Why would the Valley Gold scheme have to collapse even if it was reduced to something like 200 members wouldn't you then just amend the prizes on offer e.g only one person wins on a matchday rather than ten ? And the amount of money donated for schemes is in the £100's rather than £1,000's?
There is a critical mass. Remember that we employ two people, and it may not be widely recognised that the club takes a number of Valley Gold's costs themselves.
As a footnote, the prizes are set at levels to attract and maintain members. If the altruism of donation isn't enough, a 1/200 chance each week of a £100 prize isn't going to persuade someone to give £120. The same is true of the jackpot - the prize lowers with fewer purchasers.
Rikofold, I respect what you are saying but us VG members appear to want a meeting and whether you like it or not, if enough members vote for one you have to attend.
Simple really
No we don't. I will, but only the Chair has to attend.
rikofold, You almost sound like you've been trained in the KM school of arrogance.
I've had a membership resignation email to VG In my draft folder for some time, I open this thread with hope of some kind of reasoning between members and the committee but I am actually bemused as to how unforthcoming you appear to be.
So well done, One less member. Apathetic? You bet I am! And whilst I understand that's only a loss of £120 a year for VG, believe me the bigger picture is far more concerning perhaps you should appreciate that.
Not a member of VG or CAST, just to be clear. Rik, I'm not sure you grasp the extent of the loathing that woman has generated with her uncensored views on the fans, and the role Charlton youth stars will play in the future at CAFC. The club have plainly stated their views on the fans, the youths and the future, with additional stuff about elderly fans. There's no negotiation possible. And here is money those fans are raising to fund the academy and you seem to see a meeting as pointless. To me, witholding their money seems a perfectly legitimate option, a meeting would be democratic, and KM is in an untenable position. You are entitled to your view, but to me its wrong.
Valley Gold was originally set up to raise money to help Charlton return to The Valley. It was then repositioned to raise money for the academy in the mid 1990s. So there is precedent for a change of direction.
If the membership decided that the money was best spent on some other cause it would be incredulous to think that the club or chair wouldn’t take note and act. If they didn’t membership would significantly decline and you would probably find another Charlton lottery would be set up.
Do you know exactly how many members we would need to call a meeting?
Well of course - but that change of direction was because the initial objective had been fulfilled. The choice was to dissolve the scheme or to direct it to something new.
You're right about the membership, but that's the entire membership not 10% of it. You need just short of 200 to call a meeting, 198 or 199 I think. Sorry to burst your bubble, but it won't achieve what you think it will and the club won't be there.
Do you not feel now might be such a time to change direction again? A youth scheme with no club in a few years might be difficult.
Rikofold, I respect what you are saying but us VG members appear to want a meeting and whether you like it or not, if enough members vote for one you have to attend.
Simple really
No we don't. I will, but only the Chair has to attend.
No one has explained why CASC have a seat at this table, the organisation disappeared as a going concern 6 or 7 years ago. What membership does it have?
The following rules might be of interest in the near future.
There is a possibility that VG members that call for a meeting might be expelled if the Committee think that we bring the VG scheme into disrepute. Personally I think that KM and RD have brought a lack of credit or repute to the VG scheme.
I see that a quorum is a minimum of the Chair and 3 Officers, so in theory the Football Club reps do not have to be there to dissolve the VG scheme, although this would be highly unlikely of course.
OBJECTS
(a) Objects: The objects of the Club are, and the Club is established and shall be conducted as a society wholly or mainly for the participation in or support of athletic sports or games or cultural activities, with specific focus on the Football Academy.
EXPULSION
(a) Any Member may be expelled from membership of the Club with no refund of any monies paid to the Club by a duly convened meeting of the Management Committee for any activity deemed by the Management Committee to be such as to bring the Club into disrepute.
