Board/Fan Relationship

Vorselaarhammer

Jezz the Independent article makes grim reading....

Most depressing thing is the assertion that the only thing we're ever truly been the best at is Hooliganism.

grey_til_I_dye

bbb

Well, as long as, in the end, the board come out badly in your narrative, that's job done, isn't it?

You couldn't make it up (although you do seem to be trying to...)

Didn't George Orwell write about something like that?

MrsGrey

billybondsbeard said:

I personally would not now be surprised if the whole 'March' could have been a stitch up from start to finish

Could you clarify, as I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'a stitch up'.

Do you mean that you think it likely that the board and the Real group colluded to pretend there was going to be a march (but always intending to call it off) so that they could... what?

Or that the club wasn't part of the collusion, but the whole 'fake' march was for some reason (?what reason) an elaborate con by the ICF?

#confused

Pearces_Left_Foot

Just reading comments on the club finances 14.2 million of the loans to G&S were repaid and the rest are now interest free. The Boleyn was sold £40 million (a profit of £8.7 mio after mortgage etc taken off) I agree the board has underinvested in the team and the recruitment has been poor if they had got this right and we had a team that wasn't stuttering through the season I think most fans would be a lot happier.

Pearces_Left_Foot

Reading that Independent article the most worrying thing is that the Ultra/Lazio style link that they suggest that certain elements want. I could n't think of anything worse to be honest.

grey_til_I_dye

bbb

I'm indifferent to your dislike of the board; that isn't the issue for me.

I'm just pointing out that you seem happy to change your narrative as it suits, so long as the end result is that you get to paint the board in a negative light.

ianbishoplegend

What’s going on these days? Is there going to be a protest/March?

grey_til_I_dye

ibl

It's a shame there isn't a way to search for information.

Then you'd be able to answer your own question...

(Or you could try reading back a bit.)

claretandbluesky

This seats closer to the pitch thing has really caught the imagination of many people but it would of course only affect the 4000 (complete guess in case anyone asks) that may get a ticket in the new seats. The idea of how satisfaction could be derived by someone sitting in row W is unclear but so many people have adopted the seating proximity to pitch as something they need see happen. What they really need is for the stadium to have been built for football and the whole stands to move 30yards forward and then it is a central issue that effects everyone, as it is most would not benefit in the least from new seating closer to the pitch.

PrestonHammer

As speculation goes, that's quite impressive. I look forward to the book also. ;lol

grey_til_I_dye

I'm not attacking your point of view, though, am I?

Which bit of

I'm indifferent to your dislike of the board; that isn't the issue for me.

didn't make that clear for you?

Or was it clear, but you chose to ignore it for the sake of a cheap point?

I rather had the impression that until recently you saw the RWHF... as working class heroes, taking it to the man, and wresting back the soul of the club from the hands of unscrupulous pornographers.

Now, suddenly, they are the perfidious lapdogs of the imperialist oppressor.

As I say, any narrative, as long as it suits your aims.

MrsGrey

PrestonHammer said:

As speculation goes, that's quite impressive. I look forward to the book also. ;lol

Just don't be looking for it in the non-fiction section ;wink

grey_til_I_dye

Clearly, I didn't.

That's why there's a flag button.

Hammerwombat

Really this whole march, not march. Anti board, icf, real west ham fans, not real west ham fans. Bill gardener, united against the lies and sold our soul down the river thing is getting a bit tiresome. Just shows you that being involved with a premiership football club is not the easiest thing in the world. The board are doing their thing, mostly right, unfortunately a few howlers, but generally sort of in the right direction. And then the might of a few thousand other supporters who want it different can’t even organise a march, or the proverbial drinking session in a brewery without splitting in to different factions. Saturday we have a rather important game against Burnley. I personally believe that is more important. Mr Gardener, I wish you well. I don’t know you, never met you as far as I’m aware, but please keep supporting the club you love. You will only miss out on the highs and lows. ;scarf

Slaven_Cups_His_Beard

Pearces_Left_Foot said:

Just reading comments on the club finances 14.2 million of the loans to G&S were repaid and the rest are now interest free. The Boleyn was sold £40 million (a profit of £8.7 mio after mortgage etc taken off) I agree the board has underinvested in the team and the recruitment has been poor if they had got this right and we had a team that wasn't stuttering through the season I think most fans would be a lot happier.

14.2m of loans and mainly interest were paid to the owners, they’ve still left 45m left owing with deferred repayment and still getting interest but at a reduced amount of around 3%.

The Boleyn was sold for 38m and showed a profit due to what it had been valued at in the previous accounts. The club owed the banks before we moved and that was paid off along with the LLDC and the cost to make the LS look west ham.

They basically took back that money while have a zero net spend this season and therefore going back on their word that the transfer kitty would be the ticket sales when we moved just like the old days at UP.

Add to that the ticket revenue didn’t go up anywhere near like the 10-12m they projected.

Personally I would still have a problem with any/all the above even if we were winning most weeks.

Slaven_Cups_His_Beard

Regarding the March then it appears RWHFAG have put their trust in Brady keeping to her word and talks were their original aim.

