thanks for the write ups i've skim read it all and i am the only one who finds it weird that someone (is it Ken or Athletico or whoever ) who is a fan and happens to be a member of the Trust Board is not allowed to speak ?? or have i totally misread the situation and also why wouldn't the said individual just go along as themselves rather than with the Trust Board badge on
Apparently he was invited to be an observer rather than a participant, which seems odd in itself. But as you say, their meeting their rules.
The Trust and Charlton Athletic. An analogy perhaps is Unions and Big Business. When the going is tough the Unions serve a good purpose. When the going is good then are the Unions a help or a hindrance or just good to have around just in case things go tits up again. (Is this relevant?).
Anyway, thanks for all the contributors on this thread. For us exiles it's a God send. :-) Cheers.
thanks for the write ups i've skim read it all and i am the only one who finds it weird that someone (is it Ken or Athletico or whoever ) who is a fan and happens to be a member of the Trust Board is not allowed to speak ?? or have i totally misread the situation and also why wouldn't the said individual just go along as themselves rather than with the Trust Board badge on
Apparently he was invited to be an observer rather than a participant, which seems odd in itself. But as you say, their meeting their rules.
I believe that he asked to come and that he would only observe.
Not you're not alone oohaah, didn't say anything earlier as I didn't want to derail any feedback chat, but also because I couldn't believe no one else was thinking the same.
No idea whether Ken is a current or lapsed Bromley member, but I've been to many Bromley meetings where he has been there over the years and he has never even once been one of those that could ever be a problem. This isn't an opposition scout wanting to watch a key training session and take notes.
The thought that a fellow Charlton fan, who must be 60 years old, can only attend if he he sits there and promises not to speak, well I honestly can't believe how ridiculous the whole thing has become.
As I said the other day, the whole thing is utterly pathetic.
'Instigate meetings against the club's ? Who has instigated a meeting against the club?
I think its pretty clear that KM follows forums and Social Media. If she is looking for an excuse not to meet the Trust then, some of the rhetoric banded around before the "meeting" and indeed some of the comments at the meeting would have given her an easy "out".
The Trust facilitated the meeting and their representatives stood outside the ground telling people to come along and get the Belgians out. It might have only been a small number of people but it happened.
Add in the passive aggressive demands to meet Roland and its easy to see why she would exploit the situation and use it to avoid meeting the Trust.
Kings Hill Addick has already touched on the feeling of unease that the Trust claim they represent fans. I certainly share that unease. They have 1400 members and imo that is a very small percentage of our fanbase. They certainly don't represent me and nothing they are currently conveying would persuade me to join.
I've said on other threads there is an air of arrogance around posts from the Trust hierarchy and until that stops I can't support them and I can understand why the club will ignore them.
To be honest, I'm not surprised that Bromley Addicks want to distance themselves from the Trust at the moment. They're obviously not the CEO's favourite group either.
To be honest Addickted I feel surprised by you not standing with the Charlton fans feeling very worried. You have surprised me over these last few months.
AFKA, I think you have got the wrong end of the stick. I believe that Ken asked if he could attend in in return he wouldn't talk about the trust. That is a bit different from someone that is only allowed to turn up and only be allowed to sit in silence.
When asked to stop talking about the trust, he acknowledged this in a very dignified manner.
IMHO when the trust was brought up it had both support and non support for it. But to be honest we were their to hear what Katrien had to say and not listen the same pros and cons argument about the trust.
I've said on other threads there is an air of arrogance around posts from the Trust hierarchy and until that stops I can't support them and I can understand why the club will ignore them.
This is exactly why I am not renewing my membership.
So from this thread it is suggested a Bromley member is allowed to get up and and have a go at the trust. KM can have her say. And Ken is not allowed a say in return. Totally pathetic, great see too see the small minded Charlton politics that Bromley tried to disassociated itself with during the Prem years are back bigger and more pathetic than ever
Initial thought is that she could have been better informed about the open meeting yes 'instigated' by the Trust, but not organised as an anti owner meeting. She has got that wrong, but if that is her perception then there is nothing to be done about that. I don't know if there was any discussion regarding attendances, but from the reports here mentioning respect and disrespect, I get the impression that because it is Roland's money, there remains a bit of a notion that fans ought to be not only realistic, but grateful and deferential. I was not at the meeting but I would have been tempted to press Katrien on the concept of 'my way or the highway' position which threads back to the Evening Standard article. It is nice to hear about Katriens affection for the club, and for those who encounter Katrien they, for the most part, develop an affection for her which is no surprise because on a personal level she is very charming indeed.
She is not alone in that perception, rightly or wrongly a lot of people see the recent Trust activity as at the very least aggressive towards both Katrien and Roland.