(b) Any such expelled Member shall have the right of appeal, to be exercised by written request to the Management Committee within 1 month of the communication to such a Member of the Management Committee’s decision to expel that Member, to an independent Director of Charlton Athletic FC, who shall have the power to reverse the decision of the Management Committee to expel such a Member or to confirm that such a decision of the Management Committee shall stand.
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
(f) Appointment of Officers: CAFC shall have the right to appoint and remove 2 Officers (the “CAFC Officers”). The Supporters’ Representatives shall have the right to appoint and remove 2 Officers (the “SR Officers”.) Such appointment and removal shall be made on notice to the Club. The Officers shall be independent of those involved in the promotion of Valley Gold and the Club, acting by its Management Committee, shall be entitled to reject any person appointed by either CAFC or the Supporters’ Representatives if such appointment would affect the registration of the Club as a Small Society for the purposes of the 2005 Act.
(k) Notice of Meetings: Notice of meetings of the Management Committee, setting out the date and time of the meeting, shall be given by the Administrator on not less than 7 days’ notice. The agenda for each meeting shall be the Agreed Fixed Agenda unless an Officer or the Chair notifies the Administrator of business he wishes to be included on the agenda, in which case such business shall be included on the agenda.
(l) Quorum: The quorum of meetings of the Management Committee shall be 4 Officers or 3 Officers and the Chair, all of whom shall be entitled to vote. If a quorum is not present at a Management Committee meeting within 30 minutes of the time it is due to commence, unless the Chair reasonably considers that it is necessary and in the best interests of the Club that the meeting proceeds, that meeting will be adjourned to a date agreed by those Officers present, such date to be between 7-14 days after the date of the postponed meeting. If no quorum exists within 30 minutes of the start of the reconvened meeting, the Officers present shall constitute a quorum and the Chair shall also be entitled to vote on all resolutions at such reconvened meeting.
DISSOLUTION AND WINDING UP
(a) Dissolution: If at any meeting of the Management Committee a resolution for the dissolution of the Club is passed unanimously the Management Committee shall dissolve the Club by winding it up in the following manner. The Management Committee shall as soon as reasonably practicable:
a.1 notify all Members of the dissolution of the Club;
So we have an unelected committee who decide where our money is donated & if we want a meeting they don't even have to turn up,i'm sure if members were aware of this they would think very hard about continuing to remain in the scheme.
Rikofold, I respect what you are saying but us VG members appear to want a meeting and whether you like it or not, if enough members vote for one you have to attend.
Simple really
No we don't. I will, but only the Chair has to attend.
Seems as though that "old fashioned " word, quorum has lost its place on said committee.
I've stuck with this thread from the start and like Bow_Addick, that's my membership ditched too.
Too may words written but not enough sense perceived.
Sad really but the direction in which RD & KM have taken us has many a winding road and dead ends.
rikofold, You almost sound like you've been trained in the KM school of arrogance.
I've had a membership resignation email to VG In my draft folder for some time, I open this thread with hope of some kind of reasoning between members and the committee but I am actually bemused as to how unforthcoming you appear to be.
So well done, One less member. Apathetic? You bet I am! And whilst I understand that's only a loss of £120 a year for VG, believe me the bigger picture is far more concerning perhaps you should appreciate that.
Well I regret you see it that way. I'm trying to focus you away from wasting time on something that will have zero impact, at the very least until June when the next donation is due.
I'm bound by the rules as much as anyone. I can't make the club attend a meeting they don't have to.
So we have an unelected committee who decide where our money is donated & if we want a meeting they don't even have to turn up,i'm sure if members were aware of this they would think very hard about continuing to remain in the scheme.
I think you're leaving out the context here. Your fans' reps would attend, I certainly would, as would the chair. The context for the club is that they are not the turkey about to vote for Christmas so they won't bother turning up. Your only hope of influence is on me and Paul, and we're already batting for you in the context of making the scheme successful.
