[quote][cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Good Luck Steve, took a lot of stick mainly from people who had no idea and never bothered to find out what his job was.
Was he blameless? No, but the slide at Charlton started long before he became CEO.
Now, can we start slagging of Steve Kavanagh. I don't know what he does, I've seen him smile once and heard he wasn't born in Floyd Rd so it all must be his fault. And yes, that was sarcasm in case you didn't get it.[/quote]
Ridicoulous post & a sly attempt at slagging off people who dared questioned what Waggott did for his money. In this day & age when the majority of the workforce have to justify what they do for a living, I think the paying public were entitled to question Waggotts role within the club.
"Sarcasm" as you put it Henry, is the lowest form of wit & your post just endorsed that.
I am sorry to see him go - met him several times - he always stopped to speak - nice bloke.
I think we will miss him and his expoerience as an agent in negotiating - he managed to off load Amdy Faye and other Dowie/Pardew signings to restructure the payroll - a shame that his own role had to be restructured. I am sure it is necessary given our financial position.
structure always looked top heavy since we left the prem and even when we were in it.
Good luck to Steve and thanks for all his efforts, seemed like a decent chap to me when I met him, I for one won't be laying any blame for the clubs ills at his door.
Cant understand why posters moaned about his salary.
It was the board who gave him the contract after all.
In a painfully odd way it does appear that our financial dire straits are forcing the board into getting us back towards the old fashioned core values that brought us success originally ('the charlton way').
Well Mooney has not signed yet, Waggots gone, who shall we slag off next season? How much doees Airman earn, is it value for money? basey is rubbish too slow, too one dimensional.
In from work and just seen all this.
The major point is we need staff, playing and non-playing, who represent value for the wage we pay them. We are financially threatened, and players (for example MooToo) are open to examination as to what they contribute for their wage, and criticism if they don't produce anything. So too should be any others in the infrastructure, most especially the leaders for what they contribute and at what cost. I have little regard for what I know of Steve Waggotts contribution....his most frequent contributions 'out there' for the fans were his programme notes, and there was scant encouragement there that he was worth his very nice wage.
We are stakeholders, either as shareholders, season ticket holders, members, and supporters, and we subscribe to the TV services, and buy the merchandise, and schlepp to see the team away. It is absolutely right that in the context of football the major contributors should criticise and scrutinise the major earners.
Steve Waggott is gone, lets see if the club now suffers, and if it costs 800-1000 season ticket holders money to mitigate that suffering.
We all know who was at the root of the Prem relegation / Dowie fiasco / Les Reed comedy / Pards tragedy / and several failed takeover bids - and it ain't PV
[cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]Derek Chappell appointed Steve Waggott when he was in charge. It is my best guess that Richard Murray would never have made the appointment.
However, when Murray resumed control, there wasn't a lot he could do. If he had sacked Waggott early days then it would have caused a boardroom rift.
Additionally, Waggot had his contract which presumably would have had to be paid up in full.
A year or so later it's not quite such a rift making decision and Waggott's contract would cost less to pay up/pay off.
Pure conjecture on my part.
That sounds about right.
[cite]Posted By: LenGlover
However what I do know is that a financially struggling third division club was employing both a CEO and a Managing Director, presumably on salaries commensurate with such roles. That seems extremely top heavy to me when 14 lower paid people lost their jobs a year ago supposedly to save money and respond to the changing needs of a contracting operation.
One must assume that Richard Murray has now come to the same conclusion and has selected Mr Kavanagh above Mr Waggott for the CEO/MD role.
Finances, and looking to move forward, once left Murray with the decision of Curbishley or Gritt as sole manager.
Finances again are playing a major role, and the choice may very have
come down to Kavanagh or Waggott for a club that was top-heavy on administration salaries.
I suppose we will learn what "24/7" did for his salary if no one is added to replace him.
Will a big difference be noticed by supporters and staff, or will their be no difference noticed once he is gone?
[quote][cite]Posted By: Valiantphil[/cite]He's a Spanner fan and he is history.
Give me Reg anyday.
We all know who was at the root of the Prem relegation / Dowie fiasco / Les Reed comedy / Pards tragedy / and several failed takeover bids - and it ain't PV[/quote] Do we ? Murray?
[cite]Posted By: Valiantphil[/cite]He's a Spanner fan and he is history.
Give me Reg anyday.
We all know who was at the root of the Prem relegation / Dowie fiasco / Les Reed comedy / Pards tragedy / and several failed takeover bids - and it ain't PV
Do we ? Murray?
