|
Post by whathesaid on Aug 11, 2013 21:01:39 GMT
...because I feel that I'm getting a little lost with some of the politics at the moment.
I do ask this as a paid up member of OxVox!
Can someone explain what seems to be the problem, and why there seems to be a (I think) vocal minority who are looking for any opportunity to take issue with the work of OxVox? What's happened?
Debate is healthy, and discussion surrounding the aims and activity of OxVox is right, but I'm losing the plot a little.... any help appreciated!
|
|
|
Post by m on Aug 12, 2013 7:48:47 GMT
Good luck with your question.
I've struggled to pick a coherent point from the 'aggressors' diatribe.
|
|
|
Post by SteMerritt on Aug 12, 2013 7:53:59 GMT
I'm with you on that whathesaid, I would like to see one of the 'voteno' posse post up a list of their objections and the reasons, perhaps then they might even get some supporters on their side.
|
|
|
Post by ZeroTheHero on Aug 12, 2013 8:06:19 GMT
Glad it's not just me! As far as I can make out (and I might well be wrong) some ex-members of the OxVox hierarchy - one in particular - have become very bitter about something or other, and a couple of other people (for some reason) object to an OUFC supporters group having the right to bid for the stadium should it be put up for sale, possibly because members of the OV committee didn't come around to their houses and ask permission personally. And then there's Ken...
Is that about right?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2013 8:55:19 GMT
Glad it's not just me! As far as I can make out (and I might well be wrong) some ex-members of the OxVox hierarchy - one in particular - have become very bitter about something or other, and a couple of other people (for some reason) object to an OUFC supporters group having the right to bid for the stadium should it be put up for sale, possibly because members of the OV committee didn't come around to their houses and ask permission personally. And then there's Ken... Is that about right? I think it all stems from Mark Sennett using the word "I" instead of "we" when referring to some OxVox activity. This showed his true colours as a despotic autocrat and, frankly, he subsequently did himself no favours by not contacting each OxVox member individually, via recorded delivery letter, before deciding to fund raise for Dave Langan. I mean, it's not as if the OxVox committee already had a standing mandate to act on behalf of the membership. I can't decide which was my favourite thread of the weekend, "vote no"'s unexplained campaign or the homophobic one (you know the one, "it's only a bit of fun", "bloody PC brigade", "worse things happen in the army", "take kids to the family area (where, presumably, the invisible anti-homophobia shields will magically screen out the chants)", "if you don't like the chants go and watch cricket" and my favourite "my best mate / barman / milkman / plumber is gay and he LOVES the abuse and definitely isn't crying inside". I think, on balance, my vote goes to the latter, particularly as it inexplicably transformed into an anti-immigration piece. Good work lads.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Sennett on Aug 12, 2013 9:47:13 GMT
Some of it also stems from questions about us being independent. Well just last week we proved that as we refused to endorse the new 12th man bar until a revenue share agreement is announced. Club fully understood our view despite us working hard on it all summer. Other examples of this has been us stating on the club's own website that we didn't recomend price rises in season tickets and media comments about the need to see results off and on the pitch improve this season. None of these comments have caused issue from the club. The owner appreciates our need to stay independent. In the meantime we've been delighted to work as part of some positive projects with the club over the summer and more we come out in the near future.
But mostly it's personal aimed at me and it doens't bother me in the slightest. But it does cross the line when one person compares me to Mugabe, which quite rightly irriated one of our committee who's wife has fled from Zimbabwe. Fortunately we are here to represent the membership as a whole and the surveys and meetings we have with members provide positive feedback and also mandates of what we should focus on. We of course want to see more members and on Saturday we took time to speak to fans about what more OxVox should be doing.