There are circumstances in which we would consider voting to withhold funds, but they would have to be a bit more watertight than our CEO stumbling over her words on a stage in Dublin. Neither Paul nor I see Valley Gold as a valid target for protests - it's an independent organisation that has received funds over several years to a stated primary aim. It's benefits are worked out long term and it's very probably that withholding funds now would affect a future owner considerably more than it would the current one.
I understand everyone's anger - I'm angry too - but Valley Gold is not the club. It's perhaps the one remaining opportunity for fans to directly contribute to the future wellbeing of the club, and I think supporters should think twice before taking action to damage it. Particularly if they believe protest action will be successful in driving RD out, because it will his successor who suffers.
So we have an unelected committee who decide where our money is donated & if we want a meeting they don't even have to turn up,i'm sure if members were aware of this they would think very hard about continuing to remain in the scheme.
I think you're leaving out the context here. Your fans' reps would attend, I certainly would, as would the chair. The context for the club is that they are not the turkey about to vote for Christmas so they won't bother turning up. Your only hope of influence is on me and Paul, and we're already batting for you in the context of making the scheme successful.
There are circumstances in which we would consider voting to withhold funds, but they would have to be a bit more watertight than our CEO stumbling over her words on a stage in Dublin. Neither Paul nor I see Valley Gold as a valid target for protests - it's an independent organisation that has received funds over several years to a stated primary aim. It's benefits are worked out long term and it's very probably that withholding funds now would affect a future owner considerably more than it would the current one.
I understand everyone's anger - I'm angry too - but Valley Gold is not the club. It's perhaps the one remaining opportunity for fans to directly contribute to the future wellbeing of the club, and I think supporters should think twice before taking action to damage it. Particularly if they believe protest action will be successful in driving RD out, because it will his successor who suffers.
Rikofold. Are you saying that the current club management probably wouldn't care either way if it continues or not?
If KM turned up at the meeting & came under fire she would probably just try & scrap VG & say Roland does not need the money,just like what happened to the VIP scheme.
The following rules might be of interest in the near future.
There is a possibility that VG members that call for a meeting might be expelled if the Committee think that we bring the VG scheme into disrepute. Personally I think that KM and RD have brought a lack of credit or repute to the VG scheme.
I see that a quorum is a minimum of the Chair and 3 Officers, so in theory the Football Club reps do not have to be there to dissolve the VG scheme, although this would be highly unlikely of course.
OBJECTS
(a) Objects: The objects of the Club are, and the Club is established and shall be conducted as a society wholly or mainly for the participation in or support of athletic sports or games or cultural activities, with specific focus on the Football Academy.
EXPULSION
(a) Any Member may be expelled from membership of the Club with no refund of any monies paid to the Club by a duly convened meeting of the Management Committee for any activity deemed by the Management Committee to be such as to bring the Club into disrepute.
(b) Any such expelled Member shall have the right of appeal, to be exercised by written request to the Management Committee within 1 month of the communication to such a Member of the Management Committee’s decision to expel that Member, to an independent Director of Charlton Athletic FC, who shall have the power to reverse the decision of the Management Committee to expel such a Member or to confirm that such a decision of the Management Committee shall stand.
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
(f) Appointment of Officers: CAFC shall have the right to appoint and remove 2 Officers (the “CAFC Officers”). The Supporters’ Representatives shall have the right to appoint and remove 2 Officers (the “SR Officers”.) Such appointment and removal shall be made on notice to the Club. The Officers shall be independent of those involved in the promotion of Valley Gold and the Club, acting by its Management Committee, shall be entitled to reject any person appointed by either CAFC or the Supporters’ Representatives if such appointment would affect the registration of the Club as a Small Society for the purposes of the 2005 Act.
(k) Notice of Meetings: Notice of meetings of the Management Committee, setting out the date and time of the meeting, shall be given by the Administrator on not less than 7 days’ notice. The agenda for each meeting shall be the Agreed Fixed Agenda unless an Officer or the Chair notifies the Administrator of business he wishes to be included on the agenda, in which case such business shall be included on the agenda.
