Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2018 23:20:50 GMT
So you guess. But when Wael was meeting Macron abroad, people were jumping the gun and saying he does not like us anymore, as he was attending a champions League game. Not long after we had a 20% sell on all Macron goods. Easier for a lot to moan and say that they are doing nothing though. Just because we don't know what they are doing, does not mean that are doing nothing. That could be the case, but why employ a CEO to do nothing?? The same people say, Hani won't spend any money and he's tight. The two don't go hand in hand. It's he tight?? Or does he waste money on People to do nothing??? The bottom line is that the club structure is awful. Having a CEO who isn't actually responsible for all staff is weird. Having a CEO and a paid Chair is pretty weird, especially when they don't talk. No disrespect but do you have any experience of medium sized business? Or Boards? Fact - Hamer didn't know about Starnes being employed. Fact - Starnes works in Box 1 during the week, far away from everyone else in the stadium. Fact - Hamer and Starnes never talk to each other. Fact - Hamer got the job as he was helping AQ buy a club. Starnes got the job because he asked his friend wael if he had any work going. New Programme editor got his job as an ex work colleague of Starnes at plymouyh. None of those jobs were advertised or interviewef for. This isn't just about wasted money, it's about structure, unclear responsibilities and a very very clear lack of communication and acceptance between hamer and Starnes. Yet Wael ultimately orgsnised all this. It is causing a problem and does not help the on the field problems. Thing is a fact is something that can be proven,like rovers 1 gillingham 2. What you have listed is whats known as hearsay,look it up.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 30, 2018 23:22:30 GMT
I believe UWE falling through was at fault of UWE and not the board.I agreed with the evolution and not revolution thing, I didn't expect them to chuck money around but I expected more than we got from Higgs and co. All we've got is a fancy behind the scenes additions of whom no one really knows what they do and a London office. With the colony, costs can spiral but they were only willing to spend 2M when it would have cost 8M? Sorry but they should have knew the costs before hand and there's no way it got that out of hand out of nowhere. He said it had been re-invested. Geoff asked him to clarify whether it had all been re-invested in players and he just responded by saying some sh** like "I can guarantee you it's all been re-invested". Everyone knows where the Lambert money went - the stadium/sainsburys fiasco. Why would the UWE kill the UWE project when they approached the club in the first place and the land is now just stuck unused, just like our training ground! Given how little the AQL's have invested in the club does any seriously think they were ever going to get involved in building a £30M+ stadium. If they were surely they'd finance a better looking tent than the new family stand, get the damn large TV screen installed a bit quicker, even give DC a bit of money to get in a decent striker or two. £1.5M for the last three years (£4.5M so far?). Is that a small amount for you? Topper Takeover? I'll back that.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 30, 2018 23:26:17 GMT
The bottom line is that the club structure is awful. Having a CEO who isn't actually responsible for all staff is weird. Having a CEO and a paid Chair is pretty weird, especially when they don't talk. No disrespect but do you have any experience of medium sized business? Or Boards? Fact - Hamer didn't know about Starnes being employed. Fact - Starnes works in Box 1 during the week, far away from everyone else in the stadium.Fact - Hamer and Starnes never talk to each other. Fact - Hamer got the job as he was helping AQ buy a club. Starnes got the job because he asked his friend wael if he had any work going. New Programme editor got his job as an ex work colleague of Starnes at plymouyh. None of those jobs were advertised or interviewef for. This isn't just about wasted money, it's about structure, unclear responsibilities and a very very clear lack of communication and acceptance between hamer and Starnes. Yet Wael ultimately orgsnised all this. It is causing a problem and does not help the on the field problems. Thing is a fact is something that can be proven,like rovers 1 gillingham 2. What you have listed is whats known as hearsay,look it up. Actually, because I use the boxes for meetings so much (part of the 1883 deal). This is definitely not correct. I have never seen Martin Starnes working on his own in Box one. In fact, I have used box one for many meetings. One of the things that I have noticed about box one is the lovely artistic impression of UWE is no longer on the wall (was removed early last season).
|
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 11,862
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Nov 30, 2018 23:38:09 GMT
I believe UWE falling through was at fault of UWE and not the board.I agreed with the evolution and not revolution thing, I didn't expect them to chuck money around but I expected more than we got from Higgs and co. All we've got is a fancy behind the scenes additions of whom no one really knows what they do and a London office. With the colony, costs can spiral but they were only willing to spend 2M when it would have cost 8M? Sorry but they should have knew the costs before hand and there's no way it got that out of hand out of nowhere. He said it had been re-invested. Geoff asked him to clarify whether it had all been re-invested in players and he just responded by saying some sh** like "I can guarantee you it's all been re-invested". Everyone knows where the Lambert money went - the stadium/sainsburys fiasco. Why would the UWE kill the UWE project when they approached the club in the first place and the land is now just stuck unused, just like our training ground! Given how little the AQL's have invested in the club does any seriously think they were ever going to get involved in building a £30M+ stadium. If they were surely they'd finance a better looking tent than the new family stand, get the damn large TV screen installed a bit quicker, even give DC a bit of money to get in a decent striker or two. Who really knows, but UWE could change their mind or events force a different use. Time will tell. Regarding the funds, I doubt there is one general pot of money to be used. I suspect that funds earmarked for the stadium build would have been separate from other plans such as training ground, players or the day to day running costs. Just because it isn't used for one project won't mean it can or will be switched to another. Being such a major project, it would require different levels and may be different sources of funding not available to the other issues. If plans are to build a new stadium or to sell up then they wouldn't use that money to buy players or make the small improvements so far witnessed.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Dec 1, 2018 6:53:59 GMT
Thing is a fact is something that can be proven,like rovers 1 gillingham 2. What you have listed is whats known as hearsay,look it up. Actually, because I use the boxes for meetings so much (part of the 1883 deal). This is definitely not correct. I have never seen Martin Starnes working on his own in Box one. In fact, I have used box one for many meetings. One of the things that I have noticed about box one is the lovely artistic impression of UWE is no longer on the wall (was removed early last season). You are Martin Starnes and I claim my five pounds!
