[Archived] Has a date been agreed for supporters consultation meeting

[Parsonblue]

6 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

Sounds to me like you've accepted the venkys and making do. People like you need to take a stand instead of just passing the buck and belittling the ones trying to do something to rid us of this cancer at the heart of our club.

They've broken you down.

Not in the least.  It is what it is.  They will leave when the it suits them and not before.  If everyone walked away it would give them the perfect excuse to shut up shop and close the whole operation down.  I don't believe I'm belittling anyone, merely stating that in my experience the way in which you approach these meetings can often determine the outcomes.  If the club officials know that the meetings will be hostile in terms of verbal exchanges then will become ultra defensive with regard to their replies.  The first two meetings have been sixty minutes or so of verbal jousting with little substance forthcoming.  It's clear that as far as the authorities are concerned our owners have broken no rules which would lead to them being forced to sell.  Looking at the way in which Manchester City are expanding their ownership of clubs around the globe it's clear that football is moving into era where the ownership of clubs is becoming part and parcel of normal business portfolio's.  Venky's have clearly found a way in which owing Blackburn Rovers works from them in some business sense.  When it doesn't I have no doubt they will sell - in all probability to another company who want a football club as part of their portfolio.

[den]

1 hour ago, Parsonblue said:

What I don't support den is the way in which some believe that being verbally abusive to someone is a way of getting answers to questions, particularly when the people who are the only ones who have the real answers are sitting on the other side of the world without any intention of attending such meetings.  The two meetings thus far have provided very little in terms of moving forward.

Fans are angry Parson and I agree with you that abuse from either side isn't helpful, but I did ask you what abuse are you talking about? I also asked whether you support the EFL initiative.

[Mike E]

6 hours ago, Parsonblue said:

Not in the least.  It is what it is.  They will leave when the it suits them and not before.  If everyone walked away it would give them the perfect excuse to shut up shop and close the whole operation down.  I don't believe I'm belittling anyone, merely stating that in my experience the way in which you approach these meetings can often determine the outcomes.  If the club officials know that the meetings will be hostile in terms of verbal exchanges then will become ultra defensive with regard to their replies.  The first two meetings have been sixty minutes or so of verbal jousting with little substance forthcoming.  It's clear that as far as the authorities are concerned our owners have broken no rules which would lead to them being forced to sell.  Looking at the way in which Manchester City are expanding their ownership of clubs around the globe it's clear that football is moving into era where the ownership of clubs is becoming part and parcel of normal business portfolio's.  Venky's have clearly found a way in which owing Blackburn Rovers works from them in some business sense.  When it doesn't I have no doubt they will sell - in all probability to another company who want a football club as part of their portfolio.

So surely the aim is to somehow make it stop suiting them?

I think what you call abuse is simply good questioning. Let's not forget that Mr. Coar saw fit to threaten a fan with court action, which is FAR more 'abusive' than anything that's been aimed the other way in these meetings imo.

Personally, the harder the questions are to answer, the better. John Williams answered some VERY difficult questions with good grace. When asked about Paul Ince, he responded along the lines of 'We messed up that decision and set about putting it right as soon as possible.'

What bet we'd get that kind of honest answer when Cheston is asked about Coyle? Clue: Fat or no.

Until these people can answer questions honestly, they will face supporter wrath.

[bob fleming]

Is Suhail going? Or is he already booked up on the date in question? 

Seeing how this guy is the link between Ewood and the Rao family he really needs to be there IMO for the meeting to have any chance of being in anyway meaningful. Perhaps he could name a date convenient to him with that in mind? 

Is it going out Live this time? I'm hoping it could be filmed and put on YouTube or such like - in the interests of openness so the wider fan base will be able to see just how well the club is being run from the UK. Surely that would be far more preferable than what was printed / edited out last time. That was very strange.

[JHRover]

As I've said in the past, these meetings are only being held because the FA has introduced some rules compelling clubs to do it.

Rovers are paying lip service to the process by sending along Rob Coar and the manager neither of whom should be at the meeting. It should be owners/representatives/directors. They appear to now be treating Coar as a director even though he himself admitted he does naff all, presumably so they can plonk him on the top table for these meetings and satisfy the regulations.

