WATR (The Rovers Trust)

[Miller11]

13 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Yes Miller we are upset because we fielded a weak team in a friendly.

Have a read of the transfer thread. Rumours yes, but the jist being Gallagher following Sammie out the door and the owners preparing their exit.

 

Like I said, triggered by. Looks increasingly like Szmodics and Gallagher are off. One was inevitable, one has been widely called for. What it has done is highlight the threadbare nature of the squad and lack of required quality.

The second I get wind of the last bit being true I’ll do everything in my power to expedite their exit.

 

13 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

 

What I am after is a warm fuzzy feeling from WATR that there is a line and we are getting very close to it, where it stops being about being a ‘critical friend’ and marketing prospectuses and the like and if you have a plan for when you are looking to pivot to campaign mode to help save this football club.

 

To reiterate, 

The second they become unwilling or unable to fund us there is nothing positive about their ownership of Rovers.

Again, big couple or three weeks coming up.

You won’t see a single mention of any marketing prospectus in any of our minutes from the last 12 months. You’ll see a lot of talk about fan engagement and consultation, shadow board formation, regulatory expectations, and calls for clarity and improvement.

 

13 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

‘Exert influence’. You’ve no contact with the owners and Waggott admits he just does what he’s told. 
 

How do you propose to exert influence, besides calling for the owners to go?

The scope of our MOU allows us to provide feedback on certain areas, lately it has mostly been around ticket pricing and fan engagement. The fan led review, which we contributed heavily to, outlines a lot of the expectation on clubs to consult with supporters that is already being phased in at EFL level.

 

[Forever Blue]

1 minute ago, Miller11 said:

Like I said, triggered by. Looks increasingly like Szmodics and Gallagher are off. One was inevitable, one has been widely called for. What it has done is highlight the threadbare nature of the squad and lack of required quality.

The second I get wind of the last bit being true I’ll do everything in my power to expedite their exit.

 

To reiterate, 

The second they become unwilling or unable to fund us there is nothing positive about their ownership of Rovers.

Again, big couple or three weeks coming up.

You won’t see a single mention of any marketing prospectus in any of our minutes from the last 12 months. You’ll see a lot of talk about fan engagement and consultation, shadow board formation, regulatory expectations, and calls for clarity and improvement.

 

The scope of our MOU allows us to provide feedback on certain areas, lately it has mostly been around ticket pricing and fan engagement. The fan led review, which we contributed heavily to, outlines a lot of the expectation on clubs to consult with supporters that is already being phased in at EFL level.

 

So to clarify, as it stands, WATR are not calling for Venkys to sell up?

[Miller11]

1 minute ago, Forever Blue said:

So to clarify, as it stands, WATR are not calling for Venkys to sell up?

To clarify, no we are not. However, that shouldn’t be taken as an endorsement of the way the club is being run. Nor should it be presumed we wouldn’t welcome new owners.

[Forever Blue]

Just now, Miller11 said:

To clarify, no we are not. However, that shouldn’t be taken as an endorsement of the way the club is being run. Nor should it be presumed we wouldn’t welcome new owners.

If you’re not calling for them to sell up you are endorsing their ownership whether you care to admit or not.

[Mattyblue]

I used the prospectus as an example, an example of a very worthwhile endeavour, just like fan engagement, ticket pricing initiatives and all the rest of it.

But those are for ‘simpler’ times for when a club just needs a bit of TLC and a steer from passionate volunteers  - we have gone beyond that and right now surely, surely it’s time to get in to SOS or should I say Save Our Club mode?

What on earth are you waiting for?

Edited July 27 by Mattyblue

[Miller11]

7 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

If you’re not calling for them to sell up you are endorsing their ownership whether you care to admit or not.

 

5 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

I used the prospectus as an example, an example of a very worthwhile endeavour, just like fan engagement, ticket pricing initiatives and all the rest of it.

But those are for ‘simpler’ times for when a club just needs a bit of TLC and a steer from passionate volunteers  - we have gone beyond that and right now surely, surely it’s time to get in to SOS or should I say Save Our Club mode?

What on earth are you waiting for?