|
|
|
Post by Si Bradbury on Aug 12, 2013 11:03:12 GMT
Can someone explain what seems to be the problem, and why there seems to be a (I think) vocal minority who are looking for any opportunity to take issue with the work of OxVox? What's happened? Debate is healthy, and discussion surrounding the aims and activity of OxVox is right, but I'm losing the plot a little.... any help appreciated! Debate is healthy. In fact, those who have genuine criticisms and questions have every right to voice them and I have always always advocated people do that. Prior to joining the Supporters Trust and Committee, I was a bit critical of OxVox, its lack of progress, its poor membership, maybe how I didn't think the views of 'wider supporters', those who were considering joining weren't being listented too IMO. So I joined and not happy to be just a member, stood for the committee. It's done some pretty impressive things when you take stock of it from its inception. However, a number of issues have arose from a small group of negative people, who have 'various' agendas against the club, its ownership, its direction and the perceived closeness of the Committee with the owner. I have to say, yes the Trust are close to the club, much closer than ever before but on the positive sign, we get to speak with all club staff, the owner, his sons, Mick Brown and Chris Williams etc. That enables things to get done, that has been demonstrated a lot in the past 12 months and it was the case in the few years beforehand. We are INDEPENDENT and if that changes, then I won't be party to it.A far cry from the position the Trust rightly took when it was questioning Nick Merry and how he conducted himself around the time we played Lewes away, where that individual blamed OxVox for f***ing up a stadium deal. Even sections of the away crowd that day took time out to chant about the Trust. Pleased to say that Merry got found out for the fabricator he was and it was all bull. Further recent issues have arisen from some members who have questioned the Right to Bid, who don't particularly like Mark, are disappointed our Forum was moved here and question the independence - some of them are valid. I don't really mind if people don't like certain individuals, as long as the Trust gets things done and behaves and represents its membership and the wider fan base (the latter being equally important). I have addressed the circumstances, the secrecy and lead up to the Right to Bid but to overview was that we needed to ensure that the application had every decent opportunity to go through. The introduction of JPPC on behalf of Mr Kassam, his advisors who were involved in the consultation, perhaps suggested that sensitive decision was right. I remain of the view that we did the right thing and that had we informed and entered into a full consultation period, the application could have failed - we only had one chance to get it approved. However, I understand the concern that people felt it hadn't been communicated - but we did have a mandate from the meetings we held pre-match and the surveys/results that went to all members. People have questioned that this RTB could put off people buying the club and/or stadium. I can't see why and to be honest, if a bid was made wouldn't OUFC fans want to know? Perhaps the question being have we upset people who had this intention, I still can't see why we would! We do not have a Right to Buy, neither do we have to enforce the Right to Bid. Mark has explained the forum situation and it was relayed on our home page. As for personality clashes, well yes that happens. It shouldn't detract from the good things Mark and others have done. The Dave Langan collection has been done pretty much single-handedly done by Mark; with the kind exception of the 12th Man people doing a wonderful job last weekend at Pompey and Rose of the 12th Man going around with a bucket on Saturday, as did Mark. Credit to all of those who voluntered to make a real life difference to Dave Lanagan and credit to the fans who backed it and 'raised' the £5k+. I read somewhere about some-infighting in the committee. Unfortunately no in-fighting to report although at times I would like to offer Mark outside . We have a quite simple internal decision voting system and although not always unanimous, once a decision is made, it is supported by the entire committee. So back to the childish sniping. I know who these people are and I have no intention of naming them presently - they have views and I respect some of those opinions held. I am trying hard not to engage in the goading and trolling but for members of the Trust to refer to individuals as Mugabe, is insulting. Sad to see Bob was unable to answer the reasonable questions posed by Slappy. Sadly, I fully expect that any bannings on the new forum are nothing more than a smokescreen as again it is sad that forum has been set up by people intent on trying to damage the Trust and indirectly, the club and its owners. By the way, being close to £7m in debt is not something I am pleased about. However, Ian Lenagan and his new team have the ability to sort that out and they, I make no apologises for saying, are working very hard and doing a bloody good job of rectifying it - see the recent improvements and investment to the Commercial Team and sorting out the decor in the 12th Man Bar, Executive Boxes, Red Bar, and in the future the rest of the ground. The great thing about this Supporters Trust is that anyone has the ability and opportunity to stand for the committee or offer its help. If people want things changed, posting ridiculous messages and attacks on forums, isn't going to help. If they want to change issues then they can. I will not sit by and let a very very small group of people who have issues with an individual(s), unfair issues, try and destabilise and damage a great Supporters Trust.