In the good times and the bad, Murray has been ultimately responsible.
Have only just seen this, having returned home from the Adam Gillespie show at Canterbury ....'Nuff said.
Obviously this does not come as a surprise as most have already stated . Those who read "my" piece on Steve & David White's attendance at NWKA's Q & A meeting a while back will be aware that I have always found the CEO to be approachable, friendly and willing to listen to suggestions made by members etc . No doubt, some will construe this to mean that Steve had far too much time on his hands - after all, why should he be interested in what mere supporters think ? He was always going to be damned if he did, and damned if he didn't IYKWIM. As others have said already, Peter Varney was a hard act to follow but I'm certain Steve gave the job his best shot although that was nowhere near good enough for his detractors on here.
Without wishing to resurrect the "What does SW do for his money ?" saga, I can't believe how fair minded people turned a few comments from ex & present Club employees into a witch hunt on here. As I wrote at the time, how do you know that other dept. managers within the Club are fulfilling their roles or expectations when we are not party to their job descriptions and certainly not to their salaries ? As Henry rightly said, who will be next in line for the Black Spot ?
I wish Steve well in his next venture, wherever it may be, and hope that his future colleagues show more loyalty than some of his current ones . I fervently hope that this will see the end on this forum, of criticism, veiled or otherwise of Club employees made by other "insiders". IMHO it is not the place to air personal opinions, valid or not, and leaves a distinctly bad taste . In these instances, surely what goes on in the workplace should stay in the workplace .
Anyway, Steve, you have been voted the weakest link by the CL panel of judges, so goodbye ....and good luck.
On a personal level would never wish any one out of a job and can only hope Mr Waggott is fine financially.
From a supporter and professional level this was clearly the correct decision that needed do be made. Despite the efforts of some on this forum who thought we couldn’t survive without Mr Waggott or anyone else in his role, we are in the 3rd tier of English football, to have a CO and an MD was madness and to have continued for so long shows an indication of why this club has been in the decline for so long.
Only hope Mr Kavangah does not have programme notes or if he must keep them relevant to CAFC in 2010 and not waffle on about Champions League football as his predecessor seemed to always want to do.
As there have been references to my previous comments here I will make a few things clear. I've known Steve Waggott for 20 years. When I first got involved with the Mercury in 1989, he filed the Millwall match reports, although like me at the time he wasn't a journalist but a mate of Pete Cordwell's doing a bit of freelancing. We have a number of very good mutual friends, so I had a fair idea who he was when he first became associated with the club. There was never any question of the staff, individually or collectively, not giving him a fair wind. We all realised that he was stepping into big shoes and was unlikely to fill them. That would have been true whoever followed Peter Varney. There never has been and isn't now any animosity on my part towards Steve and as far as I'm aware that's generally true of the staff.
A great deal of weight is placed by posters here on Steve's personal qualities, understandably because these are apparent to them whereas the day to day operation of the club is not. However, these have never been in dispute. Henry, who has been a constant advocate for Steve on here and has been in regular dialogue with him about this board, has now raised the suggestion that people blame Steve for the club's recent decline. Again this has never been true, at least as far as the staff are concerned. Henry also says that Steve's critics on here have never taken the trouble to find out what his role was. This argument doesn't wash because some of his biggest critics have been those who worked most closely with him. If senior staff didn't know his role then presumably something must have been wrong in the state of Denmark. Henry and I disagree on many things and usually I respect his views, but he is no position to second guess the day to day experience of people who work at The Valley.
Was it appropriate for me, as a senior member of staff of longstanding, to criticise Steve here? Of course it wasn't. Was it necessary and did it reflect a consensus within and around the club rather than some personal agenda - I continue to believe so. For the record I've had not one word of criticism from my employers on the subject to date.
The club has operated a deeply dysfunctional management structure that has provided poor value for money. That is not Steve Waggott's fault either, but it could not continue. Whatever the full story, we don't need to look further than a financial explanation for yesterday's announcement and I think the best thing to do is to take that at face value and leave it there. We have had our fair share of villains at Charlton over the years, but Steve Waggott isn't one of them.
The club will now operate with one person at the top instead of three and I do not think that of itself will have a significant effect on the business. Indeed, an end to blurred lines of accountability is likely to make it more effective. That should tell you all you need to know.
Excellent post Airman. Sincere thanks for clearly stating your past and present views, which I hope and expect will help silence the peanut gallery (myself included!), both wrt S. Waggott and your previous comments about him.