(l) Quorum: The quorum of meetings of the Management Committee shall be 4 Officers or 3 Officers and the Chair, all of whom shall be entitled to vote. If a quorum is not present at a Management Committee meeting within 30 minutes of the time it is due to commence, unless the Chair reasonably considers that it is necessary and in the best interests of the Club that the meeting proceeds, that meeting will be adjourned to a date agreed by those Officers present, such date to be between 7-14 days after the date of the postponed meeting. If no quorum exists within 30 minutes of the start of the reconvened meeting, the Officers present shall constitute a quorum and the Chair shall also be entitled to vote on all resolutions at such reconvened meeting.
DISSOLUTION AND WINDING UP
(a) Dissolution: If at any meeting of the Management Committee a resolution for the dissolution of the Club is passed unanimously the Management Committee shall dissolve the Club by winding it up in the following manner. The Management Committee shall as soon as reasonably practicable:
a.1 notify all Members of the dissolution of the Club;
a.2 discharge all liabilities of the Club;
The quorum requires either both fans reps and both club reps, or the Chair and any 3 of the fans/club reps. So at least one club rep has to be there to dissolve the scheme.
I know it's open season on KM and I'm not defending her here - but as I've said it is enormously helpful for Valley Gold to have the CEO on the committee. It makes decision making considerably more straightforward, and it means we can challenge the business leader directly when needed rather than her staff. And we do.
I think any meeting would have to do something quite outrageous for us to expel anyone.
My role on the Supporters’ Trust board helps me to be particularly sensitive to those things our supporters value, and I’m privileged to have the opportunity to serve them and represent their interests on the Valley Gold Committee.
Some of the members are not happy with what's going on, sometimes you have to get your hands dirty.
I think we shd cut @rikofold of old some slack he's bothered to come on here and reply to these comments and good on him, being any kind of volunteer fan rep can be a thankless task; then see what number the other thread has reached next week. It is after all New Years day.
If KM turned up at the meeting & came under fire she would probably just try & scrap VG & say Roland does not the money,just like what happened to the VIP scheme.
She can't. It's an independent organisation (seriously, is this not grasped yet?) managed by a committee with strict rules and subject to industry regulation.
Incidentally I would support the continuation of the VIP scheme - the financial impact to the club is relatively marginal, although no doubt that's also the reason why the club hasn't bothered to do so. But the scheme was run by the club. Valley Gold isn't.
So we have an unelected committee who decide where our money is donated & if we want a meeting they don't even have to turn up,i'm sure if members were aware of this they would think very hard about continuing to remain in the scheme.
There are circumstances in which we would consider voting to withhold funds, but they would have to be a bit more watertight than our CEO stumbling over her words on a stage in Dublin.
But what else have you got to go on?
She won't be talking to the trust anytime soon and if you seriously think she will I would say you are delusional.
So we have an unelected committee who decide where our money is donated & if we want a meeting they don't even have to turn up,i'm sure if members were aware of this they would think very hard about continuing to remain in the scheme.
I think you're leaving out the context here. Your fans' reps would attend, I certainly would, as would the chair. The context for the club is that they are not the turkey about to vote for Christmas so they won't bother turning up. Your only hope of influence is on me and Paul, and we're already batting for you in the context of making the scheme successful.
There are circumstances in which we would consider voting to withhold funds, but they would have to be a bit more watertight than our CEO stumbling over her words on a stage in Dublin. Neither Paul nor I see Valley Gold as a valid target for protests - it's an independent organisation that has received funds over several years to a stated primary aim. It's benefits are worked out long term and it's very probably that withholding funds now would affect a future owner considerably more than it would the current one.
I understand everyone's anger - I'm angry too - but Valley Gold is not the club. It's perhaps the one remaining opportunity for fans to directly contribute to the future wellbeing of the club, and I think supporters should think twice before taking action to damage it. Particularly if they believe protest action will be successful in driving RD out, because it will his successor who suffers.
