General Fans Forum - Kassam Stadium - 7th March @ 6.30pm

[Morris Oxford]

I thought Tim’s excuses for not having a fans forum sooner (as promised) were poor.

The board were clearly waiting for some positive news before agreeing to do one, it was no coincidence that the fans forum was just after planning for the new stadium had gone in.

Claiming that they were busy and using the excuse of a change of manger was flimsy to say the least.

In fact it was Williams and the board who by stupidly delaying the dismissal of Robinson by several months caused the change of manager in March, it should and could have been much sooner than that.

As an aside I had pencilled a question about the delay in sacking Robinson but as the forum was clearly very heavily stadium based I didn’t ask it.

It was along the lines of, ‘do the Board regret the lengthy delay and the error of judgement in not dismissing Robinson sooner, and subsequently letting John Mousiniho slip through their fingers?’

 

[Morris Oxford]

I don't think he has got everything right, far from it.
Exactly.

It would be interesting to know what he believes he’s got wrong.

However I strongly suspect he’s the type of person who can always justify in their own mind their actions, regardless of the consequences.

 

[Roge]

Some strong characters on the board, came over well. Not sure about the funding of the stadium, to vague for me?? Defining time for the club. If for some reason the stadium does not go ahead then the plan B answers seems very weak. They may have lost 15 million over the last 3 years but it seems to me stadium or bust.

 

[Manorlounger]

After waiting 14 months for a Fans Forum, 1 1/2 hours was never going to be sufficient time for all the questions that would have arisen, and that was the case. The introductory waffle from CEO Williams set the tone. Having Nathan Cooper as MD was a bonus as he kept things moving along and also acted as spotter for those with questions.
The lack of time combined with some of the extended answers left little chance for any follow up questions nor, which was a shame, was there any meaningful debate. The mood amongst those in attendance was patient but a discernable dissatisfaction with some responses.
I did get to ask one of my questions but had more that were far more contentious.
What this FF showed was that there is a place for these meetings and that the club, if they really want to engage, really must make time and not just once every 14 months.

 

[Morris Oxford]

After waiting 14 months for a Fans Forum, 1 1/2 hours was never going to be sufficient time for all the questions that would have arisen, and that was the case. The introductory waffle from CEO Williams set the tone. Having Nathan Cooper as MD was a bonus as he kept things moving along and also acted as spotter for those with questions.
The lack of time combined with some of the extended answers left little chance for any follow up questions nor, which was a shame, was there any meaningful debate. The mood amongst those in attendance was patient but a discernable dissatisfaction with some responses.
I did get to ask one of my questions but had more that were far more contentious.
What this FF showed was that there is a place for these meetings and that the club, if they really want to engage, really must make time and not just once every 14 months.

They are worth doing, but a bit like the RadOx FMFF’s, the club will only do them if and when they want to. It will always be on their terms, and that’s another reason why Oxvox must remain truly independent to keep pushing and asking questions that they don’t want to answer.

 

[Morris Oxford]

Some strong characters on the board, came over well. Not sure about the funding of the stadium, to vague for me?? Defining time for the club. If for some reason the stadium does not go ahead then the plan B answers seems very weak. They may have lost 15 million over the last 3 years but it seems to me stadium or bust.

Williams comes across as quite weak, he may be a good bean counter, I wouldn’t know, but he’s not good CEO material.

Agree with the rest of your post though.

 

[Colin B]

A shame not everyone who had a question got a chance to ask one, particularly when some of the questions were so irrelevant. If we're going to hold the management to account then asking well thought out and searching questions is vital. One guy asked why Des couldn't wave at the fans more FFS! And as for the man who asked the management team to tell everyone the losses for the year before they've even been published...I'm all for holding people to account, but he pushed and pushed a point when what he was asking was akin to asking the board of a FTSE 100 company to tell him their profit/loss before it's published to the markets. We need to have credibility as a fan base to challenge the leadership. Perhaps in future questions should be vetted by OXVOX and the OUSP beforehand?

