|
Post by swissgas on May 22, 2018 15:08:41 GMT
It's interesting to see how the debate develops and I'm glad there seems to be signs of a consensus developing on the "anti Al-Qadi" / "Board Bashing" issue. If criticism and putting forward alternative viewpoints is considered "anti" then my track record goes back to the days of Graham Holmes Chairmanship when the Evening Post published a letter from me which my mates viewed with great hilarity. We all want what is best for Rovers and, if we can, we want to help the owners achieve it whoever they may be.
Just a few further points based upon the responses to this topic.
Is the newspaper article which KP referred to really lazy journalism ? Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the club to be making sure the right message is getting across and the right image presented throughout the various media forms ? I tried to convince Nick Higgs to use a PR agency because it was clear his heart was in the right place but his skill set did not include managing public relations. Although originally highly skeptical of the PR industry and PR consultants I first decided to use them about 30 years ago and having gained enormous benefits from the experience I've been a fan ever since. Good PR is extremely valuable to a business and if we want do develop a positive image for key people such as potential sponsors and business partners, potential staff and players and potential fans in and around Bristol, as well as inspiring and motivating current staff and supporters, we need professional help to do it.
Eppinggas used the phrase "a little honesty wouldn't go amiss". I don't actually think the owners are being dishonest I think they are floundering. And the same applied to Nick Higgs and Co they weren't deliberately trying to mislead us they were floundering and didn't know which way to turn. Wael's floundering is characterised by two specific things which to me are just plain wrong. Firstly, on December 2nd he admitted that his communication with fans had been lacking and promised to improve it but since then, in almost six months, has given only one interview. Secondly, when confronted with difficult issues he has come up with bluster such as the bit about the firm "on our side" which has built a dozen stadiums.He knows this will fool most fans but it won't fool everyone and to talk about that in August 2017 and then fail to mention it again in ten months is not respecting the faith which so many Rovers fans have put in him. We want him to succeed but he has to do better.
|
|
vaughan
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,237
|
Post by vaughan on May 22, 2018 16:11:25 GMT
Swiss Gas
Set up a meeting with the people that matter on your well-articulated concerns.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2018 16:53:46 GMT
So many words and so much guesswork on an Internet forum. Why don't some of you write to the Chairman with your concerns and questions? Try it. You will receive a prompt and courteous response. The Chairman doesn't make decisions that matter. That's Reason A. I have a Reason B, the best experts in the country helped me make it up, but I'm not telling you what it is
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,219
|
Post by eppinggas on May 22, 2018 17:19:09 GMT
So many words and so much guesswork on an Internet forum. Why don't some of you write to the Chairman with your concerns and questions? Try it. You will receive a prompt and courteous response. I have written to the Chairman on a number of occasions. To his credit, and as you have suggested, I have always received a prompt and courteous response. He always thanks me for my continued support. Going great so far... However to his detriment he has always avoided answering any of my questions. Obviously there is a limit to what he can and can't say - and I respect that. But to suggest writing to him and expecting him to address any concerns or questions you may have is... well... I think we're in cotton-headed ninny muggins land again.
|
|
vaughan
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,237
|
Post by vaughan on May 22, 2018 17:30:00 GMT
Well if you are feeling brave but short-changed, ask for a meeting with Wael himself....or is there a flaw with that approach?
He is hardly Lord Lucan.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2018 19:06:21 GMT
Well if you are feeling brave but short-changed, ask for a meeting with Wael himself....or is there a flaw with that approach? He is hardly Lord Lucan. What makes you think Wael has any control over what happens or what money is going to be spent?
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,219
|
Post by eppinggas on May 23, 2018 7:41:08 GMT
Well if you are feeling brave but short-changed, ask for a meeting with Wael himself....or is there a flaw with that approach? He is hardly Lord Lucan. Yes, there is a fundamental flaw in that approach. Garnering a meeting is one thing, getting answers to questions (which no-one else seems to have been able to) is another. Why would Wael say things to me in private (that I could then share) - when he has had ample opportunity to speak to everyone via an open communication? The only up-side I can see is that I can easily get to the new £250k a year offices in London and give them the once over.
|
|
vaughan
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,237
|
Post by vaughan on May 23, 2018 8:39:26 GMT
Round and round.
More words on a Forum.
Guesswork.