|
|
|
Post by m on Aug 12, 2013 13:21:11 GMT
The great thing about this Supporters Trust is that anyone has the ability and opportunity to stand for the committee or offer its help. If people want things changed, posting ridiculous messages and attacks on forums, isn't going to help. If they want to change issues then they can. ...and that's the thing. Why sit there sniping when you can change things if you wish? Unless of course you're some kind of fruitloop whose views are too nonsensical to be adopted by a democratic organisation of course...
|
|
|
Post by ox44xp on Aug 12, 2013 14:30:40 GMT
I did ask voteno about the circumstance of what and why people were voting about, but he got banned before he could answer. I think I have worked it out now, but one thing remains - if the supporters now have a right to bid, does it follow that the owner must then accept any such bid?
Where do we stand if FK announces that he has a bid from, say London Welsh, for £10m cash and we all grift and graft and get a package worth £11 million together - can FK say "Thanks but no thanks, I'll sell to LW cos I like their offer more than yours"
|
|
|
Post by Mark Sennett on Aug 12, 2013 14:43:02 GMT
Correct Ox44 it's a right to bid not a right to buy. Should Mr Kassam have a bid that's acceptable OxVox has 6 weeks to make a decision on if we wish to make a counter offer. Should we decide to we would then have a further four and a half months were the stadium couldn't be sold and we can make a bid. At the end of this period Firoka can choose to sell to whomever they want. 6 months is a long time to raise funds and do a PR campaign. Having said that we are already working with Oxford United to try and help facilitate a stadium purchase. We will report back to members if and when any concrete news is available.
|
|
|
Post by saddletramp on Aug 12, 2013 17:17:19 GMT
Believe me,i am not knocking Oxvox,or any other organisation that has the club at heart,BUT, with regards to buying the stadium, "6 months is a long time to raise funds and do a PR campaign" What planet are you on ? Its 12 years and counting,how much money is in the fund?
|
|
|
Post by sox on Aug 12, 2013 17:54:09 GMT
Glad it's not just me! As far as I can make out (and I might well be wrong) some ex-members of the OxVox hierarchy - one in particular - have become very bitter about something or other, and a couple of other people (for some reason) object to an OUFC supporters group having the right to bid for the stadium should it be put up for sale, possibly because members of the OV committee didn't come around to their houses and ask permission personally. And then there's Ken... Is that about right? I think it all stems from Mark Sennett using the word "I" instead of "we" when referring to some OxVox activity. This showed his true colours as a despotic autocrat and, frankly, he subsequently did himself no favours by not contacting each OxVox member individually, via recorded delivery letter, before deciding to fund raise for Dave Langan. I mean, it's not as if the OxVox committee already had a standing mandate to act on behalf of the membership. I can't decide which was my favourite thread of the weekend, "vote no"'s unexplained campaign or the homophobic one (you know the one, "it's only a bit of fun", "bloody PC brigade", "worse things happen in the army", "take kids to the family area (where, presumably, the invisible anti-homophobia shields will magically screen out the chants)", "if you don't like the chants go and watch cricket" and my favourite "my best mate / barman / milkman / plumber is gay and he LOVES the abuse and definitely isn't crying inside". I think, on balance, my vote goes to the latter, particularly as it inexplicably transformed into an anti-immigration piece. Good work lads. Great post, that one edges it for me as well
|
|
|
Post by oxfordharrier on Aug 12, 2013 17:59:50 GMT
Believe me,i am not knocking Oxvox,or any other organisation that has the club at heart,BUT, with regards to buying the stadium, "6 months is a long time to raise funds and do a PR campaign" What planet are you on ? Its 12 years and counting,how much money is in the fund? Well yes, but another bid on the table would probably focus the mind slightly more than 12 years with no competition. What I don't get is what happens if someone bids say 10m (I'm not going to say LW, because, whatever the conspiracy theorists say, they haven't got 10m), OUFC spend six months raising 11m, can bidder A then up their offer to 12m, say, and do OUFC then get another 6 months to match it, or what? More to the point perhaps, what if a 3rd party, seeing the chance for a bit of money from 2 teams, comes in with a daft offer, say 20m? I'd like Kiddy to look into something similar, given the land, although not the stadium on it (which is ours) is owned by the council, but what are the practical benefits, other than 6 months to match a first offer? Or is that it? Sorry this isn't quite on topic, but it seemed a sensible place to ask....
|
|
|
Post by ZeroTheHero on Aug 12, 2013 18:08:10 GMT
<sarcasm>
Since Mr Kassam has said that he is the guardian of the football club, I am sure he would be more than happy to sell it to us if we could match any offer and wouldn't use it to drive the price up.
