@Morris_Ital said:
I saw our general manager arsing about pitch side with some guests. I think perhaps as his job title implies he could have been trying to do something about the shambles at the kiosks instead of lining people up for selfies with bodger.
Were these guests members of a consortium? Perhaps getting up close and personal with Bodger is the fun that they crave from football investement?
It would be quite funny if it wasn’t so rank amateur.
In my eyes at least, there is a lack of clarity about who ultimately carries the can for non-football matters. During the never ending discussion on here about the financial situation generally and the projected £500,009 loss in particular, references were made to a highly paid executive alleged to be failing in his duty to ensure smooth running and profitable catering services. I assumed at the time that the person concerned was Michael Davies, who is in fact the General Manager. @glasshalffull’s reference to a Managing Director cast doubts in my mind.
It is important that all these folk who are, to put it mildly, disappointed with the service, know to whom they should address their comments.
If they are running the stock down for new stuff next week good luck to them, the old stuff was horrid, give them a bit of time, outsourcing something you've been dreadful at for years is a positive step.
@HCblue said:
Being charitable, I'd like to think they were running down the stock today before handing over to the new people next week.
My thoughts entirely. Although knowing when the Oxford game was to be I would have made it part of the clubs’ ABC negotiation that they had to be up and fully functioning by this big crowd derby. A business tender should have put the buyer (the club) in pole position to demand this as part of the contract. Oversite.
I went to the supermarket down the road on My way in to buy pop and a chocolate bar. It was well stocked although the fellow serving me was talking to someone on the phone throughout the transaction. I hope the club can sort this out.
A short story that sums up the omni shambles that is the catering inside the stadium.
The hot water tap for the drinks does not dispense enough to fill a cup. The poor staff have to have a second cup of hot water to top up each hot beverage. 3 years ago I was queuing and 3 board members were doing a walk round. They saw the debacle and said ‘how difficult could it be to reset the tap to dispense the right amount?’ Yesterday it was still the same.
Everyone knows it’s shit. The customers know it’s shit. No one has bothered to do shit about it. A massive fail on a significant income stream.
@TheAndyGrahamFanClub said:
A short story that sums up the omni shambles that is the catering inside the stadium.
The hot water tap for the drinks does not dispense enough to fill a cup. The poor staff have to have a second cup of hot water to top up each hot beverage. 3 years ago I was queuing and 3 board members were doing a walk round. They saw the debacle and said ‘how difficult could it be to reset the tap to dispense the right amount?’ Yesterday it was still the same.
Everyone knows it’s shit. The customers know it’s shit. No one has bothered to do shit about it. A massive fail on a significant income stream.
I know it's a bit off topic, but with a similar theme regarding time & maintenance, the mens bog at the home end of The Beechdean stand has had rather an "unhealthy" issue all the current season at least. The urinal to the left has no cistern at all attached to it. Given its location near a food outlet, (not suggesting any contamination issues btw), a general hygiene & nasal concern could be raised?
@TheAndyGrahamFanClub said:
A short story that sums up the omni shambles that is the catering inside the stadium.
The hot water tap for the drinks does not dispense enough to fill a cup. The poor staff have to have a second cup of hot water to top up each hot beverage. 3 years ago I was queuing and 3 board members were doing a walk round. They saw the debacle and said ‘how difficult could it be to reset the tap to dispense the right amount?’ Yesterday it was still the same.
Everyone knows it’s shit. The customers know it’s shit. No one has bothered to do shit about it. A massive fail on a significant income stream.
Well said. At a time those running out club are pushing an agenda of selling up based on a lack of financial feasibility it’s rather incredible that a basic aspect of football club operations has been so blatantly mismanaged and continual feedback from supporter trust members has been ignored.
So are we expected to believe that it is just Food and beverage that had been run so poorly under the current board and GM? Or are we being asked to believe they operate everything else efficiently and to a basic good standard and cost efficiencies and the food and beverage crapstorm is an exception to the rule?