We are a membership organisation. For us to take a public stance like that and effectively set back the progress we have made towards aligning with the Fan Led Review and tear up the MOU we worked extremely hard to have implemented, we’d need a very definite mandate from our membership. 

At present we have no widespread calls from our members to radically alter our approach. If there comes a point our board believe this to be the best course of action we’d have to set the wheels in motion for some sort of consultation with our members. I’m sure there will be some discussion on our future direction pretty soon after August 21st.

[Mattyblue]

I would bloody well hope so, because MOUs and the like mean the square route of feck all when the club has disappeared down the plug hole.

If I can be frank you seem to have got lost in the thick forest of football governance, MOUs, ‘fan led reviews’ and the like and forgotten what you exist for and was indeed set up for back in the first dark age of this ownership  - to ensure the survival of Blackburn Rovers.

Edited July 27 by Mattyblue

[Miller11]

Just now, Mattyblue said:

I hope so, because MOUs and the like mean the square route of feck all when the club has disappeared down the plug hole.

If I can be frank you seem to have got lost in the forest of football governance, reviews and the like and forgotten what you exist for and was indeed set up for back in the first dark age of this ownership  - to ensure the survival of Blackburn Rovers.

At various points throughout its inception Rovers Trust/We Are The Rovers has taken a completely hostile stance against the owners. From looking to buy some/all of the shares, to backing other potential investors, to calling for them to sell, to shouting Venky’s Out into the void. None of which achieved anything.

From a completely personal point of view, I’ve seen loads of instances over the years, Kean days, Coyle days, now, where individuals call for other groups or individuals to protest on their behalf. Lots of people talk about it but won’t “get their hands dirty”.

Similarly, we have a lot of people telling us what we ought to be doing who don’t want to commit a tenner a year (not saying you fall into this category by the way).

In terms of long term survival of Rovers, or any club, I’d argue that actions such as having your ground declared an ACV, and the soon to be legislation set out in the MOU around giving fans a greater say in the running of their club is pretty key.

[wilsdenrover]

@Miller11

Does the board of We Are The Rovers believe your aims are achievable with Venky’s as the club’s owners?:

[Mattyblue]

Ok, I’ll leave it there, Miller, as we’ll end up going round in circles.

All I would say is hopefully you will pivot very quickly into campaign mode (which was my original point) post an August 20th that actually led to something, as it doesn’t sound like you will be changing course otherwise.

[Miller11]

2 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

@Miller11

Does the board of We Are The Rovers believe your aims are achievable with Venky’s as the club’s owners?:

I believe we were making positive steps on points 1 and 3, but obviously a massive spanner has been thrown in the works lately.
We have to try.

I’m only speaking for myself here and not the board, but in answer to your question…

If they are providing additional funding to us, yes.

If they expect the club to be entirely self funding, no.

[K-Hod]

That absolute throbber that’s on the board and thinks Venky’s are the best owners in football is probably holding you back tbh.

What a complete empty head he is.

[Herbie6590]

@Miller11 Duncan - how many paid up members does WATR have, what is the trend ?

If your mandate is dictated only by extant members (understandably in fairness), but membership isn’t growing significantly/quickly - (especially in current circumstances) perhaps the only way to grow your membership *is* to change your stance? 
 

This is akin to a political party - do you exist to serve only your current members or do you endorse/adopt policies that are more popular - albeit not with your current membership? 🤷‍♂️

[wilsdenrover]

12 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

I believe we were making positive steps on points 1 and 3, but obviously a massive spanner has been thrown in the works lately.
We have to try.

I’m only speaking for myself here and not the board, but in answer to your question…

If they are providing additional funding to us, yes.

If they expect the club to be entirely self funding, no.

Thank you for the reply.

I believe your aims need much more than just additional funding (and I’m sure you do too)

 

[Miller11]

5 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

@Miller11 Duncan - how many paid up members does WATR have, what is the trend ?

If your mandate is dictated only by extant members (understandably in fairness), but membership isn’t growing significantly/quickly - (especially in current circumstances) perhaps the only way to grow your membership *is* to change your stance? 
 

