Steering Group Meeting Summary

[upperwinngardensowl]

Don't go in the South so cant comment on the busy concourses but that's almost an inevitable result of x thousand people leaving their seats at the same time.

Knocking through to the rooms at the back might be an option since DC's pricing strategy as rendered them empty and pointless.

[jamsandwich]

RE: Kit maker/Contract

 

It looks like the kit manufacturer tried to game us - Agree a contract, then say that they cant meet that price and that it needs to double so take it leave it - thinking that we arent canny enough to quit supplier and get a kit made in 2months.

 

 

roger those guys!

[niallzi]

Whilst in the discussion of SAG and the stadium’s current restricted capacity, i’ve just been on the online ticket booking and noticed that for the Chesterfield game (where the North Stand is closed) the entire Kop, even the restricted view seats, are for sale. Yet for QPR and Sunderland (where the North is open) they are still showing as unavailable. 

 

This is more or less concrete proof that there is nothing wrong with the Kop or its concourses, and that SAG just want to bring down the capacity of the ground as a whole. And it is likely that that is a similar case on the West Stand, and we should have no trouble in bringing the capacity back up to 38,000 subject to successful talks. Which I am quietly confident in!

 

Sounds like real progress in all aspects of the club has, is, and will be made. 

 

Very very happy Owl.

[Big Ron's Sovereign]

2 hours ago, Big Ron's Sovereign said:

Thanks, 

re the kit: was owt said about stripes ever returning? 

 

Phantom Negger  aka @nevthelodgemoorowl

Why do you just neg and why this time?

[Guest Deleted member]

56 minutes ago, Hedwig said:

Other thing is we should be looking at doing something to West Lower to increase capacity in there to 2000, then the upper is ours !

 

There are 2,494 seats in the lower half, and 4,164 seats in the upper enclosure

[Guest Ash76]

10 minutes ago, Big Ron's Sovereign said:

 

Phantom Negger  aka @nevthelodgemoorowl

Why do you just neg and why this time?

 

Why do people even care about being negged?

 

Ironic post this though considering you did the same to me earlier 

 

 

 

[Steelman]

2 hours ago, Ash76 said:

I don't really care and it doesn't matter but this supplier issue. You'd have thought they'd have signed a legally binding deal so that goalposts couldn't be moved 

 

Not buying that one myself (the explanation not the kit)

I agree 100%. They're either lying or just plain incompetent. Reading the excuse makes my blood boil. When you enter an agreement, the club should be doing the due diligence to prevent this happening. It's what all businesses do. If the club has placed themselves in a position where they can be effectively held to ransom because they have not had the correct legally binding contract in place it's a disgrace. Never mind sacking the entire medical staff, what about those running the off-field side of the business.

 

Are these the same people entrusted to identify our transfer targets and then conduct negotiations with their representatives? Hope not.

[StudentOwl]

Just now, OneDavidHirst said:

I agree 100%. They're either lying or just plain incompetent. Reading the excuse makes my blood boil. When you enter an agreement, the club should be doing the due diligence to prevent this happening. It's what all businesses do. If the club has placed themselves in a position where they can be effectively held to ransom because they have not had the correct legally binding contract in place it's a disgrace. Never mind sacking the entire medical staff, what about those running the off-field side of the business.

 

Are these the same people entrusted to identify our transfer targets and then conduct negotiations with their representatives? Hope not.

Say theoretically this happened, what are the club meant to do? By the timeline stated, this would have happened around April ish? So this company move the goalposts, we demand the original deal be kept, they say no. The options are

 

1. Find another company

2. Start legal proceedings against them demanding they honour the original contract

 

Option 2 would take weeks/months, meaning we definitely wouldn't get the kit in time, so option 1 is really the only choice. 

 

Who knows, maybe option 2 is currently ongoing, hence the lack of statement by the club at any point? Don't comment on it, that way there can be no chance of a countersuit for defamation or similar. Not saying that's definitely what happened, maybe we're doing nothing as it isn't worth the financial costs it could bring... But realistically persuing a legal battle whilst not finding another supplier would result in us not having a kit

 

I've been highly critical of the club over this issue... Whether the story they've given us is true or not who knows, but it certainly would explain everything and saying they should have demanded the original contract be honoured and just hoping it'd have been sorted in time would be mismanagement beyond the highest order. If it were me in this scenario (and it all indeed played out as we've been told) I would have done exactly the same as the club did in finding another supplier, and I'd be persuing legal action. We did the first bit, whether we've done the second bit we'll have to wait and see

[RedSoxOwl]

25 minutes ago, niallzi said:

Whilst in the discussion of SAG and the stadium’s current restricted capacity, i’ve just been on the online ticket booking and noticed that for the Chesterfield game (where the North Stand is closed) the entire Kop, even the restricted view seats, are for sale. Yet for QPR and Sunderland (where the North is open) they are still showing as unavailable. 

 

This is more or less concrete proof that there is nothing wrong with the Kop or its concourses, and that SAG just want to bring down the capacity of the ground as a whole. And it is likely that that is a similar case on the West Stand, and we should have no trouble in bringing the capacity back up to 38,000 subject to successful talks. Which I am quietly confident in!

 

Sounds like real progress in all aspects of the club has, is, and will be made. 

 

Very very happy Owl.

For the Sunderland game the majority of the restricted view tickets appear to be available on the online shop, but not for QPR. It's almost as if they're making it up as they go along... 

I really hope this is getting sorted because the sight of a full kop is magnificent and well done to Chansiri for being so aggressive on this because the SAG/SYP seem an absolute nightmare.

