The VSC report following todays meeting with the club

[Filo]

I can't understand why the vsc are a propaganda machine for the current board. When it's clear that all they want to to is leave the club ticking over until the next bidder comes along. 
How does that create consistency? 

You were screaming about the VSC getting some answers for you, and when they do you then accuse them of being a propaganda machine, how can they win with people like you?

[wing commander]

Boomstick...Give it a rest..RB attended most games last season because I see him..

   As for this plan...In theory it sounds good but for me there are far too many holes in it....Firstly we are two weeks away from starting and have very few of these pro's,development players etc..I might not listen to Wellens opinions on the club but as a player,when he says we haven't got much coming through,i believe him...So were are we going to get them from?? Or are we just going to offer pro contracts to Youth players to release them later when we realise they weren't good enough to start with...Also injuries?? We get a lot,we could vwery easily and quickly find ourselves with a team full of inexperienced kids,and we know how that normally ends up...
    Also (and this needs confirming by someone) our academy status isn't that highly accredited as yet and if we have any stand out players at a young level,they can be taken by higher academy clubs for minimal compensation...Is that true someone....
    There is no perfect system for clubs like ours,unless you live with the fairies like Boomstick seems to that is,and I'm not convinced this will work for us,but thats were we are going so im supporting it..The big plus is that its a long term,safeguard for the club which is the big plus....

[bobjimwilly]

I can't understand why the vsc are a propaganda machine for the current board. When it's clear that all they want to to is leave the club ticking over until the next bidder comes along. 
How does that create consistency? 

I suppose you could come to that assumption if you ignore everything you're being told and refute any answers your given after continually asking questions 

[Boomstick]

So the vsc accept there is at best 'risk' in the boards 'plan' of having a 'sustainable' re cheap budget? In that Rovers could get relegated, by letting all the good senior pro's leave.

Also, this month, this year or anytime another party could come along (sequentia) and buy Rovers.

The board hardly did their homework when agreeing to sell to JR, if they did they would know the football league would reject it. Hardly acting in the best interests of the club.

Sorry but I find I need to critique the current regime, in the interest of balance because the vsc is flooding this site with positive vibes towards the board, when we could do with a bit of balance

[IDM]

I can't understand why the vsc are a propaganda machine for the current board. When it's clear that all they want to to is leave the club ticking over until the next bidder comes along. 
How does that create consistency? 

If you don't agree what the VSC does, either walk away, or join.  Join and stand for one of the roles in the VSC hierarchy and campaign for the changes you want to see?

I am a VSC member - I joined so I could get access to further "members only" information sections and for the occasional offer such as seats in their box.  I didn't join for any "political" reason nor do I specifically agree with what the VSC says or does all the time.  Most of the time my own opinions do mirror those of the VSC but that is coincidence - I make up my own mind.

[IDM]

Sorry but I find I need to critique the current regime, in the interest of balance because the vsc is flooding this site with positive vibes towards the board, when we could do with a bit of balance

The VSC is reporting what it found from the club yesterday.  What did you find from the club, to counter that, to provide balance?  You are only providing your opinion, which, as this is a forum, is open to questioning and criticism (as is everyone else's). 

[wing commander]

   They sold the club for a deal in the best interests of the club as was told by your hero JR...if even LT was misled how do you expect the club to know..It was up to JR to prove he had the funds..He told us he did,he told LT he did and he told the club he did....But for whatever reason the FL said he didn't...As much as you accuse the VSC as being biased...Your very hypocritical...because Ryan can do no wrong in your eyes can he..!!!!

[Glyn_Wigley]

The only thing balanced about Boomstick is the chip on each shoulder! 

[mpc123]

I don't understand , what do you want TB to do. Already another and I say another 7 figures are being added for nothing with this plan. What more really do you want?

The only person who will take over and probably not expect anything back is JR and he has failed.

So what next, the next person will try to cream us, we have had it before and look what happened.

This plan fits perfectly, we try to progress year on year still with investment, rather than a couple of good years and no DRFC.

Get a grip. It is so easy to throw away another ones fortune.

Id rather in 10 years we had spent 5 years in league 1 and 5 in the champ than in 10 years no DRFC.

[RedJ]

So the vsc accept there is at best 'risk' in the boards 'plan' of having a 'sustainable' re cheap budget?

f**king hell, business plan contains risk shocker. Stop the presses.

[Filo]

So the vsc accept there is at best 'risk' in the boards 'plan' of having a 'sustainable' re cheap budget? In that Rovers could get relegated, by letting all the good senior pro's leave.

Also, this month, this year or anytime another party could come along (sequentia) and buy Rovers.

The board hardly did their homework when agreeing to sell to JR, if they did they would know the football league would reject it. Hardly acting in the best interests of the club.

Sorry but I find I need to critique the current regime, in the interest of balance because the vsc is flooding this site with positive vibes towards the board, when we could do with a bit of balance

In the interests of balance could the same be said of the people behing the shambolic takeover.



P.S. I'll let you into a secret, contrary to popular belief JR has never been canonised, and never will be, open your eyes and engage the brain before posting!

[DRNaith]

Maybe the next time we have a meeting with the club there will be a Rovers supporter there to speak to the owners and not Nick Clegg.

