|
Post by Topper Gas on Apr 1, 2020 12:36:52 GMT
So are the SC themselves going to respond to KM's concerns, or continue to just make no announcements?
It is with deep regret that I could not in all good conscience approve either the Bristol Rovers (1883) Limited accounts or the Bristol Rovers Football Club Limited accounts for the financial year through June 2019. I have not been given access to a current budget July 2019 through June 2020. I have been given no introduction to newly appointed auditors to ask questions or to express my concerns. I have not been invited to attend a Board Meeting since March 5th 2019. I have been suspended and effectively excluded from all Board matters with no good reasons being substantiated and no response to communications in relation to these matters since January. I was asked to stand down in November. I was told the reasons were confidential with no further explanation given"
|
|
|
Post by poorblue on Apr 1, 2020 13:00:53 GMT
I'm not ITK or have any contacts within the club. I have no hidden agenda. I see this as my interpretation. The Club had 3 directors until recently One (Al Qadi) owned 92% shares and put (£10m?) into buying those shares. His loses since have added to that money input (£24m?) (total £34m?) One (Masters) was the spokesman for 8% shareholders (£1m) who put many hours in over many years voluntarily? I presume quite confidently that he would have been part of the people putting his money into the 8% share One (Starmer) was simply an employee with no financial input? and whose only lose would be his salary? It would be normal for directors to agree a business plan and whilst some may not agree and offer a different approach the majority would rule. The collective view would prevail. If one still strongly disagreed then the outcome would be to resign. Is this what has happened. Regarding the banning of Masters if you read his statement today it is clear his stance was not a difference of opinion it was a lack of trust. If he expressed that view either inside the Boardroom or indeed outside I'm not surprised the majority shareholder would not engage with him. In my opinion you cannot operate a multi million pound business with out trust. Is that lack of trust real or perceived, time will tell. Will covid19 have an impact on what might or might not happen in the future?
|
|
|
Post by gregsy on Apr 1, 2020 13:09:37 GMT
I'm not ITK or have any contacts within the club. I have no hidden agenda. I see this as my interpretation. The Club had 3 directors until recently One (Al Qadi) owned 92% shares and put (£10m?) into buying those shares. His loses since have added to that money input (£24m?) (total £34m?) One (Masters) was the spokesman for 8% shareholders (£1m) who put many hours in over many years voluntarily? I presume quite confidently that he would have been part of the people putting his money into the 8% share One (Starmer) was simply an employee with no financial input? and whose only lose would be his salary? It would be normal for directors to agree a business plan and whilst some may not agree and offer a different approach the majority would rule. The collective view would prevail. If one still strongly disagreed then the outcome would be to resign. Is this what has happened. Regarding the banning of Masters if you read his statement today it is clear his stance was not a difference of opinion it was a lack of trust. If he expressed that view either inside the Boardroom or indeed outside I'm not surprised the majority shareholder would not engage with him. In my opinion you cannot operate a multi million pound business with out trust. Is that lack of trust real or perceived, time will tell. Will covid19 have an impact on what might or might not happen in the future? I think stating we had an employee called ''Starmer', just about somes up all of our confusions right now....
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Apr 1, 2020 13:18:44 GMT
I'm not ITK or have any contacts within the club. I have no hidden agenda. I see this as my interpretation. The Club had 3 directors until recently One (Al Qadi) owned 92% shares and put (£10m?) into buying those shares. His loses since have added to that money input (£24m?) (total £34m?) One (Masters) was the spokesman for 8% shareholders (£1m) who put many hours in over many years voluntarily? I presume quite confidently that he would have been part of the people putting his money into the 8% share One (Starmer) was simply an employee with no financial input? and whose only lose would be his salary? It would be normal for directors to agree a business plan and whilst some may not agree and offer a different approach the majority would rule. The collective view would prevail. If one still strongly disagreed then the outcome would be to resign. Is this what has happened. Regarding the banning of Masters if you read his statement today it is clear his stance was not a difference of opinion it was a lack of trust. If he expressed that view either inside the Boardroom or indeed outside I'm not surprised the majority shareholder would not engage with him. In my opinion you cannot operate a multi million pound business with out trust. Is that lack of trust real or perceived, time will tell. Will covid19 have an impact on what might or might not happen in the future? So we have an owner behaving like a despot dictator who dispenses with anyone who challenges him. Of course the SC are right not to trust anyone who behaves in that way and the fans should be onside with that rather than on the side of the despot dictator. Supporters should never blindly trust any owners, they should always try and hold them to account and stop them from behaving recklessly with the club. Supporters are for ever, owners most definitely are not!
