is different.
Some even care about who the owners are and the governance, especially when things are going badly, less so when it's going well but many care about these things because they realise that ownership impacts on the results.
You're are right, though, you should just have said that two days ago.
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
And you know this how?
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
Did you just make that all up?
Because it's the same as any other hobby. There are many levels of involvement. You know this as I would imagine you have other, non Charlton related hobbies?
This is an internet forum about a hobby, in essence. We are invested in this hobby to the extent that we sign up to a forum to discuss, stroll through pages of drival on the take over thread. Some of us are members of groups that meet up and discuss the goings on, some of us organise said groups, some of us don't.
Some of us would, or have, choose Charlton over partners. To others its not the most important thing in their life, maybe not even there main hobby.
But the point I am making is this tiny subsection of fans isn't a reflection of the majority of fans only the more engaged and fanatical. That's why it is an echo chamber.
No, that wasn't the point you were making at all. You never mentioned any "levels of involvement" just a mythical 6 o'clock majority.
You've now moved to another point which essentially a forum with 20k+ members is "tiny" and isn't a reflection of the "majority of fans". Again you claim to know how this "majority" thinks with absolutely nothing to back that up.
If YOU have an opinion, own it and express it. Don't claim that YOUR opinion is shared with others without evidence or the reverse that others' opinions are invalid as they aren't held by a made up "majority".
If you read my posts on other threeds you will will see that I care about the way the club is run. I said the protests should never have stopped. I am saying MY opinions AREN'T shared by the the majority.
I am saying I AM overly involved on an emotional level. If MY opinion was shared by the majority there would have still been protests.
Either way you are why keep going on about a made up majority.
Not protesting and not caring beyond the "results on the pitch" are not the same thing or mutually exclusive
Sorry the first time, I think, I used the word majority was when Airman questioned what "only care about the football" ment.
I stand by MY opionon that most people who go to Charlton games care more about the results on the pitch than anything else. Almost anything else is irrelevant, to them, if the on pitch performances are good. That is not an opionon I share but I believe it to be true. Maybe I should have said this 2 days ago.
Now you've changed your opinion again.
You are now saying most people who go to Charlton care MORE about the results than anything else.
That is hardly a surprise.
I'd think that would apply at just about every club, everywhere. It applies to me.
That almost anything else is irrelevant to most fans is not true, in my opinion.
A lot of people care about who the manager is, the image of the club, the style of football that is played, where it is played, what kit we wear, who the players are, what the club does in the community, internationals who play for the club, former players, the history of the club, ticket prices, away followings, the academy and youth teams, I could go on and on. Each person will care more or less about each of these as each person is different.
Some even care about who the owners are and the governance, especially when things are going badly, less so when it's going well but many care about these things because they realise that ownership impacts on the results.
You're are right, though, you should just have said that two days ago.
I haven't changed my opinion, I changed MAJORITY to MOST. You left out the bit where I said if performances are good everything else is irrelevant. That doesn't doesn't apply to me, or you.
But generally we are now arguing over syntax so I think we should leave it there.
As I understand the "reps" are representatives from diffrent "fan groups" who willingly voluntary their time and effort to attend these meetings. If that's not correct can someone correct me?
How many members does each rep represent?
Are you trusted to represent your members best interests or do you ask questions on their behalf? Or a bit of both?
I ask these question both out of curiosity but also to those that say the meetings are a waste of time, they should be boycotted etc, do you have a rep and have you told them you don't wish them to attend?
Anyone care to answer?
CAST (Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust) attends the FF. We represent 1100 members.
I We survey members on a number of different matters twice a year to ensure that we are in touch with their thinking. (Non members also respond to our survey and there is usually very little difference in their response)
Our last survey revealed that 93% of respondents thought it was important that we continued to engage with the club by attending the FF.
So your membership is about 10% of the season tickets the club claim to have sold and less than 3% of the people at Wembley?
How many people replied to your survey?
I am not "digging out" anyone for anything, I am just questioning the data gathering.
Isn't it an echo chamber? As an example Charlton life is a good cross section of fans, but it isn't representative of the whole fan base. It's representative of the most engaged fans, not the more passive ones.
If you can be arsed to log on to a forum, read comments and then post yourself, you obviously have an opinion. How many people don't do the first, do the first and not the second, the second not the third etc
You might equally ask why the people who only turned up at Wembley should have any say at all. Or whether the people who are "only interested in the football", whatever that means, even want a say.
It means the "majority" of fans that go to the game with friends and family on a Saturday. Maybe make a day of it. They might check the score of an away game at about 6pm the following Saturday. They don't go on the Internet/social media to talk about Charlton or football in general.
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
And you know this how?
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
Did you just make that all up?
Because it's the same as any other hobby. There are many levels of involvement. You know this as I would imagine you have other, non Charlton related hobbies?
This is an internet forum about a hobby, in essence. We are invested in this hobby to the extent that we sign up to a forum to discuss, stroll through pages of drival on the take over thread. Some of us are members of groups that meet up and discuss the goings on, some of us organise said groups, some of us don't.
Some of us would, or have, choose Charlton over partners. To others its not the most important thing in their life, maybe not even there main hobby.
But the point I am making is this tiny subsection of fans isn't a reflection of the majority of fans only the more engaged and fanatical. That's why it is an echo chamber.
No, that wasn't the point you were making at all. You never mentioned any "levels of involvement" just a mythical 6 o'clock majority.
You've now moved to another point which essentially a forum with 20k+ members is "tiny" and isn't a reflection of the "majority of fans". Again you claim to know how this "majority" thinks with absolutely nothing to back that up.
If YOU have an opinion, own it and express it. Don't claim that YOUR opinion is shared with others without evidence or the reverse that others' opinions are invalid as they aren't held by a made up "majority".
