Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2018 23:25:26 GMT
Most of the negative people on here will be negative no matter what. They were negative under the old owners they are negative under the new owners They were negative when we were near the top of the conference They were negative during the league 2 promotion season. They have been negative since we were back in league one. If we win league one and build a new ground there will be some very sensible reason for them to be negative. Thats what negative people are like,the important thing is not to let them drag you down imo. Absolute tosh Its the truth as i see it but by all means stick with your negative outlook.
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Jul 19, 2018 18:39:19 GMT
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding and confusion on this thread, so I thought I'd pull my previous post down (which was early on in the first page), as it has a link to the website of the programme of events, which contains the poster KP started with. Contrary to what has been said before, the event details haven't been pulled down, you can still see the same event details KP posted - follow the steps above and it still has Wael down speaking at 4.10pm. To the best of my understanding, this is the timeline … - 13th Feb - Someone spots that Wael was tagged on twitter by 'Coliseum', which says they are looking forward to hearing about the new stadium plans at the conference on 21st March. - Threads started on Gaschat, which were merged into one, with people wondering if the stadium plans were back on. Link: gaschat.co.uk/thread/11670/wael-coliseum-summit-europe- The twitter post from Coliseum is quickly taken down. - 14th Feb - Conversation on the thread has already run its course. So at this point the thought was Coliseum had Wael booked to talk about the UWE Stadium plans.- 24th Mch - Thread resurrected, post conference, wondering if Wael had attended and what was discussed. Someone points out the details are on the website. - 26th Mch - Someone else copy & pastes the details, which is exactly the same as it still says now, and the same as KP's flyer. - 27th Mch - Thread ends on Gaschat. Fast forward 16 weeks or so … - 10th Jul - Someone has kept a copy of the conference details as a screenshot, not relating to where it originally came from, shared it around, it lands in KP's inbox and he doesn't realise this is old news. Confusion reigns for a while, KP finds out Tom attended, rather than Wael. To KP's credit, as he does when he realises a mistake has been made, he apologises for bringing it up. Did Wael tell a conference things he won't tell the supporters - no, because he didn't attend. Would Wael tell a conference things he won't tell supporters - highly unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jul 19, 2018 19:17:48 GMT
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding and confusion on this thread, so I thought I'd pull my previous post down (which was early on in the first page), as it has a link to the website of the programme of events, which contains the poster KP started with. Contrary to what has been said before, the event details haven't been pulled down, you can still see the same event details KP posted - follow the steps above and it still has Wael down speaking at 4.10pm. To the best of my understanding, this is the timeline … - 13th Feb - Someone spots that Wael was tagged on twitter by 'Coliseum', which says they are looking forward to hearing about the new stadium plans at the conference on 21st March. - Threads started on Gaschat, which were merged into one, with people wondering if the stadium plans were back on. Link: gaschat.co.uk/thread/11670/wael-coliseum-summit-europe- The twitter post from Coliseum is quickly taken down. - 14th Feb - Conversation on the thread has already run its course. So at this point the thought was Coliseum had Wael booked to talk about the UWE Stadium plans.- 24th Mch - Thread resurrected, post conference, wondering if Wael had attended and what was discussed. Someone points out the details are on the website. - 26th Mch - Someone else copy & pastes the details, which is exactly the same as it still says now, and the same as KP's flyer. - 27th Mch - Thread ends on Gaschat. Fast forward 16 weeks or so … - 10th Jul - Someone has kept a copy of the conference details as a screenshot, not relating to where it originally came from, shared it around, it lands in KP's inbox and he doesn't realise this is old news. Confusion reigns for a while, KP finds out Tom attended, rather than Wael. To KP's credit, as he does when he realises a mistake has been made, he apologises for bringing it up. Did Wael tell a conference things he won't tell the supporters - no, because he didn't attend. Would Wael tell a conference things he won't tell supporters - highly unlikely. I think your timeline is correct but IMO it is possible that Wael would tell an audience of "top football people" more than he would tell supporters or certainly before he told supporters. The interesting thing about this is that the publicity for Wael's speech is quite detailed. It doesn't say "Wael will talk about his plans for Bristol Rovers" it says quite specifically that Wael will tell the conference "what went wrong" with the UWE deal, "why the plug was pulled", "how Rovers handled the consequences" and "a peek into the alternative action plan'. Would he seriously stand up in front of a large group of high powered football people and say "we gave UWE a deadline and they didn't meet it so we pulled the plug" and "our alternative action plan is to get experts who have built 12 new stadiums to look into redeveloping the Mem". I think that would make him look ridiculous so perhaps there was an alternative action plan he was going to speak about but maybe it fell through in mid March and that's why he pulled out and let Tom Gorringe talk about something different ? To back up the theory of something serious happening in March we have the unexplained formation of a new company, Dwane Developments UK Ltd, on March 13th and the board resolution allowing the allotment of more shares in BRFC 1883 Ltd on March 12th.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2018 19:56:47 GMT
I love these sorts of timelines. Bravo, Conkers.
