@richh87
Member
You're being an idiot.
Membership fees !!!!
Membership fees !!!!
So they all give their jobs up and share the membership fees all 2000 odd pounds? BrilliantMembership fees !!!!
Squeak - pass the cheddar!
Last nights meeting was totally frustrating and really didn't move things on. He refused to answer any probing questions, just talked in generalities and wouldn't discuss or debate any of the issues.
The Trust has obtained a copy of his report and we will be going through it in detail but a cursory look shows its very superficial with lots of gaps and anomalies.
This putting ltd up for sale without knowing what's in it appears to be a bit of a nonsense but maybe it will draw a few more interested parties out of the shadows.
I'm sure you'll receive the stock anwer of "They are private messages" or "Let the person who sent them share them".You've mentioned this before PGSM, the PMs. I've been highly critical of the Trust in the past, and Jan in particular. I actually found they answered my criticisms with their actions quite well with no nasty PMs!
Shouting about threats with no evidence sounds cowardice to me! Why don't you share these PMs?
You've mentioned this before PGSM, the PMs. I've been highly critical of the Trust in the past, and Jan in particular. I actually found they answered my criticisms with their actions quite well with no nasty PMs!
Shouting about threats with no evidence sounds cowardice to me! Why don't you share these PMs?
I thought the statement was odd "The meeting was positive and constructive with a willingness from both sides to continue dialogue and co-operation." followed by "After todays meeting with CCFC LTD administrator Paul Appleton and his team, the board members present left feeling totally frustrated and with grave concerns over the future of the club."
So to clarify we are positive, constructive but frustrated with grave concerns.
A lot of things can be said about the Trust but I struggle to believe that they send nasty (snigger) or threatening PM's!!
exactly what i thought.. for a moment i thought that second quote was an old one relating to a diffrent meeting. jan maybe you can enlighten us , as those two quotes ( regarding the same meeting ) seem to be at odds with each other ?
No problem:
The first quote was one agreed jointly with Appletons PR man Paul McCarthy and as ever with these joint statements you have to have a bit of give and take and it comes out a bit wishy washy. The second one is what we actually felt as fans/Trust members after having a meeting where we were told little and most questions that were asked were met with "i am not at liberty to comment".
We wish to keep the door open so we can continue to communicate with Appleton in the hope that maybe some of what we say/ask/point out to him will permeate and have an effect - maybe a slim chance but one worth pursuing. No point in cutting your nose of to spite your face.
Hope that explains it.
Nothing forced you to agree one you didn't believe though? It looks a bit schizophrenic tbh, and just your own might have been better.
And this is such a serious issue, given that nothing else important is going on????????
REALLY? Trying's all very well but WHAT HAVE THEY ACHIEVED
I've done a as much as the trust - contacted the exact same people!
Difference - I'm not asking to be PAID to do it!
And I DON'T send nasty e-mails and threats via PM as the trust have done to me! - THAT is cowardice!
Me making a suggestion about their statements isn't exactly affecting the future of the club.
They can ignore me if they want to, or they might appreciate the feedback, the choice is theirs!
That is all true - but when you have people who are giving up their time to try to do something positive for the club, I find it disappointing that people feel the need to nit pick about such trivial matters.
Just my view.
Me making a suggestion about their statements isn't exactly affecting the future
of the club.
You have been making some educated. Well thought out reasoned arguments recently.
Don't ruin it with this drivel.
That is all true - but when you have people who are giving up their time to try to do something positive for the club, I find it disappointing that people feel the need to nit pick about such trivial matters.
Just my view.
you're simply creating division amongst the fan base.
basically trolling.
Me making a suggestion about their statements isn't exactly affecting the future of the club.
They can ignore me if they want to, or they might appreciate the feedback, the choice is theirs!
noggin, where are you? ;-)
i share your view. reactionary naysayers whinging and whining whilst doin diddly squat to actually benefit the club.
you're simply creating division amongst the fan base.
basically trolling.
To me, media relations and statements are very important, so I offered my advice.
That's not the same as saying the trust are rubbish, they're a waste of space.
I was half way through a post that was mostly in support of your position, but your wish is my command.
*Cockney accent on*
Leave it out Dekker
*Cockney accent off*
It's a difficult place they are in really I think, on one hand they have given a public statement that is not only spin but really an outright lie and thats something the fans have been subjected to for years, it sucks and we don't really want it from the people representing us. On the other hand if they don't play the necessary politics they might not get to play at all and that would be counter intuitive. So perhaps by allowing the public spin and yet still telling us how they really feel they have done the best with a bad situation.
I certainly agree with you that you had every right to question it though and that it does no harm to do so.
He hadn't been making some educated well thought out reasoned arguments lately at all.
It's just been drivel that you agree with, drivel nonetheless.
That is all true - but when you have people who are giving up their time to try to do something positive for the club, I find it disappointing that people feel the need to nit pick about such trivial matters.
Just my view.
While I see where you're coming from I thought the statement was odd. Read the first paragraph and you're dancing on the ceiling go onto the second and you're hanging yourself from it. I don't think it's "nit picking" to ask questions, is it?
He hadn't been making some educated well thought out reasoned arguments lately at all.
It's just been drivel that you agree with, drivel nonetheless.
My concern would be you agree a statement and publish a contradictory one, you lose trust more than being straight with the administrator and saying that you can't agree to that, as that's not how you feel. It also makes your own position a little confused!
And I'd say in the current climate 'Administrator refuses to meet trust because they wouldn't agree statement' is more of a damning thing to hold around the administrator's neck than the trust.
In the interests of balance, at the beginning of this thread I supported them meeting the administrator without consulting members first, and given some of the earlier comments in this thread, I'll name and shame Michael from the Trust who when I contacted him, we may not agree on some things but he was polite, courteous, willing to engage and even if I disagree, left a positive impression, no abusive PMs here.
When you attack people who take time out voluntarily to help the club we all support.
It kinda discredits and weakens a lot of anything else you say.
When you attack people who take time out voluntarily to help the club we all support.
It kinda discredits and weakens a lot of anything else you say.
My concern would be you agree a statement and publish a contradictory one, you lose trust more than being straight with the administrator and saying that you can't agree to that, as that's not how you feel. It also makes your own position a little confused!
have to agree im afraid.. i liked what the trust were trying do & stand for.. but that statement was odd to say the least & in addition to the above, id say it made them/us look weak. If you dont agree with a statement , then dont agree to it. and certainly dont agree to a joint statement & then make a singular one that says the opposite.
I understand the intentions .. to keep in the good books of the administrator for future meetings.. but i dont think that's even been achieved, as he will read the statement you put out.
And before people start jumping on the "why dont you support the trust & trust them in what they are doing" .. i do support the trust, and what they are doing.. and this is my feedback on what they are doing, which as a paid up member i think we should all be allowed to offer
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?