|
|
|
Post by pirate49 on Apr 1, 2020 13:22:11 GMT
Something to keep an eye on is if this has any ramifications for the Community Trust. If I remember correctly it was the previous board, in particular Nick Higgs, who asked KM to lead the Community Trust. This he has done since, keeping 'power' very close; chairing all meetings, arranging agendas and taking minutes. Back under the old regime Toni Watola would attend meetings and 'look after' the finances. So back then the link with the BoD was strong. More recently I understand that Steve Hamer was an attendee at meetings. Then there is the matter of the Study Centre,housed in a room under the Dribuild stand and used by many students. I'm only guessing but I wouldn't be surprised if TG would love to have that space to use to generate funds for the club. So, watch this space.....
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Apr 1, 2020 13:47:27 GMT
I'm not ITK or have any contacts within the club. I have no hidden agenda. I see this as my interpretation. The Club had 3 directors until recently One (Al Qadi) owned 92% shares and put (£10m?) into buying those shares. His loses since have added to that money input (£24m?) (total £34m?) One (Masters) was the spokesman for 8% shareholders (£1m) who put many hours in over many years voluntarily? I presume quite confidently that he would have been part of the people putting his money into the 8% share One (Starmer) was simply an employee with no financial input? and whose only lose would be his salary? It would be normal for directors to agree a business plan and whilst some may not agree and offer a different approach the majority would rule. The collective view would prevail. If one still strongly disagreed then the outcome would be to resign. Is this what has happened. Regarding the banning of Masters if you read his statement today it is clear his stance was not a difference of opinion it was a lack of trust. If he expressed that view either inside the Boardroom or indeed outside I'm not surprised the majority shareholder would not engage with him. In my opinion you cannot operate a multi million pound business with out trust. Is that lack of trust real or perceived, time will tell. Will covid19 have an impact on what might or might not happen in the future? So we have an owner behaving like a despot dictator who dispenses with anyone who challenges him. Of course the SC are right not to trust anyone who behaves in that way and the fans should be onside with that rather than on the side of the despot dictator. Supporters should never blindly trust any owners, they should always try and hold them to account and stop them from behaving recklessly with the club. Supporters are for ever, owners most definitely are not! Shame then that despite all the protestations of some ITK on here, the SC and Ken barely did anything about it, or brought any of it up with the people they are supposed to represent if they had a problem with the owners Ken has basically hung on to the bitter end for what reason?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2020 14:49:20 GMT
So we have an owner behaving like a despot dictator who dispenses with anyone who challenges him. Of course the SC are right not to trust anyone who behaves in that way and the fans should be onside with that rather than on the side of the despot dictator. Supporters should never blindly trust any owners, they should always try and hold them to account and stop them from behaving recklessly with the club. Supporters are for ever, owners most definitely are not! Shame then that despite all the protestations of some ITK on here, the SC and Ken barely did anything about it, or brought any of it up with the people they are supposed to represent if they had a problem with the owners Ken has basically hung on to the bitter end for what reason? Exactly
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2020 14:54:26 GMT
So we have an owner behaving like a despot dictator who dispenses with anyone who challenges him. Of course the SC are right not to trust anyone who behaves in that way and the fans should be onside with that rather than on the side of the despot dictator. Supporters should never blindly trust any owners, they should always try and hold them to account and stop them from behaving recklessly with the club. Supporters are for ever, owners most definitely are not! Shame then that despite all the protestations of some ITK on here, the SC and Ken barely did anything about it, or brought any of it up with the people they are supposed to represent if they had a problem with the owners Ken has basically hung on to the bitter end for what reason? because perhaps he was in the wrong the whole time and is trying to spin it the other way now that he’s left ?
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Apr 1, 2020 15:01:58 GMT
Shame then that despite all the protestations of some ITK on here, the SC and Ken barely did anything about it, or brought any of it up with the people they are supposed to represent if they had a problem with the owners Ken has basically hung on to the bitter end for what reason? because perhaps he was in the wrong the whole time and is trying to spin it the other way now that he’s left ? Was he? How exactly was he in the wrong? Did he fall out with UWE then DC then Hamer, then the City Council then the Dictator? Was he embarrassed about being carried down Gloucester Rd promising supporters a new stadium, a new training ground when he never had the means to deliver either? Yep when you look at it logically and all that’s gone on sure looks like it must have been Masters in the wrong all along. Jeeeeez.
