Fans Forum Dates

[creaner]

Taken from the official City website, first one tomorrow

Fans Forum dates have been set for the coming season.

To further promote communication with supporters, the Board of Directors has scheduled a series of Fans' Forum dates for the coming season.

The first of these will take place in the Aggborough Suite after the Lowestoft game on Saturday 15th August 2015.

Future dares are as follows:-

7th November or 21st November 2015 (depending on FA Cup results)
30th January 2016
19th March 2016
The Board hope that as many supporters as possible will take the opportunity to come along to ask questions or hear the latest news

[leon]

What a shambles it was if you ever want to see how not to manage a meeting this was it.
Wasted an hour of my life.
As both a shareholder and a member of the ST why was I unaware of fundamental differences between the two which are not going to be resolved by both sides randomly SHOUTING at each other.It was embarrassing to poor old Mark (the project leader for the stadium bid) to have to listen to all of that.
If there is a prepared statement issue it to everybody beforehand so we can digest it.
In our current situation offers to join the board should be welcomed.
Hold an EGM ffs!
Two things for Fans Forums 1) Playing squad ability and funding 2) Stadium application do the point scoring elsewhere. We are 6th tier football club not a political party trying to decide on a new leader
Rant over

[creaner]

Aug 15, 2015 20:35:45 GMT leon said:

What a shambles it was if you ever want to see how not to manage a meeting this was it.
Wasted an hour of my life.
As both a shareholder and a member of the ST why was I unaware of fundamental differences between the two which are not going to be resolved by both sides randomly SHOUTING at each other.It was embarrassing to poor old Mark (the project leader for the stadium bid) to have to listen to all of that.
If there is a prepared statement issue it to everybody beforehand so we can digest it.
In our current situation offers to join the board should be welcomed.
Hold an EGM ffs!
Two things for Fans Forums 1) Playing squad ability and funding 2) Stadium application do the point scoring elsewhere. We are 6th tier football club not a political party trying to decide on a new leader
Rant over

Leon this was indeed embarrassing. I'm sorry you've lost an hour of your life to this SHOUTING. As the person at the front today who probably wasted most of your time I would actually like to be able to have a chat to you, and anyone really, about this whole sorry mess. Please PM me.
It's 9 years since I got involved with the supporters trust as I really thought there could be a future for the club. Apologies again.

[Fred]

Points scoring or the start of a power struggle ?

Either way...the showing from the forum was unprofessional and worrying from the general supporters point of view.

[creaner]

Believe me that's not how I imagined the forum going. I don't know if it was clear what the chairman was saying in his statement but in essence all the work that had been done up to now, 3 years worth, was dismissed and he wanted to start looking at alternatives. Three years of my life rejected in one minute. Was I happy? Obviously not! Will we continue to do what's necessary to ensure the survival of the club? Of course.

[downthelane]

Forum was disappointing in that we didn't get to hear properly from Anthony Hampson due to being constantly interupted by snide comments from the Trust who have their own agenda. As for Rich W's contribution, the less said the better. A Trust-run club, based on yesterday not for me.

[adycrean]

Aug 16, 2015 13:52:54 GMT downthelane said:

Forum was disappointing in that we didn't get to hear properly from Anthony Hampson due to being constantly interupted by snide comments from the Trust who have their own agenda. As for Rich W's contribution, the less said the better. A Trust-run club, based on yesterday not for me.

There is nothing wrong with having an agenda - provided in this case it is robust, relevant and affords the club the potential for a long term future. Part of the problem as I see it is that the Board doesn't seem to have a viable agenda / vision for the future. The Trust has produced and shared one in an open and honest way.

And I think some more research might be of benefit; this is about creating a club that is run for the benefit of the community as a Community Benefit Scociety - not 'Trust run'.

Moreover, having been a supporter for 40 years, to my mind there are few if any supporters who have dedicated and contributed as much to the club as Rich Widdowson.

[greenman]

I was unable to attend the match or forum Saturday but as far as I am concerned any Board who cannot be bothered to hold an AGM for 5 years do not deserve the opportunity to put forward any alternative to what the Trust is proposing. An EGM should be called asap and this current Board should be given a vote of no confidence.

[wcfcnb82]

I was unable to attend the meeting due to prior engagement, so just looking at it basically is the current board against the ST and the perdiswell bid? Seems like both are at loggerheads.

[leon]

It was not made clear as to why the Board had decided to come up with their own version but surely an EGM needs to be held so that shareholders can decide firstly if they want to change the constitution of the company?
The stadium bid is still a joint bid.
The fact is that about 90 per cent of the fan base could not care less about how the club is owned their concern is results and a new stadium.