That person was me.

I disagree with your analogy, as it's nothing like the same as dealing with a FTSE 100 company, before their figures have been published. To do that would be classed as insider trading. OUFC is a Limited Company and as such has nine months from the end of their financial year (30 June) to lodge their accounts at Companies House, meaning they have about three weeks from now until the deadline.

But that's all it is, a deadline, the last possible moment the club/company can publish its accounts before being penalised. There is nothing to stop them publishing earlier, and some clubs do (about a third of League One clubs have already lodged their accounts at Companies House), but we are always one of the last to do so. It is not as if these accounts won't have been completed, and it's not as if the shareholders meeting won't have taken place to agree the accounts either. No company leaves that until the last moment, as sometimes things need to be questioned or ratified. The situation is that the club is choosing not to make this information available until the last possible moment. That's a club that talks about communication, but chooses not to communicate until it has to.

When I was a Managing Director my company also had a 30 June year end and we had our shareholders meeting and board meeting each year in early October. This meant the accounts had to be prepared and audited in a three month window. It was a multi national, much larger than OUFC, and the UK division was about the same turnover as OUFC, so there is absolutely no way these accounts are not done.

I was not trying to catch Tim Williams out, I expect him to know the answer to the question, as CEO. He could have said "I'm not authorised by the owners to divulge that information" (which is fine) or he could have said it's approximately X amount, but instead claimed he didn't know. I felt this was disingenuous on his part, which is why I pressed him. I don't think it did him any favours to answer in the way that he did, and it didn't demonstrate a club that wants to communicate openly with its "customers" either. Instead they closed shop.

I was going to lead onto what the current year looks like, as we're three quarters of the way through it and then (with an approximate debt figure available) ask what the situation was regarding turning this debt into equity. It's OK saying that the owners are covering the debt and not charging interest, that's fine until it's not fine. Debt is debt, whether it's "soft debt" or not and we as a club are vulnerable while we have it sitting as debt. The pool of people able to buy a club with £40m of debt is far smaller than the pool of people able to buy a club with negligible debt and football is full of clubs who thought they were OK until their owners ran out of cash, or lost interest, or became unable to get cash out of their respective countries.

I hope we don't find ourselves in that situation, but make no apology for asking the question. It was a Fans Forum after all, and I won't be able to ask the question in early April, when the accounts are out.

Ironically, I was going to finish my question with a short statement saying well done to the panel for what was a generally good Fans Forum, but after the way my question was dealt with, I didn't feel inclined to do so.

 

[OxfordYankee]

That person was me.

I disagree with your analogy, as it's nothing like the same as dealing with a FTSE 100 company, before their figures have been published. To do that would be classed as insider trading. OUFC is a Limited Company and as such has nine months from the end of their financial year (30 June) to lodge their accounts at Companies House, meaning they have about three weeks from now until the deadline.

But that's all it is, a deadline, the last possible moment the club/company can publish its accounts before being penalised. There is nothing to stop them publishing earlier, and some clubs do (about a third of League One clubs have already lodged their accounts at Companies House), but we are always one of the last to do so. It is not as if these accounts won't have been completed, and it's not as if the shareholders meeting won't have taken place to agree the accounts either. No company leaves that until the last moment, as sometimes things need to be questioned or ratified. The situation is that the club is choosing not to make this information available until the last possible moment. That's a club that talks about communication, but chooses not to communicate until it has to.

When I was a Managing Director my company also had a 30 June year end and we had our shareholders meeting and board meeting each year in early October. This meant the accounts had to be prepared and audited in a three month window. It was a multi national, much larger than OUFC, and the UK division was about the same turnover as OUFC, so there is absolutely no way these accounts are not done.

I was not trying to catch Tim Williams out, I expect him to know the answer to the question, as CEO. He could have said "I'm not authorised by the owners to divulge that information" (which is fine) or he could have said it's approximately X amount, but instead claimed he didn't know. I felt this was disingenuous on his part, which is why I pressed him. I don't think it did him any favours to answer in the way that he did, and it didn't demonstrate a club that wants to communicate openly with its "customers" either. Instead they closed shop.

