I do think some people get too worked up about polls and surveys about the overall consensus about fans feelings about the board.
A significant portion of our fanbase are very disillusioned with our owners, it doesn't take stats and pie charts to 'prove' it. Things like that are holding us back from just getting on and tackling the issues at hand, let's use some common sense with this stuff.
But the Club think only 2% are negative / protesting...
The Trust has strong figures to the contrary from its last survey which will be published later this morning.
There is still work to do to ensure the Club appreciates the scale of the discontent.
This is interesting.
In the video, Meire said she had signed off the Trust's minutes of the meeting on the day and showed surprise that they were not yet published. She looked like she diverted the problem to someone else in the room.
The figures since published by the Trust shows a massive difference in the size of the fanbase being unhappy with the way the club is being run and the support for more protrests (93%)! So, she must have known this vastly higher figure before she included the 2% in her presentation? She also used the 2% continuously throughout the meeting to support her arguments to ward off future protests etc. Had these figures been available before the meeting I think she would had been quite embarassed. I wonder why the publication of those minutes were mysteriously delayed? How convenient.
Meire does not sign off Trust minutes, you mean Fans Forum
I do think some people get too worked up about polls and surveys about the overall consensus about fans feelings about the board.
A significant portion of our fanbase are very disillusioned with our owners, it doesn't take stats and pie charts to 'prove' it. Things like that are holding us back from just getting on and tackling the issues at hand, let's use some common sense with this stuff.
But the Club think only 2% are negative / protesting...
The Trust has strong figures to the contrary from its last survey which will be published later this morning.
There is still work to do to ensure the Club appreciates the scale of the discontent.
This is interesting.
In the video, Meire said she had signed off the Trust's minutes of the meeting on the day and showed surprise that they were not yet published. She looked like she diverted the problem to someone else in the room.
The figures since published by the Trust shows a massive difference in the size of the fanbase being unhappy with the way the club is being run and the support for more protrests (93%)! So, she must have known this vastly higher figure before she included the 2% in her presentation? She also used the 2% continuously throughout the meeting to support her arguments to ward off future protests etc. Had these figures been available before the meeting I think she would had been quite embarassed. I wonder why the publication of those minutes were mysteriously delayed? How convenient.
Apologies, just noticed that Shirty picked up this point on the previous page!!
Two completely different things, although the missing minutes have still not surfaced.
I do think some people get too worked up about polls and surveys about the overall consensus about fans feelings about the board.
A significant portion of our fanbase are very disillusioned with our owners, it doesn't take stats and pie charts to 'prove' it. Things like that are holding us back from just getting on and tackling the issues at hand, let's use some common sense with this stuff.
But the Club think only 2% are negative / protesting...
The Trust has strong figures to the contrary from its last survey which will be published later this morning.
There is still work to do to ensure the Club appreciates the scale of the discontent.
This is interesting.
In the video, Meire said she had signed off the Trust's minutes of the meeting on the day and showed surprise that they were not yet published. She looked like she diverted the problem to someone else in the room.
The figures since published by the Trust shows a massive difference in the size of the fanbase being unhappy with the way the club is being run and the support for more protrests (93%)! So, she must have known this vastly higher figure before she included the 2% in her presentation? She also used the 2% continuously throughout the meeting to support her arguments to ward off future protests etc. Had these figures been available before the meeting I think she would had been quite embarassed. I wonder why the publication of those minutes were mysteriously delayed? How convenient.
Apologies, just noticed that Shirty picked up this point on the previous page!!
Two completely different things, although the missing minutes have still not surfaced.
I don't know why, but the phrase 'silent majority' just makes me want to break things. So fucking smug. How do they know they're the majority?
I can tell you for sure that the silent majority think Roland and his puppet are idiots for keep making the same mistake of cheap managers/coaches with no understanding of the Championship failing. Learn from your mistakes and respect the fans and culture. Two simple lessons and everything can be reversed. I do think Meire's arrogance though is beyond this comprehension.
Glad I asked about my burning question about Roland's motives for buying the club but furious with myself and others for not challenging KM on the her response that selling players to break even cannot possibly go hand-in-hand with havIng a Premiership ambition. The reality, with this financial policy, has to be that the REALISTIC best expectations that we can have under the present owner is to remain 'competitive' in the Championship.