The problem is that the people in charge want to sell the future wellbeing of the club before we have really appreciated them
My role on the Supporters’ Trust board helps me to be particularly sensitive to those things our supporters value, and I’m privileged to have the opportunity to serve them and represent their interests on the Valley Gold Committee.
Some of the members are not happy with what's going on, sometimes you have to get your hands dirty.
You know I get a lot of this on the Trust side as well, and without wishing to sound defensive both Valley Gold and the Trust take up an inordinate amount of my time and both can be a thankless task when trying to account for decisions that aren't always universally popular.
I've now spent around 3 hours doing just that on Valley Gold tonight. You may not agree with the things we decide but both are the decisions of committees. I'm not going to apologise for believing that Valley Gold is not a valid target for protest, nor for accounting as to why I hold that belief. I'm certainly not going to take criticism like that, particularly as I have absolutely no idea how you are doing so much more hard work than I am.
Happy new year - time for my family to get some of me on this New Year's Day.
I think we shd cut @rikofold of old some slack he's bothered to come on here and reply to these comments and good on him, being any kind of volunteer fan rep can be a thankless task; then see what number the other thread has reached next week. It is after all New Years day.
Razil, I understand what you are saying and know the thankless task it can be. However telling us, we won't achieve anything, we only make us more determined.
Comments
As a footnote, the prizes are set at levels to attract and maintain members. If the altruism of donation isn't enough, a 1/200 chance each week of a £100 prize isn't going to persuade someone to give £120. The same is true of the jackpot - the prize lowers with fewer purchasers.
I've had a membership resignation email to VG In my draft folder for some time, I open this thread with hope of some kind of reasoning between members and the committee but I am actually bemused as to how unforthcoming you appear to be.
So well done, One less member. Apathetic? You bet I am! And whilst I understand that's only a loss of £120 a year for VG, believe me the bigger picture is far more concerning perhaps you should appreciate that.
VG members have been sleepwalked into a situation where their money is eagerly taken, and they are taken for granted, and have no say whatever.
A youth scheme with no club in a few years might be difficult.
There is a possibility that VG members that call for a meeting might be expelled if the Committee think that we bring the VG scheme into disrepute. Personally I think that KM and RD have brought a lack of credit or repute to the VG scheme.
I see that a quorum is a minimum of the Chair and 3 Officers, so in theory the Football Club reps do not have to be there to dissolve the VG scheme, although this would be highly unlikely of course.
OBJECTS
(a) Objects: The objects of the Club are, and the Club is established and shall be conducted as a society wholly or mainly for the participation in or support of athletic sports or games or cultural activities, with specific focus on the Football Academy.
EXPULSION
(a) Any Member may be expelled from membership of the Club with no refund of any monies paid to the Club by a duly convened meeting of the Management Committee for any activity deemed by the Management Committee to be such as to bring the Club into disrepute.
(b) Any such expelled Member shall have the right of appeal, to be exercised by written request to the Management Committee within 1 month of the communication to such a Member of the Management Committee’s decision to expel that Member, to an independent Director of Charlton Athletic FC, who shall have the power to reverse the decision of the Management Committee to expel such a Member or to confirm that such a decision of the Management Committee shall stand.
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
(f) Appointment of Officers: CAFC shall have the right to appoint and remove 2 Officers (the “CAFC Officers”). The Supporters’ Representatives shall have the right to appoint and remove 2 Officers (the “SR Officers”.) Such appointment and removal shall be made on notice to the Club. The Officers shall be independent of those involved in the promotion of Valley Gold and the Club, acting by its Management Committee, shall be entitled to reject any person appointed by either CAFC or the Supporters’ Representatives if such appointment would affect the registration of the Club as a Small Society for the purposes of the 2005 Act.