I was going to lead onto what the current year looks like, as we're three quarters of the way through it and then (with an approximate debt figure available) ask what the situation was regarding turning this debt into equity. It's OK saying that the owners are covering the debt and not charging interest, that's fine until it's not fine. Debt is debt, whether it's "soft debt" or not and we as a club are vulnerable while we have it sitting as debt. The pool of people able to buy a club with £40m of debt is far smaller than the pool of people able to buy a club with negligible debt and football is full of clubs who thought they were OK until their owners ran out of cash, or lost interest, or became unable to get cash out of their respective countries.

I hope we don't find ourselves in that situation, but make no apology for asking the question. It was a Fans Forum after all, and I won't be able to ask the question in early April, when the accounts are out.

Ironically, I was going to finish my question with a short statement saying well done to the panel for what was a generally good Fans Forum, but after the way my question was dealt with, I didn't feel inclined to do so.

It was a shame that the question wasn’t handled better. As you say, TW could’ve easily just said “I can’t divulge that yet”. I don’t know what your relationship is with him/them, but it was clear that they knew you and were perhaps more wary of the direction the question may have gone in. I thought it was the low point of the night.

 

[OxfordYankee]

After waiting 14 months for a Fans Forum, 1 1/2 hours was never going to be sufficient time for all the questions that would have arisen, and that was the case. The introductory waffle from CEO Williams set the tone. Having Nathan Cooper as MD was a bonus as he kept things moving along and also acted as spotter for those with questions.
The lack of time combined with some of the extended answers left little chance for any follow up questions nor, which was a shame, was there any meaningful debate. The mood amongst those in attendance was patient but a discernable dissatisfaction with some responses.
I did get to ask one of my questions but had more that were far more contentious.
What this FF showed was that there is a place for these meetings and that the club, if they really want to engage, really must make time and not just once every 14 months.

It was a great question and articulated very well, ML. I thought their answer was pretty decent in your case, though lacking I some detail, which, I suppose, is understandable at this point. I was sad to hear that some of those people who used the 1893 Club were no longer attending; a real shame.

 

[OxfordYankee]

Thinking about last night a little more, I’m also struck by how good it felt to be in a community. I don’t live in Oxford and my only real exposure to other fans of OUFC is at the matches, where my attention is fixed very closely on the field. But last night, I had the chance to catch-up with other people (some I know and some I didn’t) who care so passionately about the club and hear their thoughts and concerns. It made me feel good and I left feeling more positive than I had before.

Whilst I can understand why Tim Williams, Adam Benson and Grant Ferguson may have felt some trepidation before hand, I really hope they saw that it was, in fact, a great way to build trust, community and positivity. If they don’t, then I would find it hard to believe that they’re the right people for OUFC.

 

[Morris Oxford]

I think in general under the current stewardship of the club, long standing supporters haven’t been treated with the respect they deserve.

Only the club knows why they have chosen to go down that route.

Perhaps it is that more than anything which is the root cause of a feeling of disconnect between supporters and club? Rip the heart out of a club and you end up with a soulless, corporate entity. Enjoy your activations.

 

[BDJ]

My highlight was @Manorlounger mentioning biscuits.

 

[OxfordYankee]

My highlight was @Manorlounger mentioning biscuits.

Yes, though Sarge let us down through his failure to mention craft ales and farmhouse ciders. I was ready to shout bingo!

 

[Common Villager]

I think it is imperative that another fans forum with the SLT is held shortly after a decision has been made on the planning application. At this stage more should be known about how the stadium will be funded, the legal framework between club-owners-investors, and the accounts will have been published. We can't leave it until next March / April.

 

[Sarge]

Yes, though Sarge let us down through his failure to mention craft ales and farmhouse ciders. I was ready to shout bingo!