This is akin to a political party - do you exist to serve only your current members or do you endorse/adopt policies that are more popular - albeit not with your current membership? 🤷‍♂️

I don’t have an exact number, but it’s in the 400’s up by about 25% in the last year.

You are absolutely right. We can spike membership with  a critical statement at an appropriate time, I’ve seen it happen plenty of times in the past. However that hasn’t been without its issues.

[wilsdenrover]

Just now, Miller11 said:

I don’t have an exact number, but it’s in the 400’s up by about 25% in the last year.

You are absolutely right. We can spike membership with  a critical statement at an appropriate time, I’ve seen it happen plenty of times in the past. However that hasn’t been without its issues.

Have you considered having a militant wing?  😁

[OldEwoodBlue]

48 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

 

 and tear up the MOU we worked extremely hard to have implemented, 

I reckon Hulk Hogan would tear it up live streaming in exchange for likes.

Just ask him.

"Think Big"

[Forever Blue]

3 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Have you considered having a militant wing?  😁

 BLO

Blackburn Panthers

[Herbie6590]

12 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Have you considered having a militant wing?  😁

We Are The Ravers 

[BigHoz]

So these fans meetings with waggot and co are pretty useless then? No hard questions just friends seeing eye to eye having some cakes and coffee? 

[Miller11]

21 minutes ago, BigHoz said:

So these fans meetings with waggot and co are pretty useless then? No hard questions just friends seeing eye to eye having some cakes and coffee? 

Nope.

What would an example of a hard question be you’d like asked?

[Mike E]

3 hours ago, Miller11 said:

At various points throughout its inception Rovers Trust/We Are The Rovers has taken a completely hostile stance against the owners. From looking to buy some/all of the shares, to backing other potential investors, to calling for them to sell, to shouting Venky’s Out into the void. None of which achieved anything.

From a completely personal point of view, I’ve seen loads of instances over the years, Kean days, Coyle days, now, where individuals call for other groups or individuals to protest on their behalf. Lots of people talk about it but won’t “get their hands dirty”.

Similarly, we have a lot of people telling us what we ought to be doing who don’t want to commit a tenner a year (not saying you fall into this category by the way).

In terms of long term survival of Rovers, or any club, I’d argue that actions such as having your ground declared an ACV, and the soon to be legislation set out in the MOU around giving fans a greater say in the running of their club is pretty key.

People need to read this bit in particular, take a good look in the mirror and ask themselves this:

Before I criticise WATR or BRAG or similar groups, have I given up free time for the cause? Have I turned down extra work shifts or missed some important family events because I wanted to focus on doing something (for NO personal benefit) to help my club?

Only if the answer is an honest YES do you get to throw any shade their way.

I have my own criticisms of WATR which I’ve discussed with them, but my message to naysayers is if you want them to take a certain stance then put your money (less than £1/month) where your bollocks are. Put up or stfu.

[RoversClitheroe]

Question @Miller11 because as a member of 2-3 years I don't believe I have ever once had a questionnaire asking me on my views of the ownership? 

So I have no clue what mandate form the membership we're actually running off? 

Which in reality is the worst investment most of us could be making.

[MarkBRFC]

9 hours ago, K-Hod said:

That absolute throbber that’s on the board and thinks Venky’s are the best owners in football is probably holding you back tbh.

What a complete empty head he is.

As soon as I saw he had been appointed to the board I did wonder if supporting the Rovers trust was for me anymore, a man completely detached from reality to the situation.

[wilsdenrover]

12 hours ago, Mike E said:

People need to read this bit in particular, take a good look in the mirror and ask themselves this:

Before I criticise WATR or BRAG or similar groups, have I given up free time for the cause? Have I turned down extra work shifts or missed some important family events because I wanted to focus on doing something (for NO personal benefit) to help my club?

Only if the answer is an honest YES do you get to throw any shade their way.

I have my own criticisms of WATR which I’ve discussed with them, but my message to naysayers is if you want them to take a certain stance then put your money (less than £1/month) where your bollocks are. Put up or stfu.

I’d like to think WATR would welcome views from fans whether or not they’ve taken/are taking action themselves.

I think the most important thing is that any criticism is (a) constructive (b) not personal.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 28 by wilsdenrover