We are winning, we have a much improved team and now it would seem much improved communication; including assurances that we will try to retain squad players and improve over the summer with potential for quality Christmas signings to push us into the play offs if not better.
Would be nice if everyone put the chest thumping on hold and enjoy the ride, with perhaps at least a little optimism that it might just all work out well.
So from this thread it is suggested a Bromley member is allowed to get up and and have a go at the trust. KM can have her say. And Ken is not allowed a say in return. Totally pathetic, great see too see the small minded Charlton politics that Bromley tried to disassociated itself with during the Prem years are back bigger and more pathetic than ever
A Bromley member also got up and supported the trust
Not you're not alone oohaah, didn't say anything earlier as I didn't want to derail any feedback chat, but also because I couldn't believe no one else was thinking the same.
No idea whether Ken is a current or lapsed Bromley member, but I've been to many Bromley meetings where he has been there over the years and he has never even once been one of those that could ever be a problem. This isn't an opposition scout wanting to watch a key training session and take notes.
The thought that a fellow Charlton fan, who must be 60 years old, can only attend if he he sits there and promises not to speak, well I honestly can't believe how ridiculous the whole thing has become.
As I said the other day, the whole thing is utterly pathetic.
You are totally wrong.
Wwtone has already explained the situation.
The observer only suggestion was from ken not Bromley Addicks but yet again another groups meeting becomes about those poor victims the Trust.
Sorry JohnnyH2 but you do not know what you are talking about. The Bromley Addicks meeting on Thursday , which I chaired, was not about the Trust at all. Ken asked if he could attend, but we were anxious to avoid it turning into a slanging match and he himself told us that he merely wanted to listen and observe. Another member asked a detailed question about KM's attitude to the Trust, which she answered at length.. Nothing was censored but it was not our intention to create a confrontational situation and those that were there will tell you that by asking sometimes difficult questions in a pleasant and supportive manner ,we got very interesting and informative answers.
Katrien made it clear that at present she does not wish to enter into exclusive dialogue with the Trust, although she made the point that in the future she may feel differently. When a further question was asked about the Trust , I as Chairman felt that we were only returning to ground that had already been covered. Ken was reminded of what he had said when asking to attend the meeting and I steered the questioning on to other matters. . There were no harsh words or problems of any kind.
I and many of the others present are members of the Trust and support the concept if not always the way things are being done. Nevertheless the Bromley Addicks is not a branch of the Trust and did not want our meeting to be about the differences between it and the club.
Not you're not alone oohaah, didn't say anything earlier as I didn't want to derail any feedback chat, but also because I couldn't believe no one else was thinking the same.
No idea whether Ken is a current or lapsed Bromley member, but I've been to many Bromley meetings where he has been there over the years and he has never even once been one of those that could ever be a problem. This isn't an opposition scout wanting to watch a key training session and take notes.
The thought that a fellow Charlton fan, who must be 60 years old, can only attend if he he sits there and promises not to speak, well I honestly can't believe how ridiculous the whole thing has become.
As I said the other day, the whole thing is utterly pathetic.
You are totally wrong.
Wwtone has already explained the situation.
The observer only suggestion was from ken not Bromley Addicks but yet again another groups meeting becomes about those poor victims the Trust.
You don't like the trust, we get it. Is that because you're not in charge and it wasn't your idea?
for gadw sake some of you sound like a load of squabbling kids, I've just deleted the rest of what I was going to say as it really isn't worth the effort just support the team
Not you're not alone oohaah, didn't say anything earlier as I didn't want to derail any feedback chat, but also because I couldn't believe no one else was thinking the same.
No idea whether Ken is a current or lapsed Bromley member, but I've been to many Bromley meetings where he has been there over the years and he has never even once been one of those that could ever be a problem. This isn't an opposition scout wanting to watch a key training session and take notes.
The thought that 7a fellow Charlton fan, who must be 60 years old, can only attend if he he sits there and promises not to speak, well I honestly can't believe how ridiculous the whole thing has become.
As I said the other day, the whole thing is utterly pathetic.
You are totally wrong.
Wwtone has already explained the situation.
The observer only suggestion was from ken not Bromley Addicks but yet again another groups meeting becomes about those poor victims the Trust.
You don't like the trust, we get it. Is that because you're not in charge and it wasn't your idea?
Here we go. "You don't like the Trust, must be a personal jealousy"
Usual Trust tactics to deflect criticism and take over a thread about Bromley Addicks and make it about poor old victims the trust.
If you knew anything you'd remember that Razil thanked me by name on here for all my help in setting up the Trust. You'd know that Barnie and seriously red constantly begged me to join the trust board. And that other people had the idea before him.
