Taking on board the comments that she had already told us before and mentioning the black and white, I thought it was a good presentation.
It does, indeed, confirm their strategic goal(s) even if it doesn't explain how they intend to achieve them.
I didn't think she presented very well but chances are I have an exceptionally talented group of friends and peers in this regard so I might have been comparing her to the wrong group. She wasn't helped by the distortion from the microphone, and the question from the audience was not loud enough to hear which is a worry for what to espect from the whole meeting video.
Some observations that I think might question the true value of the clubs achievements:
When she says we are the most affordable club in London is that just comparing the £150 season tickets? I ask because they are completely sold out and unless you have one I don't believe you can't get one. Also some (maybe many) of them sit elsewhere so they shouldn't be getting them for that price and are not occupying the seats that they are paying for.
The point about paying academy players that are not good enough and in games that we lose is not as impressive as it sounds, but has already been mentioned.
The £9m on transfers is useless unless we know what the net spend it. If Joe gomez did go for £6m then, with Kermorgant and Stephens alone, the £1.1m previously doesn't seem so small.
I also note that she didn't hang around on the photo of the fans on the Sofa, which I believe has gone now.
As I say, overall, it is a well put together presentation, but I wouldn't have expected any less. It is, also, very one sided, but that#s exact;y what I would expect too.
I loved that JJ arrived after she started!
These were £175 this season, now £200, but they didn't sell out A block in the east stand this time around and sold very few in the additional H block of the west stand.
I think you are right that the external analysis is hopelessly skewed by a relatively small number of seat prices, although there are enough "affordable" tickets for the club to argue it offers reasonable prices.
9 million spent on players - Was Polish Pete, Tuc and (whats) LePointe 3 of those, if so then we need to keep her greasy hands away from the cheque book.
Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
They're waiting to watch the video
Correct.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
As I said within the first day of this man owning our football club and a little research, as others have stated on this thread, the ambition is to break even and that means all business plans will be based around this. Now let me give you a little situation, you aren't breaking even, January is around the corner and you have a few little gems that can get you to that milestone. They take it, the players coming back into replace them are untried and inexperienced, from the youth or from Hungary or other such places that can't cope with the fitness & quality of skill needed in this league. You drop league positions, you get relegated. You go again, You will not get out of L1 with sheer youth and or inexperienced foreign players. You also won't with a low budget coach who's sole purpose is to do everything the owner says, because that makes the coach's MAIN job producing and assisting talent; not getting results.
P.s. Katrien Meire spoke like a nervous Year 6 student doing a presentation infront of her new class, not a CEO of a large company. She's not going to enjoy the next few months from the way she has treated us, that's for sure.
Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
They're waiting to watch the video
Correct.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
I don't suppose many would be surprised at all by your last statement. I hope other CAST board members will not agree.
9 million spent on players - Was Polish Pete, Tuc and (whats) LePointe 3 of those, if so then we need to keep her greasy hands away from the cheque book.
She's likely to be including Watt, Nego, Tucudean, Reza, etc as well, so not money Roland has spent but cash he's moved from one branch to another.
Once you consider the players we've sold, I doubt he's put his hand in his pocket much for the squad. After all, the aim is to break even and play/sell as many youth players as possible.
That makes it even more frustrating that we flushed cash down the toilet for Polish Pete, LePoint and so on. So many agents must have had a laugh at her, or should I say our expense.
I know its not really contributing but I've said it before I'll say it again she is scum.
Next game the insults need to be worse an the hand gestures need to be shaken harder
To be honest that's playing into her hands, we need to be smarter.
Why would Katrien act like a red rag to a bull, By standing at the window ? Does she like being a victim ? Why would a CEO travel on the tube with irate fans after a 5-0 trashing and after 3 months without a win and not expect to get some verbal abuse ? when she had other offers of transport on that day or could have gone in the boardroom for 30 minutes ? Does she like being a victim. Why no mention of the flowers and people defending her,and saying she should not be abused outside the workplace.
Cafc supporters need to be smart, or else she will the show the pics of the few fans giving the hand gestures to the media and create the perception of the young female CEO being bullied by a male dominated crowd. When in fact the demo was all ages and sexes and only a very few were sexist or anti Belgium.
The cameras will be there against Ipswich. This is not the time to cross the line. Don't let her play her Ace card.
Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
They're waiting to watch the video
Correct.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
They're waiting to watch the video
Correct.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
She states what the aims are but there is Little or no information on how these goals will be achieved.
She has been at the helm long enough to have a proper plan, quite frankly what she put on the screen I would expect from a graduate doing their first ever presentation, not a CEO of a substantial football club.
Amateurish in the extreme and does not fill me with any hope for the foreseeable future, sadly she is totally out of her depth. Also if I presented like she did I would be ashamed of myself, she clearly hadn't prepared or rehearsed embarrassing.
