The Fans' Forum has sent the following to the club this morning:
Almost three weeks have now elapsed since the date of the abortive Q&A session with Richard Murray and Derek Chappell which the Fans' Forum had arranged for the 9th July. At that time we were told that the postponement was necessary due to a warning by legal advisors that "it was not appropriate for the duo to attend a public meeting at the current time".
This explanation was accepted, albeit reluctantly, on the basis that it formed the first tangible piece of evidence available to the majority of fans that some 'behind the scenes' discussions about future ownership of the club were occurring. Subsequently the club confirmed (on the 17th July) that "an offer for the football club (through an acquisition of some of the assets and liabilities of Charlton Athletic plc), is being progressed, and the board will make a formal announcement at the appropriate time".
We are now less than two weeks away from the start of the new season and there is huge unrest among fans at the lack of apparent development of the offer and associated communication reflecting the state of progress.
As a result, the supporters of this club are ready to galvanise themselves, as they have done before, to secure a successful and profitable future for a club which many perceive to be in serious financial and organisational trouble. There is talk among fans about staging some form of protest at Tuesday night's game against Ipswich to highlight the growing frustration about the perceived lack of progress, lack of urgency and lack of communication being shown by the club.
In addition, Tuesday evening of next week (4th August) will see an inaugural meeting to discuss a proposed Supporters' Trust - an idea which is rapidly gaining favour across a wide fanbase and which will allow supporters to channel their energies into a venture designed to rectify much of the existing condition in which the club finds itself.
All of this makes the coming week or so pivotal in terms of supporters' actions. The club needs to recognise that the time for holding statements has passed. Phrases like 'in the near future' and 'at the appropriate time' are no longer acceptable. Fans need to know the context within which their well-intentioned actions might sit, particularly if those actions are likely to jeopardise an otherwise successful completion of any existing discussions.
On behalf of Charlton supporters everywhere, the Fans' Forum asks:
1) Are talks concerning the offer for the football club still on-going? If not, what contingency plans are in place to stabilise the club financially and to re-invigorate the increasingly disillusioned fanbase?
2) If talks are on-going, when is a conclusion expected and when is a statement from the club anticipated? Note ... 'in the near future' is not regarded as an acceptable answer.
3) Are there aspects of the supporters' events planned for the next two weeks which should be influenced (either positively or negatively) by any on-going talks?
You are aware that all Charlton supporters want the absolute best for the club they love. This week sees the point at which we have decided not to sit and wait by the plane wreckage for help which may or may not arrive, but to act positively by striking off into the wilderness. Before we set off, it's vital to know if there is a rescue party just about to find us ..... or if it has also got itself lost in the wilderness.
Finally, we ask that a meeting be arranged between the Fans' Forum and both Richard Murray and Derek Chappell. If a public meeting involving the Chairmen is still not appropriate, perhaps a restricted meeting with the Fans' Forum representatives will allow greater depth to be applied to the answers that fans so desperately seek.
0
Comments
no way that's far too quick but i'd expect an answer 'soon'
Other than the Supporter Trust initiative there's nothing here that AFKA hadn't already asked in his "Open Letter" and even that didn't emanate from the Fans Forum.
All in all while you've stirred yourself into action I think you've underlined how ineffectual the FF has been in getting answers. As to what reply you'll get from Richard Murray and Derek Chappell, as there has been no formal announcement regarding the cessation of negotiations I'd conclude that they are still on-going and for very obvious reasons you won't get any indication of when they'll be concluded. Similarly I expect RM and DC will point you towards earlier statements regarding stabilising the club's finances. If/when they do that'll be a very ironic response, as your excuse for inaction when I questioned you a few weeks back was that the club had already issued a statement...
No personal grievances here, I think the FF are admirable in their support of the club and desire to maintain lines of communication and do something, but have been proven to be ineffective in actually articulating matters of concern from us Fans. This letter is welcome, but that AFKA beat them to it by three weeks suggests too me that they need to up their game a little.
On the mailing list, director David Sumners has had the integrity to post a comment on the situation, under his own name. It's probably not appropriate to post his comments here, but here is what I posted back:
Dear David
I am not presuming to speak for anyone else here, doubtless others will say whether or not they see things the same way. This is how I feel about the situation and the way I perceive the Board to have handled it, based on my limited knowledge
Firstly you personally will always have my highest respect for being on this List and participating , for at least 11 years as I recall. Secondly I fully recognise how much money several of you have put in, and I do not pretend that in your shoes I could airily write it off 'for the greater good of the club'.