Perhaps this is the most informative thing we learned on Tuesday. I would have had more respect for KM if she had come out and said exactly that.
Of course, there is always the hope that we have a team that 'over-performs' and that, come January time, we are somewhere near the top 6. We will then see if RM's assertion is real that the owner reassesses things every January and (it was strongly suggested) could invest to strengthen the squad if promotion looked possible.
I just wish KM had been honest and said that Championship survival on a more sound footing was the realistic ambition and that reaching the Premier League is no more than a hope than an 'ambition'.
Do others see it my way?
I noticed a few times that as soon as the floor had asked their question, ME would be on hand to take the mic back. Was this a reliberate ploy to prevent fans for asking follow up questions when it became clear that the panel had avoided the question?
Deliberate or not, he always does. So if you want to follow up you have to shout & then you can appear to be "aggressive". Plus they say you've had your turn, we're moving on.
This is why you need a small meeting of competent and strong individuals and that is why the club have resisted this.
I wouldn't blame Mick per se - the club were determined to make it a q&a, which is why they insisted on chairing it themselves. I had agreed with KM in advance of the meeting that we would be allowed to work the fans side of the meeting in the way the various fans' reps and supporters had all agreed on, but it was ignored and to their detriment I feel. It was a factor in the way the evening turned out though.
So she lied again. How can we trust someone that is not trustworthy ?
Glad I asked about my burning question about Roland's motives for buying the club but furious with myself and others for not challenging KM on the her response that selling players to break even cannot possibly go hand-in-hand with havIng a Premiership ambition. The reality, with this financial policy, has to be that the REALISTIC best expectations that we can have under the present owner is to remain 'competitive' in the Championship.
Perhaps this is the most informative thing we learned on Tuesday. I would have had more respect for KM if she had come out and said exactly that.
Of course, there is always the hope that we have a team that 'over-performs' and that, come January time, we are somewhere near the top 6. We will then see if RM's assertion is real that the owner reassesses things every January and (it was strongly suggested) could invest to strengthen the squad if promotion looked possible.
I just wish KM had been honest and said that Championship survival on a more sound footing was the realistic ambition and that reaching the Premier League is no more than a hope than an 'ambition'.
Do others see it my way?
I noticed a few times that as soon as the floor had asked their question, ME would be on hand to take the mic back. Was this a reliberate ploy to prevent fans for asking follow up questions when it became clear that the panel had avoided the question?
Deliberate or not, he always does. So if you want to follow up you have to shout & then you can appear to be "aggressive". Plus they say you've had your turn, we're moving on.
This is why you need a small meeting of competent and strong individuals and that is why the club have resisted this.
I wouldn't blame Mick per se - the club were determined to make it a q&a, which is why they insisted on chairing it themselves. I had agreed with KM in advance of the meeting that we would be allowed to work the fans side of the meeting in the way the various fans' reps and supporters had all agreed on, but it was ignored and to their detriment I feel. It was a factor in the way the evening turned out though.
So she lied again. How can we trust someone that is not trustworthy ?
From the Luzon appointment everything that comes out of her trap needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.
Rather like outlaw motorcycle gangs who were accused of being 'only 1%' and then claimed it as a badge of honour, perhaps the protest could claim the 2% badge. Imagine a large proportion of the crowd holding up flyers stating 'I am the 2%'.
I don't see any point in blaming anyone at the meeting. In the end the club (ie Murray and Meire) seem to have manipulated it to their advantage. Given the discontent among the fans, it seemed better to genuinely listen to the complaints, but in this brave new world of 2015, everything like this is a publicity stunt, intended to make one side seem 'better'. As a discontented fan, it was the 'follow up questions' that I wanted answered. It seems there was never a chance of that, and for me at least, that put's me back to my default position. There will never be meaningfull dialogue with the current regime, and while they think 5 managers in 20 months is a satisfactory, there seems little else to do but keep up the protests.Ms Meire can continue to believe it's just 2%, but she's nailed her own ass onto the current manager. If results don't improve, she'll be the scapegoat for more and more fans. And rightly so. She's CEO. Really she should resign if she had some idea of what she's done, but code of honour rarely happens in the boardroom, and certainly not in ours at the moment.
I do think some people get too worked up about polls and surveys about the overall consensus about fans feelings about the board.
