WATR (The Rovers Trust)

[Mattyblue]

Obviously I’m nowhere near as invested as you Mike, but I’ve paid my dues since the start and I’ve not received as much as a single email in ten years, despite asking and asking and asking what is surely a very simple request to be added to the mailing list for newsletters etc.

To be fair to mhead he has forwarded them on to me when I’ve asked him directly but it’s all a bit slapdash.

Edited September 25, 2023 by Mattyblue

[Miller11]

1 hour ago, Mike E said:

What is going on at We Are The Rovers? At the AGM I stepped back with the intention being to become a co-opted board member (Heritage) rather than elected, but was subsequently deleted from the WhatsApp group (ooo, bitchy) so I considered myself excommunicated.

I didn’t mind this too much as stepping down a touch was precisely because I couldn’t attend many meetings, due to my boys. I was still willing to contribute, but clearly nobody on the board felt I had a voice with any value.

Now I’m being told that the Chair has similarly felt ‘encouraged’ to step down? Doesn’t sit right with me after the solid (imo) progress made in the last 6 years after inheriting a board of two fantastic people wishing to step down themselves,  so almost an empty room.

I’ve given 5 years of volunteering, pioneered the Marketing Prospectus, and been fucked off to one side without any explanation or gratitude, and now the Chair has also stepped away. Don’t get me wrong, change can be needed and be a very good thing, but the nature of these changes hasn’t sat well with me tbh.

Can any board members please shed light? I have my own opinions on what (or who) has happened, but I’m open to changing my mind and appreciate I only really know my side of the story.

Hi Mike,

I’ll try and address all your points.

Firstly, yes, John Murray has stepped down as chair of the Trust and leaves with everyone’s thanks for his work over the last 5 years. This change hadn’t been publicly announced yet and the intention was to send an appropriate email to the membership advising them of this and the necessary restructuring that goes with it.

Neither I or anyone else currently on the board were aware of your desire to remain involved. We understood you were standing down due to very understandable constraints on your time due to a growing family. For clarity, being a co-opted board member is not much different to being an elected one. There’d still be an expectation to attend meetings and the same sanctions around not doing so would apply as outlined in our rules. We currently have no need for any co-opted members as our board is not at capacity. Co-option is a way to bring expertise to the board outside an election period rather than a watered down version of a board member. 

You were removed from the WhatsApp group after the AGM along with others who were standing down. It’s not really an approved comms channel for discussing important matters, it’s a WhatsApp group. This seemed logical. I’m sorry if you feel it was bitchy.

All members who stood down were thanked for their efforts at the AGM by our then chair. Any conversations you had with him regarding heritage and remaining involved were not relayed to anyone else.

You’ve highlighted one of our biggest recent issues. Evidently our internal and external communications need improving. The situation @Mattybluedescribes is obviously unacceptable and we’re investing in our infrastructure to eliminate issue like his going forward. There’s a number of issues we need to get right to ensure we continue with the progress made in the last 12 months.

Hope that clears things up a bit?

 

[chaddyrovers]

how will you replace John Murray and what will the process be? 

[RoversClitheroe]

Question for the group, I myself pay a yearly fee.

What is the point of this new partnership with the club?

Is Waggot still not going to be held to account? 

Banged on about a bus saying we'd bought it? Ended up being a lease? 

Where's the pressure being put on him as CEO?

[Miller11]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

how will you replace John Murray and what will the process be? 

Mike Graham will be acting as interim chair until we have the chance to elect a replacement. This will either be at an EGM or our next AGM and the usual election process will apply.

2 hours ago, RoversClitheroe said:

Question for the group, I myself pay a yearly fee.

What is the point of this new partnership with the club?

Is Waggot still not going to be held to account? 

Banged on about a bus saying we'd bought it? Ended up being a lease? 

Where's the pressure being put on him as CEO?

It’s not a partnership, but our recent Memorandum of Understanding states that we will have regular dialogue. A link to the document is below to give you an idea of the scope of it.

https://mcusercontent.com/f646174da39488e19ed1200d3/files/59d9f2c7-e9a3-1c28-afc4-cc20fef81840/Rovers_Trust_Memorandum_of_Understanding.pdf
 

We will be canvassing members for their ideas/opinions/questions for our next meeting over the coming weeks. Some areas definitely in the agenda will be:

- Ticketing

It won’t be long until season tickets planning starts happening internally, so this is high on our agenda. We have of course discussed this previously but recent events (the looming disastrous attendance v Cardiff, our efforts for the Girona friendly, feedback from lapsed season ticket holders, comparisons with other clubs) will all allow us to approach it in a structured and evidenced way.

 

-  The current state of play regarding finances

Articles 2.d and 2.f of the MOU outline we can discuss current finances and ask questions regarding the ownership of Rovers. There is scope for us to push for answers beyond “The owners are fully committed”, and while we won’t necessarily get a picture of what is happening in India, we will be able to discuss the impact any issues are having on the financing of the club and highlight any concerns with the way we are being run.