|
|
|
Post by inee on Apr 1, 2020 15:13:13 GMT
So we have an owner behaving like a despot dictator who dispenses with anyone who challenges him. Of course the SC are right not to trust anyone who behaves in that way and the fans should be onside with that rather than on the side of the despot dictator. Supporters should never blindly trust any owners, they should always try and hold them to account and stop them from behaving recklessly with the club. Supporters are for ever, owners most definitely are not! I'm not his biggest fan however despot dictator is a tad strong fella ,he ain't quite lenin, stalin, mao or pol pol is he
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2020 15:15:05 GMT
because perhaps he was in the wrong the whole time and is trying to spin it the other way now that he’s left ? Was he? How exactly was he in the wrong? Did he fall out with UWE then DC then Hamer, then the City Council then the Dictator? Was he embarrassed about being carried down Gloucester Rd promising supporters a new stadium, a new training ground when he never had the means to deliver either? Yep when you look at it logically and all that’s gone on sure looks like it must have been Masters in the wrong all along. Jeeeeez. is telling your mates what happens in confidential board meeting not wrong? Seems justified to ban someone if they are leaking things personally wouldn't really call that a dictatorship. Also why would you only speak out now if you’d been wronged all this time... are people bitter that they can’t have information leaked to them anymore or something the leaks dried up once he wasn’t allowed in anymore funnily enough
|
|
|
Post by inee on Apr 1, 2020 15:32:15 GMT
Wasn’t masters leaking stuff from boardroom meetings to his mates? Surely that’s enough to warrant him not being trusted? Looks to me like he wasn’t going to win his court case against the club and is trying to save face. I seem to recall a long while back something about an email ken sent to someone knowing the contents would be bought up on the forums(not just this un but tudder uns too), i think it caused a bit of a hoo haa here, maybe related to that in some way. The thing is ken either needs to come out and tell it like it was and give the owner a chance to give the clubs side, but i think we will colonise pluto before that will happen. The bit that stands out for me is the statement that "I was told the reasons were confidential with no further explanation given". That in itself is a strange statement from the club, surely in this day and age those types of thing are illegal, i'm sure someone who knows this type of stuff will let us know if it's legal or illegal.
|
|
|
Post by gregsy on Apr 1, 2020 15:37:55 GMT
Manfred mann predicted this in 1963:
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Apr 1, 2020 15:42:26 GMT
Was he? How exactly was he in the wrong? Did he fall out with UWE then DC then Hamer, then the City Council then the Dictator? Was he embarrassed about being carried down Gloucester Rd promising supporters a new stadium, a new training ground when he never had the means to deliver either? Yep when you look at it logically and all that’s gone on sure looks like it must have been Masters in the wrong all along. Jeeeeez. is telling your mates what happens in confidential board meeting not wrong? Seems justified to ban someone if they are leaking things personally wouldn't really call that a dictatorship. Also why would you only speak out now if you’d been wronged all this time... are people bitter that they can’t have information leaked to them anymore or something the leaks dried up once he wasn’t allowed in anymore funnily enough Ken Masters represents the Supporters Club who ran a share scheme to inject money into the club for quite frankly a derisory 8% stake considering the money invested. That’s invested, note, and not loaned by way of Equity Release like the ALQs have done other than what they paid for the Shares from Higgs and Co. So, anyway Masters represents those of us that put money into the club via this scheme. His duty is to the supporters and it his his duty to report to the SC executive what goes on in Board Meetings. He and they will be bound by confidentiality but that shouldn’t stop them from challenging the owners. It is sad and unsatisfactory that the person who represents us the fans has felt the need to resign, he might not be whiter than white in always keeping hold of his frustrations and that might have given the dictator all the reason he needed to get rid of any supporters reps from the Board asking questions he doesn’t want to answer. We are lucky to have a rep on the Board in the first place of course, it’s not normal at most clubs, and only happened because of the need for cash in the Dunford days. Whether you like Ken Masters as a person or not, supporters should be very concerned about how the relationship has deteriorated and the reasons for that. Slagging Ken Masters off and being blind to the real underlying cause of this breakdown is exactly what the dictator wants you to do. The dictator let’s not forget who has fallen out already with so many people who have worked for the club or with the club and failed to deliver anything he promised.