-that was on my list of un asked Q's - though John Clarke did mention in one of his answers that it was a mistake on the plans saying sports bar, it should apparently say 'bar'

 

[m]

It was very clear that they do read this place.

(As @RyanioBirdio has previously stated)

 

[Maurice Earp]

I wasn't able to make it this evening (6:30pm start was too early for me), but managed to catch most of the stream. A few randomly assorted thoughts:

- The issue of how the stadium will be funded still seems largely unclear. Both Grant and Tim skirted the question as to whether or not the owners would be willing to self-fund the stadium if enough investment is not forthcoming. I appreciate there's a lot they still don't know, but I would've liked a bit more certainty as to the board's commitment beyond 'they're currently losing £5-6m a year'. Additionally, what happens in the event that costs exceed budgets and there's a shortfall in funding?

- Grant repeated the fact that the site would have to be used for football regardless of who owned the stadium / club. That's not the crux of the matter though, is it? We could still find ourselves in a situation such as the one we're in now, couldn't we?

- I thought Jonathan Clarke spoke well on the whole. I would've liked to ask him how confident he is that the stadium can be built in time, based on current assumptions as to when we will get a verdict regarding the planning application. I work in construction (albeit I've never worked on a project anywhere near as complicated as the stadium will be) and my humble opinion is that the timescales are unbelievably tight, particularly when you consider just how ambitious the plans are in respect of the environmental credentials

- Tim still doesn't seem to appreciate the benefit of communicating directly with the fan base. Essentially his preference appears to be to talk to us when he has something he wants to say or his boss(es) are coming over for a visit

- I don't quite understand what Jim Goddard's role is, nor why he's been brought back into the club at a seemingly much higher level than he was at before

No mention of Mr Benson???

 

[Maurice Earp]

I have to say I was disappointed. In my view they can consider themselves fortunate not to have received more difficult questions (they didn’t get round to mine).

A few takeaways;

- Fundamentally they’re utterly convinced that the job they are doing is super. Any narrative that doesn’t fit their belief system is never going to be warmly met. This is a problem.

- They couldn’t comprehend the subject of supporter disenchantment. They referenced that it is up to supporters to create a positive atmosphere and communication (whether good or bad) is subjective. The reality is they have to accept much more accountability here. Healthy support, positivity and atmosphere permeates from the top down rather than the bottom up. They left this to supporters to figure it out which is a worry. When morale among supporters ought to be at a near all-time high, it’s nowhere near. They simply could not contemplate this and pinned it largely on supporters. The line about communication being subjective was naive too. It’s universally accepted it wasn’t good enough. I don’t expect radical improvements based off their message.

- The excuse for a lack of a fans forum last year was excused due to being busy, sacking KR, recruiting, LM, losing LM and then the stadium. For me, that’s not a sufficient reason. To dedicate two hours inside 365 days around going’s on in a League One football club outside of normal operating hours is simply not a reasonable enough excuse.

- Adam Benson clearly has the capacity to alienate people. Perhaps I read him wrong, however intuition suggests to me he’s stubborn. It also didn’t reflect well when the gentleman mentioned how much he’d raised (who he’d put a stop to and didn’t applaud). Not a good look.

- Grant is very good at covering for Tim’s lack of diplomacy. On a number of occasions Grant simplified and gave more clarity on a previous answer that Tim had given/butchered. On one occasion Tim snapped very easily at a question around company accounts and what those losses would look like, which he should have breezed.

- Despite the importance of the forum and the time constraints, in typical OUFC fashion, top marks to the guy who asked the final question of the evening with much more important issues yet to be raised… Why wasn’t Des giving the fans a nice wave at the end of each game followed by a request for more inventive half time entertainment. Classic.

Couldn't agree more. He seems to forget that without the fans there would be no club. It's the fans that are at the heart of the club.

 

[Maurice Earp]

Out of interest, what was it tonight that reinforced this for you?