And by "we" you mean?...

[Wild Rover]

So the vsc accept there is at best 'risk' in the boards 'plan' of having a 'sustainable' re cheap budget? In that Rovers could get relegated, by letting all the good senior pro's leave.

Also, this month, this year or anytime another party could come along (sequentia) and buy Rovers.

The board hardly did their homework when agreeing to sell to JR, if they did they would know the football league would reject it. Hardly acting in the best interests of the club.

Sorry but I find I need to critique the current regime, in the interest of balance because the vsc is flooding this site with positive vibes towards the board, when we could do with a bit of balance

In the interests of balance could the same be said of the people behing the shambolic takeover.



P.S. I'll let you into a secret, contrary to popular belief JR has never been canonised, and never will be, open your eyes and engage the brain before posting!

Firstly, the "FL" only voted on the changes to "Ownership" in L1 and 2 after 4th June, that was the point at which the "Liquid assets" were introduced too. So the take over was well and truly underway at that point, SO, neither would have been aware of the "Rule Changes".
Secondly, it was the FFI where R/T did not meet criteria, and as we stand, the "FL" left door open for R/T to show funding .

So, I fail to see how either LT/JR or TB/DW and /OR their advisors could be aware.

Having said that, a representative of DRFC will have been at that meeting, so at some point in time AFTER 4th June, the club will have known the outcome of the vote and the "Regulations". Now who was that DRFC rep?.

[RobTheRover]

So the vsc accept there is at best 'risk' in the boards 'plan' of having a 'sustainable' re cheap budget? In that Rovers could get relegated, by letting all the good senior pro's leave.

Also, this month, this year or anytime another party could come along (sequentia) and buy Rovers.

The board hardly did their homework when agreeing to sell to JR, if they did they would know the football league would reject it. Hardly acting in the best interests of the club.

Sorry but I find I need to critique the current regime, in the interest of balance because the vsc is flooding this site with positive vibes towards the board, when we could do with a bit of balance

Sorry Boomer, I'm struggling with that one.  Exactly how are we flooding the place with positive vibes about the board?

We are simply trying to work with the club to help it move forward.  We wrote to JR during the take over proposal period offering the same.  As I stated many times, dont make this an issue of personalities, because it isn't one. 

The VSC is there to be a critical friend to the club (amongst other things) and we do tell them where we think they get it wrong and we do feed in to them where supporters think they get it wrong through comments on here.  What we do have at the moment are a CEO and a dedicated team of staff who are more than happy to listen to those comments and take appropriate action where they can.

[Wellred]

Maybe the next time we have a meeting with the club there will be a Rovers supporter there to speak to the owners and not Nick Clegg.

And by "we" you mean?...

I kind of thought it might be the supporters.
Sorry I didn't realise it was only meant to be for VSC members.

[BobG]

Don't you actually read what's written Boomstick?

BobG

[no eyed deer]

Too many posters on here remember me of Ned Flanders.  My glass is not  half empty , but bone dry

[bedale rover]

Maybe the next time we have a meeting with the club there will be a Rovers supporter there to speak to the owners and not Nick Clegg.

And by "we" you mean?...

I kind of thought it might be the supporters.
Sorry I didn't realise it was only meant to be for VSC members.

2 things
I am sure that the various supporters branches could talk to the club if they asked
Aren't the VSC members supporters too?


There was clearly a paucity of information about how the club was going to move forward after the collapse of the proposed takeover and the VSC tried to ask the questions that ALL supporters would want answered

[Wellred]

Maybe the next time we have a meeting with the club there will be a Rovers supporter there to speak to the owners and not Nick Clegg.

And by "we" you mean?...

I kind of thought it might be the supporters.
Sorry I didn't realise it was only meant to be for VSC members.

2 things
I am sure that the various supporters branches could talk to the club if they asked
Aren't the VSC members supporters too?


There was clearly a paucity of information about how the club was going to move forward after the collapse of the proposed takeover and the VSC tried to ask the questions that ALL supporters would want answered

We're any supporters consulted or asked what questions they would like to ask before this meeting took place?

[RobTheRover]

It was a general meeting to discuss the club's next steps, long term strategy, and how the club would repair the damage of the failed TO, but there were a few comments from the forum used to make points (specifically around budget and player comments/departures), so in that regard supporter's comments drove much of it. 

[BobG]

Wild Rover:

The agenda, proposed rule changes and supporting papers are sent out weeks in advance for any AGM. Now, whilst JR was not on the Board of DRFC at the time, he certainly was both a major shareholder and a bloke who supposedly has shedloads of experience. He should have known of the liklihood of the rule change aeons before he launched his takeover. Changes of that significance don't suddenly spring out of the blue. He's had ample time and opportunity to learn what was likely to happen. It's a major failure by him and his advisors (the word is a total misnomer in this instance) which undermines their credibility even more - as if more were actually needed. Mind you, and perish the thought, all this blame heaped upon the FL could simply be a convenient place to lay the blame rather than accept the responsibility.

No. JR had access to all the imfo. He knew where to go to get it. He's known the process for 10 years and more. The failing was entirely down to him.

BobG