Speculation.
Wink emojis.
Maybe...perhaps...there is nothing of substance to communicate...yet.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on May 23, 2018 9:32:34 GMT
Well if you are feeling brave but short-changed, ask for a meeting with Wael himself....or is there a flaw with that approach? He is hardly Lord Lucan. What makes you think Wael has any control over what happens or what money is going to be spent? true, but why do so many think/know Hani is the one in control.
No one ever mentions Samer or Mr Al-Qadi and there say (or not as the case may be)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2018 12:47:12 GMT
there is nothing of substance to communicate...yet. But as already mentioned, twice, this makes it 3 times, the same length of time has now elapsed since UWE collapsed as there was between the Ashton Vale stadium plan being abandoned and Lansdown announcing his fully funded Plan B (but we had a pretty good idea what was going on long before the formal announcement), so don't you think that we ought to be hearing something soon? Wael has the very best people on, so surely it shouldn't take longer than 1982's project. But of course, there has to actually be something happening to be able to report, or does having that thought make me 'Anti these owners'?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2018 12:53:32 GMT
Roses update.
Even more are blooming today than yesterday. A riot of colour.
Happy days. Oh yeah...UTG etc.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2018 13:32:10 GMT
Round and round. More words on a Forum. Guesswork. Speculation. Wink emojis. Maybe...perhaps...there is nothing of substance to communicate...yet. Exactly. And all to what end? What’s the punchline? Say those of us who think the club’s being run better than for years ‘wake up and smell the coffee’? Then what? Stamp our foot and be as miserable as others? What’s the actual beef? That the A-Q’s should leave because [they’ve not flooded us with more money than they ever promised to / the imagined motivation of one or more of them doesn’t suit / they haven’t produced a new stadium and training ground in what some think to be a reasonable timetable / they knocked back a stadium plan that didn’t fly / forward momentum (and what a novelty that is) is not fast enough / some non-issue / everything isn’t permanently perfect / who cares, moan whatever, no rational reason required - don’t delete as appropriate ]. Then what? Or is it not that they should leave, or anything should or shouldn’t happen, but that whatever happens it will be to a background of whines and sneers? It’s draining. That’s why I largely swerve here nowadays (I’m not part of an organised boycott, FGS). Swiss excepted (I don’t necessarily agree with him, but he makes sensible input), it’s the peppering of every thread by a minority determined to spread gloom, but never coming to a valid point that I can do without.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2018 13:32:36 GMT
"Definite plans were presented in 2007 and the club filed for planning permission in 2009. This was granted in 2010, but then progress stalled as several legal challenges were filed against the decision, mainly due to the site forming part of a green belt. Public inquiries had to decide over the fate of the stadium plans, but late 2013 the club announced that they had decided to renovate Ashton Gate instead, hereby indefinitely shelving the Ashton Vale plans."
Ashton Vale Stadium
So there was a 3 year gap between permission being granted and the plans collapsing. City were clearly doing groundwork on the Ashton Gate redevelopment while keeping the Ashton Vale development plans in place. Once City canned AV in 2013, planning was approved in late 2013, final clearance in Spring 2014 and development started in May 2014. Work was "completed" in the summer of 2016. Rovers plans with UWE went public in 2011 and have been dead for nine months. Realistically I don't think it's absurd to want details of development plans by January 2019 (18 months from the collapse), or at the very least next summer.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2018 13:37:09 GMT
The owners are here for the long haul. Armageddon in March did not materialise. Look for the positives and thy shall find. Just for the record, what were the prophesies of doom for March? I have vague memories of something. It might be worth making notemas a benchmark for the next outbreak of ‘if you knew what I know....’ gets people so irate.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2018 13:51:40 GMT
"Definite plans were presented in 2007 and the club filed for planning permission in 2009. This was granted in 2010, but then progress stalled as several legal challenges were filed against the decision, mainly due to the site forming part of a green belt. Public inquiries had to decide over the fate of the stadium plans, but late 2013 the club announced that they had decided to renovate Ashton Gate instead, hereby indefinitely shelving the Ashton Vale plans."
