"when the directors are back from their holidays".
As i said.Taking the pi55.And don't give me the 'everybody deserves a holiday' bollox.I know lot's of people that havn't holiday'd for years due to work commitments.They should especially not be sunning themselves when my football club could be heading down the swanny.Second rate board!
I think people overestimate the FF from what I can see they have done far more than their remit, they are what the club allows them to be, they part of the club in that sense.
What you say may be true BFR, I nevertheless regard the FF as a bit like the United Nations, not very effective but it's all we've got at the moment. The intentions of the reps. are sound and they're putting in a lot of work on our behalf. We can only try to improve and strengthen the FF, babies and bathwater argument.
[quote][cite]Posted By: stilladdicted[/cite]What you say may be true BFR, I nevertheless regard the FF as a bit like the United Nations, not very effective but it's all we've got at the moment. The intentions of the reps. are sound and they're putting in a lot of work on our behalf. We can only try to improve and strengthen the FF, babies and bathwater argument.[/quote]
I didn't say get rid of it, just that it needs a more defined remit and I'd prefer that the members were chosen by us and not appointed by the Board.
As I say above, do we know for sure that the Board members who are on the FF are actually on holiday or not? If they aren't what conclusion do we draw from SW's excuse?
[quote][cite]Posted By: Curb_It[/cite]Sorry hate too strong a word... but definitely some sort of vendetta. Odd.[/quote]
Nope...
No vendetta, if there were I'd have climbed in to them big time, as others do with their grievances. I'm just pointing out the inherent flaws in the FF. Take it or leave it, but I think I've made my point.
'I didn't say get rid of it, just that it needs a more defined remit and I'd prefer that the members were chosen by us and not appointed by the Board. '
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]I think people overestimate the FF from what I can see they have done far more than their remit, they are what the club allows them to be, they part of the club in that sense.
Absolutley wrong Raz.....sorry mate they dont just pay lip service to the club/board. I've been a member and I should know.
No board members sit on the Fans Forum....they are totally outside of the club, contrary to popular belief. They make appointments with SW and SK, usually ecvery 4-6 weeks and once a quarter have a meeting which they ask the Chairmen to attend. If you want the Fans Forum to be a success then YOU as fans have to use it, rather than just sit and nit pick...get behind it and you watch how successful it can be....
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]I think people overestimate the FF from what I can see they have done far more than their remit, they are what the club allows them to be, they part of the club in that sense.
Are you basing this on anything, or is it just a groundless opinion that you decided to air?
I only ask because it seems a very odd perspective given that the FF has been very visible, particularly on here, being constructively critical, in a way that we've not seen before from our supporters representatives. I find it odd that you'd imply that their scope is limited by the club, when they appear to be operating in a more challenging manner than we've been used to.
[quote][cite]Posted By: stilladdicted[/cite]'I didn't say get rid of it, just that it needs a more defined remit and I'd prefer that the members were chosen by us and not appointed by the Board. '
Point taken, agreed. So what do we do about it?[/quote]
Next time ensure that we have a more direct remit with outlined objectives and of course the power to do things etc and of course some way of voting our representatives on to it and not having them appointed/foisted on us.
Maybe via the Supporters' Trust we could elect a representative (assuming that all shareholders collectively pool their shares) to sit on the board as a sitting and full member of the PLC board and therefore that person will have some critical oversight. This isn't uncommon in PLC land and with smallish companies it is quite popular, if we formed a Shareholder Action Group (SAG) we could achieve this.
this guy who writes in the Newsshopper has at least twice, including this week, suggested that the T/O is imminent, that again doesn't give the FF much credibility.
must admit the NS column does seem rather inconsequential
How many Charlton fans do you know?.....I know perhaps 30-40...would that be enough to get me voted onto a supporters group? I doubt it....when people voted for a supporters representative the winning vote from memory was about 400...a good cross section of the then 23,000 season ticket holders....not really is it? Unfortunatley we dont live in an ideal world, at least the people on the Forum are willing to stand up and be counted and put in untold hours....as I said before....its up to you as fans to make the Forum work by getting behind it.....