A significant portion of our fanbase are very disillusioned with our owners, it doesn't take stats and pie charts to 'prove' it. Things like that are holding us back from just getting on and tackling the issues at hand, let's use some common sense with this stuff.
But the Club think only 2% are negative / protesting...
The Trust has strong figures to the contrary from its last survey which will be published later this morning.
There is still work to do to ensure the Club appreciates the scale of the discontent.
This is interesting.
In the video, Meire said she had signed off the Trust's minutes of the meeting on the day and showed surprise that they were not yet published. She looked like she diverted the problem to someone else in the room.
The figures since published by the Trust shows a massive difference in the size of the fanbase being unhappy with the way the club is being run and the support for more protrests (93%)! So, she must have known this vastly higher figure before she included the 2% in her presentation? She also used the 2% continuously throughout the meeting to support her arguments to ward off future protests etc. Had these figures been available before the meeting I think she would had been quite embarassed. I wonder why the publication of those minutes were mysteriously delayed? How convenient.
Apologies, just noticed that Shirty picked up this point on the previous page!!
Two completely different things, although the missing minutes have still not surfaced.
What's in these minutes that is so important ?
A few times during the meeting it was said (or similar), but these things were discussed at the Fans Forum, why doesn't anybody know? Well the reason is that the content is embargoed until the minutes are published, and they've yet to be published several weeks on. The embargo invalidates any suggestion fans reps should cascade ahead of the minutes being published.
There was a commitment to removing the embargo and getting the FF videoed to address this.
Clearly KM was 'unaware' of the FF notes being being on the website, or at least that was my view of the video? This was the case 2 years ago, and was brought up then under Bradshaw's 'stewardship.'
At the time it was putting the reps that attended in a very difficult position because fans quite rightly were asking for the details of the meeting to be put up, and there was a time delay . Never quite understood the reason for the time delay, if the CEO is so paranoid about what is discussed at the FF then perhaps they should produce the notes themselves or get a PA down there to do that. Recording the meeting would be a good idea, but then information may be released that individuals may not want made public at that time.
So unless you agree to have unedited tape/notes, you will get claims of non disclosure. One of the reasons the CEO should not be the 'editor', which at present she has overall control of the communication's. It might appear to be a small issue, but what is to stop any CEO claiming that virtually anything is not 'confidential', even the price of pies, pint's, and pot holes!. One of the reasons that the new head of communications has to have an independent authority, and just not rubber stamp everything through. In CAFC's case with the chairman's apparent philosophy, I am not convinced such a person could be impartial.
Rather like outlaw motorcycle gangs who were accused of being 'only 1%' and then claimed it as a badge of honour, perhaps the protest could claim the 2% badge. Imagine a large proportion of the crowd holding up flyers stating 'I am the 2%'.
Rather like outlaw motorcycle gangs who were accused of being 'only 1%' and then claimed it as a badge of honour, perhaps the protest could claim the 2% badge. Imagine a large proportion of the crowd holding up flyers stating 'I am the 2%'.
Exactly right.
Plenty of time to get some flyers printed up. Would be good to have them ready for the Ipswich game.
Rather like outlaw motorcycle gangs who were accused of being 'only 1%' and then claimed it as a badge of honour, perhaps the protest could claim the 2% badge. Imagine a large proportion of the crowd holding up flyers stating 'I am the 2%'.
I really like this idea. A peaceful demonstration inside the ground as an endorsement of the pre match protest in the car park.
Holding up a 2% flyer would make a clear statement to KM of the numbers of discontented fans she has chosen to "dismiss". There would be no need to make any verbal protest (at the same time) just a look in the direction of the Directors' box should be all that is necessary. It would be hard for the Sky cameras to miss it if it happens during the match at a chosen time. Perhaps then we can ALL have a better understanding of the strength of feeling amongst the fanbase who are still showing their support for the club by attending the home matches.
Right have finally bitten the bullet and watched the video of the meeting to get a proper view. Here are my main observances (apologies in advance if most, if not all have previously been said):
- Opening presentation. Not specific enough and without proper facts, it is hard to gauge the success (e.g. £9m outlay on player sales, not knowing how much incoming sales contributed it is hard to see whether that is a lot or not). Objectives need to be SMART (Specific, Measurable, Accurate, Realistic, Timeframe) and from what I could tell, they were not. Just waffle.