 

We are awaiting and preparing for our first meeting since the MOU was signed, so it’s difficult to pre-empt any outcomes at the moment, but it should be the start of better dialogue. 

 

 

[1864roverite]

The only thing ongoing in India is a criminal investigation into financial fraud allegations 

[Upside Down]

I also have not received any emails or newsletters from the trust.

I would advise this is something that needs to be addressed immediately.

[Miller11]

6 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

I also have not received any emails or newsletters from the trust.

I would advise this is something that needs to be addressed immediately.

Completely agree and apologise. Please could you send me a DM on here (same @Mattyblue) and I’ll ensure you get them in the interim while we are sorting out our IT infrastructure and database. We’ve got a newsletter going out in the next couple of days.

[Mike E]

On 25/09/2023 at 13:02, Miller11 said:

Hi Mike,

I’ll try and address all your points.

Firstly, yes, John Murray has stepped down as chair of the Trust and leaves with everyone’s thanks for his work over the last 5 years. This change hadn’t been publicly announced yet and the intention was to send an appropriate email to the membership advising them of this and the necessary restructuring that goes with it.

Neither I or anyone else currently on the board were aware of your desire to remain involved. We understood you were standing down due to very understandable constraints on your time due to a growing family. For clarity, being a co-opted board member is not much different to being an elected one. There’d still be an expectation to attend meetings and the same sanctions around not doing so would apply as outlined in our rules. We currently have no need for any co-opted members as our board is not at capacity. Co-option is a way to bring expertise to the board outside an election period rather than a watered down version of a board member. 

You were removed from the WhatsApp group after the AGM along with others who were standing down. It’s not really an approved comms channel for discussing important matters, it’s a WhatsApp group. This seemed logical. I’m sorry if you feel it was bitchy.

All members who stood down were thanked for their efforts at the AGM by our then chair. Any conversations you had with him regarding heritage and remaining involved were not relayed to anyone else.

You’ve highlighted one of our biggest recent issues. Evidently our internal and external communications need improving. The situation @Mattybluedescribes is obviously unacceptable and we’re investing in our infrastructure to eliminate issue like his going forward. There’s a number of issues we need to get right to ensure we continue with the progress made in the last 12 months.

Hope that clears things up a bit?

 

Understandable, I think it’s a case of crossed wires and misunderstanding, so thank you for the reply 🙂

I do feel that JM was keen as mustard as recently as the Girona game, so it did appear very out of the blue to hear via mutuals that he’s no longer Chair.

Hope all is well and hopefully WATR carries on its progress.

I remain an interested and opinionated member!

#WaggottOut

re: ticketing, for my views just refer to the original of our wonderful Marketing Prospectus 😅

Edited September 26, 2023 by Mike E

[davulsukur]

On 25/09/2023 at 21:09, Miller11 said:

Mike Graham will be acting as interim chair until we have the chance to elect a replacement. This will either be at an EGM or our next AGM and the usual election process will apply.

It’s not a partnership, but our recent Memorandum of Understanding states that we will have regular dialogue. A link to the document is below to give you an idea of the scope of it.

https://mcusercontent.com/f646174da39488e19ed1200d3/files/59d9f2c7-e9a3-1c28-afc4-cc20fef81840/Rovers_Trust_Memorandum_of_Understanding.pdf
 

We will be canvassing members for their ideas/opinions/questions for our next meeting over the coming weeks. Some areas definitely in the agenda will be:

- Ticketing

It won’t be long until season tickets planning starts happening internally, so this is high on our agenda. We have of course discussed this previously but recent events (the looming disastrous attendance v Cardiff, our efforts for the Girona friendly, feedback from lapsed season ticket holders, comparisons with other clubs) will all allow us to approach it in a structured and evidenced way.

 

-  The current state of play regarding finances

Articles 2.d and 2.f of the MOU outline we can discuss current finances and ask questions regarding the ownership of Rovers. There is scope for us to push for answers beyond “The owners are fully committed”, and while we won’t necessarily get a picture of what is happening in India, we will be able to discuss the impact any issues are having on the financing of the club and highlight any concerns with the way we are being run.

 

We are awaiting and preparing for our first meeting since the MOU was signed, so it’s difficult to pre-empt any outcomes at the moment, but it should be the start of better dialogue. 

 

 

Really glad to see this is being asked and I really hope you get some better answers than a standard brush off.

Apologies, when is the meeting?

[Miller11]

4 hours ago, davulsukur said:

Really glad to see this is being asked and I really hope you get some better answers than a standard brush off.

Apologies, when is the meeting?

31st October, which while not as soon as I’d like does give us plenty of time to prepare, and canvas member opinions.

I think the highlighted point is becoming more pertinent by the day and we will endeavour to get full and open answers, even if they aren’t necessarily what anyone wants to hear.