If the trust think that is acceptable well then I out.
Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
They're waiting to watch the video
Correct.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
Sorry, joined late and could not read everything on here, but glanced through and apart for a stupid question to JJ on his goal Saturday, I cannot find any other questions by fans, was there any?
She outlines objectives, but does not share the strategy, unless the "strategy" is to breakeven, but I don't see how that will help to achieve the objectives...
I was there last night (I asked the Remind us of Mr Duchatelet's motivation for buying a football club that he does not support AND loses money every year.....) and wanted to clarify that the question to JJ about the goal on Saturday was made by Mick Everett as a joke and was not a 'stupid question'. He meant it as a joke (asked twice) as you will see in the video.
Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
They're waiting to watch the video
Correct.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
They're waiting to watch the video
Correct.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
She states what the aims are but there is Little or no information on how these goals will be achieved.
She has been at the helm long enough to have a proper plan, quite frankly what she put on the screen I would expect from a graduate doing their first ever presentation, not a CEO of a substantial football club.
Amateurish in the extreme and does not fill me with any hope for the foreseeable future, sadly she is totally out of her depth. Also if I presented like she did I would be ashamed of myself, she clearly hadn't prepared or rehearsed embarrassing.
If the trust think that is acceptable well then I out.
I didn't say it was acceptable, I said it was a step in the right direction. I laid out two specific examples why it wasn't enough.
It will never cease to amaze me how people on social media react to something no-one's actually said.
Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
They're waiting to watch the video
Correct.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
Weegie - I took from last night that the strategy is, indeed, to break even in the Championship and that this would be possible through TV money, target 20k and, probably most significantly, sales of home grown Academy players. I think it was RM who said that the owner reviews the position every January and would consider investing for a push for promotion to the Prem if we were in a decent position near the top. It would be great if true. The problem is that CAFC is notoriously appalling in the final third of most seasons!
Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
They're waiting to watch the video
Correct.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
I'm not having a go at Rikofold, as an aside it sounds like he did very well last night.
What I said, was IF the trust have the same view as that, then I'm out. Cannot for the life of me see how that presentation is a step forward.
I also asked about the reference in the Strategy presentation of Charlton having 'Premiership Ambitions' and whether there was a timescale in the plan for this......and, if so, did the owner have a 'walk away' position. I cannot recall any significant reply that answered the question. My fear is that there is an inherent contradiction between being able to position the team near the top approaching January when any quality talent would, most likely, leave in the early days (like JG and GP) leaving us with a team unlikely to sustain any such lofty position. Hmmmmmmm.
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
Was it?
Sounded very like him to me, and I've heard a lot of him lately.
Out of interest @PragueAddick@rikofold , do the trust have any plans to sit down discuss this, review their position and issue a statement on their (hopefully new) stance? If so, what would the timescale be?
Weegie - I took from last night that the strategy is, indeed, to break even in the Championship and that this would be possible through TV money, target 20k and, probably most significantly, sales of home grown Academy players. I think it was RM who said that the owner reviews the position every January and would consider investing for a push for promotion to the Prem if we were in a decent position near the top. It would be great if true. The problem is that CAFC is notoriously appalling in the final third of most seasons!
He needs to make sure we're competitive from August instead.
The objectives could be painted any way you like, including winning the Champions League, having a 90,000 all seater stadium with it's own underground links, and a squad of 5 star international champions wearing the beloved shirt week in week out. The reality is a series of untested and largely not good enough signings, a series of managerial changes which at the minute leaves us with one we 'snapped up' from the belgian 3rd tier. The ground is emptying week by week, because the club serves up dross and has done so since our first year back in the Championship (and even that was a struggle). Target 20,000 , or even more if you feel the urge, but the problems are all in the directors box (apart from RD as he's never there) and if the smug delivery last night was anything to go by (introducing young untried academy players into a losing and de-motivated squad is NOT a positive, it just shows the weak squad we have) it'll be ongoing. I saw nothing in the presentation to inspire optimism. It was just spin, and apathetic attempt to show a relegation position as some sort of improvement. Make no mistake, last night was a White wash and it's an ongoing thing.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
Was it?
Sounded very like him to me, and I've heard a lot of him lately.
Whom did you think it was?
I'm pretty sure that question (a good question by the way probably on the tip of a lot of tongues) was not asked by rikofold but by somebody else.
Out of interest @PragueAddick@rikofold , do the trust have any plans to sit down discuss this, review their position and issue a statement on their (hopefully new) stance? If so, what would the timescale be?
Too bloody right we do, but we all agreed that we have to wait for the video. I was hoping to be watching it right now since I had an hour or so free, but the thing still isn't available.
Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
They're waiting to watch the video
Correct.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
Apologies if it's already been mentioned - I've tried to trawl through 30 odd pages but was beginning to lose the will to live. Is there an official (early) evaluation of the meeting from the Trust? Do the Trust still believe that continuing to campaign for meaningful dialogue is still the way to go?
They're waiting to watch the video
Correct.
Only Steve and I were at the meeting, so it's important that the board gets the full picture before we finalise our response to the evening.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
You've picked on his last line which is his own opinion, and I doubt he will find much agreement there. But why not instead concentrate on his sensible well-argued criticisms in the rest of his post?
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
Comments
I think you are right that the external analysis is hopelessly skewed by a relatively small number of seat prices, although there are enough "affordable" tickets for the club to argue it offers reasonable prices.
Speaking personally, I wasn't overly impressed at the over-management of the meeting, nor that it was not the meeting we were invited to. I welcomed the presentation, although it would be nice if just for once there wasn't the kind of overly-positive spin on things. We get the club wants to break even, so showing how you're covering the funds spent on incoming transfers is important and not necessary to hide. This is part of my own frustration, that when the club gets the chance to be a little more open they still feel what we need to hear is the garden's rosy. We don't, we want to be brought into the true picture.
Another example is the budget. Up 40% since they arrived, but then we all know it was pitiful in the last throes of the cowboys. As I understand it, this year's comparative playing budget is better than 3rd bottom (last year) but not hugely. That means you have to get other things spectacularly right - like the academy and particularly the coaching - to overperform against that budget and start to reach for the express ambition. The academy side seems to be going well in that regard, so why not say something like; "This model is going to take time to get right and to work itself through. We won't let the club go down in that period, but it will mean a slow build to be competitive at the upper end of the Championship and we ask for your patience and to make the difference whilst we develop it." I think most of us are reasonable enough to get that - because the spin is hope deferred, which as the proverb goes makes the heart sick. If you imply we're splashing out we're just going to question mediocrity all the more, and trust the club less. That is, improving budgets should mean better performances, but if every other club improves by the same amount...
But I do think the presentation was a big step in the right direction, personally.
P.s. Katrien Meire spoke like a nervous Year 6 student doing a presentation infront of her new class, not a CEO of a large company. She's not going to enjoy the next few months from the way she has treated us, that's for sure.
Once you consider the players we've sold, I doubt he's put his hand in his pocket much for the squad. After all, the aim is to break even and play/sell as many youth players as possible.
That makes it even more frustrating that we flushed cash down the toilet for Polish Pete, LePoint and so on. So many agents must have had a laugh at her, or should I say our expense.
By standing at the window ?
Does she like being a victim ?
Why would a CEO travel on the tube with irate fans after a 5-0 trashing and after
3 months without a win and not expect to get some verbal abuse ?
when she had other offers of transport on that day or could have gone in the boardroom for 30 minutes ?
Does she like being a victim.
Why no mention of the flowers and people defending her,and saying she should not be abused outside the workplace.
Cafc supporters need to be smart, or else she will the show the pics of the few fans giving the hand gestures to the media and create the perception of the young female CEO being bullied by a male dominated crowd.
When in fact the demo was all ages and sexes and only a very few were sexist or anti Belgium.
The cameras will be there against Ipswich.
This is not the time to cross the line.
Don't let her play her Ace card.
http://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/69926/comments-on-the-opening-presentation#latest
She has been at the helm long enough to have a proper plan, quite frankly what she put on the screen I would expect from a graduate doing their first ever presentation, not a CEO of a substantial football club.
Amateurish in the extreme and does not fill me with any hope for the foreseeable future, sadly she is totally out of her depth. Also if I presented like she did I would be ashamed of myself, she clearly hadn't prepared or rehearsed embarrassing.
If the trust think that is acceptable well then I out.
If that's the case, the trust can count my support out. Others have put it better on the specific thread about why that presentation is a complete joke.
It's all well and good wanting us to get competitive, increase attendances etc, but the opposite is happening! She's just telling you what you want to hear.
It will never cease to amaze me how people on social media react to something no-one's actually said.
Also, having just watched it, who was the one person who asked a question in that session, a very pertinent one about whether £9m in transfers was net (or before outgoing transfers). Yep, @rikofold.
What I said, was IF the trust have the same view as that, then I'm out. Cannot for the life of me see how that presentation is a step forward.
Sounded very like him to me, and I've heard a lot of him lately.
Whom did you think it was?
I saw nothing in the presentation to inspire optimism. It was just spin, and apathetic attempt to show a relegation position as some sort of improvement. Make no mistake, last night was a White wash and it's an ongoing thing.
Whom did you think it was?
I'm pretty sure that question (a good question by the way probably on the tip of a lot of tongues) was not asked by rikofold but by somebody else.