I leave you to consider the words of Steve Bradshaw in regard to consultation in relation to ACV. He has given a firm undertaking on the CAFC website........ “There are no current plans to move stadium, and of course we would always give fans the opportunity to have their say in the event that such a situation arose, so the club would support proposals that would formalise this right to consultation.” Read more at http://www.cafc.co.uk/news/article/20130722-have-a-say-in-the-valleys-future-935037.aspx#TBLyLFaPrKprAbEx.99
I do not remember the club ever stating that publicly?...... as a matter of policy. If nothing else the application of ACV has produced this, and quite possibly a consultation period. Not a perfect situation, but better than nothing, which your post alludes to?
Ken, I support the ACV application, but what on earth makes you think an undertaking from Bradshaw is worth anything? He hasn't even got the respect of the people who work for him.
I leave you to consider the words of Steve Bradshaw in regard to consultation in relation to ACV. He has given a firm undertaking on the CAFC website........ “There are no current plans to move stadium, and of course we would always give fans the opportunity to have their say in the event that such a situation arose, so the club would support proposals that would formalise this right to consultation.” Read more at http://www.cafc.co.uk/news/article/20130722-have-a-say-in-the-valleys-future-935037.aspx#TBLyLFaPrKprAbEx.99
I do not remember the club ever stating that publicly?...... as a matter of policy. If nothing else the application of ACV has produced this, and quite possibly a consultation period. Not a perfect situation, but better than nothing, which your post alludes to?
Ken, I support the ACV application, but what on earth makes you think an undertaking from Bradshaw is worth anything? He hasn't even got the respect of the people who work for him.
I am sure you do Airman, for someone who fought so hard to return to the valley 20 years ago. If people wish to go on the CAFC website and be unsincere, then I think that will be a serious breach of trust if they subsequently do not deliver there words into action. I think there position will be very difficult to have any credability, let alone authority, and let's admit it it aint too high in the first place if we take your position.
As you support the ACV that was my main point. Steve Bradshaw's comments are in addition to the application. They are for him to uphold, and implement.If they are empty words why state them?. So what is your message to the supporters Rick, I assume it is to sign up for the ACV as we have both done? See Bradshaw's comments as a 'side order' to the main dish on the menu?..... if they are hard for you to swallow........
I leave you to consider the words of Steve Bradshaw in regard to consultation in relation to ACV. He has given a firm undertaking on the CAFC website........ “There are no current plans to move stadium, and of course we would always give fans the opportunity to have their say in the event that such a situation arose, so the club would support proposals that would formalise this right to consultation.” Read more at http://www.cafc.co.uk/news/article/20130722-have-a-say-in-the-valleys-future-935037.aspx#TBLyLFaPrKprAbEx.99
I do not remember the club ever stating that publicly?...... as a matter of policy. If nothing else the application of ACV has produced this, and quite possibly a consultation period. Not a perfect situation, but better than nothing, which your post alludes to?
Ken, I support the ACV application, but what on earth makes you think an undertaking from Bradshaw is worth anything? He hasn't even got the respect of the people who work for him.
I am sure you do Airman, for someone who fought so hard to return to the valley 20 years ago. If people wish to go on the CAFC website and be unsincere, then I think that will be a serious breach of trust if they subsequently do not deliver there words into action. I think there position will be very difficult to have any credability, let alone authority, and let's admit it it aint too high in the first place if we take your position.
As you support the ACV that was my main point. Steve Bradshaw's comments are in addition to the application. They are for him to uphold, and implement.If they are empty words why state them?. So what is your message to the supporters Rick, I assume it is to sign up for the ACV as we have both done? See Bradshaw's comments as a 'side order' to the main dish on the menu?..... if they are hard for you to swallow........
Ken, my point is that Bradshaw's a nobody. He's not a director, he left mighty Colchester under a cloud, and I doubt if he'll last much longer at The Valley the way he's going.
To put it another way, his views carry no more authority on such matters than mine when I was on the staff.
I know Airman .....but there are only 3 directors and you never hear of Richard Murray speaking on behalf of CAFC on such matters on the club website, nor would I expect to. TJ has never spoken if I am correct, and Slater has only occassionally done so. Without a Press officer at present...... who would you expect to comment? Steve Bradshaw is effectively the person dealing with these matters, which I am sure you are aware. I am only to pleased to speak to any CAFC employee, as the liason officer, before Christmas few of them would do so? Mind you in the past few of them did, you being an exception along with Dave Archer and Matt Wright and there hands were somewhat 'tied'.
I know Airman .....but there are only 3 directors and you never hear of Richard Murray speaking on behalf of CAFC on such matters on the club website, nor would I expect to. TJ has never spoken if I am correct, and Slater has only occassionally done so. Without a Press officer at present...... who would you expect to comment? Steve Bradshaw is effectively the person dealing with these matters, which I am sure you are aware. I am only to pleased to speak to any CAFC employee, as the liason officer, before Christmas few of them would do so? Mind you in the past few of them did, you being an exception along with Dave Archer and Matt Wright and there hands were somewhat 'tied'.
There are four directors and if no one else is willing I'd expect to hear it from the executive vice chair - but evidently he's a Trappist monk.
