Fans Forum/Roverstore/Commercial Chat

[magicalmortensleftpeg]

34 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

He came for a fight and to be as obstructive as possible.

He shot so many questions down with "you'll have to ask them" 

He didn't speak to us as fans or customers. He treated us like we were his subjects, he treated us like he had the right to be disrespectful and the right to talk to us in a way which made us look stupid or uncomfortable amongst our peers.

We didn't shout, we didn't rise to the bait and we remained professional.

What I will say at the end , I shook everyone's hands including his and all shook hands back.

The issue is within the function and their ability to do the job. I dont know these people personally so try and avoid making it personal 

Remaining professional doesn’t include ridiculing club representatives on social media, releasing versions of the minutes without the club’s consent and generally using the episode to boost your own standing with the fans. 

How is that helping? The FF is one of (the only?) portal of communication we have with the club. Is any of this going to improve fan-club relations?

The club (SS in particular) don’t come out of the minutes well and that’s on them, but you have a responsibility on behalf of the fans to ask the difficult questions, not burn the thing to the ground. 

Demanding that the club apologise for how the Venky’s have run the club for example - what did you honestly expect club employees to say? It looks like cheap point scoring. 

[Mattyblue]

Come off it, Morten. If even the likes of Mike Graham who has painstakingly tried to build bridges with the regime for years has now thrown in the towel and is all in with Glen’s approach, that tells you the time for constructive dialogue with these people is now over. 

[glen9mullan]

18 minutes ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

Remaining professional doesn’t include ridiculing club representatives on social media, releasing versions of the minutes without the club’s consent and generally using the episode to boost your own standing with the fans. 

How is that helping? The FF is one of (the only?) portal of communication we have with the club. Is any of this going to improve fan-club relations?

The club (SS in particular) don’t come out of the minutes well and that’s on them, but you have a responsibility on behalf of the fans to ask the difficult questions, not burn the thing to the ground. 

Demanding that the club apologise for how the Venky’s have run the club for example - what did you honestly expect club employees to say? It looks like cheap point scoring. 

Couple of points, on your post.

Boosting profile - I'm actually an extremely private person, I dont get paid for anything I do Rovers related. 

Minutes- The club has released on its website minutes which have been universally rejected by the FF attendees, me stating the facts is my perogative as an attendee given my name appears on those minutes.

The FF being the only comms is a major issue. You stating we have a responsibility to the fans, how do you arrive at this? Most ff members are independents who represent only their selves and have no responsibility to anyone. 

Finally the questions were asked, and as the club wanted to avoid the answers being shared accurately, I've chosen the stance to be transparent as I always am

[arbitro]

9 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

Couple of points, on your post.

Boosting profile - I'm actually an extremely private person, I dont get paid for anything I do Rovers related. 

Minutes- The club has released on its website minutes which have been universally rejected by the FF attendees, me stating the facts is my perogative as an attendee given my name appears on those minutes.

The FF being the only comms is a major issue. You stating we have a responsibility to the fans, how do you arrive at this? Most ff members are independents who represent only their selves and have no responsibility to anyone. 

Finally the questions were asked, and as the club wanted to avoid the answers being shared accurately, I've chosen the stance to be transparent as I always am

Well done Glen for keeping calm to what I saw as a provocative, ill informed post.

[lraC]

The way I see the situation with the minutes now is this and I stand to be corrected.

Version 1 was written by O2G and everyone, in attendance bar Glen received a copy, before they went to the club. Those who saw them agreed that they were fair and accurate, so the went to the club, who duly agreed them and they were ready to publish them. Was Glen left out in error, or was this a deliberate attempt at keeping  the peace?

Before they were published, Glen then saw them and let it be known to all attendees that they were not accurate, so version 2 were drawn up, agreed by all attendees and Re-Presented to the club. The club then let it be known they were not happy with this version and also advised, they would not allow these to be published. 

Version 3 were then released to those who attended the meeting and these were version 2 only with the controversial points removed and these have now been released onto the website, but not agreed as accurate by the fans forum.

[lraC]

44 minutes ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

Remaining professional doesn’t include ridiculing club representatives on social media, releasing versions of the minutes without the club’s consent and generally using the episode to boost your own standing with the fans. 