[nevthelodgemoorowl]

5 minutes ago, Big Ron's Sovereign said:

 

Phantom Negger  aka @nevthelodgemoorowl

Why do you just neg and why this time?

Because it's a dead rubber. You may not have noticed but we have a new shirt and it's not stripes. Also the misconception that stripes are traditional is way off the mark. Off the top of my head I think it was 24 years before we first donned the stripes.

 

In our History we have worn, the shirt considered traditional, stripes less than 66% of the time. None stripes including plain, hoops, halves and a variety of post modernist designs have been used from time to time. However, given the time it took us to first don the stripes the term 'traditional' is in need of consideration.

 

I suppose I neg because the shirt does not impact on my loyalty to the club. I didn't have a dicky fit when we played out our entire cup run of 66 in all white, nor when we adopted the WBA style of white sleeves and not today as we return to solid Royal with white sleeves. Changing shirts is a commercial rather than an aesthetic practice. We are used to it, let it pass without comment...Unless of course the club colours are sacrificed. 

 

4 Paras of expaination; That's why I find it easier to neg, nothing personal !     

[Big Ron's Sovereign]

16 minutes ago, Ash76 said:

 

Why do people even care about being negged?

 

Ironic post this though considering you did the same to me earlier 

 

 

 

 

I disagreed with your comment, hence why I negged. The one I'm referring to was just a question I was asking and was weird getting negged for.

 

Just for the record I don't give a monkeys about being negged, I have received a truck load from the Nuhiu lovers 

[fred mciver]

Again DC seems to have played a blinder but sad to see little about recruitment process and people, last season and this.

 

Accordingly, I don't buy the teams worked us out last season ploy.

 

Surely then, they also worked out Brighton from past 5 years and Newcastle after Xmas.

 

Quality usually wins out and with a £6 mill stopper coming and, just as significant,  NO loss of key players, we are going up.

[Dick_Turpin]

1 minute ago, fred mciver said:

Again DC seems to have played a blinder but sad to see little about recruitment process and people, last season and this.

 

Accordingly, I don't buy the teams worked us out last season ploy.

 

Surely then, they also worked out Brighton from past 5 years and Newcastle after Xmas.

 

Quality usually wins out and with a £6 mill stopper coming and, just as significant,  NO loss of key players, we are going up.

Huddersfield didn't exactly sit back against us. 

[Guest Ash76]

26 minutes ago, OneDavidHirst said:

I agree 100%. They're either lying or just plain incompetent. Reading the excuse makes my blood boil. When you enter an agreement, the club should be doing the due diligence to prevent this happening. It's what all businesses do. If the club has placed themselves in a position where they can be effectively held to ransom because they have not had the correct legally binding contract in place it's a disgrace. Never mind sacking the entire medical staff, what about those running the off-field side of the business.

 

Are these the same people entrusted to identify our transfer targets and then conduct negotiations with their representatives? Hope not.

 

Blimey, I'm not sure it needs you getting this worked up about it mate

[Mountain Owl]

46 minutes ago, Grandad said:

 

There are 2,494 seats in the lower half, and 4,164 seats in the upper enclosure

That was gonna be my point. Reading between the lines SAG have put a safety capacity of 1,500 on the lower lepps which is ludicrous considering its far easier to get out of the ground than from the upper tier. If this new guy can get this back up to say 2,200 then there should be no reason we can't have the upper tier for our own fans.

Edited August 3, 2017 by Mountain Owl

[Hedwig]

49 minutes ago, Grandad said:

 

There are 2,494 seats in the lower half, and 4,164 seats in the upper enclosure

Knew there was more than 2k available.

I was meaning this new guy needs to get SAG / SYP to increase the capacity to somewhere near what it is capable of, allowing the visitors to have the lower, leaving the upper for home fans..

Edited August 3, 2017 by Hedwig

[Concrete Owl]

Thanks Jarvy. Saves scrolling through all the tripe. Much appreciated. 

[Guest Deleted member]

I would imagine by identifying the kit supplier as the company that do the stuff for Mercedes - he may have potentially opened up a reyt can of worms by suggesting they reneged on a contract

[soldierboyblue]

1 hour ago, rickygoo said:

Huddersfield didn't exactly sit back against us. 

You sometimes have to accept we play below par  and are not going to win every game - the shame was it was in the play offs.

[The Batman]

1 hour ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said:

Because it's a dead rubber. You may not have noticed but we have a new shirt and it's not stripes. Also the misconception that stripes are traditional is way off the mark. Off the top of my head I think it was 24 years before we first donned the stripes.

 

In our History we have worn, the shirt considered traditional, stripes less than 66% of the time. None stripes including plain, hoops, halves and a variety of post modernist designs have been used from time to time. However, given the time it took us to first don the stripes the term 'traditional' is in need of consideration.

 

I suppose I neg because the shirt does not impact on my loyalty to the club. I didn't have a dicky fit when we played out our entire cup run of 66 in all white, nor when we adopted the WBA style of white sleeves and not today as we return to solid Royal with white sleeves. Changing shirts is a commercial rather than an aesthetic practice. We are used to it, let it pass without comment...Unless of course the club colours are sacrificed. 

 

4 Paras of expaination; That's why I find it easier to neg, nothing personal !     

 

I know you're getting on a bit Nev, but surely you can't remember our 1st 24 years?

 

Nobody knows what we wore until 1875, so you've no idea if we wore stripes.

 

We've had them for the majority of our 150 years.

 

It's our tradition.

 

Now we seem to have no real identity.

 

Just blue and white, in no particular pattern.