Chief Executive
Physical Education Teacher/Lecturer
Sports Journalist
Football Agent
With the list of previous jobs shown as above, I’m sure it will not be long before Mr Waggott finds another job.
Financially this had to be done, as if Mr Waggott was earning the annual earnings as stated on this forum on many occasions, then the club could not justify having two high earners at the sharp end of the operation, when every penny is vital now.
With Mr Kavanagh taking over from the start of next month, then time will tell if this will make any difference to the running of the club.
I always liked Steve, but it was clear he was going, he himself thought he was going last year so he had a year's grace.
I do hope we get someone else in and don't have Kav in charge. The man is all finance and no real football knowledge (heard one of his cost saving plans include stopping the drinking water at the training ground as it costs too much). If you thought Waggot was scary you aint seen nothing yet.
Would be surprised if we got the old guard back in though.
To be fair Harvey that water suggestion aint a bad idea and given our current situation a number cruncher keeping an eye on the purse strings may not be a bad thing.
Say a big bottle of evian costs £2 and 20 players get one each a day thats 12k a year at a conservative estimate on water which could go towards wages or running costs.
Cant see why the players cant "spalsh out" on their own water or alternatively use that recent invention the tap if they dont want to "dip" into their own pockets.
Comments
Was he blameless? No, but the slide at Charlton started long before he became CEO.
Now, can we start slagging of Steve Kavanagh. I don't know what he does, I've seen him smile once and heard he wasn't born in Floyd Rd so it all must be his fault. And yes, that was sarcasm in case you didn't get it.[/quote]
Ridicoulous post & a sly attempt at slagging off people who dared questioned what Waggott did for his money. In this day & age when the majority of the workforce have to justify what they do for a living, I think the paying public were entitled to question Waggotts role within the club.
"Sarcasm" as you put it Henry, is the lowest form of wit & your post just endorsed that.
I think we will miss him and his expoerience as an agent in negotiating - he managed to off load Amdy Faye and other Dowie/Pardew signings to restructure the payroll - a shame that his own role had to be restructured. I am sure it is necessary given our financial position.
Good luck for the future Steve.
Good luck to Steve and thanks for all his efforts, seemed like a decent chap to me when I met him, I for one won't be laying any blame for the clubs ills at his door.
R
It was the board who gave him the contract after all.
In a painfully odd way it does appear that our financial dire straits are forcing the board into getting us back towards the old fashioned core values that brought us success originally ('the charlton way').
Kav is a hamster, why would he go to a casc meeting?
The major point is we need staff, playing and non-playing, who represent value for the wage we pay them. We are financially threatened, and players (for example MooToo) are open to examination as to what they contribute for their wage, and criticism if they don't produce anything. So too should be any others in the infrastructure, most especially the leaders for what they contribute and at what cost. I have little regard for what I know of Steve Waggotts contribution....his most frequent contributions 'out there' for the fans were his programme notes, and there was scant encouragement there that he was worth his very nice wage.
We are stakeholders, either as shareholders, season ticket holders, members, and supporters, and we subscribe to the TV services, and buy the merchandise, and schlepp to see the team away. It is absolutely right that in the context of football the major contributors should criticise and scrutinise the major earners.
Steve Waggott is gone, lets see if the club now suffers, and if it costs 800-1000 season ticket holders money to mitigate that suffering.
However, when Murray resumed control, there wasn't a lot he could do. If he had sacked Waggott early days then it would have caused a boardroom rift.
Additionally, Waggot had his contract which presumably would have had to be paid up in full.
A year or so later it's not quite such a rift making decision and Waggott's contract would cost less to pay up/pay off.
Pure conjecture on my part.
Give me Reg anyday.
We all know who was at the root of the Prem relegation / Dowie fiasco / Les Reed comedy / Pards tragedy / and several failed takeover bids - and it ain't PV
That sounds about right.
Finances, and looking to move forward, once left Murray with the decision of Curbishley or Gritt as sole manager.
Finances again are playing a major role, and the choice may very have
come down to Kavanagh or Waggott for a club that was top-heavy on administration salaries.
I suppose we will learn what "24/7" did for his salary if no one is added to replace him.
Will a big difference be noticed by supporters and staff, or will their be no difference noticed once he is gone?
Give me Reg anyday.
We all know who was at the root of the Prem relegation / Dowie fiasco / Les Reed comedy / Pards tragedy / and several failed takeover bids - and it ain't PV[/quote]
Do we ? Murray?
In the good times and the bad, Murray has been ultimately responsible.