[rigger]

The first question should be : How much money was saved by shutting the Blackburn end for the Cardiff game ? The club reps should surely have the figures to hand, because they must know, that question will be asked.

[Mattyblue]

550 less Rovers fans for a third round tie than the first.

So was not opening a couple of bogs and concession stands worth it?

[MarkBRFC]

14 hours ago, Miller11 said:

31st October, which while not as soon as I’d like does give us plenty of time to prepare, and canvas member opinions.

I think the highlighted point is becoming more pertinent by the day and we will endeavour to get full and open answers, even if they aren’t necessarily what anyone wants to hear.

This might clash with the Chelsea game so be prepared for a postponement.

I also have never received any correspondence from the Trust despite being signed up since pretty much the beginning.

Edited September 28, 2023 by MarkBRFC

[rigger]

5 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

This might clash with the Chelsea game so be prepared for a postponement.

I also have never received any correspondence from the Trust despite being signed up since pretty much the beginning.

Perhaps the meeting could be held on the coach, going to the game. 

Edited September 28, 2023 by rigger

[Miller11]

24 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

This might clash with the Chelsea game so be prepared for a postponement.

I also have never received any correspondence from the Trust despite being signed up since pretty much the beginning.

Yeah, we probably should’ve realised there was a potential clash… the club definitely should have.

If you can DM me your details I’ll get it sorted.

[tomphil]

19 hours ago, rigger said:

The first question should be : How much money was saved by shutting the Blackburn end for the Cardiff game ? The club reps should surely have the figures to hand, because they must know, that question will be asked.

Would you believe the answer they'd trot out ?

I wouldn't once the spin doctor has been on it, only real things they would save money on is stewards.  

[rigger]

1 hour ago, tomphil said:

Would you believe the answer they'd trot out ?

I wouldn't once the spin doctor has been on it, only real things they would save money on is stewards.  

At least if they give out the figures they are justifying their actions by. They could then be picked apart.

[RoversClitheroe]

On 28/09/2023 at 12:46, Miller11 said:

Yeah, we probably should’ve realised there was a potential clash… the club definitely should have.

If you can DM me your details I’ll get it sorted.

This is a worry in my eyes, if everyone needs a DM to reconnect with the trust.

[Miller11]

1 hour ago, RoversClitheroe said:

This is a worry in my eyes, if everyone needs a DM to reconnect with the trust.

We’ve had some people not receiving emails. Our new system will prevent this occurring in the future. The majority of members receive them fine, a few have raised the issue on here and I’ve took their details to make sure they get added rather than ask them to go through the contact us page of the website.

[philipl]

The impression I am getting is that it isn't just the tiny vocal minority but the whole fan base now has zero confidence in SWAG.

The last six months have been an object lesson in how not to communicate with your customers.

He has not only misjudged how and when to speak but has become a laughing stock meme when he has to the extent JDT made the bus a running joke for at least a couple of months.

His inability to communicate reasons for decisions and then produce risible unconvincing rationales when he attempts have destroyed his credibility. 

Marketing to the fans is a case study in failure.

Every CEO always has a massive backwards management job with the shareholders but the total absence of the occasional cuddly word for SWAG from Madam throughout his how many years -7? suggests he is failing in that direction also to the enormous detriment of the club.

I know how difficult it is to tell someone they are failing to their face but I think it needs doing on 31 October. 

Edited September 29, 2023 by philipl

[glen9mullan]

2 hours ago, philipl said:

The impression I am getting is that it isn't just the tiny vocal minority but the whole fan base now has zero confidence in SWAG.

The last six months have been an object lesson in how not to communicate with your customers.

He has not only misjudged how and when to speak but has become a laughing stock meme when he has to the extent JDT made the bus a running joke for at least a couple of months.

His inability to communicate reasons for decisions and then produce risible unconvincing rationales when he attempts have destroyed his credibility. 

Marketing to the fans is a case study in failure.

Every CEO always has a massive backwards management job with the shareholders but the total absence of the occasional cuddly word for SWAG from Madam throughout his how many years -7? suggests he is failing in that direction also to the enormous detriment of the club.

I know how difficult it is to tell someone they are failing to their face but I think it needs doing on 31 October. 

Be before then

[RoversClitheroe]

13 hours ago, glen9mullan said:

Be before then

Elaborate? I'm intrigued 

[lraC]

13 hours ago, glen9mullan said:

Be before then

Go for it Glen.

I know you won’t hold back, so even showing him the latest farce with the real cost of closing the Blackburn end, should provoke an interesting debate.

Based on the two replies pasted on here, his estimate of the crowd dropped by 2,000 roughy in the space of 24 hours.  No one at present knows what the saving was, but assuming a minimum drop off of 2,000 fans, it has surely cost money overall, not to mention the bad feeling it aroused. 

[Upside Down]

Loss of 2000 fans? s
Surely couldn't be less than £13-15k.

Cost of opening the Blackburn End?

Priceless.