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Apr 1, 2020 16:12:17 GMT
Confidentiality doesn’t stop you from updating supporters or challenging the board. Amazing if he’s not been involved for well over 12 months and has concerns about transparency that it’s taken this long for it to become untenable. The honourable thing if he has concerns about the running of the club is to resign as soon as this is apparent and to give as much detail as practically possible within his confidentiality agreement, like many others in similar boats at other clubs have done according to his own statement.
Quite straightforward really, he doesn’t have to reveal specifics he can just say little things like the ownership does not give him confidence in the long term future of the club, that he has no confidence in the club having the desire to deliver a new stadium/ training facility/ invest in the future of the club/ whatever it is. Enough to give supporters the hint and to challenge the ownership. Idleness infers all is well. Resignations and statements give cause for a concern. When it’s delayed this long after allegedly years of the same behaviour it destroys any credibility in what you’re coming out with.
Murmurings are he was a very naughty man on a number of occasions. And that’s from people who were on balance largely on his side (anti AlQ too)
I don’t know who to believe but frankly from what I have read I’m inclined to not believe either other than what is clearly cold hard fact. The fact he is a supporter and has done great things for the community trust doesn’t mean we should take word from him as gospel.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Apr 1, 2020 16:43:49 GMT
The club needs to explain exactly why someone representing a significant shareholding PAID FOR BY THE FANS has been excluded from meetings, communications and contact with other Directors for so long. Would you trust Guy Fawkes? Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Apr 1, 2020 16:48:08 GMT
The club needs to explain exactly why someone representing a significant shareholding PAID FOR BY THE FANS has been excluded from meetings, communications and contact with other Directors for so long. Would you trust Guy Fawkes? Exactly. Thank you for that half baked conjecture but The CLUB needs to explain why they have booted the fans rep out despite the money the fans have invested. Utterly unacceptable to do so without any explanation.
|
|
|
Post by inee on Apr 1, 2020 16:59:11 GMT
is telling your mates what happens in confidential board meeting not wrong? Seems justified to ban someone if they are leaking things personally wouldn't really call that a dictatorship. Also why would you only speak out now if you’d been wronged all this time... are people bitter that they can’t have information leaked to them anymore or something the leaks dried up once he wasn’t allowed in anymore funnily enough Ken Masters represents the Supporters Club who ran a share scheme to inject money into the club for quite frankly a derisory 8% stake considering the money invested. That’s invested, note, and not loaned by way of Equity Release like the ALQs have done other than what they paid for the Shares from Higgs and Co. So, anyway Masters represents those of us that put money into the club via this scheme. His duty is to the supporters and it his his duty to report to the SC executive what goes on in Board Meetings. He and they will be bound by confidentiality but that shouldn’t stop them from challenging the owners. It is sad and unsatisfactory that the person who represents us the fans has felt the need to resign, he might not be whiter than white in always keeping hold of his frustrations and that might have given the dictator all the reason he needed to get rid of any supporters reps from the Board asking questions he doesn’t want to answer. We are lucky to have a rep on the Board in the first place of course, it’s not normal at most clubs, and only happened because of the need for cash in the Dunford days. Whether you like Ken Masters as a person or not, supporters should be very concerned about how the relationship has deteriorated and the reasons for that. Slagging Ken Masters off and being blind to the real underlying cause of this breakdown is exactly what the dictator wants you to do. The dictator let’s not forget who has fallen out already with so many people who have worked for the club or with the club and failed to deliver anything he promised. People seem to forget BSS resigned a while back because he felt the role was just a token role ,i spose the writing was on the wall then. who knows i feel it would be good to have BSS let the reasons over his departure be known as enough time has passed. I also felt it strange that BSS was never replaced as it's my understanding that 2 sc directors were meant to serve
|
|
|
Post by inee on Apr 1, 2020 16:59:43 GMT
The club needs to explain exactly why someone representing a significant shareholding PAID FOR BY THE FANS has been excluded from meetings, communications and contact with other Directors for so long. Would you trust Guy Fawkes? Exactly. Yes i would
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Apr 1, 2020 17:04:26 GMT
Would you trust Guy Fawkes? Exactly. Thank you for that half baked conjecture but The CLUB needs to explain why they have booted the fans rep out despite the money the fans have invested. Utterly unacceptable to do so without any explanation. Correction. It’s what the SC invest and represent not the “fans”. KM and his weasels do not represent the majority of fans by any stretch. One does wonder why he tried to help destroy the owner of the club he so say supports, if there was nothing in it for him? Perhaps he would care to explain his cloak and dagger tactics in many areas. It should be obvious to him why he’s got the boot but his continuing to play dumb save face makes him even more of a disgrace IMO.
|
|