How is that helping? The FF is one of (the only?) portal of communication we have with the club. Is any of this going to improve fan-club relations?

The club (SS in particular) don’t come out of the minutes well and that’s on them, but you have a responsibility on behalf of the fans to ask the difficult questions, not burn the thing to the ground. 

Demanding that the club apologise for how the Venky’s have run the club for example - what did you honestly expect club employees to say? It looks like cheap point scoring. 

Oh come on, how on earth can you arrive at that conclusion.

If you were prepared to fight the cause like Glen is fair enough, but you are now being controversial for the sake of it, unless you have a hidden agenda.

[lraC]

20 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

Couple of points, on your post.

Boosting profile - I'm actually an extremely private person, I dont get paid for anything I do Rovers related. 

Minutes- The club has released on its website minutes which have been universally rejected by the FF attendees, me stating the facts is my perogative as an attendee given my name appears on those minutes.

The FF being the only comms is a major issue. You stating we have a responsibility to the fans, how do you arrive at this? Most ff members are independents who represent only their selves and have no responsibility to anyone. 

Finally the questions were asked, and as the club wanted to avoid the answers being shared accurately, I've chosen the stance to be transparent as I always am

I will second every bit of your post.

What a ridiculous post you have had to reply to there.

I

[lraC]

1 hour ago, philipl said:

 

There is enough out in the open to surmise:

SS is making total fools of Pune

SS covered his backside financially with the forced sale of Wharton

SS doubling down saying he didn't know Wharton was that good means

SS is doubling the mess he is in 

Even Pune will be looking at this Summer's football transfer business and know they could have covered the cash shortfall by lending under 10 million with a corresponding bond and sold Wharton for at least 40m in this window if there were anyone left at Ewood with the skill and gumption to set up a proper auction. 

Oh and we would have comfortably made the play offs and JE might not have sacked the club like JDT did before him.

 

ie it is now so obvious that SS decision making is abysmal, even Venky's might notice.

He is making out he is saving them money and with that one decision alone could have cost them £20m plus.

[Miller11]

45 minutes ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

Remaining professional doesn’t include ridiculing club representatives on social media, releasing versions of the minutes without the club’s consent and generally using the episode to boost your own standing with the fans. 

How is that helping? The FF is one of (the only?) portal of communication we have with the club. Is any of this going to improve fan-club relations?

The club (SS in particular) don’t come out of the minutes well and that’s on them, but you have a responsibility on behalf of the fans to ask the difficult questions, not burn the thing to the ground. 

Demanding that the club apologise for how the Venky’s have run the club for example - what did you honestly expect club employees to say? It looks like cheap point scoring. 

Another example here of why it’s important to add context to the minutes. Neither Glen, I, or anybody else in there demanded an apology from Venky’s.

In response to Yasir stating that he didn’t believe pricing was the biggest issue regarding ticket sales, I agreed with him. I said that for me the biggest issue is people losing hope, being sick and tired of the same old mistakes, and that the significant drop off 13 years ago was due to people’s anger and frustrations with the owners.

I suggested that if they want to start attracting those people they lost back then to return, then a little bit of contrition, and an acknowledgement from the owners of their mistakes might go a long way - although I did caveat this with we are now at the stage where actions are needed rather than words. I adied why every bit of comms that comes out of the club paints everything as rosey. You’d think we were highly functioning and free of any mistakes or issues - just show some acknowledgement!

”Balaji’s” statement yesterday shows it fell on deaf ears.

[47er]

9 minutes ago, lraC said:

Oh come on, how on earth can you arrive at that conclusion.

If you were prepared to fight the cause like Glen is fair enough, but you are now being controversial for the sake of it, unless you have a hidden agenda.

or a not -hidden agenda.

[superniko]

8 hours ago, Bronzed A Donis said:

Sadly I doubt it. There is always an excuse ready. Sometimes I wish I didn't know or care about any of it tbh, must he fun to still have that childlike mind and I mean that with sincerity.

 

1 hour ago, Hasta said:

I doubt it.

Look at how some posters are suddenly choosing to 'ignore' this thread now it shows the club are refusing to publish honest minutes.