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,068
|
Post by Angas on Jul 19, 2018 20:59:33 GMT
I didn't realise the attendees were "high powered football people". I'd assumed they were simply 'business' people from various walks of life. So that does put a slightly different spin on what might have been said, had Wael attended.
I wonder what theoretically might have happened in March ...
|
|
vaughan
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,237
|
Post by vaughan on Jul 19, 2018 21:20:35 GMT
Swiss,
Give it a rest. Your almost desperate attempts to find a smoking gun does you no favours.
We appreciate that you simply do not trust the AlQs, but in this episode, you just have to admit that there is no case to answer.
Move on.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2018 22:03:20 GMT
So Wael did intend discussing, with people not directly involved, the reasons that the UWE deal didn't happen? I very much doubt he'd have given any more detail on "What went wrong and why the plug was eventually pulled" than we've already been told. I struggle to believe that anyone really thinks otherwise. I struggle to believe that people obsess about God knows what, search for and imagine conspiracies, ill-intent and malice aforethought at every turn and in the most obscure non-issues, go round in circles, forget what they were trying to convince themselves of so up the outrage a level and go round again - throwing in lots of and-another-things for good measure - and generally peddle misery about things that really don't matter, and then repeat ad nauseam ad infinitum. Was there ever an announcement that these people didn't pick issues with as proof positive that everything's going to the dogs? Still, the evidence is in front of us. They walk among us. I just wish they'd curb the urge to evangelise their weird outlook and draw everyone else into their twilight zone. I have no idea what all this particular 4-pager is or ever was about, why it's a problem, or why it's remotely relevant to anything. Something to do with a meeting that did or didn't happen and all supporters not receiving daily briefings on everything, which never did and never will happen anywhere, and it doesn't matter. It sounds like white noise. I still think 'what's the actual point?' - not just this, but all the associated nonsense threads like it? What's the punchline to all this, and - in the generous thought that there is a punchline - what can or should I or anyone else do about whatever it is (other than be outraged, which seems like a bad thing with no upside)? Add to that, if there were anything worth raising an eyebrow about, it would get smothered out by the constant outrage about eff-all. It's a lovely summer, nothing's metaphorically on fire or even subject to a worrying ticking noise, so why not just relax? If the urge to be outraged comes back, throw in the odd 'does it actually matter' test - and then go back and sit in the garden.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2018 22:18:01 GMT
I disagree. And that's fine, let's disagree. I haven't formed a view on BRFC's owners. This is why I read keenly the interpretations and ideas of all of those delighted by the change from Higgs/Watola/Wonga/Court to Hamer/WAQ/Dwane/Evolution as well as those raising concerns about our Jordanian bankers. Take a break if you get bored of it, or find other threads of more interest. But don't shut it down. No point in these boards without opposing opinions and analysis.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jul 19, 2018 22:19:06 GMT
