|
Post by johnmalyckyj on Mar 19, 2018 21:25:59 GMT
Surprised if this was a planned appointment that the news article on the main didn't detail his responsibilities and SHs responsibilities. Easy thing if there is a plan behind the appointment It was finalised a couple of weeks ago, before SH knew anything about it. Mr Turner was behind the appointment.(according to the corridors etc etc) Evidence please?
|
|
|
Post by gregsy on Mar 19, 2018 21:28:05 GMT
|
|
|
New CEO
Mar 19, 2018 21:29:26 GMT
via mobile
Post by LJG on Mar 19, 2018 21:29:26 GMT
So I understand? Was his response to another poster stating we didn’t have a pot to p£££ in and a third party had to bail us out and pay the players! Didn't say any such thing. I said the club itself hasn't got two half pennies to rub together, never said the family don't have money, and the third party was another input of funds from the family as there were insufficient funds to pay the players. Several outlays that had not been budgeted for had depleted the available funds ( according to the corridors etc etc ) Since this new CEO is an appointment to the club do you maintain that narrative?
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Mar 19, 2018 21:33:37 GMT
Pathetic as I view the board should be keeping the 8‰ informed. On this occasion what is contentious about detailing the new CEO duties, the Al Qs are apparently very good business people so they must have brought him in with a job description? To give them carte blanche as they are majority shareholders is to me pathetic, sorry if that is an offensive view. I agree though that stance under NH would also have been pathetic Well you've lost me there. I am not sure that four months before he starts I need a job description of the CEO, I've been a shareholder since 2002 and no-one has ever sent a job description of any employee to us in that period and why would they? We have a Board to run the operational side of the Football Club and part of their job is to recruit people to enable the playing side of the operation to get on with it. It is only a few years ago that people were complaining (me included) that innocent people were made redundant following the relegation out of the Football League. Now the off-field operation is expanded to help the evolution process and people want to complain about that. Regards John Malyckyj I don’t think people are complaining John, but just want this new persons role clarified so we all understand. Especially given the cost of having 2 chiefs when we are losing money hand over fist every year. Hamer is on a 6 figure salary as chairman. Starnes will be on a 6 figure salary as CEO and in terms of size of the company that is BRFC it is vastly similar roles. If we had a turnover of 50 million, with a new stadium and playing top 10 championship football I could understand it. But we aren’t even close to that and we don’t really need it before we get all of the above. In football the chairman is usually the owner or majority shareholder with a CEO appointment underneath. Perhaps Hamers time is up and this will be a new man to take over?
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Mar 19, 2018 21:34:40 GMT
I honestly, honestly wouldn't be surprised if Gasincider is a "Flat Earther". He's so utterly obsessed with needing to "know" things that others don't it's making this forum almost unbearable. Cringeworthy isn't the word. For starters, having a username that in itself suggests that you are party to information that others are not is sad enough. Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that perhaps he once did. However, it's clear now that a lot of information stays "in-house"; there are far fewer leaks. It comes across that this really winds Gas "incider" up and he can't help but throw regular tantrums and troll others. I would put my mortgage on him being a "Flat Earther" and someone who loves conspiracy theories as it would give him the ability to feel he "knows something" that others don't. And I thought you were a grown up. You clearly underestimated RD!!
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Mar 19, 2018 21:37:37 GMT
It was finalised a couple of weeks ago, before SH knew anything about it. Mr Turner was behind the appointment.(according to the corridors etc etc) Evidence please? Let you know next home game.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 19, 2018 21:39:12 GMT
Didn't say any such thing. I said the club itself hasn't got two half pennies to rub together, never said the family don't have money, and the third party was another input of funds from the family as there were insufficient funds to pay the players. Several outlays that had not been budgeted for had depleted the available funds ( according to the corridors etc etc ) Since this new CEO is an appointment to the club do you maintain that narrative? Just read what he's posted, although the fact we're losing £2/3m per season really tells it's own story, if he wasn't for the ALQ meeting that shortfall then we'd go bust. The simple fact is we can only meet the new CEO's salary if the ALQ's pay it themselves, it's a strange business model.