Perhaps, but the whole Anderson thing was pretty high profile at a time when almost everyone was angry at our ownership (time and maybe the young ‘social media’ fan base has swayed that).

But if it came to light that Anderson is still involved, and has been throughout I think that would cause waves.

(I doubt it is true otherwise we’d surely hear more about it, but just after quoting Mike who said there are rumours)

[Miller11]

13 minutes ago, lraC said:

The way I see the situation with the minutes now is this and I stand to be corrected.

Version 1 was written by O2G and everyone, in attendance bar Glen received a copy, before they went to the club. Those who saw them agreed that they were fair and accurate, so the went to the club, who duly agreed them and they were ready to publish them. Was Glen left out in error, or was this a deliberate attempt at keeping  the peace?

Before they were published, Glen then saw them and let it be known to all attendees that they were not accurate, so version 2 were drawn up, agreed by all attendees and Re-Presented to the club. The club then let it be known they were not happy with this version and also advised, they would not allow these to be published. 

Version 3 were then released to those who attended the meeting and these were version 2 only with the controversial points removed and these have now been released onto the website, but not agreed as accurate by the fans forum.

No. To correct the first paragraph.

Version 1 was sent to the club before being sent to other attendees. As soon as it landed in my inbox I messaged Glen asking what he thought of them. As he hadn’t received them I forwarded them to him. We both came to the same conclusion on them, as did others on the forum at that time.

[RevidgeBlue]

12 minutes ago, lraC said:

The way I see the situation with the minutes now is this and I stand to be corrected.

Version 1 was written by O2G and everyone, in attendance bar Glen received a copy, before they went to the club. Those who saw them agreed that they were fair and accurate, so the went to the club, who duly agreed them and they were ready to publish them. Was Glen left out in error, or was this a deliberate attempt at keeping  the peace?

Before they were published, Glen then saw them and let it be known to all attendees that they were not accurate, so version 2 were drawn up, agreed by all attendees and Re-Presented to the club. The club then let it be known they were not happy with this version and also advised, they would not allow these to be published. 

Version 3 were then released to those who attended the meeting and these were version 2 only with the controversial points removed and these have now been released onto the website, but not agreed as accurate by the fans forum.

Sorry to labour this point, but, (if it was him) how could O2G write up a completely inaccurate and/or misleading version 1 in the first place, and secondly, IF version 1 was circulated to the other Forum members bar GM for approval before being sent to the Club, how could they confirm them as being accurate but then also confirm Glen's amended version as being accurate when he (rightly) kicked off about it?

[lraC]

4 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

No. To correct the first paragraph.

Version 1 was sent to the club before being sent to other attendees. As soon as it landed in my inbox I messaged Glen asking what he thought of them. As he hadn’t received them I forwarded them to him. We both came to the same conclusion on them, as did others on the forum at that time.

Cheers Duncan. 

[47er]

We are going to have these problems so long as the FF is recognised by the Club as the sole  organisation representative of the fanbase.

I believe it isn't, I certainly hope it isn't and I believe the owners are running foul of the new laws by keeping up the pretence.

Parson, you are as loyal a Rovers fan as exists, can't you see that what Glen and others are trying to do is to enable your club to survive forever? More to a fan than paying at the turnstile.

[lraC]

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Sorry to labour this point, but, (if it was him) how could O2G write up a completely inaccurate and/or misleading version 1 in the first place, and secondly, IF version 1 was circulated to the other Forum members bar GM for approval before being sent to the Club, how could they confirm them as being accurate but then also confirm Glen's amended version as being accurate when he (rightly) kicked off about it?

I wrote what I did, as thats the way, I see it, but no problem at all being corrected on it, as just done so by Miller 11

[RevidgeBlue]

Edit: Miller has beaten me to it and explained it. Sadly I think it's clear where the blame lies and frankly the Club aren't going to look a gift horse like that in the mouth if they can get away with it.

[superniko]

9 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

No. To correct the first paragraph.

Version 1 was sent to the club before being sent to other attendees. As soon as it landed in my inbox I messaged Glen asking what he thought of them. As he hadn’t received them I forwarded them to him. We both came to the same conclusion on them, as did others on the forum at that time.