</sarcasm>
|
|
|
Post by Matt D on Aug 13, 2013 20:22:20 GMT
I'd like Kiddy to look into something similar, given the land, although not the stadium on it (which is ours) is owned by the council, but what are the practical benefits, other than 6 months to match a first offer? Or is that it? Sorry this isn't quite on topic, but it seemed a sensible place to ask.... oxfordharrier, the practical benefits are six months more than you would have otherwise, plus access to various grants to help a community group put a bid in place. i think the other important point is that there are less tangible benefits. a community group then becomes a factor in any decision to sell that has to be taken into account, and that opens up conversations. for instance, it's started some conversations with the council to explore how a community-owned stadium might be feasible. saddletramp, it's true six months is not that long, but it's six months more than we would have had otherwise. before the RTB we had a situation where it was quite feasible that the first oxford united supporters might have known about a sale is when they woke up and read about it in the oxford mail. that can't happen now, and while we would have loved to have longer than six months, that's how much the legislation allows, and as i say, it's six months more than we would have had.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Aug 13, 2013 23:59:43 GMT
Believe me,i am not knocking Oxvox,or any other organisation that has the club at heart,BUT, with regards to buying the stadium, "6 months is a long time to raise funds and do a PR campaign" What planet are you on ? Its 12 years and counting,how much money is in the fund? Has anyone made a real attempt to purchase the Stadium during those 12 years? Merry kept stringing fans along suggesting that it was a possibility but we all know that was a load of BS. It may or may not be possible but there are increasing numbers of instances where groups of fans are getting involved in ownership of clubs and stadia. Six months may not be a long time but there is nothing to stop advanced planning to ensure that if a counter bid is needed many of the elements are already in place. The supporters trust should be the catalyst for wealthy and less wealthy fans to come together with a common aim but it seems that there are a small number who are more interested in their egos than the benefit of OUFC and its supporters. Alternatively we can all take a defeatist attitude and allow the Status Quo to continue.
|
|
|
Post by one trick Raponi on Aug 14, 2013 19:32:32 GMT
Broadly speaking any deal that gives OUFC increased revenue is better than the zilch share we currently have. I'm sure OxVox have ideas on what would represent a worthwhile deal, as will a lot of fans.
Working on the presumption the revenue share deal goes through and gives a percentage of revenue directly to OUFC, supporters buy into it and OUFC (& Stad Co) revenue rises. Do OxVox have any thoughts on how increased revenue for StadCo would affect the value/asking price of the stadium? and how this might affect our chances (positively or negatively) of securing the finance necessary to buy the ground?
|
|
|
Post by Mark Sennett on Aug 14, 2013 19:39:28 GMT
Increased revenue if say £100k-£200k per annum for stadco would do little to increase the value.
|
|
|
Post by ox9hp18 on Aug 14, 2013 19:46:21 GMT
as well as the £1 any non season ticket holder pays to drink in the bar , why not IF we get any cut of the takings , they should be put into a fund to buy out ka55ham ?
|
|
|
Post by one trick Raponi on Aug 14, 2013 20:02:37 GMT
Increased revenue if say £100k-£200k per annum for stadco would do little to increase the value. Thanks Mark.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Aug 15, 2013 1:15:03 GMT
The £1 goes to the 12th Man Fund so none to Kassam and any cut of the takings will go to OUFC to help reduce losses.
The price of the stadium quoted by IL at a distant Fans Forum included roughly 4 times the cash generated by the stadium. If the profits increase as a result of the new bar then it could slightly increase Kassam's asking price but costs (products and staff) and OUFC share have to be deductd first so any profit will be a fraction of the additional takings so any increase will not be significant in the overall scheme.
The significant additional cash generated from London Welsh will have a much bigger impact.
|
|