It’s very valid in context of the takeover discussions and whether the club is actually sustainable but just not being run well enough.
Until we can say we’ve been run well under supporter ownership ( it is a given out football department is run well by GA & AH , I refer here to everything else) is would be negligent to sell up on the based our current board , those who are tasked with running the club , giving up and saying “we can’t run it sustainably so we suggest you sell”
I’ll say that again to be clear...there is a huge difference between NOT being sustainable , and NOT being sustainable under current management.
Saying “ they try hard and commit lots of voluntary hours l” is no basis for counter argument not is my criticism personal.
You are going all Farage on us again @marlowchair.
The actual question you are asking is a valid one but (in my view) devalued by exaggeration / inaccuracies (they have done something about the catering) and innuendo (they’ve not done ‘A’ well so obviously they must also not have done ‘B’, ‘C’, ‘D’, etc well either).
You seem to be in a position to add real value to the debate on here with you knowledge of the workings of the club and it’s a shame (to me) that you resort to this type of post when your one the other day (on how the financial loans worked) was perfectly judged.
At the moment you are coming over like the boy in the emperors new clothes, who once everyone realises that he IS naked, is running round saying ‘look. He’s got nothing on. It was me who showed you all that.’
You don’t have to like me booker, you seem to agree with the points I’ve made.If I cared what you thought of me I would be taking it personally,something I believe no one should do in this debate.
On the point at hand, you accuse me of exaggeration and inaccuracies, whilst you could be accused of being overly dismissive of the Debacle our food and beverage is , and too willing to discount the probability that such poor governance and operational competency over 3 + years in food and beverage , is repeated in other departments in the club.
The outright lack of attempt to seek any profit or increase in sales on a massive local derby on the weekend was alarming and surely we can ask that if working hard to seek an added £5-7k in profit on a big event like that wasn’t something our club currently sees any merit in doing , then how many other matchdays and events have we approached with similar lethargy and apathy? And how much had that cost us over a 5 year period? Meanwhile on the other have those responsible are telling us as we speak they just can’t see where the gap in our finances is ........ you see the problem yes?
We are a small club being managed under one GM. If you want to believe we can get it so embarrassingly wrong in one area but are somehow miraculously running efficiently and profitably in others, that’s up to you.
Maybe answer this question booker, do you believe we have been run and are running to the best of our ability off the pitch?
If your answer is no, how do you feel about those responsible for not running out club as best as it can be, also telling us we are not financially sustainable?
@marlowchair I don’t know you so have absolutely no personal feelings at all towards you. I do read your posts however and find them frustrating as I find them a strange mix of well-informed knowledge and unnecessary extrapolation that I think gets in the way of your ‘message’.
In answer to your question on the limited information I do have, my answer is almost certainly ‘no’ but, and this is where your style grates with me, that doesn’t automatically mean that it is being run badly, which seems to be your main argument. For what it’s worth my gut feeling is that we are being run off the pitch in an amateurish way and it is obvious that we could and should have done better in many respects. Where I am not sure is whether that would make the sort of difference financially and reputationally that you seem to think it should. I’m genuinely open-minded about that, which is probably why I do find your posts frustrating as you do have more information than probably most on here but usually present it from your perceived bias.
The second question is harder to answer. The simple answer at the moment is ‘concerned’. It is clear that the board have taken the view over the past two or three years that to be a moderately successful football league club is not achievable under the present fan ownership, a view that may or may not be accurate but is probably defensible given the current state of affairs. In the interests of disclosure I would personally like to see us maintain our identity as a fan-owned club but feel that would see us float between about 70th best placed club and 120th best placed club dependent on the effectiveness of the manager, etc.
What concerns (but also amuses me given the amateur nature of it) is that in the run up to last week there does appear to have been a concerted effort to spin our position to maximum effect to support their position. I have visions of the finance director wiping his forehead in relief when we only drew Norwich in the League Cup.