(k) Notice of Meetings: Notice of meetings of the Management Committee, setting out the date and time of the meeting, shall be given by the Administrator on not less than 7 days’ notice. The agenda for each meeting shall be the Agreed Fixed Agenda unless an Officer or the Chair notifies the Administrator of business he wishes to be included on the agenda, in which case such business shall be included on the agenda.
(l) Quorum: The quorum of meetings of the Management Committee shall be 4 Officers or 3 Officers and the Chair, all of whom shall be entitled to vote. If a quorum is not present at a Management Committee meeting within 30 minutes of the time it is due to commence, unless the Chair reasonably considers that it is necessary and in the best interests of the Club that the meeting proceeds, that meeting will be adjourned to a date agreed by those Officers present, such date to be between 7-14 days after the date of the postponed meeting. If no quorum exists within 30 minutes of the start of the reconvened meeting, the Officers present shall constitute a quorum and the Chair shall also be entitled to vote on all resolutions at such reconvened meeting.
DISSOLUTION AND WINDING UP
(a) Dissolution: If at any meeting of the Management Committee a resolution for the dissolution of the Club is passed unanimously the Management Committee shall dissolve the Club by winding it up in the following manner. The Management Committee shall as soon as reasonably practicable:
a.1 notify all Members of the dissolution of the Club;
a.2 discharge all liabilities of the Club;
I've stuck with this thread from the start and like Bow_Addick, that's my membership ditched too.
Too may words written but not enough sense perceived.
Sad really but the direction in which RD & KM have taken us has many a winding road and dead ends.
R
I'm bound by the rules as much as anyone. I can't make the club attend a meeting they don't have to.
This is becoming a house of cards, if it goes, then I can't see KM being able to explain it away other than unhappy customers.
£120 pa to use on petrol /B&Bs for away games.
And as good a way as any to support OUR lads.
That aside staying in at least means we can bring a meeting, then leave if you feel
I can see no reason to continue.
A lot has been mentioned about boycotts.
Perfectly reasonable to look at VG.
There are circumstances in which we would consider voting to withhold funds, but they would have to be a bit more watertight than our CEO stumbling over her words on a stage in Dublin. Neither Paul nor I see Valley Gold as a valid target for protests - it's an independent organisation that has received funds over several years to a stated primary aim. It's benefits are worked out long term and it's very probably that withholding funds now would affect a future owner considerably more than it would the current one.
I understand everyone's anger - I'm angry too - but Valley Gold is not the club. It's perhaps the one remaining opportunity for fans to directly contribute to the future wellbeing of the club, and I think supporters should think twice before taking action to damage it. Particularly if they believe protest action will be successful in driving RD out, because it will his successor who suffers.
Based on your responses to this thread, I am now out.
I know it's open season on KM and I'm not defending her here - but as I've said it is enormously helpful for Valley Gold to have the CEO on the committee. It makes decision making considerably more straightforward, and it means we can challenge the business leader directly when needed rather than her staff. And we do.
I think any meeting would have to do something quite outrageous for us to expel anyone.
My role on the Supporters’ Trust board helps me to be particularly sensitive to those things our supporters value, and I’m privileged to have the opportunity to serve them and represent their interests on the Valley Gold Committee.
Some of the members are not happy with what's going on, sometimes you have to get your hands dirty.
Incidentally I would support the continuation of the VIP scheme - the financial impact to the club is relatively marginal, although no doubt that's also the reason why the club hasn't bothered to do so. But the scheme was run by the club. Valley Gold isn't.
She won't be talking to the trust anytime soon and if you seriously think she will I would say you are delusional.
Same time there may be need for some careful well thought out reform.
I've now spent around 3 hours doing just that on Valley Gold tonight. You may not agree with the things we decide but both are the decisions of committees. I'm not going to apologise for believing that Valley Gold is not a valid target for protest, nor for accounting as to why I hold that belief. I'm certainly not going to take criticism like that, particularly as I have absolutely no idea how you are doing so much more hard work than I am.
Happy new year - time for my family to get some of me on this New Year's Day.