There are simply several things which cause me extreme disquiet, and undermine my faith in the Board which I previously thought was unshakeable. They are as follows:
It is clear that one of the two parties is being intransigent. After all it should be in neither side's interest to fail to resolve it so close to the season start. The reasons why I might tend to think that it is the selling rather than the buying side are this: It has proved more difficult to successfully sell Charlton than other clubs who seem less attractive (Notts County being the most bizarre example). Rightly or wrongly I have difficulty in accepting the official explanation of why Zabeel pulled out after the due diligence stage. Secondly I am uneasy about the overall intentions of Derek Chappell. He is a major shareholders but has in total put in far less than other directors if we look at the total period since the return to The Valley. Thirdly I was disturbed by an intervention on the Charlton Life forum by a person calling himself David Smith who presented himself as an ordinary fan, but whom I suspected after he responded to my question to be one of the Directors. I found it worrying that a director should apparently communicate in such an underhand way. I also worried that Mr Smith maintained that Charlton had extra value for a buyer compared to provincial clubs because of the fact of the Olympics and the proximity to the London Gateway. if I was the buyer I really would not pay a premium for those two things. Just my opinion, but another reason why I tend to side with the buyer. Of course I do not know who the buyers are, and I fully accept that I should be careful what I wish for.
I've been both an employee and an intermediary in M&A situations in advertising agencies, whose structure and human characteristics are closer to a football club business than people might imagine. In two cases the buyer and seller got locked in for a protracted period. Smart people on both sides but they got so engrossed that they failed to notice something vital. The clients, and the employees could see that the agency being bought was drifting, and both the clients and key employees gradually left. So the agency ended up being far less valuable. It had less clients, and its key staff had gone.
I wouldn't be so presumptious to say that after reading this, I urge you to do this or that. I'm just telling you about my fears and my disiilusionment.
Richard Hunt
Well done the FF. Not sure on the plane wreckage / wilderness para, but i agree with the intention fully.
This whole episode this summer has highlighted to me the need for a strong, independent body. The supporters club is a dead duck in its current format, and i now firmly believe that the current Forum vehicle, despite the participants best intentions, has too many restrictions on it to be that option going forward.
I think there are some very good individuals on the current FF that should certainly play an effective part in fan representation going forward, and i really hope they approach the potential Trust meeting with an open mind towards opportunity, not defensiveness of their current vehicle.
Why not quote what David Summers said.
It was on a public list. Without read that your post has little context.
Do you honestly, really, expect an answer to this, bearing in mind that potential purchasers will probably expect a level of discretion to me maintained, and the risk of getting people's hopes up? I think asking what will happen to the club long-term if there is no buyer is a sensible question, though.
As above.
Perhaps this is something that should be asked off the record, to assist those who are putting the effort into the trust?
This is all a bit "the fans are spitting their dummies out, say something soothing so they stop crying". The long-term future of Charlton Athletic is far more important than the short-term feelings of us fans. How the board and management are going to run the club over the next season without an injection of outside funds is, I think, far more pertinent.
As such, I think setting up a supporters' trust - so we have a body that's robust and is ready in case things really *do* go wrong - really is the way forward. I'm not quite sure what this letter's meant to achieve, apart from getting something off the authors' chests.
Out of respect to him. I presume he doesn't regard it as totally public, otherwise he'd probably be on here.
But in reply to other Listers comments he indicated that it is ridiculous to suppose that a couple of directors would block the sale simply to avoid a personal loss.
Also not sure about the plane wreckage metaphor as I think that takes away from the rest of the letter but that is an aside.
Seth, how ridiculous to pick what you know is a totally unreasonable deadline for a response just so you can have a moan first thing tomorrow morning.
Why not let the people who wrote the letter decide what they think is a reasonable time scale rather than trying to appear "harder than the rest".
I'm glad to see the Trust idea getting support but please do remember that it is a long term project and not an instant or easy solution.
And also that takeover or not the Trust idea is still valid.
The author's, and about 10,000 like minded people. As such, a correct and valuable step.
This is no time for pathetic bickering amongst ourselves.
A good idea, but perhaps someone could contact David Summers and ask him to put his remarks here in person rather than have a third party do it (no offence to Prague Addict). I'm sure his letter will raise questions and if willing he will then be able to answer them.
Thanks, so we can kill that myth then.
Well done Dave.
I
I have no idea why the above appeared as a Henry quote, It was a quote from Inspector Sands
Now now Henry,
There are more ridiculous things on here than my 5pm suggestion. However I am impressed by your developing skills at telepathy, just needs a bit of tweaking and practice in order to become more accurate and credible.
As I say above...contact DS and ask him to post his remarks here.
Let's just see what response the latest communication generates and then judge the value.
As far as repeating what was in AFKA's letter (most of which, of course, was included in the Fans' Forum communication to the club in February) is concerned, that it based on the fact that the questions remain unanswered. Not surprisingly, the same questions will continue to dominate our thoughts until they are answered.
Avoid the point as ever Seth, switch it back to the person pointing out your mistakes as ever.
I know Prague is being curtious, but there really isn't anything there would be classed as classified. He denies a suggestion that money has gone into directors pockets, stating its only ever been in the other direction, and strongly refutes that any directors would block a sale to avoid taking a loss.
All it all, it doesn't say anything that is not already known to most.