Unless there is a guarantee in advance that Pasha or another representative of the owners is going to be in attendance answering questions then the meeting should be boycotted with a joint statement published and posted to the cretins at Wembley explaining why. Its a waste of time for all concerned until those running the club start taking it seriously.

The fiasco with no published minutes, edited recordings for those not invited and pre-prepared questions just makes even more of a mockery of the whole thing.

[den]

15 minutes ago, JHRover said:

As I've said in the past, these meetings are only being held because the FA has introduced some rules compelling clubs to do it.

Rovers are paying lip service to the process by sending along Rob Coar and the manager neither of whom should be at the meeting. It should be owners/representatives/directors. They appear to now be treating Coar as a director even though he himself admitted he does naff all, presumably so they can plonk him on the top table for these meetings and satisfy the regulations.

Unless there is a guarantee in advance that Pasha or another representative of the owners is going to be in attendance answering questions then the meeting should be boycotted with a joint statement published and posted to the cretins at Wembley explaining why. Its a waste of time for all concerned until those running the club start taking it seriously.

The fiasco with no published minutes, edited recordings for those not invited and pre-prepared questions just makes even more of a mockery of the whole thing.

It's an EFL initiative and they're based on the docks at Preston!

[Parsonblue]

1 hour ago, MGPensioner said:

Yes I thought afterwards that seemed like it was you.

It was me indeed. Good to meet you PB 

We can apply pressure via SD and FSF to make them comply. We have to keep complaining as loudly as possible that they are failing to meet the requirements. The process is quite new and can only gain stature.

As long as we keep pressure anyway we possibly can.

Good to meet you too.  Do we know what happens at other clubs?  How are Coventry, Charlton and Blackpool in particular handling these meetings?  It's an EFL initiative but how closely do they monitor these meetings or is it simply a tick box exercise on their part to pay lip service to fan consultation?  

[chaddyrovers]

The EFL and FA cannot force any owners or.directors or reps of the owners attend these meetings. 

Pasha or Venkys wont attend. 

It will be Cheston, Slivester and Coar plus Mowbray will attend

The meeting.wont achieve anything from the directors and Mowbray will impress

[blueboy3333]

8 hours ago, Parsonblue said:

It's an EFL initiative but how closely do they monitor these meetings or is it simply a tick box exercise on their part to pay lip service to fan consultation?  

It's a tick-box exercise by the club to fulfil a tick-box exercise by the EFL, in which long-standing supporters of the club can be threatened with legal action by members of the club's  boardroom. 

 

[only2garners]

14 hours ago, den said:

It's an EFL initiative and they're based on the docks at Preston!

They have moved Den, albeit only to the old Halifax building on Fishergate Hill!

[Gav]

On 8/31/2017 at 06:57, blueboy3333 said:

It's a tick-box exercise by the club to fulfil a tick-box exercise by the EFL, in which long-standing supporters of the club can be threatened with legal action by members of the club's  boardroom. 

 

Hindsights a wonderful thing as we all know, and I'm not criticizing anyone here other than our ex-chairman, but I think it was Paul who was threatened? He should have made a bigger deal about it, gone to the local press, national press, EFL, to expose what a sham that meeting and subsequent meetings have been, and will continue to be under the current regime.

For the ex-chairman to threaten a fan in this forum is an absolute disgrace, bully boy tactics that backfired, from someone who has presided over the destruction of this great football and Paul was right, could he look into Jack Walkers eyes now and say you did his best? I doubt that very much, just another yes man feathering his own nest.

I said from the outset that these meetings are a complete sham, if anything i'm even more convinced now after the shenanigans thats taken place in them so far. Surely the time is fast approaching when the supporters groups get together and put out a statement in the press to say until we have owner representation in the meetings we will be boycotting them? because all they're achieving at the moment is helping the football club comply with EFL rules.

 

[JHRover]

1 hour ago, Gav said:

Hindsights a wonderful thing as we all know, and I'm not criticizing anyone here other than our ex-chairman, but I think it was Paul who was threatened? He should have made a bigger deal about it, gone to the local press, national press, EFL, to expose what a sham that meeting and subsequent meetings have been, and will continue to be under the current regime.

For the ex-chairman to threaten a fan in this forum is an absolute disgrace, bully boy tactics that backfired, from someone who has presided over the destruction of this great football and Paul was right, could he look into Jack Walkers eyes now and say you did his best? I doubt that very much, just another yes man feathering his own nest.

