Save our Southend Thursdays meeting here!

[TrueBlue]

Ron did not come across at all well in my opinion. What SUFC would be left with are scraps, when and if we move to Fossetts.To have open ended situation where Ron could take at will is
totally ludicrous !! He wants it all ways.His reaction to refunds on season and away tickets was dreadful.He should have offered refunds and advertised it straight away, not after being
pressured.His puppet accountant, mentioned nobody had requested a refund !! I would be interested to know what are the revenue streams per year ! FA,Premier League monies, Pools,
season tickets,sponsership,match day revenue, transfer fees, advertising,and others I can't remember.So does Ron really pay much out of his own pocket ? When he first became owner of SUFC,the debt was just over three million, and we owned Roots Hall. Transferred the assets
into his own companies and then charged rent. We now owe seventeen million plus to Ron,and have minimal assets.A catastrophe by all means.I fear nothing ,but heartache for the future.

Indeed it’s not like his accountant is going to say “no that’s not right Ron”

 

[Westcliff DGS]

I think if you ask many of our fans they think the same about MM, Ron does his usual and tries to create a divide. As for his swearing, a degree of professionalism would not hurt would it? Especially when that’s being recorded
Drop me a message you can ask your own question, open forum after all

Yep i agree, could have been more professional from RM and some others actually, while I didnt find the swearing offensive the points could have been made in other ways. We have all probably sworn at some stage in a conversation and thought after i probably could have phrased the better, hopefully RM goes away and does that.

When I watched it (twice), I thought the most professional thing that came across was the guy who switched his camera off while eating, think was the guy who did the video. He also made some good points and didn’t interrupt replies to his remarks.

Over all it was decent as I have said before, but on the professional thing I honk people need to remember how their reactions will come across. It is ok to disagree with what people say but there wa sone person shaking his head and spinning around in his chair when he disagreed with a comment, there were people clearly not paying attention, when people are speaking that is off putting in my opinion. I do not think anyone would do that in a meeting face to face, so for me it is a professional thing to do when doing it over Zoom or just turn your camera off and vent in private.

These things are in their infancy and will get better like the asking of questions will as they go forward, as I said in a previous post it is a good first step and a good initiative.

The only thing I do not think is a good idea is having a lot of people their if it is an open forum, when I say a lot I mean more than was there on the video. It should be an agreed set of attendees, agreed agenda with 1 (preferable) or 2 (at max) asking questions otherwise as I mentioned before in my previous post people talk over each other and it becomes hard to clear.

I will also add, while RM did come across poorly when speaking to Jack, I thought Jack handled it well and I actually think Ron likes him. I would think he could be a good option as one of the 2 (if two were chosen) to ask questions as I think Ron would be engaging.

Woud still be nice to know who is in attendance so we can put faces to names if that makes sense.

 

[TrueBlue]

Yep i agree, could have been more professional from RM and some others actually, while I didnt find the swearing offensive the points could have been made in other ways. We have all probably sworn at some stage in a conversation and thought after i probably could have phrased the better, hopefully RM goes away and does that.

When I watched it (twice), I thought the most professional thing that came across was the guy who switched his camera off while eating, think was the guy who did the video. He also made some good points and didn’t interrupt replies to his remarks.

Over all it was decent as I have said before, but on the professional thing I honk people need to remember how their reactions will come across. It is ok to disagree with what people say but there wa sone person shaking his head and spinning around in his chair when he disagreed with a comment, there were people clearly not paying attention, when people are speaking that is off putting in my opinion. I do not think anyone would do that in a meeting face to face, so for me it is a professional thing to do when doing it over Zoom or just turn your camera off and vent in private.

These things are in their infancy and will get better like the asking of questions will as they go forward, as I said in a previous post it is a good first step and a good initiative.

The only thing I do not think is a good idea is having a lot of people their if it is an open forum, when I say a lot I mean more than was there on the video. It should be an agreed set of attendees, agreed agenda with 1 (preferable) or 2 (at max) asking questions otherwise as I mentioned before in my previous post people talk over each other and it becomes hard to clear.

I will also add, while RM did come across poorly when speaking to Jack, I thought Jack handled it well and I actually think Ron likes him. I would think he could be a good option as one of the 2 (if two were chosen) to ask questions as I think Ron would be engaging.

Woud still be nice to know who is in attendance so we can put faces to names if that makes sense.

Will have to check but I’m sure there is a setting within Zoom that sticks a name on your box, that would be helpful. It’s early days and like us I’m sure the trust are trying to perfect it. The feedback is most helpful

 

[Westcliff DGS]

Will have to check but I’m sure there is a setting within Zoom that sticks a name on your box, that would be helpful. It’s early days and like us I’m sure the trust are trying to perfect it. The feedback is most helpful

That s why i offer the feedback, teams puts up the names so am sure Zoom does too Some how. Never used Zoom so just assuming

 

[Barling Magna]

It should be an agreed set of attendees, agreed agenda with 1 (preferable) or 2 (at max) asking questions otherwise as I mentioned before in my previous post people talk over each other and it becomes hard to clear.