|
|
|
Post by Gasshole on Dec 1, 2018 7:05:45 GMT
Actually, because I use the boxes for meetings so much (part of the 1883 deal). This is definitely not correct. I have never seen Martin Starnes working on his own in Box one. In fact, I have used box one for many meetings. One of the things that I have noticed about box one is the lovely artistic impression of UWE is no longer on the wall (was removed early last season). You are Martin Starnes and I claim my five pounds! We have a winner, instalments ok Hugo?
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Dec 1, 2018 9:04:22 GMT
Actually, because I use the boxes for meetings so much (part of the 1883 deal). This is definitely not correct. I have never seen Martin Starnes working on his own in Box one. In fact, I have used box one for many meetings. One of the things that I have noticed about box one is the lovely artistic impression of UWE is no longer on the wall (was removed early last season). You are Martin Starnes and I claim my five pounds! You got me Wael. So shall we announce our exciting news? We have been in talks with Bristol university for the last year or so and are delighted to announce Bristol University Memorial Stadium. BUMS can be something to unite the fragmented support. Remember Wael when the opportunity was presented? We both just needed to grasp BUMS with great excitement. Roll on 2019 where we can all get together and enjoy BUMS. /me passes £5 to Hugo.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Dec 1, 2018 11:19:52 GMT
If the bottom falls out of our BUMS deal we do have a plan b.
The Avon Regeneration Stadium Enterprise Scheme are also rumoured to be interested in investing.
|
|
|
Post by utg12 on Dec 1, 2018 20:43:02 GMT
Thing is a fact is something that can be proven,like rovers 1 gillingham 2. What you have listed is whats known as hearsay,look it up. Actually, because I use the boxes for meetings so much (part of the 1883 deal). This is definitely not correct. I have never seen Martin Starnes working on his own in Box one. In fact, I have used box one for many meetings. One of the things that I have noticed about box one is the lovely artistic impression of UWE is no longer on the wall (was removed early last season). Well I have physically seen him working in box one and have been told he uses it most of the time (ok, so not when a meeting is on - the difference between box 1 and, say, box 4, isn't the point). The point is clear and indesputable - they do not work together, talk together or get on. Obviously someone will now say my own eyes are wrong and people will believe them because they have more posts than me. 🤔
|
|
|
Post by utg12 on Dec 1, 2018 20:48:39 GMT
The bottom line is that the club structure is awful. Having a CEO who isn't actually responsible for all staff is weird. Having a CEO and a paid Chair is pretty weird, especially when they don't talk. No disrespect but do you have any experience of medium sized business? Or Boards? Fact - Hamer didn't know about Starnes being employed. Fact - Starnes works in Box 1 during the week, far away from everyone else in the stadium. Fact - Hamer and Starnes never talk to each other. Fact - Hamer got the job as he was helping AQ buy a club. Starnes got the job because he asked his friend wael if he had any work going. New Programme editor got his job as an ex work colleague of Starnes at plymouyh. None of those jobs were advertised or interviewef for. This isn't just about wasted money, it's about structure, unclear responsibilities and a very very clear lack of communication and acceptance between hamer and Starnes. Yet Wael ultimately orgsnised all this. It is causing a problem and does not help the on the field problems. Thing is a fact is something that can be proven,like rovers 1 gillingham 2. What you have listed is whats known as hearsay,look it up. No you are wrong. Something I know and have seen, but cannot factually prove through, say the BBC sports results, is not hearsay. Its simply something that, er, I have seen but cannot factually prove through, say the BBC sports results. The funny thing with this forum is you want information but then get sniffy when you are given it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2018 20:49:53 GMT
If the bottom falls out of our BUMS deal we do have a plan b. The Avon Regeneration Stadium Enterprise Scheme are also rumoured to be interested in investing. remember that old plan by the working assocation trust society - complete Twats!