I have no doubt the board has the best interests of the club in mind (as they see it) but would I trust them to be able to make such key decisions for the club’s long-term future? Not a chance, which is why we all need to be as well-informed as possible.
So apologies for picking on you all the time, but you do have the knowledge that can help inform but I just wish you presented it with less of your own spin a lot of the time.
@Chris said:
Which specific areas other than food and beverage have not been run optimally, and what evidence can you provide for this?
Seriously?
Marlowchair, I wonder if you’ve ever considered that some of the alleged inefficiency to which you refer could be caused by a shortage of experienced staff? Hiring more staff with greater experience would obviously cost more money with no guarantee of a commensurate return, let alone a profit. Another question: you seem to know a lot about how the club operates behind the scenes and how it could be made better so have you ever offered your views or services to the Trust?
@Chris I can't believe you have been to a kiosk over the past season and believe they are run well (I exclude the staff in the kiosk from this). There are huge queues as not all kiosks (or serving points) are open, nearly every match day they run out of something or everything, the general offering is poor, the signage does not reflect the offering, apart from one or two exceptions the food is appalling.
You have a captive audience happy to spend money but every week we are turning them away. I went to the League Cup game v FGR and it was 30 minutes queue for a coffee. The queue stretched round the toilets all the way to the Kenco kiosk which of course remains unmanned. Lovely irony.
Chucking money away every game
@bookertease said: @marlowchair I don’t know you so have absolutely no personal feelings at all towards you. I do read your posts however and find them frustrating as I find them a strange mix of well-informed knowledge and unnecessary extrapolation that I think gets in the way of your ‘message’.
In answer to your question on the limited information I do have, my answer is almost certainly ‘no’ but, and this is where your style grates with me, that doesn’t automatically mean that it is being run badly, which seems to be your main argument. For what it’s worth my gut feeling is that we are being run off the pitch in an amateurish way and it is obvious that we could and should have done better in many respects. Where I am not sure is whether that would make the sort of difference financially and reputationally that you seem to think it should. I’m genuinely open-minded about that, which is probably why I do find your posts frustrating as you do have more information than probably most on here but usually present it from your perceived bias.
The second question is harder to answer. The simple answer at the moment is ‘concerned’. It is clear that the board have taken the view over the past two or three years that to be a moderately successful football league club is not achievable under the present fan ownership, a view that may or may not be accurate but is probably defensible given the current state of affairs. In the interests of disclosure I would personally like to see us maintain our identity as a fan-owned club but feel that would see us float between about 70th best placed club and 120th best placed club dependent on the effectiveness of the manager, etc.
What concerns (but also amuses me given the amateur nature of it) is that in the run up to last week there does appear to have been a concerted effort to spin our position to maximum effect to support their position. I have visions of the finance director wiping his forehead in relief when we only drew Norwich in the League Cup.
I have no doubt the board has the best interests of the club in mind (as they see it) but would I trust them to be able to make such key decisions for the club’s long-term future? Not a chance, which is why we all need to be as well-informed as possible.
So apologies for picking on you all the time, but you do have the knowledge that can help inform but I just wish you presented it with less of your own spin a lot of the time.
Excellent reply thank you.
I agree with you on most, maybe all points. I acknowledge what you say about the way I put my view forward but I’m a passionate person and get incensed when i feel ineptitude is not seeing the best achieved by a great club my grandfather and mum raised me to love.
I agree with your point that we cannot be sure if a more competent running of the clubs business would be enough to see us survive and prosper financially. But I am strongly of the view that until we are running competently , it is extremely premature of the directors to be so defeatist and swift to give up and recommend we sell up.
Especially when those same Directors are conflicted because they are also the ones responsible for the club running as it is currently.
I understand their defensiveness, it’s only natural. But I also have no time for it.we must be objective in tabling future options. Currently we are not,
To set out my stall clearly , I am neither pro sale or anti sale. I prefer full trust ownership but am a realist. I am also rather adamant ( in case you weren’t sure ) that our direct board are too close to it and conflicted to provide an objective and thorough due diligence process .