This is the priority for the next Zoom meeting. All other attendees should just listen.

 

[Shrimpet steve]

**** off ron lol! Never heard ron swear so much!

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Finally caught up with this.Thought it was interesting when Scott was asking a few questions.Suprised that the (really important) financial stuff only came up in the last 10 mins or so.Paul Fitz. has grown a pair too (must have got fed up with all those (private) ST meetings with the Chairman.(See the Chairman's still giving out the same old BS when he can get away with it too).

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

This is the priority for the next Zoom meeting. All other attendees should just listen.

Thought most of them did anyway.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Ron did not come across at all well in my opinion. What SUFC would be left with are scraps, when and if we move to Fossetts.To have open ended situation where Ron could take at will is
totally ludicrous !! He wants it all ways.His reaction to refunds on season and away tickets was dreadful.He should have offered refunds and advertised it straight away, not after being
pressured.His puppet accountant, mentioned nobody had requested a refund !! I would be interested to know what are the revenue streams per year ! FA,Premier League monies, Pools,
season tickets,sponsership,match day revenue, transfer fees, advertising,and others I can't remember.So does Ron really pay much out of his own pocket ? When he first became owner of SUFC,the debt was just over three million, and we owned Roots Hall. Transferred the assets
into his own companies and then charged rent. We now owe seventeen million plus to Ron,and have minimal assets.A catastrophe by all means.I fear nothing ,but heartache for the future.

He did mention 25k paid in January (I imagine that's included in the 130k wage bill each month?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I fear we're in for "a transient moment." Hopefully 3 points on Saturday will prove me wrong. ?

 

[OldBlueLady]

Finally caught up with this.Thought it was interesting when Scott was asking a few questions.Suprised that the (really important) financial stuff only came up in the last 10 mins or so.Paul Fitz. has grown a pair too (must have got fed up with all those (private) ST meetings with the Chairman.(See the Chairman's still giving out the same old BS when he can get away with it too).

Fitz has always been ballsy with Ron, just people have never believed or accepted it.

 

[WestyReturns]

In all honesty is this meeting going to achieve anything? I dont think so. Meetings for decades have not changed how he has run the club. It's time for action to force Ron's hand. Need to take the hard stance. Boycott if needed (which many will naturally be doing as attendances decline). Ron clearly doesnt have a clue how to run a successful business.

 

[TrueBlue]

Fitz has always been ballsy with Ron, just people have never believed or accepted it.

Yeah I have to agree, I have seen it myself in person many times, see this is another reason why Kay I said to Paul these should be filmed as now fans can see the trust do give it a go

 

[Ricey]

I thought Paul was very good with Ron and it’s obvious that there was mutual respect as when Paul challenged him Ron didn’t kick off. That is something you don’t see or isn’t able to be shown in written down minutes.

 

[Jai]

Fitz has always been ballsy with Ron, just people have never believed or accepted it.

Exactly, I have never known Paul to be any different with Ron.

There's been an age-old pattern where Southend fans have criticised the Trust for not being tough enough with Ron or asking the right questions, only to discover that when they get the opportunity to question him themselves, they find he is economical with the truth, evasive, or simply doesn't want to disclose the information they want to hear, and there's nothing they can do about it because Ron owns the club lock, stock and barrel and he doesn't have to say anything he doesn't want to. He is not accountable, and that is a major flaw of the football club ownership system we have in this country.

 

[rigsby]

In all honesty is this meeting going to achieve anything? I dont think so. Meetings for decades have not changed how he has run the club. It's time for action to force Ron's hand. Need to take the hard stance. Boycott if needed (which many will naturally be doing as attendances decline). Ron clearly doesnt have a clue how to run a successful business.

Probably best to wait till after Covid before starting a boycott.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Fitz has always been ballsy with Ron, just people have never believed or accepted it.

Yeah I've heard different from someone who attended public meeting which he'd chaired but that's not what I saw.A smaller meeting would help to keep control of the agenda though woold help to keep control of the agenda-Otherwise as the Chairman demonstrated its rather easy to veer off the topic nd down memory lane.

 

[ItsMichaelBlack]

When is the next one ? It would be quality to stream it live like on YouTube or something and have less people or people only
Contributing to the questions and people commenting asking questions in the live comments. That would be pure entertainment. @TrueBlue should do it on his channel as he is establishing a decent following also has videos on his channel from when YouTube first started.

 

[OldBlueLady]

Yeah I've heard different from someone who attended public meeting which he'd chaired but that's not what I saw.

Well, I have no idea who that was, but his stance has never been any different.

 

[Ricey]

Exactly, I have never known Paul to be any different with Ron.

There's been an age-old pattern where Southend fans have criticised the Trust for not being tough enough with Ron or asking the right questions, only to discover that when they get the opportunity to question him themselves, they find he is economical with the truth, evasive, or simply doesn't want to disclose the information they want to hear, and there's nothing they can do about it because Ron owns the club lock, stock and barrel and he doesn't have to say anything he doesn't want to. He is not accountable, and that is a major flaw of the football club ownership system we have in this country.

It certainly opened my eyes and changed my opinion.