I said from the outset that these meetings are a complete sham, if anything i'm even more convinced now after the shenanigans thats taken place in them so far. Surely the time is fast approaching when the supporters groups get together and put out a statement in the press to say until we have owner representation in the meetings we will be boycotting them? because all they're achieving at the moment is helping the football club comply with EFL rules.

 

Lets be fair to old Bob, he doesn't want to be at these meetings, the only reason he is there is because there's nobody else with director/owner status able or willing to go following the boardroom purge.

He's had a cushy little number these last few years whilst not really having to do anything, especially not communicating or mixing with the lowly supporters. To be plonked onto the top table at a supporter consultation meeting with Mike Cheston must have been a nightmare situation for him. Hardly surprising that his frustration got the better of him and he ended up threatening people.

Football would be so much better if it wasn't for irritating supporters wanting answers about their club. If only old Bob could continue with the prawn sandwich matchday experience without having to lower himself to the commoners level.

Chaddy mentioned a while ago that he believed that Coar had been elevated to director status in recent months and that he might be doing some sort of work at the club in the absence of anyone else. I think its more likely they're now calling him a director as it means his presence at these meetings ticks all the boxes without raising suspicion at the league and without the need for someone else to be brought along.

Anything to keep Suhail out of the spotlight.

[lraC]

1 hour ago, Gav said:

Hindsights a wonderful thing as we all know, and I'm not criticizing anyone here other than our ex-chairman, but I think it was Paul who was threatened? He should have made a bigger deal about it, gone to the local press, national press, EFL, to expose what a sham that meeting and subsequent meetings have been, and will continue to be under the current regime.

For the ex-chairman to threaten a fan in this forum is an absolute disgrace, bully boy tactics that backfired, from someone who has presided over the destruction of this great football and Paul was right, could he look into Jack Walkers eyes now and say you did his best? I doubt that very much, just another yes man feathering his own nest.

I said from the outset that these meetings are a complete sham, if anything i'm even more convinced now after the shenanigans thats taken place in them so far. Surely the time is fast approaching when the supporters groups get together and put out a statement in the press to say until we have owner representation in the meetings we will be boycotting them? because all they're achieving at the moment is helping the football club comply with EFL rules.

 

I don't think I know Paul personally, but would he be prepared to go down the route now, of bringing it out in the open to the wider audience?

[tomphil]

36 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Lets be fair to old Bob, he doesn't want to be at these meetings, the only reason he is there is because there's nobody else with director/owner status able or willing to go following the boardroom purge.

He's had a cushy little number these last few years whilst not really having to do anything, especially not communicating or mixing with the lowly supporters. To be plonked onto the top table at a supporter consultation meeting with Mike Cheston must have been a nightmare situation for him. Hardly surprising that his frustration got the better of him and he ended up threatening people.

Football would be so much better if it wasn't for irritating supporters wanting answers about their club. If only old Bob could continue with the prawn sandwich matchday experience without having to lower himself to the commoners level.

Chaddy mentioned a while ago that he believed that Coar had been elevated to director status in recent months and that he might be doing some sort of work at the club in the absence of anyone else. I think its more likely they're now calling him a director as it means his presence at these meetings ticks all the boxes without raising suspicion at the league and without the need for someone else to be brought along.

Anything to keep Suhail out of the spotlight.

Classic Rao & partners tactic of window dressing say someone is just an adviser when he's clearly a shadow director and then fill a void when under scrutiny by fans say someone who clearly isn't a director but probably just an adviser on how to placate the authorities IS a director now.

Above all else that area of the club has been a sham since they arrived but no one brings them to book and the further down the leagues you go no one will bat an eyelid because skeleton set ups can be blamed on downscale and lack of finance and are probably acceptable at league 1 level.

[Neal]

Should be a totall boycott with a letter of no confidence presented by the fans... Unfortunately many fans are now comfortable to lap up the BS and are comfortable with their ownership. 

[perthblue02]

25 minutes ago, lraC said:

I don't think I know Paul personally, but would he be prepared to go down the route now, of bringing it out in the open to the wider audience?