Swiss, Give it a rest. Your almost desperate attempts to find a smoking gun does you no favours. We appreciate that you simply do not trust the AlQs, but in this episode, you just have to admit that there is no case to answer. Move on. Vaughan When you say I don't trust the Al-Qadi family nothing could be further from the truth. I have been trying to send a consistent message since July last year but am obviously not getting it across effectively. For me there is no conspiracy about asset stripping or trying in some way to swindle Rovers it is simply that the family made a mistake in purchasing the club. Two of the main points I have pushed are that rich and successful people do make mistakes and running alongside that is the observation that too many fans believe there is a grand scheme to "evolve" Rovers into a successful club just because "the family are rich so they must know what they are doing". The evidence suggests to me that despite the best efforts of Steve Hamer and Tom Gorringe the project is floundering and Martyn Starnes virtually confirmed that this week when he said he was going to have to start work on long term planning. If he is doing that now then how could there have been a long term plan previously ? I trust the family to do their best to get out of the mess which has been created with minimum damage to themselves and to Rovers. Oldie said yesterday that although he likes the changes the new owners have brought in he agrees that losses of 2 million per year are not sustainable. The overstatement of the wealth of the family at the start did nobody any favours and unfortunately I think many fans are still under the impression they have infinite cash to loan if they so wish. But if you look at the AJIB figures you will see that it is not a large bank, it's performance is deteriorating and Hani and his family have enough on their plate without having to subsidise Rovers. I sympathise with them and hope they do manage to find a solution to the problem. My speculation about important changes having possibly been on the table in early March and then suddenly cancelled is not intended to do down the Al Qadi family or imply there is a smoking gun. It's simply putting forward some ideas based on what we know Wael intended to say at the conference, the resolution to allot new shares and the formation of a new company called Dwane Developments. There is nothing sinister in this. If you knew you couldn't sustain losses of 2 million per year so you had to find a way of resolving that problem, and you thought you had found such a way, then possibly you would feel inclined to go to a football conference and tell people about it.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Jul 19, 2018 23:39:24 GMT
very sensible from swiss IMO. And might be spot on too - we can't tell at this stage, but it is at least plausible
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Jul 20, 2018 7:07:18 GMT
I dont beleive nyone thinks 2m a year losses are sustainable, lord knows we argued about the same things under Nick Higgs.
There is a material difference though as the current ownership seem to be employing capable and forward thinking people to generate revenue. A far cry from anything the club has seen for years if at all.
I will simply say again, they have been far from perfect, made miss steps and maybe given people too much hope with some of the things said and then not said, but they have still done more and give me some impression they have an idea beyond build it and they will come
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Jul 20, 2018 10:58:50 GMT
Well, There you are. Another made up story.Someone fabricated that poster / flyer / mailshot or whatever it was that Jooles has on the first post in this thread? Well I never! Is that not normal for a Bristol Rovers forum site ?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2018 11:12:23 GMT
Someone fabricated that poster / flyer / mailshot or whatever it was that Jooles has on the first post in this thread? Well I never! Is that not normal for a Bristol Rovers forum site ? Incredible isn't it, half truth gets turned into fact and used to hang someone out to dry on internet forum. I've never heard of such a thing.
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,068
|
Post by Angas on Jul 20, 2018 13:01:35 GMT
Is that not normal for a Bristol Rovers forum site ? Incredible isn't it, half truth gets turned into fact and used to hang someone out to dry on internet forum. I've never heard of such a thing. It happens in newspapers all the time. It's the way of the world.
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Jul 21, 2018 20:13:44 GMT
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding and confusion on this thread, so I thought I'd pull my previous post down (which was early on in the first page), as it has a link to the website of the programme of events, which contains the poster KP started with... I think your timeline is correct but IMO it is possible that Wael would tell an audience of "top football people" more than he would tell supporters or certainly before he told supporters. The interesting thing about this is that the publicity for Wael's speech is quite detailed. It doesn't say "Wael will talk about his plans for Bristol Rovers" it says quite specifically that Wael will tell the conference "what went wrong" with the UWE deal, "why the plug was pulled", "how Rovers handled the consequences" and "a peek into the alternative action plan'. Would he seriously stand up in front of a large group of high powered football people and say "we gave UWE a deadline and they didn't meet it so we pulled the plug" and "our alternative action plan is to get experts who have built 12 new stadiums to look into redeveloping the Mem". I think that would make him look ridiculous so perhaps there was an alternative action plan he was going to speak about but maybe it fell through in mid March and that's why he pulled out and let Tom Gorringe talk about something different ? To back up the theory of something serious happening in March we have the unexplained formation of a new company, Dwane Developments UK Ltd, on March 13th and the board resolution allowing the allotment of more shares in BRFC 1883 Ltd on March 12th. Yes, the wording of what was said to be Wael's speech does come across strange. I was going to touch on that before, but there is only so much time I can spend on a football forum, and I was beginning to bore myself typing up that timeline! Here it is for convenience: 4:10 pm
Fallout of the breakdown of a deal In any business, not all deals are meant to be a success. How to manage a situation when a deal doesn't go through? In this session, we will learn from the failed negotiations between Bristol Rovers and UWE, what went wrong and why the plug was eventually pulled, and how did Rovers handle the consequences and fallout of the breakdown of the deal. We'll also get a peek into the alternative action plan the club is working on at the moment.We can only speculate as to how that wording came about. It may have been an off the cuff, even jovial, remark: "I can't talk about the new stadium, as the deal has fallen through; it would be more along the lines of …", not knowing that it would be quoted in the programme of events. And even if Wael, or someone from the club, knowing offered that up as the wording to use, it doesn't mean to say he would have spoken about anything meaty that Rovers fans would be wanting to hear. I agree that if it was an audience of "top football people", then they may get told something before the fans - that is if it is an audience to do with planning, or funding, or something along those lines. The audience for these Coliseum Conferences is business folk, from sport in general, planning or building sports stadia, and sharing experiences and knowledge. So I imagine Wael would have (and perhaps Tom did) shared the experiences: of having a deal falling through; any lessons learned; what they may do differently next time; planning a way forward; building a team around you; team meetings; sharing ideas; forming a long term plan; putting in place an interim short term plan; communicating (or when not to communicate) with stakeholders, customers (fans), council, media - etc. etc. just general stuff, not specifics, like all those business type speeches that go on every day, up and down the country, and let's be honest wouldn't interest the majority of Rovers fans. I doubt very much he would have gone into detail about what specifically went wrong, at least nothing different than has already been said in public. I think the reaction has been a storm in a teacup.
|
|
dido
Predictions League
Peter Aitken
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,883
|
Post by dido on Jul 21, 2018 21:50:34 GMT
''... a storm in a teacup....''? On a football forum.? Mountain out of a molehill-type-thing? Surely not.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jul 21, 2018 23:16:15 GMT
I think your timeline is correct but IMO it is possible that Wael would tell an audience of "top football people" more than he would tell supporters or certainly before he told supporters. The interesting thing about this is that the publicity for Wael's speech is quite detailed. It doesn't say "Wael will talk about his plans for Bristol Rovers" it says quite specifically that Wael will tell the conference "what went wrong" with the UWE deal, "why the plug was pulled", "how Rovers handled the consequences" and "a peek into the alternative action plan'. Would he seriously stand up in front of a large group of high powered football people and say "we gave UWE a deadline and they didn't meet it so we pulled the plug" and "our alternative action plan is to get experts who have built 12 new stadiums to look into redeveloping the Mem". I think that would make him look ridiculous so perhaps there was an alternative action plan he was going to speak about but maybe it fell through in mid March and that's why he pulled out and let Tom Gorringe talk about something different ? To back up the theory of something serious happening in March we have the unexplained formation of a new company, Dwane Developments UK Ltd, on March 13th and the board resolution allowing the allotment of more shares in BRFC 1883 Ltd on March 12th. Yes, the wording of what was said to be Wael's speech does come across strange. I was going to touch on that before, but there is only so much time I can spend on a football forum, and I was beginning to bore myself typing up that timeline! Here it is for convenience: 4:10 pm
Fallout of the breakdown of a deal In any business, not all deals are meant to be a success. How to manage a situation when a deal doesn't go through? In this session, we will learn from the failed negotiations between Bristol Rovers and UWE, what went wrong and why the plug was eventually pulled, and how did Rovers handle the consequences and fallout of the breakdown of the deal. We'll also get a peek into the alternative action plan the club is working on at the moment.We can only speculate as to how that wording came about. It may have been an off the cuff, even jovial, remark: "I can't talk about the new stadium, as the deal has fallen through; it would be more along the lines of …", not knowing that it would be quoted in the programme of events. And even if Wael, or someone from the club, knowing offered that up as the wording to use, it doesn't mean to say he would have spoken about anything meaty that Rovers fans would be wanting to hear. I agree that if it was an audience of "top football people", then they may get told something before the fans - that is if it is an audience to do with planning, or funding, or something along those lines. The audience for these Coliseum Conferences is business folk, from sport in general, planning or building sports stadia, and sharing experiences and knowledge. So I imagine Wael would have (and perhaps Tom did) shared the experiences: of having a deal falling through; any lessons learned; what they may do differently next time; planning a way forward; building a team around you; team meetings; sharing ideas; forming a long term plan; putting in place an interim short term plan; communicating (or when not to communicate) with stakeholders, customers (fans), council, media - etc. etc. just general stuff, not specifics, like all those business type speeches that go on every day, up and down the country, and let's be honest wouldn't interest the majority of Rovers fans. I doubt very much he would have gone into detail about what specifically went wrong, at least nothing different than has already been said in public. I think the reaction has been a storm in a teacup. I know what you mean about typing fatigue, I often used to do a "Sunday Sermon" on here which if nothing else was a good cure for fans' insomnia ! To me a storm in a tea cup is more like the current debates about things like Ellis Harrison's move, the new shirt design or even the uncovered prefabricated stands which Shoveler has just brought up. Something which fans get very heated about but which happens at every football club and has no long term effect on progress or otherwise. Up till a year ago the UWE Stadium project was considered the most important thing to ever happen in Rovers history so, IMO, this topic about it's demise and the "alternative action plan" is much more than a storm in a teacup. The project had 100% support from the fan base and everyone agreed there was no possible way the club could progress without a new stadium. The cancellation of the project was a huge disappointment to us all but at least we were told we had experts working on a Mem redevelopment. So when, in March, we saw Wael was scheduled to speak at this conference ( billed as an exclusive boutique event) about the collapse of the UWE deal and the alternative action plan then of course hopes were raised. But, as often happens at Rovers, no more was heard about it and when the subject is brought up again four months later the consensus is that there is nothing to discuss or be concerned about". I'm not the type of person to be outraged and I take most things with a pinch of salt and a wry smile. But it does puzzle me that Rovers fans have such a capacity to be so positive and committed about something one minute and yet the next minute, when nothing has happened, they say "well it didn't really matter" and "there's nothing we can do about it anyway". Again, I know I'm in a small minority on this so please no one get offended by my thoughts.
|
|
vaughan
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,237
|
Post by vaughan on Jul 22, 2018 8:24:14 GMT
Swiss,
Please don't believe that you are in a minority.
Personally, I was very upset that UWE fell through and this prompted me to write to Chairman about possibility of outside investment. He flatly ruled out that possibility as not being of interest to AlQs.
So we are left with AlQs to devise a plan. It would be insulting to say that they are not aware of the fans' impatience or the requirement to address this.
We have no other choice but to await the ground re-development master plan. The longer we go without this, the more that the clamour will grow for a grandiose plan.
Wael has consistently said that he is here for the long haul. You either trust his words or you don't.
Personally, I don't see in his appointments someone who is going to jump ship soon.
Never under-estimate that he is a football nut.
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,284
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jul 22, 2018 16:09:14 GMT
Its the truth as i see it but by all means stick with your negative outlook. You’re making me laugh now and that’s a good thing. Keep up the good work
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2018 18:10:28 GMT
To me a storm in a tea cup is more like the current debates about things like Ellis Harrison's move, the new shirt design or even the uncovered prefabricated stands which Shoveler has just brought up. Something which fans get very heated about but which happens at every football club and has no long term effect on progress or otherwise. Okay my Swiss fellow. I brought it up. No fuss was made. Certainly no storm. I was confused about uncovered family seating. Only that. No outrage or anything. I posed the question. A chap called Dan tweeted the same to TG. TG tweeted back with 'definitely covered'. And the website will get amended thus. Problem solved. In an evening, two people posed my question. It's answered on both Twitter and Gas Guzzler. Good result. I don't understand complicated business. But I know it's more crucial than my question. That's what we've got you here for. Keep it up, Sir.
|
|