So questions for next forum
1) How much money sits in the bank from St Modwens, FA Cup run and sale of 2 players
2) Is it true that the club could fold through continued ground sharing and if so provide figures as to why you think that.

Probable response will be that it is Commercial in Confidential, in other words you are not important enough but keep on buying your season ticket, Gold Bond, Teambuilder, 50-50 draw tickets and programmes.

[zeke]

The results better keep coming. This is the only thing keeping fans motivated to turn up.

We're in our third year of exile and the club has known for over five years that Nunnery Way was a no-no. Perdiswell was our thing of hope to keep the club alive and now they want to start from scratch elsewhere?

Without any hope of a new ground, even the regulars have a breaking point. I'm worried!

[Deleted]

This is very worrying. Do the board not discuss matters with the trust? Has the board rejected the Perdiswell plan? If so why, and do they have any alternative proposals? It's going to be difficult enough to survive in exile with the Perdiswell plan in place - but without the hope of a return to Worcester the club will wither away. The objectors to Perdiswell must be delighted.

To the rest of us this sounds like a shambles.

[wcfcnb82]

I've always said that the club will go under before a new ground is ever built. And if we do go, then it will be very very difficult to build again. People wont go and watch archdale standard football. We're not s hereford or chester, we are the fourth most popular sporting attraction in worcester with a council that doesn't care about us.
Too many internal loggerheads at the club and that's why the club could be in trouble it's far from over but this latest setback is worrying to us fans.

[rob]

So what actually happened at this 'forum'? Was there a prepared statement from the Chairman? If so, I hope it will be available on the Worcester city website in due course.

[Brooksiders Return!!]

BEGIN
This is a quick personal statement from me, and does not reflect or represent the views of the Supporters Trust of which I am a Director.
Two accusations were levelled directly at me by Anthony Hampson at the fans forum.

1. No businesses in Worcestershire would invest in Worcester City FC because of my involvement.

RESPONSE : If for one moment I believed that that was the case, I'd happily put my shares up for transfer, remove myself from any activities with the Supporters Trust and go back to watching football matches. I'd do it tomorrow. Until that meeting, no-one from the Board had ever spoken to me directly and said that my presence around the club is the very reason that the likes of Worcester Bosch, Halfords, Sanctuary Group, Joy Global, Thomas Vale, GKN and thousands of others is preventing inward investment into the business. I would have appreciated a call or a conversation with Mr Hampson, he knows how to get hold of me, I'm not hard to find.
Personally I find this idea utterly preposterous, not least because the vast majority of these companies are not even aware of my existence in life, let alone at the football club. However, if Mr Hampson can show me that this is the case, I exit stage left!

2. I have not bought a season ticket

RESPONSE : This was an incorrect statement by Mr Hampson, I have bought a season ticket, I didn't buy a discounted ticket as I decided not to. I have bought a full price season ticket, and whatsmore, I won't use it, I'll pay at the gate every match, as I have done for the previous two seasons.

Jem Pitt
END

[jimbo]

Sorry to say, I was also not available to attend.
BUT
This is all very worrying. Taking on board all the comments made so far & some of them quite surprising as I know the views (or previous views) of some of these people & being a football supporter first & shareholder of the club secondly, can I ask.......
1) Are we looking to relocate WCFC back to Worcester as a football club under its present constitution.
2) Are we looking to relocate WCFC ( or similar name) back to Worcester as a "supporters trust" run club.
3) Are we looking to relocate WCFC ( or similar name) back to Worcester as a community facility.
Answer these questions & we may get some idea of what support can be gained.
My personal opinion, as many of you will well know is:
1) I want a local & successful football club.
2) Rightly or wrongly I am not bothered if it is managed by a trust, a committee or a board of directors.
3) Possibly controversially, I personally do not think that being a community facility should be a priority.
Do those "activist" amongst you actually know what most of the supporters want ? Because when I ask them, they haven't got a clue what's going on behind the scene. They just want to support their club.
I think we're losing sight of the fact that football supporters are simply football supporters, & yes, if things go completely 'tits up' as in Hereford & other clubs, then they may or may not rally round.
Please, please do not treat this response as a negative, I am really trying to help you look at what "the man in the street" thinks/wants.
For those of you who don't know me.....
I am a small shareholder, who is quite willing to give my stakeholding to the right cause.
I did join the ST soon after it was formed, but have not been for several years.
I do think WCFC should not drop several levels in the hope we can one day we can reach league standards.
On saying all this, I have quietly given my support to the present board of directors. But my patience with them is wearing thin as I too cannot comprehend any reason not to have an AGM every year, let alone five & & an EGM must be demanded immediately.