I thought that he was pretty fair tonight and spoke to him before and after the forum and my opinion is that he is listening and things will get better. I don't think he has got everything right, far from it. The same applies to all of the SLT at various points. But this forum has been a wake up call for the club and I think we should judge them on what they do differently as a result.

I do think that Michael North deserved a better answer to the question he asked, and better treatment regarding the work he and others have done for many years, and that will be followed up. However, his question was fumbled by Jim Goddard saying how great his job was and Grant talking about everyone being very busy. In fairness to Adam, he was not given the opportunity to address the key issue and provide an answer.

Totally agree with this point.

 

[uptheus]

Totally agree with this point.

I get the feeling this will get addressed, if not it’ll be an own goal by the club which we could well do without them!! own goal that is!

 

[uptheus]

I think it is imperative that another fans forum with the SLT is held shortly after a decision has been made on the planning application. At this stage more should be known about how the stadium will be funded, the legal framework between club-owners-investors, and the accounts will have been published. We can't leave it until next March / April.

Totally agree. I wonder if it would be possible to dedicate a section (30mins) of the September fans forum which is suppose to be about the footballing side, to cover the latest stadium status, especially if we get the go ahead in June/July, plus further update on bridge situation etc. Would be a great way to engage the fans both on and off the pitch.

 

[Morris Oxford]

In fairness Tim was correct in his opening (somewhat boring) monologue, in that the supporters were there out of their own free will and travelling expense. Whereas those sat at the high table were paid to be there.

It’s worth remembering that fact.

Tim, Adam, Grant et al are all paid to communicate with the supporters, it’s part of their job.

 

[Morris Oxford]

It was very clear that they do read this place.

(As @RyanioBirdio has previously stated)

Do Tim and Adam each have their own individual ‘little black book’ of regular posters on YF?

Each poster has A,B,C,D, E or F next to their name depending on whether they are seen as;

(A) Barking Mad.
(B) An irritant.
(C) Glass half empty type.
(C) Cautiously Neutral.
(D) Glass half full type.
(E) A Happy Clapper.
(F) A useful Idiot.

 

[Berliner]

Do Tim and Adam each have their own individual ‘little black book’ of regular posters on YF?

Each poster has A,B,C,D, E or F next to their name depending on whether they are seen as;

(A) Barking Mad.
(B) An irritant.
(C) Glass half empty type.
(C) Cautiously Neutral.
(D) Glass half full type.
(E) A Happy Clapper.
(F) A useful Idiot.

Everyone A and B then?

 

[m]

Do Tim and Adam each have their own individual ‘little black book’ of regular posters on YF?

Each poster has A,B,C,D, E or F next to their name depending on whether they are seen as;

(A) Barking Mad.
(B) An irritant.
(C) Glass half empty type.
(C) Cautiously Neutral.
(D) Glass half full type.
(E) A Happy Clapper.
(F) A useful Idiot.

How will people know which (C) I am?

(It's the 2nd)

 

[BicesterU]

*Dons steel helmet*

I found myself agreeing with TW about comms. Is it the *amount* that matters, or the quality - what he called meaningfulness?

It's also easy to forget that comms is myriad. I was stunned to hear that we only sell 600 programmes per game. Can that really be right? And if it is right, does it justify the time and effort it must demand each week from OUFC employees who - as I think we'd all agree - must have other ways to spend their time?

I would hate to see the programme go, but likewise it's easy enough to understand why online channels with many times the number of followers might be prioritised.

It's also obvious from reading this forum that there's no consensus about what 'good comms' actually is. It's a classic case of being able to please some of the people some of the time, etc...

However, it's obviously good news that TW was talking about monthly Q&As and it'll be interesting to see how the new SLO implements parts of the Fan Engagement Strategy.

 

[Common Villager]

*Dons steel helmet*

I found myself agreeing with TW about comms. Is it the *amount* that matters, or the quality - what he called meaningfulness?