The chairman of WHUISA was the one that was some made a connection to the left wing and his association years gone by with Khan. He’s since received threats (truly out of order) and has said he won’t be going back to games. There are also other rumours that certain people were “pressured” (probably the best description) into not marching once RWHFAG sat down with board members

SuzanneClaret

It’s a sad state of affairs in which no one comes well.

epsom_bubbles

What’s happened to our club. A while back, we got Moyes in (wasn’t sure of him at the time) and he gradually steadied the ship. We ‘pinged’ up the table, there was a confident air about the club. Suddenly, we are shipping goals, looking over our shoulder, praying that we maintain the 3 point buffer. Now we have marches, no marches, dissatisfaction with the board. We even have some people on here having a pop at each other. I feel I want to close my eyes for a couple of months and see what sort of club we turn out to be. Hopefully it will be as a Premiership side, looking forward to the new season and all singing from the same song sheet. I’ve been a supporter for over 50 years, and seen some worrying times. This seems to be among the worst, which is a shame after that positive vibe a few months back. I guess a convincing win on Saturday will make ne feel ‘good’ again and dispel all this march/protest stuff. Rant over

Yeoldhammer

West Ham fan TV, have put an interview up with Andy Swallow and Micky Morgan head of (RWHFAG) to explain why the march was called off.

Yeoldhammer

they also have an interview with David Gold on there

claretandbluesky

I think that interview left as many questions as answers as was conducted by a sympathetic interviewer, a bit like Theresa May being interviewed by one of her own cabinet members. The questions needed in my view were, if you were representing the members as was made clear why was the decision not to march put to the members? was there any intervention by third parties sinister or not which put pressure upon you? What explicit evidence did you have that the subsequent decision to march without you was being backed by the left side of politics? If you were against marching from the beginning how did the decision to march come about? if through canvassed members wishes and as you had previously expressed this is not about us it's about you, then why did you take the decision to march back from the members without even consultation ?

This however is just in the interests of providing answers to reasonable questions, as I will say I agree with not marching on account of providing the board a window of time to act upon promises.

I do also respect that the admin members interviewed are, and have quite rightly made the point, that this was all new to them, and so i recognise it's not right to expect foot perfect communication and PR.

SuzanneClaret

It’s looks like, to me, from the outside, a platform to air personal individual grievances. The main one being moving from Upton Park.

This can not be changed.

What is needed is a constructive plan for changing the things that can be changed.

Respectful upkeep of the memorial garden.
West Hamming the stadium and the island.
Changing the temporary seating in the BM & TB into the permanent retractable seating promised.
Concession on the second floor concourse.

ASLEFshrugged

Suze - the stadium and the island aren't West Ham's, they belong to the GLA/Mayor of London or Newham Council so they might not want them to be more West Ham-ed

Even if Mayor/Newham agreed to more West Ham-ing they'd have to be un-West Ham-ed to comply with clause under the leasing agreement that both the stadium and the island has to be "clean" for athletics

As for permanent retractable seating I'm not even sure that is possible without major engineering works that would need longer than pre-season break, we might have to move out for a whole season and you can bet your boots that the GLA will not pay for it.

SuzanneClaret

I know ;weep

But it is what was promised.

I think at the very least the owners should be pushing for it.

claretandbluesky

I agree and I think that's why an affective fans group is needed to hold to account public promises and push for action on new issues as they arise. I believe most clubs have fan representation to some degree but I feel it is likely just lip service with most and that is where this group changed things as the board really took them seriously and tried to work with them. Due to subsequent fracture and meltdown it remains to be seen if this will continue to be the case, I hope it will.

OldCastleSwift

SuzanneClaret said:

I know ;weep

But it is what was promised.

And this is one reason why some fans feel like they've been lied to.

Makes me sad to see how much of a mess this club has become.

SuzanneClaret

I still hope she didn’t lie (I know, more fool me), but I do.

I hope what KB said in those meetings she meant, but due to constraints placed by E20 she couldn’t deliver.

It’s a easier than to think that I was duped.

PrestonHammer

Surely before they had promised anything, they would have known whether or not they could deliver on those promises. It seems to me that they would say anything to get everybody on side.

SuzanneClaret

KB was made promises by the owners about the retractable seating, which she then made to us.

Turns out they couldn’t/wouldn’t do it.

It’s a big mess and no mistake.

grey_til_I_dye

Unless people are going to insist that Brady is flat lying, here is her response from the meeting:

In 2013 London Legacy Development Corporation provided us with the video that we shared with you in good faith, regarding the technical information about how the seating solution would work.

From a West Ham point of view, however, our primary focus was only in relation to the distance of the seats from the pitch and our contract (which is a matter of public record) states that clearly.

Our requirement was that the seats move as close to the pitch as possible and were as permanent as possible during the football season while still being covered by the acoustic roof. We believe this has been delivered.

We accept that as the transformation plans evolved this could have been more effectively clarified and for that we apologise.

We gave you only the information that was given to us and we did so on the basis that LLDC had provided it to us and it was correct.

We do, however believe that we delivered against our commitment of bringing the seats as close to the pitch as possible under the roof whilst maintaining sightlines.

For clarity, the retractable element would not bring seats closer to the pitch; it merely speeds up the transition between modes to aid the multi-purpose use of the Stadium.

So the retractable seating solution initially envisaged would not have made any difference to the match day experience for fans.