Obviously this does not come as a surprise as most have already stated . Those who read "my" piece on Steve & David White's attendance at NWKA's Q & A meeting a while back will be aware that I have always found the CEO to be approachable, friendly and willing to listen to suggestions made by members etc . No doubt, some will construe this to mean that Steve had far too much time on his hands - after all, why should he be interested in what mere supporters think ? He was always going to be damned if he did, and damned if he didn't IYKWIM. As others have said already, Peter Varney was a hard act to follow but I'm certain Steve gave the job his best shot although that was nowhere near good enough for his detractors on here.
Without wishing to resurrect the "What does SW do for his money ?" saga, I can't believe how fair minded people turned a few comments from ex & present Club employees into a witch hunt on here. As I wrote at the time, how do you know that other dept. managers within the Club are fulfilling their roles or expectations when we are not party to their job descriptions and certainly not to their salaries ? As Henry rightly said, who will be next in line for the Black Spot ?
I wish Steve well in his next venture, wherever it may be, and hope that his future colleagues show more loyalty than some of his current ones . I fervently hope that this will see the end on this forum, of criticism, veiled or otherwise of Club employees made by other "insiders". IMHO it is not the place to air personal opinions, valid or not, and leaves a distinctly bad taste . In these instances, surely what goes on in the workplace should stay in the workplace .
Anyway, Steve, you have been voted the weakest link by the CL panel of judges, so goodbye ....and good luck.
From a supporter and professional level this was clearly the correct decision that needed do be made. Despite the efforts of some on this forum who thought we couldn’t survive without Mr Waggott or anyone else in his role, we are in the 3rd tier of English football, to have a CO and an MD was madness and to have continued for so long shows an indication of why this club has been in the decline for so long.
Only hope Mr Kavangah does not have programme notes or if he must keep them relevant to CAFC in 2010 and not waffle on about Champions League football as his predecessor seemed to always want to do.
A great deal of weight is placed by posters here on Steve's personal qualities, understandably because these are apparent to them whereas the day to day operation of the club is not. However, these have never been in dispute. Henry, who has been a constant advocate for Steve on here and has been in regular dialogue with him about this board, has now raised the suggestion that people blame Steve for the club's recent decline. Again this has never been true, at least as far as the staff are concerned. Henry also says that Steve's critics on here have never taken the trouble to find out what his role was. This argument doesn't wash because some of his biggest critics have been those who worked most closely with him. If senior staff didn't know his role then presumably something must have been wrong in the state of Denmark. Henry and I disagree on many things and usually I respect his views, but he is no position to second guess the day to day experience of people who work at The Valley.
Was it appropriate for me, as a senior member of staff of longstanding, to criticise Steve here? Of course it wasn't. Was it necessary and did it reflect a consensus within and around the club rather than some personal agenda - I continue to believe so. For the record I've had not one word of criticism from my employers on the subject to date.
The club has operated a deeply dysfunctional management structure that has provided poor value for money. That is not Steve Waggott's fault either, but it could not continue. Whatever the full story, we don't need to look further than a financial explanation for yesterday's announcement and I think the best thing to do is to take that at face value and leave it there. We have had our fair share of villains at Charlton over the years, but Steve Waggott isn't one of them.
The club will now operate with one person at the top instead of three and I do not think that of itself will have a significant effect on the business. Indeed, an end to blurred lines of accountability is likely to make it more effective. That should tell you all you need to know.
Amalgamating certain roles makes sense . Let's hope that no more "foot soldiers" at the Club receive their P45s.
I heard he smiles a lot too!!!!
Next...!!!
Physical Education Teacher/Lecturer
Sports Journalist
Football Agent
With the list of previous jobs shown as above, I’m sure it will not be long before Mr Waggott finds another job.
Financially this had to be done, as if Mr Waggott was earning the annual earnings as stated on this forum on many occasions, then the club could not justify having two high earners at the sharp end of the operation, when every penny is vital now.
With Mr Kavanagh taking over from the start of next month, then time will tell if this will make any difference to the running of the club.
I do hope we get someone else in and don't have Kav in charge. The man is all finance and no real football knowledge (heard one of his cost saving plans include stopping the drinking water at the training ground as it costs too much). If you thought Waggot was scary you aint seen nothing yet.
Would be surprised if we got the old guard back in though.
Say a big bottle of evian costs £2 and 20 players get one each a day thats 12k a year at a conservative estimate on water which could go towards wages or running costs.
Cant see why the players cant "spalsh out" on their own water or alternatively use that recent invention the tap if they dont want to "dip" into their own pockets.