- Quite a lot of rudeness / condescension from mostly KM but sometimes RM too. Examples include: the black and white reference, her remark re: the Club Charter ("I should change it") - joke comment I know but unprofessional, answers to questions being "What would you do?"
- Fans representatives were excellent, especially @rikofold who I thought had the hardest job of opening the meeting from the fans' POV. John C also was excellent in his relentless pursuit of a proper answer regarding the CADSA and West Stand issues. The club response (Mick E?) I felt was defensive and not very respectful.
- It is disappointing, but in hindsight not surprising, that the posts were moved regarding the chair of the meeting. As Rich said, we all agreed on an independent chair who would allow a two-way dialogue. KM obviously thought that was too much of a threat. Also as Rich said, we thought it would be just RM and KM in the meeting with the fans and not a panel full of club employees.
- General feeling that questions were ignored / not answered (similar to how politicians answer).
- However it is easy to see (especially in the first half) how people can get pulled into the club's (and KM's) way of thinking, and believing everything she says. I suppose that's what lawyers do, but you can't blame fans for believing what she is saying. Luckily our fans reps didn't fall for it.
- The comments about how we should stand up to the negative crowd (protest) were frankly ridiculous but show that she is rattled.
- I can see why Rich apologised to KM however not right to say on behalf of fans (I know Rich has replied many times on here re this so no need for further comment). This was a clear strategy of KM preying on the weak and making her the victim (although yes technically she was the victim of some verbal abuse). The apology makes her seem right and Charlton fans were wrong to protest at all. -- On this note, I like that Rich moved on extremely quickly from that onto other leading questions and later on said that we had the right to protest. So shows solidarity across the fanbase.
- Seems like a lot of operational decisions are being made incorrectly which shows lack of leadership and management skills from a supposedly competent CEO.
- The Fans Forum minutes question (why the long delay) was not answered well enough. The response about it should be videoed next time was irrelevant IMO. No apologies from her, which actually is a running theme.
- The meeting I feel got more heated as time went on, especially the fans were getting more discontented, which surely is not a good sign! I'm basing this more on the avoidance of proper answers to our structured questions.
- Syd. Bless him.
- Good ending comments from Rich (?) and a shame that KM refused to budge on her belief that season tickets had gone up this year. Where was the comparison figure from last year? Why not disclose the figures of sales from last year to this year. Well done on the pursuit of this.
- KM seemed very surprised that the fans were so well organised. She must have underestimated us to her detriment. I don't personally feel that KM actually does want any more dialogue, and especially wouldn't turn up on her own. She needs backup.
- Her body language, especially at the end, seemed to suggest she was rattled, defensive and possibly believing she was over her head. Whether this was the case or not remains to be seen, just my thoughts on it.
- The comments from the club shop employee re the MK game. Uncalled for and not true. Definitely not representative of the fanbase but glad to see no-one from the panel nor floor responded to or backed it up.
- In the end, the length of the meeting seemed just about right but it did start to go round in circles.
Rather like outlaw motorcycle gangs who were accused of being 'only 1%' and then claimed it as a badge of honour, perhaps the protest could claim the 2% badge. Imagine a large proportion of the crowd holding up flyers stating 'I am the 2%'.
That is exactly the line I was going down as well @RalphMilnesgut. I inboxed a few people on Thirsday with some potential next step thoughts, pretty much saying what you are saying
'keep things really simple but try to make a point. She made a big thing in the video of it only being 2% of fans unhappy, and the responsibility of other fans to drown them out. We need to think of ways to show it isn't just the 2%.
What do you think of another leaflet , card handout for the Ipswich game? A plain white leaflet with a black 2 in the middle (or vice versa), with a couple of lines at the bottom explaining what it's about. Blanket handout before game, in the 2nd minute 'stand up for the 2%' sings the north upper and everyone who wants to, stands up and holds up the card high.
Objective is to give a very clear message that it isn't just 2% unhappy, doesn't involve anyone missing the game, and isn't offensive.'
Could also on the 2nd minute release black and white balloons, banners etc. 1 minute of clear protest at the start of the game and then everyone continues backing the players.
Right have finally bitten the bullet and watched the video of the meeting to get a proper view. Here are my main observances (apologies in advance if most, if not all have previously been said):
- Opening presentation. Not specific enough and without proper facts, it is hard to gauge the success (e.g. £9m outlay on player sales, not knowing how much incoming sales contributed it is hard to see whether that is a lot or not). Objectives need to be SMART (Specific, Measurable, Accurate, Realistic, Timeframe) and from what I could tell, they were not. Just waffle.