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Dec 1, 2018 20:53:14 GMT
Why would the UWE kill the UWE project when they approached the club in the first place and the land is now just stuck unused, just like our training ground! Given how little the AQL's have invested in the club does any seriously think they were ever going to get involved in building a £30M+ stadium. If they were surely they'd finance a better looking tent than the new family stand, get the damn large TV screen installed a bit quicker, even give DC a bit of money to get in a decent striker or two. £1.5M for the last three years (£4.5M so far?). Is that a small amount for you? Topper Takeover? I'll back that. I think your confusing a limited companies annual losses with investment? Paying £250K for a nice office and charging the club £500K interest p.a. all offset against the Mem value is not investing money in the club. This latest update on the Supporters Club website tells you what the owners really this about us: bristolroverssc.co.uk/2018/12/01/forum-to-follow-the-agm/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2018 20:55:00 GMT
Thing is a fact is something that can be proven,like rovers 1 gillingham 2. What you have listed is whats known as hearsay,look it up. No you are wrong. Something I know and have seen, but cannot factually prove through, say the BBC sports results, is not hearsay. Its simply something that, er, I have seen but cannot factually prove through, say the BBC sports results. The funny thing with this forum is you want information but then get sniffy when you are given it. Something you cannot factually prove is hearsay. Simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by utg12 on Dec 1, 2018 21:01:35 GMT
No you are wrong. Something I know and have seen, but cannot factually prove through, say the BBC sports results, is not hearsay. Its simply something that, er, I have seen but cannot factually prove through, say the BBC sports results. The funny thing with this forum is you want information but then get sniffy when you are given it. Something you cannot factually prove is hearsay. Simple as that. So, if I saw someone die and reported it on the internet, but didn't hold the death certificate, it's simply hearsay? There is absolutely nothing inbetween the negative connotation of 'hearsay', and the word 'fact'?
|
|
|
Post by Big Jock on Dec 1, 2018 21:06:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by utg12 on Dec 1, 2018 21:06:54 GMT
£1.5M for the last three years (£4.5M so far?). Is that a small amount for you? Topper Takeover? I'll back that. I think your confusing a limited companies annual losses with investment? Paying £250K for a nice office and charging the club £500K interest p.a. all offset against the Mem value is not investing money in the club. This latest update on the Supporters Club website tells you what the owners really this about us: bristolroverssc.co.uk/2018/12/01/forum-to-follow-the-agm/Yes, I thought that was neatly slipped out in the Gillingham programme. Just in case anyone doesn't know what it means..... It means that unlike previous years the club are not supplying anyone to attend the AGM and answer questions after. Even though the club have more top people around than before, including a paid Chair and a paid CEO. Hardly surprising really considering the new owners forced the SC to reduce its representation on the Board from 2 to 1.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2018 21:07:42 GMT
Something you cannot factually prove is hearsay. Simple as that. So, if I saw someone die and reported it on the internet, but didn't hold the death certificate, it's simply hearsay? There is absolutely nothing inbetween the negative connotation of 'hearsay', and the word 'fact'? Prove to us you didn’t see somebody die.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2018 21:27:13 GMT
So you guess. But when Wael was meeting Macron abroad, people were jumping the gun and saying he does not like us anymore, as he was attending a champions League game. Not long after we had a 20% sell on all Macron goods. Easier for a lot to moan and say that they are doing nothing though. Just because we don't know what they are doing, does not mean that are doing nothing. That could be the case, but why employ a CEO to do nothing?? The same people say, Hani won't spend any money and he's tight. The two don't go hand in hand. It's he tight?? Or does he waste money on People to do nothing??? Here we are again at your post about "facts". They might be true but then again they might not be true. Thats hearsay. It does not mean your a liar but just saying something is a fact does not make it a fact. The bottom line is that the club structure is awful. Having a CEO who isn't actually responsible for all staff is weird. Having a CEO and a paid Chair is pretty weird, especially when they don't talk. No disrespect but do you have any experience of medium sized business? Or Boards? Fact - Hamer didn't know about Starnes being employed. Fact - Starnes works in Box 1 during the week, far away from everyone else in the stadium. Fact - Hamer and Starnes never talk to each other. Fact - Hamer got the job as he was helping AQ buy a club. Starnes got the job because he asked his friend wael if he had any work going. New Programme editor got his job as an ex work colleague of Starnes at plymouyh. None of those jobs were advertised or interviewef for. This isn't just about wasted money, it's about structure, unclear responsibilities and a very very clear lack of communication and acceptance between hamer and Starnes. Yet Wael ultimately orgsnised all this. It is causing a problem and does not help the on the field problems.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2018 21:34:41 GMT
Something you cannot factually prove is hearsay. Simple as that. So, if I saw someone die and reported it on the internet, but didn't hold the death certificate, it's simply hearsay? There is absolutely nothing inbetween the negative connotation of 'hearsay', and the word 'fact'? Your original list of "facts" was in fact hearsay. It might be honest in good faith hearsay but its still hearsay. I mean we are being taken over are we not? Posters have stated that we are being taken over so it must be true right?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2018 21:53:36 GMT
Something you cannot factually prove is hearsay. Simple as that. So, if I saw someone die and reported it on the internet, but didn't hold the death certificate, it's simply hearsay? There is absolutely nothing inbetween the negative connotation of 'hearsay', and the word 'fact'? If you do see someone die i would always advise getting a 2nd opinion from a medical professional.
|
|