[quote][cite]Posted By: Salad[/cite][quote]this guy who writes in the Newsshopper has at least twice, including this week, suggested that the T/O is imminent, that again doesn't give the FF much credibility.[/quote]must admit the NS column does seem rather inconsequential[/quote]
Well he needs to be reined in, it doesn't give the FF or the NS much credibility if he makes statements like that and then nothing happens.
To get back on point...who from the club side sits on the FF and are they on holiday or not? And if they are in the employ of the club why are they on holiday during the season and during protracted takeover negotiations?
It concerns me that SW seems to be giving the FF the swerve and makes an excuse which the FF should check out, or at the very least have had the wit to ask, but didn't...again draw your conclusions from that. The time right now is for critical thinking and not excuse accepting.
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]I think people overestimate the FF from what I can see they have done far more than their remit, they are what the club allows them to be, they part of the club in that sense.
Absolutley wrong Raz.....sorry mate they dont just pay lip service to the club/board. I've been a member and I should know.
I did say they have done far more than their remit, but that even in that case they are subject to the goodwill of the club.
this guy who writes in the Newsshopper has at least twice, including this week, suggested that the T/O is imminent, that again doesn't give the FF much credibility.
must admit the NS column does seem rather inconsequential
Well he needs to be reined in, it doesn't give the FF or the NS much credibility if he makes statements like that and then nothing happens.
To get back on point...who from the club side sits on the FF and are they on holiday or not? And if they are in the employ of the club why are they on holiday during the season and during protracted takeover negotiations?
It concerns me that SW seems to be giving the FF the swerve and makes an excuse which the FF should check out, or at the very least have had the wit to ask, but didn't...again draw your conclusions from that. The time right now is for critical thinking and not excuse accepting.
Umm ..... Steve Waggott has suggested that we arrange our next meeting in early September ..... that's a cool one week after our preferred date of 27th Aug. Not sure if that really amounts to the Fans' Forum being given the swerve, or that it indicates a lack of wit on our part, but maybe you disagree .... in your binary world?
Also, to be clear .... the Fans' Forum is a group of fans. It is does not represent the club and there are no club members (directors or otherwise) on the Fans' Forum. What we do is to arrange meetings with representatives of the club, usually Steve Waggott, Steve Kavanagh and David White, plus operational guys like Mick Everitt, Paul Ellison etc. On less frequent occasions we try to meet with Richard Murray and Derek Chappell, the most recent attempt being the abortive Q &A in July.
For the next meeting, it is our intention to meet with as many club directors as possible in an attempt to get whatever clarity we can about current developments. That's why we accept, but are not impressed with, Steve Waggott's point about delaying a week from our original proposal in order to get the club representation we seek at that next meeting.
There is a remit on the main website, although the ff has asked for this to be revisited - to no avail.
Only the people that originally applied to be on the forum - became the forum. In the clubs defence, they met with all and it was decided that due to low interest a vote wouldn't be needed when the group was small! Are they at fault for that? Its the apathy of fans to blame.
The fans forum have then taken on new members via interview process. Not wholly overseen by the club so I don't see where the 'control by the club' lies.
I think there is only so much the ff can ask the same question, and there are only so many times the club or sw as he is the contact can say - 'I can't say anything' it is out of his control, the ff control and the fans' control. Doesn't mean its not been asked, keeps being asked or that it wants to be answered by the club but they can't.
Personally your frustrations to me bfr come across as being directed to the club in the first and the ff in the second. Perhaps sw is elaborating on the holiday directors bit and the ff are being fobbed off. What can they, you or a supporters trust rep do about it apart from camp up outside directors houses for proof??
I would say that even if the FF now directs its own interview process, it is still not 'owned' by the supporters. The club appointed the reps, now they in turn appoint new members presumably subject to the club having the final say. It is a valid point that supporters have no direct influence in the election process and this is a weakness which could do with a closer look.
Henry got elected with 400 votes (in round figures) Vince and Brian got slightly less and about the same number again were to other candidates / spoilt.
Approximately 1,600 votes at a time when we had about 20,000 season ticket holders. I realise that only adult season ticket holders were allowed to vote but even so it is hardly an impressive turnout is it?