- Quite a lot of rudeness / condescension from mostly KM but sometimes RM too. Examples include: the black and white reference, her remark re: the Club Charter ("I should change it") - joke comment I know but unprofessional, answers to questions being "What would you do?"
- Fans representatives were excellent, especially @rikofold who I thought had the hardest job of opening the meeting from the fans' POV. John C also was excellent in his relentless pursuit of a proper answer regarding the CADSA and West Stand issues. The club response (Mick E?) I felt was defensive and not very respectful.
- It is disappointing, but in hindsight not surprising, that the posts were moved regarding the chair of the meeting. As Rich said, we all agreed on an independent chair who would allow a two-way dialogue. KM obviously thought that was too much of a threat. Also as Rich said, we thought it would be just RM and KM in the meeting with the fans and not a panel full of club employees.
- General feeling that questions were ignored / not answered (similar to how politicians answer).
- However it is easy to see (especially in the first half) how people can get pulled into the club's (and KM's) way of thinking, and believing everything she says. I suppose that's what lawyers do, but you can't blame fans for believing what she is saying. Luckily our fans reps didn't fall for it.
- The comments about how we should stand up to the negative crowd (protest) were frankly ridiculous but show that she is rattled.
- I can see why Rich apologised to KM however not right to say on behalf of fans (I know Rich has replied many times on here re this so no need for further comment). This was a clear strategy of KM preying on the weak and making her the victim (although yes technically she was the victim of some verbal abuse). The apology makes her seem right and Charlton fans were wrong to protest at all. -- On this note, I like that Rich moved on extremely quickly from that onto other leading questions and later on said that we had the right to protest. So shows solidarity across the fanbase.
- Seems like a lot of operational decisions are being made incorrectly which shows lack of leadership and management skills from a supposedly competent CEO.
- The Fans Forum minutes question (why the long delay) was not answered well enough. The response about it should be videoed next time was irrelevant IMO. No apologies from her, which actually is a running theme.
- The meeting I feel got more heated as time went on, especially the fans were getting more discontented, which surely is not a good sign! I'm basing this more on the avoidance of proper answers to our structured questions.
- Syd. Bless him.
- Good ending comments from Rich (?) and a shame that KM refused to budge on her belief that season tickets had gone up this year. Where was the comparison figure from last year? Why not disclose the figures of sales from last year to this year. Well done on the pursuit of this.
- KM seemed very surprised that the fans were so well organised. She must have underestimated us to her detriment. I don't personally feel that KM actually does want any more dialogue, and especially wouldn't turn up on her own. She needs backup.
- Her body language, especially at the end, seemed to suggest she was rattled, defensive and possibly believing she was over her head. Whether this was the case or not remains to be seen, just my thoughts on it.
- The comments from the club shop employee re the MK game. Uncalled for and not true. Definitely not representative of the fanbase but glad to see no-one from the panel nor floor responded to or backed it up.
- In the end, the length of the meeting seemed just about right but it did start to go round in circles.
P.S. Sorry for the long post!
Actually It wasn't me that apologised, but in defence of that comment I would say that it removed any sense that the meeting backed the extreme elements of the protest and allowed us to focus back on the reasons for it. I think it took all the sting out of KM's argument in that sense. I understand why fans may have bristled at it, but I think it had value on the night.
Actually It wasn't me that apologised, but in defence of that comment I would say that it removed any sense that the meeting backed the extreme elements of the protest and allowed us to focus back on the reasons for it. I think it took all the sting out of KM's argument in that sense. I understand why fans may have bristled at it, but I think it had value on the night.
Rather like outlaw motorcycle gangs who were accused of being 'only 1%' and then claimed it as a badge of honour, perhaps the protest could claim the 2% badge. Imagine a large proportion of the crowd holding up flyers stating 'I am the 2%'.
That is exactly the line I was going down as well @RalphMilnesgut. I inboxed a few people on Thirsday with some potential next step thoughts, pretty much saying what you are saying
'keep things really simple but try to make a point. She made a big thing in the video of it only being 2% of fans unhappy, and the responsibility of other fans to drown them out. We need to think of ways to show it isn't just the 2%.