|
|
|
New CEO
Mar 19, 2018 21:47:15 GMT
via mobile
Post by LJG on Mar 19, 2018 21:47:15 GMT
Since this new CEO is an appointment to the club do you maintain that narrative? Just read what he's posted, although the fact we're losing £2/3m per season really tells it's own story, if he wasn't for the ALQ meeting that shortfall then we'd go bust. The simple fact is we can only meet the new CEO's salary if the ALQ's pay it themselves, it's a strange business model. I've read it. It's unclear because it's duplicitous. I've asked a simple question 4 times without response. If the answer is so obvious let him respond with the obvious answer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2018 22:10:55 GMT
When we were relegated people were all over the forums saying we needed a CEO to run the club properly and we still had a chairman then. Now we have a CEO at long last, what’s the problem? Our board was very thin on numbers before we bought in a Commercial Director and now CEO. I’d say it looks a pretty strong board now who I don’t imagine signed up just to tart up some portaloos.
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Mar 19, 2018 22:11:17 GMT
Getting the gas in the North Sea involved spending a lot of money on setting up a proper company, finding investors, building temporary infrastructures, being willing to wait a while until it finds something, and propping the whole lot up on stilts until it showed a return.
Getting the gas into the Championship seems to be a similar journey.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 19, 2018 22:19:04 GMT
When we were relegated people were all over the forums saying we needed a CEO to run the club properly and we still had a chairman then. Now we have a CEO at long last, what’s the problem? Our board was very thin on numbers before we bought in a Commercial Director and now CEO. I’d say it looks a pretty strong board now who I don’t imagine signed up just to tart up some portaloos. Until somebody comes up with a new stadium plan then they ain't got much else to work on?
|
|
|
New CEO
Mar 19, 2018 22:39:14 GMT
via mobile
Post by gasforeverman on Mar 19, 2018 22:39:14 GMT
The Ceo will need an office. Another office gate on the horizon :-)
|
|
|
New CEO
Mar 19, 2018 22:44:40 GMT
via mobile
Post by gashead1981 on Mar 19, 2018 22:44:40 GMT
When we were relegated people were all over the forums saying we needed a CEO to run the club properly and we still had a chairman then. Now we have a CEO at long last, what’s the problem? Our board was very thin on numbers before we bought in a Commercial Director and now CEO. I’d say it looks a pretty strong board now who I don’t imagine signed up just to tart up some portaloos. Difference was Higgs was a major shareholder and chairman who had made bad decision after bad decision, had taken us out of the league as a result of his decisions and was a builder by trade. We also couldn’t afford a CEO, we couldn’t afford a DOF either. Hamer is a football man and is a CEO in effect. And we still can’t afford it either!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2018 1:49:15 GMT
And perhaps that's exactly why you appoint a CEO? To deliver the objectives? Leaving the chairman to do as he should, represent all stakeholder / shareholders. It's a classic organisational structure. I really don't understand the negative comments.... Oldie is quite right that this is a classical organisation structure. Every company in the FTSE 100 will have something recognisable to this and undoubtedly every FTSE 250 company as well but there isn't a Company in the FTSE 250 with a £4.5m turnover. So I shall challenge Oldie to provide any evidence of a £4.5M turnover company emoploying a full time chairman and ceo at a rumoured cost of £200k plus. Which would at least backup our approach Fair shout. Many "Tightly Held" Incorpotated companies do away with the Chairmanship as there are a very limited number of shareholders, or the leading shareholder chairs meetings. However if the company is part of a grouping, or conglomerate, then often a chair is appointed. Either way this would be a shareholder led decision. In our case the shareholders have decided to underwrite the cost of a chairman and CEO. It's their money, they can do as they please. I don't know their logic. Perhaps they want the CEO to drive the business and be unfettered by Time constraints involving several thousand vested stakeholders? I have no idea why. But it's their shout so I really don't understand the indignation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2018 1:50:40 GMT