Still not sure why, if there is space elsewhere, why some other business just does not build houses there. What is the business case for someone buying the Valley site rather than just buying the peninsula site? I understand why the Silent Board would want to sell but not why it makes sense for a developer to buy. BTW if we have a Trappist on the Board, the beer fans might be able to look forward to better Ale
I know Airman .....but there are only 3 directors and you never hear of Richard Murray speaking on behalf of CAFC on such matters on the club website, nor would I expect to. TJ has never spoken if I am correct, and Slater has only occassionally done so. Without a Press officer at present...... who would you expect to comment? Steve Bradshaw is effectively the person dealing with these matters, which I am sure you are aware. I am only to pleased to speak to any CAFC employee, as the liason officer, before Christmas few of them would do so? Mind you in the past few of them did, you being an exception along with Dave Archer and Matt Wright and there hands were somewhat 'tied'.
There are four directors and if no one else is willing I'd expect to hear it from the executive vice chair - but evidently he's a Trappist monk.
Trappist Monk. No wonder he can't speak. That beers lethal.
"There are no current plans to move stadium", means sod all.
Maybe there wasn't when he said it, but so what. There may easily be the following day, or tomorrow or next week.
It means nothing, nowt, nada.
Oh I thought that CAFC were part of a 'proposal' to move to the peninsular/Macro site?. Of course it does not mean that tommorow afternoon at 4pm the club will NOT announce a ground share with Westham at the Olympic stadium, or some such idea? I have enough trouble getting a response out of CAFC to confirm arrangements, and the thought of getting them to deny 'rumours' I feel is not going to happen. Even when Airman was there, they rarely responded to concerns/enquiries of a business nature. I know I tried ? ( and we all know I have bored people to death with my previous comments of who I worked for haven't we?...... althought at the time it was the Financial Times newspaper ?)
Have to say I think the statement is better than nowt, and technically it means not only is acv not going to be opposed, but also that the FA and other bodies are in support.
So it has some value. Clearly it is not cast iron but then again what is whomever gives it, with creative wording
So out of the 4 DRF only 1 the non english went to charlton because it was his local team
the other 2 went due to family and 1 who went with someone who has CAFC in his blood i pressume
so how is it flawed ,
Whilst I suppose I didn't mention it, the third person did in fact have other neighbours and friends who supported other teams. As a youngster he went with various people to Fulham, Liverpool and West Ham, maybe others he's not mentioned, of these he chose Charlton to be his team. You specifically said people only went if they had in it in their blood.
And even if, as you suggest, he is invalid because he went with other peopl who had it in their blood that still leaves one in four.
Do you believe it is not worth promoting the club to increase the attendance by 25%?
Still not sure why, if there is space elsewhere, why some other business just does not build houses there. What is the business case for someone buying the Valley site rather than just buying the peninsula site? I understand why the Silent Board would want to sell but not why it makes sense for a developer to buy. BTW if we have a Trappist on the Board, the beer fans might be able to look forward to better Ale
The Peninsula is polluted ground and there is a limit to the number of residences which can be built on it. They removed an amount of top soil in order to build commercially but the ground would need to be further decontaminated to be fit for more housing, which wouldn't be commercially viable. That is why they are adding as many commercial properties on the site as possible. The Valley however is a brown field site which could be used for housing.
Have to say I think the statement is better than nowt, and technically it means not only is acv not going to be opposed, but also that the FA and other bodies are in support.
So it has some value. Clearly it is not cast iron but then again what is whomever gives it, with creative wording
Correct. That's actually one of the main things that makes our ACV application stronger than others, that it isn't opposed by the property owner, unlike Oxfors and Manchester United. This was definitely something the chaps from Greenwich Council picked up on when me and Ken met them on Wednesday.
Comments
the other 2 went due to family and 1 who went with someone who has CAFC in his blood i pressume
so how is it flawed ,
If people wish to go on the CAFC website and be unsincere, then I think that will be a serious breach of trust if they subsequently do not deliver there words into action.
I think there position will be very difficult to have any credability, let alone authority, and let's admit it it aint too high in the first place if we take your position.
As you support the ACV that was my main point. Steve Bradshaw's comments are in addition to the application.
They are for him to uphold, and implement.If they are empty words why state them?.
So what is your message to the supporters Rick, I assume it is to sign up for the ACV as we have both done?
See Bradshaw's comments as a 'side order' to the main dish on the menu?..... if they are hard for you to swallow........
To put it another way, his views carry no more authority on such matters than mine when I was on the staff.
TJ has never spoken if I am correct, and Slater has only occassionally done so.
Without a Press officer at present...... who would you expect to comment?
Steve Bradshaw is effectively the person dealing with these matters, which I am sure you are aware.
I am only to pleased to speak to any CAFC employee, as the liason officer, before Christmas few of them would do so?
Mind you in the past few of them did, you being an exception along with Dave Archer and Matt Wright and there hands were somewhat 'tied'.
Maybe there wasn't when he said it, but so what. There may easily be the following day, or tomorrow or next week.
It means nothing, nowt, nada.
Of course it does not mean that tommorow afternoon at 4pm the club will NOT announce a ground share with Westham at the Olympic stadium, or some such idea?
I have enough trouble getting a response out of CAFC to confirm arrangements, and the thought of getting them to deny 'rumours' I feel is not going to happen.
Even when Airman was there, they rarely responded to concerns/enquiries of a business nature. I know I tried ? ( and we all know I have bored people to death with my previous comments of who I worked for haven't we?...... althought at the time it was the Financial Times newspaper ?)
So it has some value. Clearly it is not cast iron but then again what is whomever gives it, with creative wording
And even if, as you suggest, he is invalid because he went with other peopl who had it in their blood that still leaves one in four.
Do you believe it is not worth promoting the club to increase the attendance by 25%?
Anyway, quick ACV update here;
http://www.castrust.org/2013/08/acv-campaign-the-story-so-far/