Think the FA would do everything possible to stop one of their own going under oath in a court of law when possibly facing  questions relating to one of their former business partners , former employees , their compliance unit (I know don't laugh) and one of their approved most protected agents part in  the Blackburn Rovers heist. 

[JHRover]

I think some people enjoy these sort of meetings as it makes them feel important to be able to sit in the same room or at least makes them think they are being heard when they ask questions of 'directors'. Even though 99% of what comes back is nothing more than drivel and box ticking nonsense. Alongside that there will be a number of people who believe that 'anything is better than nothing' so whilst it isn't ideal at least it is something and its a rare opportunity to make Cheston and co. squirm on the spot.

Cheston's been in hiding since last season. Last summer he was a regular in the Telegraph, this summer we haven't heard a peep from him. As the most senior executive at the club he should be taken to task for last season's disaster. The most senior employee of Blackburn Rovers should have been castigated for presiding over a humiliating relegation to the 3rd tier, yet there hasn't been a word.

Whilst I've never had the honour of being invited to such meetings I've read the accounts and listened to the recordings and the only thing that has come out of it of any interest was Cheston's admission that Pasha is a real person, on the club payroll but he doesn't know his name or job title.

[Dreams of 1995]

55 minutes ago, JHRover said:

I think some people enjoy these sort of meetings as it makes them feel important to be able to sit in the same room or at least makes them think they are being heard when they ask questions of 'directors'. Even though 99% of what comes back is nothing more than drivel and box ticking nonsense. Alongside that there will be a number of people who believe that 'anything is better than nothing' so whilst it isn't ideal at least it is something and its a rare opportunity to make Cheston and co. squirm on the spot.

Cheston's been in hiding since last season. Last summer he was a regular in the Telegraph, this summer we haven't heard a peep from him. As the most senior executive at the club he should be taken to task for last season's disaster. The most senior employee of Blackburn Rovers should have been castigated for presiding over a humiliating relegation to the 3rd tier, yet there hasn't been a word.

Whilst I've never had the honour of being invited to such meetings I've read the accounts and listened to the recordings and the only thing that has come out of it of any interest was Cheston's admission that Pasha is a real person, on the club payroll but he doesn't know his name or job title.

Imagine being the finance director and having an employee on the payroll but not knowing his name or his JOB TITLE. He is literally throwing money into an unknown entity - it's the opposite of what a finance director should be doing.

Still, Venkys have changed this summer.

[Gav]

4 hours ago, JHRover said:

I think some people enjoy these sort of meetings as it makes them feel important to be able to sit in the same room or at least makes them think they are being heard when they ask questions of 'directors'. Even though 99% of what comes back is nothing more than drivel and box ticking nonsense. Alongside that there will be a number of people who believe that 'anything is better than nothing' so whilst it isn't ideal at least it is something and its a rare opportunity to make Cheston and co. squirm on the spot.

Cheston's been in hiding since last season. Last summer he was a regular in the Telegraph, this summer we haven't heard a peep from him. As the most senior executive at the club he should be taken to task for last season's disaster. The most senior employee of Blackburn Rovers should have been castigated for presiding over a humiliating relegation to the 3rd tier, yet there hasn't been a word.

Whilst I've never had the honour of being invited to such meetings I've read the accounts and listened to the recordings and the only thing that has come out of it of any interest was Cheston's admission that Pasha is a real person, on the club payroll but he doesn't know his name or job title.

Spot on JH 

[AggyBlue]

So tonight (Oct 5) is the next Supporters Consultation Meeting, anyone going?

Are Radio Lancs involved again, compering/recording the meeting?

[Mike E]

Going on behalf of Rovers Trust. I may try and report what happens on here, but no promises as I can never get a good connection at Ewood.

[mhead]

Lets hope that Cheston does not have a coughing fit tonight AND that someone gives him his P45.

Whilst representing the Trust myself I go with no hope - and definitely any malice for the 'vandalism' of the Club under control.

[Madon]

I'm going tonight on behalf of this site, I'll try my best to post any necessary updates.

[MCMC1875]

Ewood Park WMC Supporters Group sending 4 representatives. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

11 minutes ago, Madon said:

I'm going tonight on behalf of this site, I'll try my best to post any necessary updates.

Ask them do Venkys

A-Have any idea what is going on at the club beyond the spreadsheets they see 

B-Have any interest in football 

Thanks