If you read my posts on other threeds you will will see that I care about the way the club is run. I said the protests should never have stopped. I am saying MY opinions AREN'T shared by the the majority.
I am saying I AM overly involved on an emotional level. If MY opinion was shared by the majority there would have still been protests.
Either way you are why keep going on about a made up majority.
Not protesting and not caring beyond the "results on the pitch" are not the same thing or mutually exclusive
Sorry the first time, I think, I used the word majority was when Airman questioned what "only care about the football" ment.
I stand by MY opionon that most people who go to Charlton games care more about the results on the pitch than anything else. Almost anything else is irrelevant, to them, if the on pitch performances are good. That is not an opionon I share but I believe it to be true. Maybe I should have said this 2 days ago.
Now you've changed your opinion again.
You are now saying most people who go to Charlton care MORE about the results than anything else.
That is hardly a surprise.
I'd think that would apply at just about every club, everywhere. It applies to me.
That almost anything else is irrelevant to most fans is not true, in my opinion.
A lot of people care about who the manager is, the image of the club, the style of football that is played, where it is played, what kit we wear, who the players are, what the club does in the community, internationals who play for the club, former players, the history of the club, ticket prices, away followings, the academy and youth teams, I could go on and on. Each person will care more or less about each of these as each person is different.
Some even care about who the owners are and the governance, especially when things are going badly, less so when it's going well but many care about these things because they realise that ownership impacts on the results.
You're are right, though, you should just have said that two days ago.
I haven't changed my opinion, I changed MAJORITY to MOST. You left out the bit where I said if performances are good everything else is irrelevant. That doesn't doesn't apply to me, or you.
But generally we are now arguing over syntax so I think we should leave it there.
No, you changed from don't care about anything other than results to care more about results. Huge difference.
Comments
In a recent CAST survey;
36% of respondents thought the surveys had achieved a lot,
32% thought they had achieved nothing,
62% were looking for their Werther's Originals,
23% thought a further survey was needed,
61% said they just loved completing surveys generally,
82% couldn't understand why they were constantly bombarded with online marketing from all over the place,
11% fell asleep before they could .....źzzzzzz.......
As a member of CAST, and would like to thank the volunteers who run it, giving up their own time to run surveys, read & write emails, stand outside The Valley talking to fans and trying to grow the membership, writing articles, and, yes, attending the Fans Forum which must be one of the most frustrating activities known to mankind, considering the never-ending stream of half-truths & lies they appear to have been fed by this regime over the years.
Other representatives on FF may gauge the mood of those they represent in less formal ways – and if the members of those groups are unhappy with the way they are represented, it is down to them to act. It is not helpful for outsiders to carp from the side-lines.
Those of you who feel you are not represented have the solution in your own hands – participate in CAST’s surveys, join CAST or one of the other groups and make your opinions known to the committee. If your circumstances permit, why not volunteer to help?
The FF will never fulfil its potential while dealing with the current regime – especially when no-one of appropriate seniority attends – but if the structure is maintained from the fans side, there is a hope it may be more effective under a competent owner. If fans walk away now, it may not be so easy to walk back when we are taken over.
(No idea.)
So why continue to go along, particularly now after all that has gone on over the years. When will enough be enough? Ever?
And a new owner is a new owner. They will do their own thing, regardless of what the current shower do. If they are competent then I would think they would welcome the involvement and engagement of their customer base.
We love you, Ravi !
All they care about the performance on the pitch, they couldn't give a flying hoot who the ceo, cfo, dof or uncle Tom cobbly is.
Did you do a survey?
How big is this Majority?
Do they all wait to 6.00pm or do some check earlier?
Did you just make that all up?
This is an internet forum about a hobby, in essence. We are invested in this hobby to the extent that we sign up to a forum to discuss, scroll through pages of drival on the take over thread. Some of us are members of groups that meet up and discuss the goings on, some of us organise said groups, some of us don't.
Some of us would, or have, choose Charlton over partners. To others its not the most important thing in their life, maybe not even there main hobby.
But the point I am making is this tiny subsection of fans isn't a reflection of the majority of fans only the more engaged and fanatical. That's why it is an echo chamber.
You've now moved to another point which essentially a forum with 20k+ members is "tiny" and isn't a reflection of the "majority of fans". Again you claim to know how this "majority" thinks with absolutely nothing to back that up.
If YOU have an opinion, own it and express it. Don't claim that YOUR opinion is shared with others without evidence or the reverse that others' opinions are invalid as they aren't held by a made up "majority".
I am saying I AM overly involved on an emotional level. If MY opinion was shared by the majority there would have still been protests.
Not protesting and not caring beyond the "results on the pitch" are not the same thing or mutually exclusive
I stand by MY opionon that most people who go to Charlton games care more about the results on the pitch than anything else. Almost anything else is irrelevant, to them, if the on pitch performances are good. That is not an opionon I share but I believe it to be true. Maybe I should have said this 2 days ago.
You are now saying most people who go to Charlton care MORE about the results than anything else.
That is hardly a surprise.
I'd think that would apply at just about every club, everywhere. It applies to me.
That almost anything else is irrelevant to most fans is not true, in my opinion.
A lot of people care about who the manager is, the image of the club, the style of football that is played, where it is played, what kit we wear, who the players are, what the club does in the community, internationals who play for the club, former players, the history of the club, ticket prices, away followings, the academy and youth teams, I could go on and on. Each person will care more or less about each of these as each person is different.
Some even care about who the owners are and the governance, especially when things are going badly, less so when it's going well but many care about these things because they realise that ownership impacts on the results.
You're are right, though, you should just have said that two days ago.
But generally we are now arguing over syntax so I think we should leave it there.