What do you think of another leaflet , card handout for the Ipswich game? A plain white leaflet with a black 2 in the middle (or vice versa), with a couple of lines at the bottom explaining what it's about. Blanket handout before game, in the 2nd minute 'stand up for the 2%' sings the north upper and everyone who wants to, stands up and holds up the card high.
Objective is to give a very clear message that it isn't just 2% unhappy, doesn't involve anyone missing the game, and isn't offensive.'
Could also on the 2nd minute release black and white balloons, banners etc. 1 minute of clear protest at the start of the game and then everyone continues backing the players.
It's a good idea but needs to well organised, or we'll have 10 fans scattered about supporting this, 100 still outside protesting, 400 wearing black and white and 1 guy lobbing tennis balls and 2 blowing whistles.
It's a good idea but needs to well organised, or we'll have 10 fans scattered about supporting this, 100 still outside protesting, 400 wearing black and white and 1 guy lobbing tennis balls and 2 blowing whistles.
Sure, but if a small number of fans do it, it's at least accurate ;-)
It's a good idea but needs to well organised, or we'll have 10 fans scattered about supporting this, 100 still outside protesting, 400 wearing black and white and 1 guy lobbing tennis balls and 2 blowing whistles.
Sure, but if a small number of fans do it, it's at least accurate ;-)
But the signs would only make sense to KM, the people on here who have read this thread and people who have watched the video of the meeting all the way through. I think maybe 90% of the fans inside the ground would not have a clue about what the 2% sign refered to.
It's a good idea but needs to well organised, or we'll have 10 fans scattered about supporting this, 100 still outside protesting, 400 wearing black and white and 1 guy lobbing tennis balls and 2 blowing whistles.
Sure, but if a small number of fans do it, it's at least accurate ;-)
But the signs would only make sense to KM, the people on here who have read this thread and people who have watched the video of the meeting all the way through. I think maybe 90% of the fans inside the ground would not have a clue about what the 2% sign refered to.
So they can be educated as the leaflets are handed out.
'Did you know that the Charlton Athletic board believe only 2% of fans are unhappy with the current state of affairs at the club. Please show them they are wrong by holding up this card at XXXX time during the match today. Thank you'.
It's a good idea but needs to well organised, or we'll have 10 fans scattered about supporting this, 100 still outside protesting, 400 wearing black and white and 1 guy lobbing tennis balls and 2 blowing whistles.
Sure, but if a small number of fans do it, it's at least accurate ;-)
But the signs would only make sense to KM, the people on here who have read this thread and people who have watched the video of the meeting all the way through. I think maybe 90% of the fans inside the ground would not have a clue about what the 2% sign refered to.
Can assure that if others think it's a worthwhile exercise to take forward, everyone in the ground will know exactly what it is all about
Comments
Sorry about that, but the use of percentages like this is a pet peeve of mine.
Sorry, the article read the Trust comments on the latest survey. Confusing. I think I have got it now. Too much reading fatigue.
There was a commitment to removing the embargo and getting the FF videoed to address this.
This was the case 2 years ago, and was brought up then under Bradshaw's 'stewardship.'
At the time it was putting the reps that attended in a very difficult position because fans quite rightly were asking for the details of the meeting to be put up, and there was a time delay .
Never quite understood the reason for the time delay, if the CEO is so paranoid about what is discussed at the FF then perhaps they should produce the notes themselves or get a PA down there to do that. Recording the meeting would be a good idea, but then information may be released that individuals may not want made public at that time.
So unless you agree to have unedited tape/notes, you will get claims of non disclosure. One of the reasons the CEO should not be the 'editor', which at present she has overall control of the communication's. It might appear to be a small issue, but what is to stop any CEO claiming that virtually anything is not 'confidential', even the price of pies, pint's, and pot holes!.
One of the reasons that the new head of communications has to have an independent authority, and just not rubber stamp everything through. In CAFC's case with the chairman's apparent philosophy, I am not convinced such a person could be impartial.
Holding up a 2% flyer would make a clear statement to KM of the numbers of discontented fans she has chosen to "dismiss". There would be no need to make any verbal protest (at the same time) just a look in the direction of the Directors' box should be all that is necessary. It would be hard for the Sky cameras to miss it if it happens during the match at a chosen time. Perhaps then we can ALL have a better understanding of the strength of feeling amongst the fanbase who are still showing their support for the club by attending the home matches.