[quote][cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite]Do we not get what we deserve?
Henry got elected with 400 votes (in round figures) Vince and Brian got slightly less and about the same number again were to other candidates / spoilt.
Approximately 1,600 votes at a time when we had about 20,000 season ticket holders. I realise that only adult season ticket holders were allowed to vote but even so it is hardly an impressive turnout is it?[/quote]
I'm perplexed that so few who could vote actually did so - as events unfolded I suspect quite a few abstainers might have preferred to have cast a vote. Was voting that difficult?
But at least Ben Hayes was elected by us and not appointed.
[cite]Posted By: stilladdicted[/cite]I would say that even if the FF now directs its own interview process, it is still not 'owned' by the supporters. The club appointed the reps, now they in turn appoint new members presumably subject to the club having the final say. It is a valid point that supporters have no direct influence in the election process and this is a weakness which could do with a closer look.
Not at all....the club had no say when I was actively involved. When recruiting you have to look to the dynamics of the group and what skills or traits they can bring to the table...thats something that voting a person on via poll or voting procedure cant possibly do...how do you suggest that can be dealt with?
Voting via who has the largest number of Charlton mates isnt going to achieve anything....as i said 400 out of 23,000 was hardly a stunning turnout was it...
[cite]Posted By: stilladdicted[/cite]I would say that even if the FF now directs its own interview process, it is still not 'owned' by the supporters. The club appointed the reps, now they in turn appoint new members presumably subject to the club having the final say. It is a valid point that supporters have no direct influence in the election process and this is a weakness which could do with a closer look.
Not at all....the club had no say when I was actively involved. When recruiting you have to look to the dynamics of the group and what skills or traits they can bring to the table...thats something that voting a person on via poll or voting procedure cant possibly do...how do you suggest that can be dealt with?
Voting via who has the largest number of Charlton mates isnt going to achieve anything....as i said 400 out of 23,000 was hardly a stunning turnout was it...
While what you say about recruiting people with relevant skills and traits makes some sense, it has nothing to do with democracy or representation. It is very open to the perception that it is forum members choosing their own mates to join them - whether or not that is true.
Whether or why people vote in elections is not the point; it's the fact that they can which matters and which lends the elected party credibility.
While what you say about recruiting people with relevant skills and traits makes some sense, it has nothing to do with democracy or representation. It is very open to the perception that it is forum members choosing their own mates to join them - whether or not that is true.
Whether or why people vote in elections is not the point; it's the fact that they can which matters and which lends the elected party credibility.[/quote]
Comments
As i said.Taking the pi55.And don't give me the 'everybody deserves a holiday' bollox.I know lot's of people that havn't holiday'd for years due to work commitments.They should especially not be sunning themselves when my football club could be heading down the swanny.Second rate board!
..........
Exactly....
I didn't say get rid of it, just that it needs a more defined remit and I'd prefer that the members were chosen by us and not appointed by the Board.
As I say above, do we know for sure that the Board members who are on the FF are actually on holiday or not? If they aren't what conclusion do we draw from SW's excuse?
Nope...
No vendetta, if there were I'd have climbed in to them big time, as others do with their grievances. I'm just pointing out the inherent flaws in the FF. Take it or leave it, but I think I've made my point.
Point taken, agreed. So what do we do about it?
Absolutley wrong Raz.....sorry mate they dont just pay lip service to the club/board. I've been a member and I should know.
I only ask because it seems a very odd perspective given that the FF has been very visible, particularly on here, being constructively critical, in a way that we've not seen before from our supporters representatives. I find it odd that you'd imply that their scope is limited by the club, when they appear to be operating in a more challenging manner than we've been used to.
Point taken, agreed. So what do we do about it?[/quote]
Next time ensure that we have a more direct remit with outlined objectives and of course the power to do things etc and of course some way of voting our representatives on to it and not having them appointed/foisted on us.
Maybe via the Supporters' Trust we could elect a representative (assuming that all shareholders collectively pool their shares) to sit on the board as a sitting and full member of the PLC board and therefore that person will have some critical oversight. This isn't uncommon in PLC land and with smallish companies it is quite popular, if we formed a Shareholder Action Group (SAG) we could achieve this.