But you don't know anything so it must be because I'm not in charge.
Sorry JohnnyH2 but you do not know what you are talking about. The Bromley Addicks meeting on Thursday , which I chaired, was not about the Trust at all. Ken asked if he could attend, but we were anxious to avoid it turning into a slanging match and he himself told us that he merely wanted to listen and observe. Another member asked a detailed question about KM's attitude to the Trust, which she answered at length.. Nothing was censored but it was not our intention to create a confrontational situation and those that were there will tell you that by asking sometimes difficult questions in a pleasant and supportive manner ,we got very interesting and informative answers.
Katrien made it clear that at present she does not wish to enter into exclusive dialogue with the Trust, although she made the point that in the future she may feel differently. When a further question was asked about the Trust , I as Chairman felt that we were only returning to ground that had already been covered. Ken was reminded of what he had said when asking to attend the meeting and I steered the questioning on to other matters. . There were no harsh words or problems of any kind.
I and many of the others present are members of the Trust and support the concept if not always the way things are being done. Nevertheless the Bromley Addicks is not a branch of the Trust and did not want our meeting to be about the differences between it and the club.
I'm fully aware the meeting was not about the trust so I must know something about what I'm talking about! If you did not want the meeting to be about the trust seems odd you allowed a question about it in the first place.
Sorry JohnnyH2 but you do not know what you are talking about. The Bromley Addicks meeting on Thursday , which I chaired, was not about the Trust at all. Ken asked if he could attend, but we were anxious to avoid it turning into a slanging match and he himself told us that he merely wanted to listen and observe. Another member asked a detailed question about KM's attitude to the Trust, which she answered at length.. Nothing was censored but it was not our intention to create a confrontational situation and those that were there will tell you that by asking sometimes difficult questions in a pleasant and supportive manner ,we got very interesting and informative answers.
Katrien made it clear that at present she does not wish to enter into exclusive dialogue with the Trust, although she made the point that in the future she may feel differently. When a further question was asked about the Trust , I as Chairman felt that we were only returning to ground that had already been covered. Ken was reminded of what he had said when asking to attend the meeting and I steered the questioning on to other matters. . There were no harsh words or problems of any kind.
I and many of the others present are members of the Trust and support the concept if not always the way things are being done. Nevertheless the Bromley Addicks is not a branch of the Trust and did not want our meeting to be about the differences between it and the club.
I'm fully are the meeting was not about the trust so I must know something about what I'm talking about! If you did not want the meeting to be about the trust seems odd you allowed a question about it in the first place.
As you know we don't know what the questions will be when someone sticks there hand up.
It was a reasonable and valid question. KM gave a full and frank answer.
It's not a thread about 'Bromley Addicks' though, it's a thread about the CEO engaging with supporters/groups.
Virtual no one gives a fig if that was a triumph for Bromley/East Kent/Eltham/Trust as they don't give a monkeys chuff about CAFC supporter group politics
It's not a thread about 'Bromley Addicks' though, it's a thread about the CEO engaging with supporters/groups.
Virtual no one gives a fig if that was a triumph for Bromley/East Kent/Eltham/Trust as they don't give a monkeys chuff about CAFC supporter group politics
You are right, but I do believe that the fans are very divided on the board and see the future in a different way.
It's not a thread about 'Bromley Addicks' though, it's a thread about the CEO engaging with supporters/groups.
Virtual no one gives a fig if that was a triumph for Bromley/East Kent/Eltham/Trust as they don't give a monkeys chuff about CAFC supporter group politics
It's a thread about an event hosted by Bromley Addicks.
You and others obviously do care as you've now posted three times about the way the Trust were treated.
You're right that it shouldn't be about BA or the Trust but it is CAST supporters who weren't even at the meeting who keep mentioning it and seeing sinister motives in something that has been explained on numerous occasions.
Deary me. Now the team's winning it seems Charlton fan anger has nowhere to go - so we all have a go at each other instead. Time for people to grow up. Game day. COYRs
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about how the meeting was run and of Ken's part in the proceedings.
Mindful that a lot of people wanted to see and hear KM the committee decided that it would be open to just Bromley Addicks members and that for now it would not be taking any new members. They did not want it to be taken over by any other group albeit some members of the VIPs and The Trust are also members of Bromley Addicks.
Ken asked if three members of the trust could attend and in his words " We would purely observe, and not ask or answer any questions directed to KM"
Our initial response was to say no but as Ken was a lapsed member ( last a members in 2011 season) it was agreed that he could come along on the basis that he set out in the initial inquiry.
He was fine with that and in fact I invited him to sit on my table.
There were a number of Bromley Addicks members who spoke favourably about the trust. However when Ken got up to speak he was reminded of the basis on which he was attending and sat down without any problem.