I honestly, honestly wouldn't be surprised if Gasincider is a "Flat Earther". He's so utterly obsessed with needing to "know" things that others don't it's making this forum almost unbearable. Cringeworthy isn't the word. For starters, having a username that in itself suggests that you are party to information that others are not is sad enough. Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that perhaps he once did. However, it's clear now that a lot of information stays "in-house"; there are far fewer leaks. It comes across that this really winds Gas "incider" up and he can't help but throw regular tantrums and troll others. I would put my mortgage on him being a "Flat Earther" and someone who loves conspiracy theories as it would give him the ability to feel he "knows something" that others don't. Hey!! I'm into a bit of conspiracy theory myself!!! The Earth isn't flat though. You can tell because the sun drops behind the horizon rather than staying in the sky and getting smaller. Actually you are wrong. The sun doesn’t move, the Earth does 😎👍
|
|
|
Post by Gasshole on Mar 20, 2018 4:35:16 GMT
Can someone post a clip of a monkey riding a tricycle, I am losing the will to live.
|
|
|
New CEO
Mar 20, 2018 6:53:42 GMT
via mobile
Post by countygroundhotel on Mar 20, 2018 6:53:42 GMT
Oldie is quite right that this is a classical organisation structure. Every company in the FTSE 100 will have something recognisable to this and undoubtedly every FTSE 250 company as well but there isn't a Company in the FTSE 250 with a £4.5m turnover. So I shall challenge Oldie to provide any evidence of a £4.5M turnover company emoploying a full time chairman and ceo at a rumoured cost of £200k plus. Which would at least backup our approach Fair shout. Many "Tightly Held" Incorpotated companies do away with the Chairmanship as there are a very limited number of shareholders, or the leading shareholder chairs meetings. However if the company is part of a grouping, or conglomerate, then often a chair is appointed. Either way this would be a shareholder led decision. In our case the shareholders have decided to underwrite the cost of a chairman and CEO. It's their money, they can do as they please. I don't know their logic. Perhaps they want the CEO to drive the business and be unfettered by Time constraints involving several thousand vested stakeholders? I have no idea why. But it's their shout so I really don't understand the indignation. Appreciate the reply which backs up the point that I don't believe this is a normal structure for a company the size of Bristol Rovers
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Mar 20, 2018 7:05:30 GMT
Fair shout. Many "Tightly Held" Incorpotated companies do away with the Chairmanship as there are a very limited number of shareholders, or the leading shareholder chairs meetings. However if the company is part of a grouping, or conglomerate, then often a chair is appointed. Either way this would be a shareholder led decision. In our case the shareholders have decided to underwrite the cost of a chairman and CEO. It's their money, they can do as they please. I don't know their logic. Perhaps they want the CEO to drive the business and be unfettered by Time constraints involving several thousand vested stakeholders? I have no idea why. But it's their shout so I really don't understand the indignation. Appreciate the reply which backs up the point that I don't believe this is a normal structure for a company the size of Bristol Rovers We are a very small Cog on the rump of the mighty AJIB, owners of BRFC and as such need a CEO to fit into their large Structure
|
|
|
Post by pucklegas on Mar 20, 2018 7:15:47 GMT
This post needs some “Big jock” humour😂
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Mar 20, 2018 7:17:11 GMT
Hey!! I'm into a bit of conspiracy theory myself!!! The Earth isn't flat though. You can tell because the sun drops behind the horizon rather than staying in the sky and getting smaller. Actually you are wrong. The sun doesn’t move, the Earth does 😎👍 Heard that said to me a few times, but thought it was to do with something else. How wrong could I be!! 😀
|
|