I also feel they are responsible for the trading position currently which also creates bias by the very definition.
We need an independent viability audit and consideration report on the entire buyers market before we can possibly make a genuinely objective and measured decision on this.
@marlowchair: I know I am regarded on here as perhaps an over-diligent guardian of the English language but I do find that the loose and often verbose structure of your posts tends to get in the way of the central message at times. Also, and this is more of a pedantic nit-pick, it struck me in your most recent post that “rather adamant” is on a par with “very unique”.
Of course, for political reasons, your message has to include a fair amount of insinuation and in that context I share your reservations about the ability of those in charge to control what has become a much larger operation with a substantially increased customer base at a time when areas of the business arguably require more than part-time management, however qualified and competent those unpaid servants may be. In that respect, I suppose the big question is whether there are other professional people amongst the enlarged fan base who, with limited knowledge of the nuts and bolts of the business, could do a better job. It really does feel like it’s time for a change but I’m sure we are right to be extremely wary about (a) the conclusion that the club could not be run much more profitably than it is at present, without outside investment and (b) the motivation of the would-be investors.
Micra, whilst your support for the ‘absolute adjective’ is understandable it should be recognised that grammarians are now rather more flexible. Perhaps ‘rather adamant’ is not so very different from ‘almost dead’ or ‘nearly square’?
Any further thoughts on the away socks sponsorship by the way?
Comments
It would be quite funny if it wasn’t so rank amateur.
Even by your standards, you're being rather bitter, @marlowchair.
The MD has taken steps to address the catering problem and part of his match day duties is to host the match sponsors.
In my eyes at least, there is a lack of clarity about who ultimately carries the can for non-football matters. During the never ending discussion on here about the financial situation generally and the projected £500,009 loss in particular, references were made to a highly paid executive alleged to be failing in his duty to ensure smooth running and profitable catering services. I assumed at the time that the person concerned was Michael Davies, who is in fact the General Manager. @glasshalffull’s reference to a Managing Director cast doubts in my mind.
It is important that all these folk who are, to put it mildly, disappointed with the service, know to whom they should address their comments.
£500,000.
If they are running the stock down for new stuff next week good luck to them, the old stuff was horrid, give them a bit of time, outsourcing something you've been dreadful at for years is a positive step.
Sorry Micra, I mistakenly put ‘the’ at the beginning of my post. I was referring to Michael Davies our general manager.
My thoughts entirely. Although knowing when the Oxford game was to be I would have made it part of the clubs’ ABC negotiation that they had to be up and fully functioning by this big crowd derby. A business tender should have put the buyer (the club) in pole position to demand this as part of the contract. Oversite.
Oversight?
I went to the supermarket down the road on My way in to buy pop and a chocolate bar. It was well stocked although the fellow serving me was talking to someone on the phone throughout the transaction. I hope the club can sort this out.
Of course, as ever thanks for your diligence.
Not been in Monty's for a while, is it always like that now?
A short story that sums up the omni shambles that is the catering inside the stadium.
The hot water tap for the drinks does not dispense enough to fill a cup. The poor staff have to have a second cup of hot water to top up each hot beverage. 3 years ago I was queuing and 3 board members were doing a walk round. They saw the debacle and said ‘how difficult could it be to reset the tap to dispense the right amount?’ Yesterday it was still the same.
Everyone knows it’s shit. The customers know it’s shit. No one has bothered to do shit about it. A massive fail on a significant income stream.
I know it's a bit off topic, but with a similar theme regarding time & maintenance, the mens bog at the home end of The Beechdean stand has had rather an "unhealthy" issue all the current season at least. The urinal to the left has no cistern at all attached to it. Given its location near a food outlet, (not suggesting any contamination issues btw), a general hygiene & nasal concern could be raised?