Well he needs to be reined in, it doesn't give the FF or the NS much credibility if he makes statements like that and then nothing happens.
To get back on point...who from the club side sits on the FF and are they on holiday or not? And if they are in the employ of the club why are they on holiday during the season and during protracted takeover negotiations?
It concerns me that SW seems to be giving the FF the swerve and makes an excuse which the FF should check out, or at the very least have had the wit to ask, but didn't...again draw your conclusions from that. The time right now is for critical thinking and not excuse accepting.
30 or 40? Call yourself a supporter, you're a plastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I did say they have done far more than their remit, but that even in that case they are subject to the goodwill of the club.
Umm ..... Steve Waggott has suggested that we arrange our next meeting in early September ..... that's a cool one week after our preferred date of 27th Aug. Not sure if that really amounts to the Fans' Forum being given the swerve, or that it indicates a lack of wit on our part, but maybe you disagree .... in your binary world?
Also, to be clear .... the Fans' Forum is a group of fans. It is does not represent the club and there are no club members (directors or otherwise) on the Fans' Forum. What we do is to arrange meetings with representatives of the club, usually Steve Waggott, Steve Kavanagh and David White, plus operational guys like Mick Everitt, Paul Ellison etc. On less frequent occasions we try to meet with Richard Murray and Derek Chappell, the most recent attempt being the abortive Q &A in July.
For the next meeting, it is our intention to meet with as many club directors as possible in an attempt to get whatever clarity we can about current developments. That's why we accept, but are not impressed with, Steve Waggott's point about delaying a week from our original proposal in order to get the club representation we seek at that next meeting.
Only the people that originally applied to be on the forum - became the forum. In the clubs defence, they met with all and it was decided that due to low interest a vote wouldn't be needed when the group was small! Are they at fault for that? Its the apathy of fans to blame.
The fans forum have then taken on new members via interview process. Not wholly overseen by the club so I don't see where the 'control by the club' lies.
I think there is only so much the ff can ask the same question, and there are only so many times the club or sw as he is the contact can say - 'I can't say anything' it is out of his control, the ff control and the fans' control. Doesn't mean its not been asked, keeps being asked or that it wants to be answered by the club but they can't.
Personally your frustrations to me bfr come across as being directed to the club in the first and the ff in the second. Perhaps sw is elaborating on the holiday directors bit and the ff are being fobbed off. What can they, you or a supporters trust rep do about it apart from camp up outside directors houses for proof??
Henry got elected with 400 votes (in round figures) Vince and Brian got slightly less and about the same number again were to other candidates / spoilt.
Approximately 1,600 votes at a time when we had about 20,000 season ticket holders. I realise that only adult season ticket holders were allowed to vote but even so it is hardly an impressive turnout is it?
Henry got elected with 400 votes (in round figures) Vince and Brian got slightly less and about the same number again were to other candidates / spoilt.
Approximately 1,600 votes at a time when we had about 20,000 season ticket holders. I realise that only adult season ticket holders were allowed to vote but even so it is hardly an impressive turnout is it?[/quote]
I'm perplexed that so few who could vote actually did so - as events unfolded I suspect quite a few abstainers might have preferred to have cast a vote. Was voting that difficult?
But at least Ben Hayes was elected by us and not appointed.
Not at all....the club had no say when I was actively involved. When recruiting you have to look to the dynamics of the group and what skills or traits they can bring to the table...thats something that voting a person on via poll or voting procedure cant possibly do...how do you suggest that can be dealt with?
Voting via who has the largest number of Charlton mates isnt going to achieve anything....as i said 400 out of 23,000 was hardly a stunning turnout was it...
While what you say about recruiting people with relevant skills and traits makes some sense, it has nothing to do with democracy or representation. It is very open to the perception that it is forum members choosing their own mates to join them - whether or not that is true.
Whether or why people vote in elections is not the point; it's the fact that they can which matters and which lends the elected party credibility.
Whether or why people vote in elections is not the point; it's the fact that they can which matters and which lends the elected party credibility.[/quote]
Should we have a secret ballot??