- Opening presentation. Not specific enough and without proper facts, it is hard to gauge the success (e.g. £9m outlay on player sales, not knowing how much incoming sales contributed it is hard to see whether that is a lot or not). Objectives need to be SMART (Specific, Measurable, Accurate, Realistic, Timeframe) and from what I could tell, they were not. Just waffle.
- Quite a lot of rudeness / condescension from mostly KM but sometimes RM too. Examples include: the black and white reference, her remark re: the Club Charter ("I should change it") - joke comment I know but unprofessional, answers to questions being "What would you do?"
- Fans representatives were excellent, especially @rikofold who I thought had the hardest job of opening the meeting from the fans' POV. John C also was excellent in his relentless pursuit of a proper answer regarding the CADSA and West Stand issues. The club response (Mick E?) I felt was defensive and not very respectful.
- It is disappointing, but in hindsight not surprising, that the posts were moved regarding the chair of the meeting. As Rich said, we all agreed on an independent chair who would allow a two-way dialogue. KM obviously thought that was too much of a threat. Also as Rich said, we thought it would be just RM and KM in the meeting with the fans and not a panel full of club employees.
- General feeling that questions were ignored / not answered (similar to how politicians answer).
- However it is easy to see (especially in the first half) how people can get pulled into the club's (and KM's) way of thinking, and believing everything she says. I suppose that's what lawyers do, but you can't blame fans for believing what she is saying. Luckily our fans reps didn't fall for it.
- The comments about how we should stand up to the negative crowd (protest) were frankly ridiculous but show that she is rattled.
- I can see why Rich apologised to KM however not right to say on behalf of fans (I know Rich has replied many times on here re this so no need for further comment). This was a clear strategy of KM preying on the weak and making her the victim (although yes technically she was the victim of some verbal abuse). The apology makes her seem right and Charlton fans were wrong to protest at all.
-- On this note, I like that Rich moved on extremely quickly from that onto other leading questions and later on said that we had the right to protest. So shows solidarity across the fanbase.
- Seems like a lot of operational decisions are being made incorrectly which shows lack of leadership and management skills from a supposedly competent CEO.
- The Fans Forum minutes question (why the long delay) was not answered well enough. The response about it should be videoed next time was irrelevant IMO. No apologies from her, which actually is a running theme.
- The meeting I feel got more heated as time went on, especially the fans were getting more discontented, which surely is not a good sign! I'm basing this more on the avoidance of proper answers to our structured questions.
- Syd. Bless him.
- Good ending comments from Rich (?) and a shame that KM refused to budge on her belief that season tickets had gone up this year. Where was the comparison figure from last year? Why not disclose the figures of sales from last year to this year. Well done on the pursuit of this.
- KM seemed very surprised that the fans were so well organised. She must have underestimated us to her detriment. I don't personally feel that KM actually does want any more dialogue, and especially wouldn't turn up on her own. She needs backup.
- Her body language, especially at the end, seemed to suggest she was rattled, defensive and possibly believing she was over her head. Whether this was the case or not remains to be seen, just my thoughts on it.
- The comments from the club shop employee re the MK game. Uncalled for and not true. Definitely not representative of the fanbase but glad to see no-one from the panel nor floor responded to or backed it up.
- In the end, the length of the meeting seemed just about right but it did start to go round in circles.
P.S. Sorry for the long post!
'keep things really simple but try to make a point. She made a big thing in the video of it only being 2% of fans unhappy, and the responsibility of other fans to drown them out. We need to think of ways to show it isn't just the 2%.
What do you think of another leaflet , card handout for the Ipswich game? A plain white leaflet with a black 2 in the middle (or vice versa), with a couple of lines at the bottom explaining what it's about. Blanket handout before game, in the 2nd minute 'stand up for the 2%' sings the north upper and everyone who wants to, stands up and holds up the card high.
Objective is to give a very clear message that it isn't just 2% unhappy, doesn't involve anyone missing the game, and isn't offensive.'
Could also on the 2nd minute release black and white balloons, banners etc. 1 minute of clear protest at the start of the game and then everyone continues backing the players.
'Did you know that the Charlton Athletic board believe only 2% of fans are unhappy with the current state of affairs at the club. Please show them they are wrong by holding up this card at XXXX time during the match today. Thank you'.