Well said. At a time those running out club are pushing an agenda of selling up based on a lack of financial feasibility it’s rather incredible that a basic aspect of football club operations has been so blatantly mismanaged and continual feedback from supporter trust members has been ignored.
So are we expected to believe that it is just Food and beverage that had been run so poorly under the current board and GM? Or are we being asked to believe they operate everything else efficiently and to a basic good standard and cost efficiencies and the food and beverage crapstorm is an exception to the rule?
It’s very valid in context of the takeover discussions and whether the club is actually sustainable but just not being run well enough.
Until we can say we’ve been run well under supporter ownership ( it is a given out football department is run well by GA & AH , I refer here to everything else) is would be negligent to sell up on the based our current board , those who are tasked with running the club , giving up and saying “we can’t run it sustainably so we suggest you sell”
I’ll say that again to be clear...there is a huge difference between NOT being sustainable , and NOT being sustainable under current management.
Saying “ they try hard and commit lots of voluntary hours l” is no basis for counter argument not is my criticism personal.
You are going all Farage on us again @marlowchair.
The actual question you are asking is a valid one but (in my view) devalued by exaggeration / inaccuracies (they have done something about the catering) and innuendo (they’ve not done ‘A’ well so obviously they must also not have done ‘B’, ‘C’, ‘D’, etc well either).
You seem to be in a position to add real value to the debate on here with you knowledge of the workings of the club and it’s a shame (to me) that you resort to this type of post when your one the other day (on how the financial loans worked) was perfectly judged.
At the moment you are coming over like the boy in the emperors new clothes, who once everyone realises that he IS naked, is running round saying ‘look. He’s got nothing on. It was me who showed you all that.’
You don’t have to like me booker, you seem to agree with the points I’ve made.If I cared what you thought of me I would be taking it personally,something I believe no one should do in this debate.
On the point at hand, you accuse me of exaggeration and inaccuracies, whilst you could be accused of being overly dismissive of the Debacle our food and beverage is , and too willing to discount the probability that such poor governance and operational competency over 3 + years in food and beverage , is repeated in other departments in the club.
The outright lack of attempt to seek any profit or increase in sales on a massive local derby on the weekend was alarming and surely we can ask that if working hard to seek an added £5-7k in profit on a big event like that wasn’t something our club currently sees any merit in doing , then how many other matchdays and events have we approached with similar lethargy and apathy? And how much had that cost us over a 5 year period? Meanwhile on the other have those responsible are telling us as we speak they just can’t see where the gap in our finances is ........ you see the problem yes?
We are a small club being managed under one GM. If you want to believe we can get it so embarrassingly wrong in one area but are somehow miraculously running efficiently and profitably in others, that’s up to you.
Maybe answer this question booker, do you believe we have been run and are running to the best of our ability off the pitch?
If your answer is no, how do you feel about those responsible for not running out club as best as it can be, also telling us we are not financially sustainable?
Which specific areas other than food and beverage have not been run optimally, and what evidence can you provide for this?
Seriously?
If you’re going to imply that things are run badly then that seems a reasonable question to me.
@marlowchair I don’t know you so have absolutely no personal feelings at all towards you. I do read your posts however and find them frustrating as I find them a strange mix of well-informed knowledge and unnecessary extrapolation that I think gets in the way of your ‘message’.
In answer to your question on the limited information I do have, my answer is almost certainly ‘no’ but, and this is where your style grates with me, that doesn’t automatically mean that it is being run badly, which seems to be your main argument. For what it’s worth my gut feeling is that we are being run off the pitch in an amateurish way and it is obvious that we could and should have done better in many respects. Where I am not sure is whether that would make the sort of difference financially and reputationally that you seem to think it should. I’m genuinely open-minded about that, which is probably why I do find your posts frustrating as you do have more information than probably most on here but usually present it from your perceived bias.