[Dodger]

I have to be honest and say that I wasn't aware of a fans forum taking place until I read 'creaners' opening post. My pre-arranged travel commitments meant that I couldn't have attended and, judging by the comments made so far, it may have been a worthless exercise anyway.

The obvious question is "Are the ST and the Directors singing from the same hymn sheet?" in wanting City back to Worcester and at the planned location of Perdiswell?

It would appear not. So what are the two sides of the debate (or shouting match if you prefer)?

When Anthony Hampson became Chairman his statement to BBC H&W included the following:-

"I hope I can bring some energy to the new stadium project,". "I'm hoping that the shareholders, fans and the community will back Worcester City for the future."

Now I'm not a shareholder nor a member of the ST but, as a season ticket holder/supporter, I would like to know which direction we are supposed to be going!

Sustainability and viability have been quoted many times but these need to be at the core of any decision making...........is City financially sound or is the money being frittered away?

If needs be, let's have 2 gatherings - 1) An AGM where the board can outline their 5 year (or whatever) plan and, 2) A Supporters Trust meeting to do likewise.

As mentioned earlier, the average supporter may only want to pay his money and watch a match and has little interest in the goings on behind the scenes yet may still want to know whether he can still turn up.................and where.

Dodger.

[cloud]

Aug 16, 2015 21:56:56 GMT @archieclaines said:

This is very worrying. Do the board not discuss matters with the trust? Has the board rejected the Perdiswell plan? If so why, and do they have any alternative proposals? It's going to be difficult enough to survive in exile with the Perdiswell plan in place - but without the hope of a return to Worcester the club will wither away. The objectors to Perdiswell must be delighted.

To the rest of us this sounds like a shambles.

Spot on.  This really is worrying if true.  I thought we were all 100% backing the bid.  I hope that's still the case & this is a misunderstanding somehow.

First of all we need to understand exactly what went on at the forum (the facts) concerning the Board & Perdiswell, are there minutes to be issued (or is Saturday's forum just to be viewed as an informal get together?)

[stamoo]

I WAS at the forum meeting. I have to say it was a bit of a shock to say the least for these internal differences to be suddenly and dramatically revealed in such a hostile and angry manner. it certainly took the edge of the wonderful victory we had just watched. Carl & Matt and several of the players were there and I wonder what they made of it all?

Anyway it was specifically made clear that whatever model of ownership the club may decide upon that is a SEPARATE issue entirely from the planning permission application.

It is entirely possible that the planning application be approved and then a future ownership model be decided upon. Of course if we permission is granted we then need to decide how to raise money to build the stadium, but it was stated that this should not affect the application itself.

We were assured that the delays in the application being heard was due to difficulties in obtaining a meeting with the Senior Planning Officer whose diary has been full but a meeting is fixed for next month. There are three outstanding concerns but we were assured these were minor issues which have or will be easily addressed.

For my part it was a confusing meeting because members of the trust and the Board began arguing about some detailed technical issues which, unless you had studied them or had special knowledge it was impossible to judge who was correct. It was not the right forum for such a discussion. The anger and emotion was not helpful and while I understand people feel very passionately about this both sides are going to have to come together to work this through or else the Club may well be sunk!

I am a Trust member who thinks they have done a magnificent job so far in putting the application together. Truly outstanding work by volunteers. I also support the Board who I think have kept the club alive after the move from the Lane when it looked like it could be the End. Although the AGM issue is a puzzle.

We all want the same thing and it seems we have come a long way. We have a great little club punching above its weight and the prospect of a secure future with a new stadium back in the City. I do hope the Supporters Trust and the Board are not going to undo all of the good work and shoot themselves in the foot!

[Deleted]

This meeting with the planning officer, is it with the club, the trust or both? Who's driving the application? It seems Creaner and co's efforts have been undercut.

[stamoo]

It was made crystal clear the planning application is a JOINT application being put forward by both the Trust and the Club. No one at the forum was saying or suggesting this was or should no longer be the case.

[leon]

For anybody not at the Forum if you read Stamoo's post that is a pretty good and fair reflection, much better than my attempt!

Genuinely I assumed it would cover 2 things -the stadium bid update and a playing squad update and thoughts for the season by the Management Team.

[Brooksiders Return!!]

