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

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.
I don’t know that he wasn’t given the opportunity? There were various questions where three different panel members gave an answer. Why on that one was Adam not able to chime in after Grant?
 
I thought it was the best FF for many years. Nearly every question was a good one and the answers were sincere, at least they felt so to me.

John Clarke, the Development Director, in particular was excellent. A good communicator who clearly knows his stuff.

The overriding thought I came away with was that TW and AB have misjudged the pace by which you can turn a community club into a corporate beast. They’re trying to run before walking and are leaving many people behind and feeling very disconnected. Their language is overly corporate and formal and it undermines their ability to communicate with many fans. We do need to change and improve off the field, but it needs to be done more subtly than they’ve tried. They’ve laid out their plans, so let’s see how they execute them.

As for the finance, well I thought the points made about sustainable debt vs debt were valid. Very few of us are lucky enough to buy our house outright. We need a deposit and a mortgage, which are entirely normal things. The same is true for stadiums. The size of the deposit will be crucial. Given the affordability tests lenders will put us through, the deposit (equity, I assume) will be significant. How they intend to make money is a mystery to me (other than selling the club should it become established in the Championship), though I don’t think we should completely dismiss the power of ego and prestige being fairly significant here.

I enjoyed the evening and was really heartened by the numbers that attended, though it was a shame to see the demographic so dominated by those of us of vintage maturity. Well done to all those who made it possible.

Lastly, GF’s comment about the conversation he’d had with some 1st team players about the atmosphere was troubling, but not unexpected. Hopefully, the team can replicate the level of performance we saw at Portsmouth, play some dynamic attacking football and win some matches. If they do, I’m sure they’ll be richly rewarded from the stands.
 
Last edited:
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.
Surely the question of Michael's and Sue Trafford's stall has already been diligently "followed up" by OxVox, without any satisfactory outcome as yet.
 
Thank you for OxVox for organising and pushing for this.

I wasn’t as impressed as most on here about the content. Thought the stadium guy knew his stuff so spoke confidently and a lot - the panel knew the time allowed so happy for the stadium access and safe standing questions. Why did three people answer one question? Because it ate the time up.

Mr North question wasn’t answered.

Any slightly difficult question led to tetchiness.

When asked about the staff leaving, Mr Williams said they support staff yet we all know different people in the club with a story to tell that doesn’t support that. Mr Goddard said it’s a happy place - it might be for him with his police pension and highly paid job but that’s not the case for the staff on the ground and he doesn’t make it any happier for them. As someone else here has said, his answer felt very preplanned.

Mr Williams says social media has improved. What has improved? Attaching links to club shop merchandise? Videos asking players what there favourite film is? Showing players running on the training ground? We know the communication has got worse including the social media but unfortunately the nature of the meeting did not allow for follow up to the panel’s answers.

One of my questions if they had got to me would be why they allow the head of academy to live in Scotland and only work a couple of days a week in Oxford .

Overall a lot of filibustering with not a lot of substance.
 
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.
What I would say is that Benson came across as very humourless for someone in marketing-maybe it was nerves I don't know -at least I think that TW has a sense of humour and the questioning on the accounts was what- trying to catch the CEO out-he's smarter than that and they all have higher overseers to respect too which is kind of different when you have a "senior mgmt team" and not just a chairman who fronts everything on that front. But think they have had to address and rethink some comms stuff. On we go.
 
Thank you Oxvox and OUSP for putting on the event.
I thought that it was interesting. The questions generally were good, and pretty informative.

The more I see and hear about the ground, the more that I think it will be fantastic. Like chalk and cheese compared to the Kassam.
- it will be one of the best stadiums in the UK for disabled people
- the plaza will be a place with lots of food outlets, somewhere for people to gather before games.
-But so will the concourses. It sounds to me as if they will be large, heated, with good food outlets decent beer at sensible prices, TVs , tables etc ( according to Adam Benson). I went to Gloucester Rugby a couple of years ago and saw how well this can work.
- there sens to be huge amounts of work going on to make it an fantastic stadium.

The new stadium should allow a whole new generation of supporters. Some suggested that they sit in their cars for a couple of hours before games. The new stadium should provide a load more entertainment and meeting spaces before and after games.

Somebody suggested that the club would be re-engaging with Michael North and something better would be put in place?

I hope and think that the club have been stung by the criticism of their communication. Hopefully this will be a reset. I think that the senior management have misjudged what they have done and need to work hard at getting this right.
 
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.
I don't think he has got everything right, far from it.
Exactly.
 
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?’
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom