WATR (The Rovers Trust)

[RevidgeBlue]

3 minutes ago, J*B said:

Yes, if you're viewing it as a one-off meeting. If this is meeting one of many and the agreement was "i'll personally improve communication with fans" then its a success. 

"Meanwhile seventeen days later the Club goes out of business".

[AVE1875]

11 minutes ago, J*B said:

To be fair I think either i'm completely numb to negativity, or the majority of the responses here have been overwhelmingly positive!

I would say positive, I don't believe any of the comments are negative; they are an opinion... An opinion as such people are perfectly allowed to express. In the end, everyone commenting shares one common ground; the betterment of Blackburn Rovers. 

Having worked in business for many years (as I am sure many others have), I appreciate the need to be critical but to also be intelligent about how you express that criticism without tarnishing the relationship (which could be classified as a definition of a critical friend). Professionally, I deal with Stakeholders and Shareholders at many levels in one of the biggest organisations in the UK (truthfully) so I can appreciate things need to be done a specific way in a means to not damage that connection but then to also build onto having a connection that allows you to have more difficult discussions comfortably at no risk of complicating the arrangement. 

I think those who are majorly involved with meetings etc, need to understand that subscribers are going to post erratically sometimes even doubt you... But when you think of it, that is part of the parcel. I do sympathise with you after seeing some of the comments on here, but we're in a complicated position and it is to be expected.

[wilsdenrover]

7 minutes ago, J*B said:

Yes, if you're viewing it as a one-off meeting. If this is meeting one of many and the agreement was "i'll personally improve communication with fans" then its a success. 

There’s levels of success though.

Him agreeing to improve communication is fine but why couldn’t he  (and maybe he did) start by communicating some information there and then? (eg expanding on the club’s position regarding the Venkys court case)

[J*B]

Just now, AVE1875 said:

I would say positive, I don't believe any of the comments are negative; they are an opinion... An opinion as such people are perfectly allowed to express. In the end, everyone commenting shares one common ground; the betterment of Blackburn Rovers. 

Having worked in business for many years (as I am sure many others have), I appreciate the need to be critical but to also be intelligent about how you express that criticism without tarnishing the relationship (which could be classified as a definition of a critical friend). Professionally, I deal with Stakeholders and Shareholders at many levels in one of the biggest organisations in the UK (truthfully) so I can appreciate things need to be done a specific way in a means to not damage that connection but then to also build onto having a connection that allows you to have more difficult discussions comfortably at no risk of complicating the arrangement. 

I think those who are majorly involved with meetings etc, need to understand that subscribers are going to post erratically sometimes even doubt you... But when you think of it, that is part of the parcel. I do sympathise with you after seeing some of the comments on here, but we're in a complicated position and it is to be expected.

Brilliant post.

If WATR, or another other supporters group, gets access to Suhail and doesn't treat the meeting with respect then it'll be the last one. You can be critical and demand change without being a cock. 

[Miller11]

7 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

"Meanwhile seventeen days later the Club goes out of business".

Personally I feel a good level of comfort that this won’t be the case. It’s not for me to try and persuade anyone else of that though. The fact it’s a concern is, in my opinion, a direct result of their communication and the lack of trust it inspires.

[J*B]

3 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

Personally I feel a good level of comfort that this won’t be the case. It’s not for me to try and persuade anyone else of that though. The fact it’s a concern is, in my opinion, a direct result of their communication and the lack of trust it inspires.

I make it 15:37 as we speak and as yet I haven't been e-mailed the meeting notes @Miller11 ... if they're being released any later than 16:00, I hope your family don't intend on speaking to you tonight 😅

[Miller11]

3 minutes ago, J*B said:

I make it 15:37 as we speak and as yet I haven't been e-mailed the meeting notes @Miller11 ... if they're being released any later than 16:00, I hope your family don't intend on speaking to you tonight 😅

The delay is proving my point above. It’s an absolute priority for WATR to get this message out ASAP.

[wilsdenrover]

3 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

The delay is proving my point above. It’s an absolute priority for WATR to get this message out ASAP.

Is the delay at the club’s end?

[wilsdenrover]

If I’m putting things together correctly, the club is delaying the communication of the fact they’ve agreed to improve how they communicate 🤦‍♂️
 

 

 

[arbitro]

Whatever any individual thinks I feel it was important to get this bloke around the table, a feat which many of us thought would never happen. Personally I don't agree with the 'all guns blazing'approach in the first meeting. My own opinion is that Pasha would have been nervous and cautious based on his reluctance to meet and individual or fan groups for many years. Gaining his confidence is important and in future meetings he will hopefully open up.

[RoversClitheroe]

Intrigued as to why he's only just agreed to it?

Wasn't it down to Gestede to improve the Comms? After being lauded as a legend at the last meeting too

[1864roverite]

My basic take on this issue is this UNLESS your a paid up member of WATR you should NOT expect anything by demand!

Be grateful that these supporters do what they do, free and for the love of the club - they do not in anyway deserve criticism or demands by timelines🤬

Edited August 5, 2024 by 1864roverite

[wilsdenrover]

Just now, 1864roverite said:

My basic take on this issue is this UNLESS your a paid up member of WATR you should expect anything by demand!

Be grateful that these supporters do what they do, free and for the love of the club - they do not in anyway deserve criticism or demands by timelines🤬

shouldn’t ( not should)?

[RoversClitheroe]

1 minute ago, 1864roverite said:

My basic take on this issue is this UNLESS your a paid up member of WATR you should expect anything by demand!

Be grateful that these supporters do what they do, free and for the love of the club - they do not in anyway deserve criticism or demands by timelines🤬

Agreed.

[philipl]

1 hour ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Unless I've missed it somewhere, this is something that we need to ascertain, are these hearings a series of one off affairs whereby the Club have to trot off periodically more or less indefinitely to get expenditure authorised or is it envisaged that there will eventually be a final hearing at which a decision will be made either

a) They can now transfer funds without restriction or

b) They are not allowed to transfer funds over any longer

If so how long is that going to take to get to a final determination?

God knows

... or perhaps the WATR minutes taker...

 

[We Are The Rovers]

On Friday August 2nd, representatives of We Are The Rovers met with club CEO Steve Waggott and COO Suhail Shaikh to discuss recent events and raise ongoing supporter concerns.

During the meeting we touched on three main areas:

- The lack of clarity around the ongoing court case

- Questions about the owners ability/willingness to fund the club

- Level of communication and engagement

We impressed upon them the growing concern that supporters have around the ongoing legal issues involving the owners, which appear to be impacting the clubs ability to function.

We stressed that if the owners are either unwilling or unable to run the club on a benefactor model, placing the club up for sale was the only viable option.

The forthcoming 20th August Delhi High Court case was also discussed. It was reiterated to WATR that the forthcoming 20th August Delhi High Court hearing is seen as an opportunity for the Owners to agree a better solution is in place for remittance of funds to BRFC in the UK, and that the Owners are committed to continue to fund any losses of Blackburn Rovers for the coming season.

It was highlighted that much of the unrest is a result of a void in communications, and the need for a full explanation of the current position is required directly from the club.

As a result of this initial meeting, it was agreed that a wider consultation between the club and a broad range of supporters and fan groups should take place at an appropriate time in the future. Planning for this is ongoing and further details will be provided in due course.

The COO has agreed to attend future scheduled WATR Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) meetings on a regular basis. Work will also be undertaken to allow regular communication and, if possible, in person meetings between the Owners and representatives of WATR in the future.

While the meeting was positive overall, and welcomed by both WATR and the Club, it is only the first step to improving engagement between the club and its most important stakeholder - its fanbase.

[rigger]

So it has been agreed what should be done. Now all that needs to be agreed is when and how, that will be done.

[Hasta]

23 minutes ago, We Are The Rovers said:

The forthcoming 20th August Delhi High Court case was also discussed. It was reiterated to WATR that the forthcoming 20th August Delhi High Court hearing is seen as an opportunity for the Owners to agree a better solution is in place for remittance of funds to BRFC in the UK, and that the Owners are committed to continue to fund any losses of Blackburn Rovers for the coming season.

“ It was reiterated that after the 20th August the owners may willing to fund Blackburn Rovers properly again. However, if not, they will at least guarantee to keep you going for another 12 months”

Edited August 5, 2024 by Hasta

[J*B]

“the Owners are committed to continue to fund any losses of Blackburn Rovers for the coming season”

This feels like a change in tone @Miller11, usually it’s “continued support for the future” or similar. Was that the impression you got? 

[Ossydave]

3 minutes ago, J*B said:

“

the Owners are committed to continue to fund any losses of Blackburn Rovers for the coming season”

This feels like a change in tone @Miller11, usually it’s “continued support for the future” or similar. Was that the impression you got? 

Isn't that the exact wording from the forum meeting?

[Ossydave]

Jesus, people waited all day to read that 🙄 

[tomphil]

They aren't funding it though are they the incoming transfer instalments are yet this seems to be being passed off as then guaranteeing this seasons losses cover.

As for the court case on a reassurance scale of 1 to 10 with one being remaining huge concerns that was a minus 1 it tells us nothing except the usual 'the owners hope...'

[simongarnerisgod]

i wish they`de **** off and let us get back to being a proper football club,if it means administration then so be it,there always be a rovers.whatever division we are in

[RoversClitheroe]

I'm so confused? 

So basically setting up another fan forum to teach them how to communicate with fans?

[Forever Blue]

Assume the position.
 

We’ll communicate again at an unspecified date about how we’ll communicate in the future.  
 

And you’ll be grateful. 
 

Love 

Stash x