I also believed that it would cover those kinds of items. It was therefore unfortunate that the Chairman decided to open what should have been a fairly placid meeting by issuing a statement ( On behalf of the Board of Directors) following his comments in the programme from Tuesday night regarding the Supporters Trust. There was absolutely no need for those derogatory and disparaging statements either in the programme, or reiterated in the fans forum. To then take it to a personal level was a further unexpected twist.
It might be worth looking at the role of a Chairman, for those who aren't aware. The Chairman has NO greater responsibilities than any other Director at the club. The Chairman does not run the company, he merely runs the Board of Directors, in so much as he represents their instruction. His main role is to preside over company meetings, that's pretty much it! He is NOT in charge of the football club.
As a shareholder, I have questions over this statement that I will be seeking answers to, firstly, was this statement the accepted view of the Board of Directors? Did they advise the Chairman to represent their instruction and issue the statement? Or was he speaking as an individual? or a maverick Chairman? If this was the expressed wishes of the Board of Directors, then unless stated otherwise, every Director has put his name to that statement.

(The above is a personal statement, and represents my position as a shareholder in the company. This does not express any views of the Supporters Trust of which I am a Director)

[citytoon]

Wow. It's really worrying to read about the factions between the different interests. Everyone needs to be pulling in the same direction here to secure City's future. Renting at Aggborough can only work as a temporary solution, presumably only for a short while longer. Getting a new ground in Worcester and running a sustainable club must be the focus as it's key to City's future. Surely Perdiswell and the hard work that has gone into the application is the last chance saloon and it's too late for other alternatives?

[The Verner]

Is it really wise in public view, talking about what happened on here, how long until Protect Perdiswell use this as a negative against the project !

(The above and any comments made are my view and this does not express any views of the Supporters Trust of which I am a Director or the Football Club of which I hold a position in staff)

[Brooksiders Return!!]

I don't think that the constitutional make up of a company is really of much interest to a local protest group. Companies change formation and debate it rigorously all the time. The fans forum was an open meeting, it would be democratically wrong, and pretty offensive, to suggest that comment made at a public meeting should be censured in any way.

[wcfcnb82]

What were the programme comments from the chairman?

[The Verner]

Did I state anything about the consitutional make up of the company or any form of change being censured in any way ? No I dont think I did !

Im just suggesting that the two parties meet around a table and sort things out in a calm manner and move forward.

(The above and any comments made are my view and this does not express any views of the Supporters Trust of which I am a Director or the Football Club of which I hold a position in staff)

[Brooksiders Return!!]

Did I state anything about the constitutional make up of the company or any form of change being censured in any way ? No I dont think I did either!
Read what I said, I said it would be wrong NOT to talk about what happened at the meeting, as what happened at the meeting was for public consumption and would be of no interest to a protest group. I am pleased that views have been put forward on here, whether I agree with them or not is irrelevent, at least fans are talking, because every fans view is of importance. Lets keep it that way.

[creaner]

Aug 17, 2015 7:48:16 GMT stamoo said:

I WAS at the forum meeting. I have to say it was a bit of a shock to say the least for these internal differences to be suddenly and dramatically revealed in such a hostile and angry manner. it certainly took the edge of the wonderful victory we had just watched. Carl & Matt and several of the players were there and I wonder what they made of it all?

Anyway it was specifically made clear that whatever model of ownership the club may decide upon that is a SEPARATE issue entirely from the planning permission application.

It is entirely possible that the planning application be approved and then a future ownership model be decided upon. Of course if we permission is granted we then need to decide how to raise money to build the stadium, but it was stated that this should not affect the application itself.

We were assured that the delays in the application being heard was due to difficulties in obtaining a meeting with the Senior Planning Officer whose diary has been full but a meeting is fixed for next month. There are three outstanding concerns but we were assured these were minor issues which have or will be easily addressed.

For my part it was a confusing meeting because members of the trust and the Board began arguing about some detailed technical issues which, unless you had studied them or had special knowledge it was impossible to judge who was correct. It was not the right forum for such a discussion. The anger and emotion was not helpful and while I understand people feel very passionately about this both sides are going to have to come together to work this through or else the Club may well be sunk!

I am a Trust member who thinks they have done a magnificent job so far in putting the application together. Truly outstanding work by volunteers. I also support the Board who I think have kept the club alive after the move from the Lane when it looked like it could be the End. Although the AGM issue is a puzzle.

We all want the same thing and it seems we have come a long way. We have a great little club punching above its weight and the prospect of a secure future with a new stadium back in the City. I do hope the Supporters Trust and the Board are not going to undo all of the good work and shoot themselves in the foot!

The ownership options can seem confusing and you're right nobody would have learned anything from Saturday! It also very important as it is the basis on how we intend to fund the new stadium and to help us to convince the City Council we can be trusted with such a valuable asset. I wrote a brief guide here explaining why the Community Benefit Society route is the preferred model, as advised by Supporters' Direct. I've updated it a bit.
As I say have a read and if you have any questions find me at a game and I will be more than happy to go through it.