It's also easy to forget that comms is myriad. I was stunned to hear that we only sell 600 programmes per game. Can that really be right? And if it is right, does it justify the time and effort it must demand each week from OUFC employees who - as I think we'd all agree - must have other ways to spend their time?

I would hate to see the programme go, but likewise it's easy enough to understand why online channels with many times the number of followers might be prioritised.

It's also obvious from reading this forum that there's no consensus about what 'good comms' actually is. It's a classic case of being able to please some of the people some of the time, etc...

However, it's obviously good news that TW was talking about monthly Q&As and it'll be interesting to see how the new SLO implements parts of the Fan Engagement Strategy.

I agree with the quality over quantity aspect of Tim's argument, but he backed this up by saying something along the lines of 'what's the point in communicating if I have nothing to say?'. Sometimes nothing is better than nothing. A good example of this would be the delayed submission of the planning application. All he needed to do was come out and explain the reason for the delays (e.g. we want to ensure we've met every single one of the council's requirements in full and this requires an extra few weeks/months of preparation) and most fans would've felt much more comfortable about the situation. Instead they said nothing for weeks after the previously reported pre-Christmas deadline, which resulted in concerns and rumours spreading.

Quality communication is proactive and open, not just an opportunity to share good news.

 

[BicesterU]

I agree with the quality over quantity aspect of Tim's argument, but he backed this up by saying something along the lines of 'what's the point in communicating if I have nothing to say?'. Sometimes nothing is better than nothing. A good example of this would be the delayed submission of the planning application. All he needed to do was come out and explain the reason for the delays (e.g. we want to ensure we've met every single one of the council's requirements in full and this requires an extra few weeks/months of preparation) and most fans would've felt much more comfortable about the situation. Instead they said nothing for weeks after the previously reported pre-Christmas deadline, which resulted in concerns and rumours spreading.

Quality communication is proactive and open, not just an opportunity to share good news.

Completely agree. That kind of 'nothing to say, but here's why' communication also helps improve confidence among the fan base and prevents a vacuum being created that some people are keen to fil with their own theories.

 

[ZeroTheHero]

I found myself agreeing with TW about comms. Is it the *amount* that matters, or the quality - what he called meaningfulness?

It also depends on the medium and what you mean by 'comms'.

Would I want an email a day with a few bits of meaningless, if slightly amusing, stuff in it? No I wouldn't.
Is it very different if that same content is posted on the Artist Formerly Known As Twitter? Yes it is - it isn't invasive, and helps to 'build a brand'.

As someone who subscribes to iFollow, I used to really quite enjoy the pre-match shows on the site. It gave a bit of background, maybe had a couple of silly challenges and was perhaps slightly amateur in an endearing way. You got to see the players in a different light, and the fact that CW and MB are actually supporters (not just employees) really shone through. It helped me get in the mood for the game at the end of the week. Meaningless? Possibly. Did it help to build a sense of being a bit of a club insider and part of the whole thing? Certainly.

The same can be said of the five minutes fans forums. Were they ever a revelation? Not really, but they were a point of contact. If I talk to a friend, I don't always need to have something major to say - of course the club isn't my 'friend' but it needs to be more like that than a grey corporate entity. I want to hear the human faces and voices of those behind the scenes.

The comms I get at the moment is a weekly email (it usually does little other than rehash/point to website content and try to sell me stuff). There is little to get 'involved' with.

 

[Common Villager]

No mention of Mr Benson???

I don't really know what to make of him. He's Head of Commercial, so regardless of how you dress it up, his primary concern is going to be maximising revenue and profit.

I have a bigger issue with Tim, to be honest. He's CEO, his job is to create a vision for and set the tone of the club. The vision he's created is Top-30 club and the tone he's set is customer-not-fan. Benson has been brought in to help deliver that vision, and the way he's approaching that is unsurprising given his boss' numbers over people approach.

I just keep coming back to the fact I don't think Tim is a good CEO. He's undoubtedly an intelligent guy, was probably an excellent accountant, but he just doesn't seem to get people.