Cheers Duncan, Glen et al. The time and effort put in to what must be an incredibly frustrating situation doesn’t go un-noticed by the majority here. 

[lraC]

11 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

No. To correct the first paragraph.

Version 1 was sent to the club before being sent to other attendees. As soon as it landed in my inbox I messaged Glen asking what he thought of them. As he hadn’t received them I forwarded them to him. We both came to the same conclusion on them, as did others on the forum at that time.

Can I just clarify this, who was version 1 written by and do you know why it went to the  club, before any of those attending saw it?

[glen9mullan]

6 minutes ago, lraC said:

Can I just clarify this, who was version 1 written by and do you know why it went to the  club, before any of those attending saw it?

The process which i understand has always been process.

1. Secretary writes minutes

2. He then in consultation with chair makes edits.

3.They go club.

4. Approval is granted (dont know if this includes edits both ways between 3 parties).

5. The approval given with notification they'll be on website within 48 hours.

6. They are circulated to attendees.

At no point do they get shared with attendees until full approval has been met 

Only logical reason I can come to for this is, given 20 plus attendees, it could take a long time if everyone had edits.

That being said, they shouldn't go club before members have seen first and this needs to change 

[47er]

2 hours ago, glen9mullan said:

The process which i understand has always been process.

1. Secretary writes minutes

2. He then in consultation with chair makes edits.

3.They go club.

4. Approval is granted (dont know if this includes edits both ways between 3 parties).

5. The approval given with notification they'll be on website within 48 hours.

6. They are circulated to attendees.

At no point do they get shared with attendees until full approval has been met 

Only logical reason I can come to for this is, given 20 plus attendees, it could take a long time if everyone had edits.

That being said, they shouldn't go club before members have seen first and this needs to change 

You're being tactful but why was one attendee (you) left out? And why isn't O2G putting us all straight?

This reminds me of that Pune trip 14? years ago when The FF travelled to Pune as guests of Venkys and didn't ask the hard questions.

 

Edited 2 hours ago by 47er

[lraC]

16 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

The process which i understand has always been process.

1. Secretary writes minutes

2. He then in consultation with chair makes edits.

3.They go club.

4. Approval is granted (dont know if this includes edits both ways between 3 parties).

5. The approval given with notification they'll be on website within 48 hours.

6. They are circulated to attendees.

At no point do they get shared with attendees until full approval has been met 

Only logical reason I can come to for this is, given 20 plus attendees, it could take a long time if everyone had edits.

That being said, they shouldn't go club before members have seen first and this needs to change 

I think this is where the biggest problem is. From what you had said there, two people have written/ seen them before they went to the club. Given that this version was accepted by the club, but not any other member of the fans forum, the only conclusion, I can come to, is they  were deliberate club friendly version, aimed at keeping the peace, so I respectfully ask the two people who saw/wrote version one, to explain why. I also respectfully request if previous minutes, were also aimed at keeping the peace, or has every other set of minutes, accurately represented the meetings, controversial or not?

[RevidgeBlue]

6 minutes ago, lraC said:

 the only conclusion, I can come to, is they  were deliberate club friendly version, aimed at keeping the peace, so I respectfully ask the two people who saw/wrote version one, to explain why. I also respectfully request if previous minutes, were also aimed at keeping the peace, or has every other set of minutes, accurately represented the meetings, controversial or not?

This.

[glen9mullan]

20 minutes ago, 47er said:

You're being tactful but why was one attendee (you) left out? And why isn't OSG putting us all straight?

This reminds me of that Pune trip 14? years ago when The FF travelled to Pune as guests of Venkys and didn't ask the hard questions.

 

O2G on holiday 

Why i was left out I don't know, 

I'm doing a pod today and dont want to spoil the content, but if I told you the date the club gave me as the date for the meeting was also incorrect by 3 days , you'd not believe me.

I did make point at end of meeting to LT id see her Thursday at the next FF given the club told me it was then and not Monday.

It was only @K-Hod telling me a couple of days before when I asked that I found out it was the monday!!!!

My attendance imho was not wanted 

[47er]

1 minute ago, glen9mullan said:

O2G on holiday 

When I go on holiday I take my phone and laptop with me!