Ashton Vale Stadium
So there was a 3 year gap between permission being granted and the plans collapsing. City were clearly doing groundwork on the Ashton Gate redevelopment while keeping the Ashton Vale development plans in place. Once City canned AV in 2013, planning was approved in late 2013, final clearance in Spring 2014 and development started in May 2014. Work was "completed" in the summer of 2016. Rovers plans with UWE went public in 2011 and have been dead for nine months. Realistically I don't think it's absurd to want details of development plans by January 2019 (18 months from the collapse), or at the very least next summer. But they insisted that there was a Plan B, tied to their ''Beautiful piece of land''. As you say, 1982 really did have a Plan B, AV was abandoned and the new plan made public the same calandar year. Can't be bothered to look at it right now, but it feels like it was more than 3 years between PP being granted on UWE and the project being binned. I don't care how long it takes, in a way, as stated previously, I'm probably happier with the 3rd tier club that we've always been than I would be with some faceless CL corporate 'entity', but I do get a bit stressed when the things we are being told don't seem to quite add up.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on May 23, 2018 13:53:25 GMT
The owners are here for the long haul. Armageddon in March did not materialise. Look for the positives and thy shall find. Just for the record, what were the prophesies of doom for March? I have vague memories of something. It might be worth making notemas a benchmark for the next outbreak of ‘if you knew what I know....’ gets people so irate. I may be wrong, but I thought it was the £10m credit facility would be used up and then what etc..
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2018 14:02:53 GMT
Just for the record, what were the prophesies of doom for March? I have vague memories of something. It might be worth making notemas a benchmark for the next outbreak of ‘if you knew what I know....’ gets people so irate. I may be wrong, but I thought it was the £10m credit facility would be used up and then what etc.. That rings a distant bell. Ta. So, that was either a) bollocks, or b) in hand [or maybe c) bollocks in hand, and why not?]. So that’s all good. I’m glad my blood pressure was unaffected by the issue.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2018 14:06:53 GMT
"Definite plans were presented in 2007 and the club filed for planning permission in 2009. This was granted in 2010, but then progress stalled as several legal challenges were filed against the decision, mainly due to the site forming part of a green belt. Public inquiries had to decide over the fate of the stadium plans, but late 2013 the club announced that they had decided to renovate Ashton Gate instead, hereby indefinitely shelving the Ashton Vale plans."
Ashton Vale Stadium
So there was a 3 year gap between permission being granted and the plans collapsing. City were clearly doing groundwork on the Ashton Gate redevelopment while keeping the Ashton Vale development plans in place. Once City canned AV in 2013, planning was approved in late 2013, final clearance in Spring 2014 and development started in May 2014. Work was "completed" in the summer of 2016. Rovers plans with UWE went public in 2011 and have been dead for nine months. Realistically I don't think it's absurd to want details of development plans by January 2019 (18 months from the collapse), or at the very least next summer. But they insisted that there was a Plan B, tied to their ''Beautiful piece of land''. As you say, 1982 really did have a Plan B, AV was abandoned and the new plan made public the same calandar year. Can't be bothered to look at it right now, but it feels like it was more than 3 years between PP being granted on UWE and the project being binned. I don't care how long it takes, in a way, as stated previously, I'm probably happier with the 3rd tier club that we've always been than I would be with some faceless CL corporate 'entity', but I do get a bit stressed when the things we are being told don't seem to quite add up. Day dot really is February 2016, previous agreements can kind of be overlooked. That was a different business that agreed to those deals and the new incumbents are well within their rights not to feel it is best for the business. The UWE plans were ditched in August 2017 so from day dot that was 18 months. Truth is the current incumbents knew they weren't going to progress with UWE for a period before that. The clock is ticking, with every moment the ground is getting worse, if there's nothing progressing by the 2nd and then 3rd anniversary of the ownership then the questions will really start flowing.
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on May 23, 2018 15:56:24 GMT
Roses update. Even more are blooming today than yesterday. A riot of colour. Happy days. Oh yeah...UTG etc. Thank you for your roses update. It prompted me to listen to 'Good Year For The Roses' by Elvis Costello, which is an absolutely wonderful song
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on May 23, 2018 17:58:34 GMT
Roses update. Even more are blooming today than yesterday. A riot of colour. Happy days. Oh yeah...UTG etc. Thank you for your roses update. It prompted me to listen to 'Good Year For The Roses' by Elvis Costello, which is an absolutely wonderful song Or guns and roses, or the stone roses...
|
|