The second question is harder to answer. The simple answer at the moment is ‘concerned’. It is clear that the board have taken the view over the past two or three years that to be a moderately successful football league club is not achievable under the present fan ownership, a view that may or may not be accurate but is probably defensible given the current state of affairs. In the interests of disclosure I would personally like to see us maintain our identity as a fan-owned club but feel that would see us float between about 70th best placed club and 120th best placed club dependent on the effectiveness of the manager, etc.
What concerns (but also amuses me given the amateur nature of it) is that in the run up to last week there does appear to have been a concerted effort to spin our position to maximum effect to support their position. I have visions of the finance director wiping his forehead in relief when we only drew Norwich in the League Cup.
I have no doubt the board has the best interests of the club in mind (as they see it) but would I trust them to be able to make such key decisions for the club’s long-term future? Not a chance, which is why we all need to be as well-informed as possible.
So apologies for picking on you all the time, but you do have the knowledge that can help inform but I just wish you presented it with less of your own spin a lot of the time.
@Chris I can't believe you have been to a kiosk over the past season and believe they are run well (I exclude the staff in the kiosk from this). There are huge queues as not all kiosks (or serving points) are open, nearly every match day they run out of something or everything, the general offering is poor, the signage does not reflect the offering, apart from one or two exceptions the food is appalling.
You have a captive audience happy to spend money but every week we are turning them away. I went to the League Cup game v FGR and it was 30 minutes queue for a coffee. The queue stretched round the toilets all the way to the Kenco kiosk which of course remains unmanned. Lovely irony.
Chucking money away every game
Chris was inviting evidenced observations about areas other than food and bevs.
Excellent reply thank you.
I agree with you on most, maybe all points. I acknowledge what you say about the way I put my view forward but I’m a passionate person and get incensed when i feel ineptitude is not seeing the best achieved by a great club my grandfather and mum raised me to love.
I agree with your point that we cannot be sure if a more competent running of the clubs business would be enough to see us survive and prosper financially. But I am strongly of the view that until we are running competently , it is extremely premature of the directors to be so defeatist and swift to give up and recommend we sell up.
Especially when those same Directors are conflicted because they are also the ones responsible for the club running as it is currently.
I understand their defensiveness, it’s only natural. But I also have no time for it.we must be objective in tabling future options. Currently we are not,
To set out my stall clearly , I am neither pro sale or anti sale. I prefer full trust ownership but am a realist. I am also rather adamant ( in case you weren’t sure ) that our direct board are too close to it and conflicted to provide an objective and thorough due diligence process .
I also feel they are responsible for the trading position currently which also creates bias by the very definition.
We need an independent viability audit and consideration report on the entire buyers market before we can possibly make a genuinely objective and measured decision on this.
@marlowchair: I know I am regarded on here as perhaps an over-diligent guardian of the English language but I do find that the loose and often verbose structure of your posts tends to get in the way of the central message at times. Also, and this is more of a pedantic nit-pick, it struck me in your most recent post that “rather adamant” is on a par with “very unique”.
Of course, for political reasons, your message has to include a fair amount of insinuation and in that context I share your reservations about the ability of those in charge to control what has become a much larger operation with a substantially increased customer base at a time when areas of the business arguably require more than part-time management, however qualified and competent those unpaid servants may be. In that respect, I suppose the big question is whether there are other professional people amongst the enlarged fan base who, with limited knowledge of the nuts and bolts of the business, could do a better job. It really does feel like it’s time for a change but I’m sure we are right to be extremely wary about (a) the conclusion that the club could not be run much more profitably than it is at present, without outside investment and (b) the motivation of the would-be investors.
Micra, whilst your support for the ‘absolute adjective’ is understandable it should be recognised that grammarians are now rather more flexible. Perhaps ‘rather adamant’ is not so very different from ‘almost dead’ or ‘nearly square’?
Any further thoughts on the away socks sponsorship by the way?
As tedious as people find this sort of thing, "right now" always annoys me. As does "a bit random".
I have visions of @Micra taking about 3 hours typing his posts out on a small screen..
@micra done good.