Very disappointing how a really good evening has deteriorated into internecine warfare and point scoring. I would suggest that all parties step back take a deep breath and look forward to forthcoming wins over Blackburn, Blackpool and Reading
Comments
Anyway, thanks for all the contributors on this thread. For us exiles it's a God send. :-) Cheers.
No idea whether Ken is a current or lapsed Bromley member, but I've been to many Bromley meetings where he has been there over the years and he has never even once been one of those that could ever be a problem. This isn't an opposition scout wanting to watch a key training session and take notes.
The thought that a fellow Charlton fan, who must be 60 years old, can only attend if he he sits there and promises not to speak, well I honestly can't believe how ridiculous the whole thing has become.
As I said the other day, the whole thing is utterly pathetic.
The Trust facilitated the meeting and their representatives stood outside the ground telling people to come along and get the Belgians out. It might have only been a small number of people but it happened.
Add in the passive aggressive demands to meet Roland and its easy to see why she would exploit the situation and use it to avoid meeting the Trust.
Kings Hill Addick has already touched on the feeling of unease that the Trust claim they represent fans. I certainly share that unease. They have 1400 members and imo that is a very small percentage of our fanbase. They certainly don't represent me and nothing they are currently conveying would persuade me to join.
I've said on other threads there is an air of arrogance around posts from the Trust hierarchy and until that stops I can't support them and I can understand why the club will ignore them.
When asked to stop talking about the trust, he acknowledged this in a very dignified manner.
IMHO when the trust was brought up it had both support and non support for it. But to be honest we were their to hear what Katrien had to say and not listen the same pros and cons argument about the trust.
To be honest, I'm surprised by all the negativity. More so than when we had tweedlie dee and tweedle dum in charge.
I've said on other threads there is an air of arrogance around posts from the Trust hierarchy and until that stops I can't support them and I can understand why the club will ignore them.
This is exactly why I am not renewing my membership.
I've struggled to keep off the 'master chef' thread.
We are winning, we have a much improved team and now it would seem much improved communication; including assurances that we will try to retain squad players and improve over the summer with potential for quality Christmas signings to push us into the play offs if not better.
Would be nice if everyone put the chest thumping on hold and enjoy the ride, with perhaps at least a little optimism that it might just all work out well.
Wwtone has already explained the situation.
The observer only suggestion was from ken not Bromley Addicks but yet again another groups meeting becomes about those poor victims the Trust.
Katrien made it clear that at present she does not wish to enter into exclusive dialogue with the Trust, although she made the point that in the future she may feel differently. When a further question was asked about the Trust , I as Chairman felt that we were only returning to ground that had already been covered. Ken was reminded of what he had said when asking to attend the meeting and I steered the questioning on to other matters. . There were no harsh words or problems of any kind.
I and many of the others present are members of the Trust and support the concept if not always the way things are being done. Nevertheless the Bromley Addicks is not a branch of the Trust and did not want our meeting to be about the differences between it and the club.
I've just deleted the rest of what I was going to say as it really isn't worth the effort
just support the team
Usual Trust tactics to deflect criticism and take over a thread about Bromley Addicks and make it about poor old victims the trust.
If you knew anything you'd remember that Razil thanked me by name on here for all my help in setting up the Trust. You'd know that Barnie and seriously red constantly begged me to join the trust board. And that other people had the idea before him.
But you don't know anything so it must be because I'm not in charge.
It was a reasonable and valid question. KM gave a full and frank answer.
Virtual no one gives a fig if that was a triumph for Bromley/East Kent/Eltham/Trust as they don't give a monkeys chuff about CAFC supporter group politics
You and others obviously do care as you've now posted three times about the way the Trust were treated.
You're right that it shouldn't be about BA or the Trust but it is CAST supporters who weren't even at the meeting who keep mentioning it and seeing sinister motives in something that has been explained on numerous occasions.
Time for people to grow up.
Game day. COYRs
Mindful that a lot of people wanted to see and hear KM the committee decided that it would be open to just Bromley Addicks members and that for now it would not be taking any new members. They did not want it to be taken over by any other group albeit some members of the VIPs and The Trust are also members of Bromley Addicks.
Ken asked if three members of the trust could attend and in his words " We would purely observe, and not ask or answer any questions directed to KM"
Our initial response was to say no but as Ken was a lapsed member ( last a members in 2011 season) it was agreed that he could come along on the basis that he set out in the initial inquiry.
He was fine with that and in fact I invited him to sit on my table.
There were a number of Bromley Addicks members who spoke favourably about the trust. However when Ken got up to speak he was reminded of the basis on which he was attending and sat down without any problem.
So to those who say he was censored he was not !