CUSG Meeting - Mon 4th Nov 19

Why has the new scoreboard not materialised yet?

Whose debt will get the £75K TV money - Andrew Jenkins or EWM?

In recent interviews, Holdsworth stated that the club is in a safe place. Is there any concern about current poor attendances?

Do the club recognise the overwhelming feeling of apathy towards the owners?

Why is David Holdsworth still at the club?

Why is Steven Pressley still at the club?

What is the ambition of the club this season? Is it still promotion?

What does David Holdsworth do between September and December ?

If DH is indead employed by CUFC, why has he not been sacked, he’s signed 20+ players and appointed two managers who are a downgrade on the poor (very poor options in some cases) that we already had?

What have they spent the Mccaron and Galloway money on ?

Are they actually doing any work on the paddock or have we cordoned it off cause we can’t afford the repairs?

Can the club state a financhial figure which an interested party would have to bring to the club to take us over ?

Is the EWM facility just preventing us becoming the next Bury ?

What does Steve Pattinson bring to Carlisle United - bar obvious lending us 10,000 nearly 20 years ago to sign Stuart Green ?

Is Mr Nixon’s fa position dependant upon Carlisle staying in the FL ?

CCU wrote:

CUFC52 wrote: Are they actually doing any work on the paddock or have we cordoned it off cause we can’t afford the repairs?

The roof of A Stand had been removed last week, was a lot of netting etc in its place...

Why has it taken over 4 months (and counting) to fix a small roof? Absolutely tinpot.

Any duplicates just remove! - caught me out this morning!

Club

What is the current debt level and can we have a breakdown of it please?

If EWM call in their loans, what would happen? - We don't want waffle saying it won't happen we want to know what would happen if they did?

Holdsworth says the club is healthy - We are currently bottom 5 in tier 4, losing supporters, money and playing dreadful football - in what part are we healthy?

Why is Steven Pattinson on the holdsings board - what does he bring?

Would the club work with Andrew Lapping, if he decides to make an offer of help or would it have to be a hostile takeover?

Why does Andrew Jenkins keep blaiming referees in his program notes - is it not time he takes a look at his own problems?



Club & Trust

It's rumoured that the club are talking to someone regarding "Succession" how far in are talks?, is this a full takeover or investment? who is it?

People are sick to death of EWM's silence. The longer this goes on, the more frustrated fans become, and their respect for EWM sinks. What may be seen by some as helping out the club, can be seen by others as propping up the current regime, and preventing succession.

John Jackson is a registered Director, however has never spoken about the club. Could an interview be arranged between him and Jon Colman?

Are CUOSC present at these meetings?

CCU wrote:

paddockite wrote: Are CUOSC present at these meetings?

Yes...

Why, when many fans have emailed or contacted them in some way over the last week with there thoughts, and suggestions etc, do they not even have the decency to reply.

CCU wrote:

paddockite wrote:

CCU wrote:

paddockite wrote: Are CUOSC present at these meetings?

Yes...

Why, when many fans have emailed or contacted them in some way over the last week with there thoughts, and suggestions etc, do they not even have the decency to reply.

No idea. One for them to answer. Eventually...

I wasn't asking you!

A question for the club and CUOSC.

What specific steps have you taken in the last 3 months to find new owners for the club?

For Nigel Clibbens

* There was accusations that at the Northampton match one of the directors challenged a fan to a fight and that you were protecting him from getting involved by dragging him away. You say you have investigated this and found no evidence. Surely this investigation should be carried out by someone unconnected with the incident. If some fans think they saw you protecting Mr Pattison that night, what reassurances can you give them that your investigation was impartial?

* You said there was an “incident” at the Northampton match which was monitored by staff. Could you go into some more detail about what this incident was that it apparently made people believe Mr Pattison was threatening a fan?

* You say that fans are allowed to criticize the BOD. At the Northampton match, several fans reported that when they were criticizing the BOD they were warned to stop otherwise they would be ejected. How do you explain that?

* If Mr Pattison did not challenge a fan to a fight, that still means something happened which led people to believe he did. If people have got the wrong idea about a director then surely you want to establish what caused them to think that, so we can avoid that happening again. Can the club appeal for all fans who were near the directors box that night to get in touch with the club about what they saw/heard? Additionally you can maybe invite a third party to investigate and have a look at the CCTV as well, as a fresh pair of eyes might pick up on something you’ve missed.

For All

* Lack of communication is still a problem. At the Plymouth game the directors were criticized for sitting with the home fans. It later turned out that they didn't choose to do this, it was a decision made by Plymouth. There was an innocent explanation but the lack of communication about it initially led some people to assume the directors had deliberately chosen not to sit with their own fans. Do you accept that the club needs to do more about communicating with fans to ensure misunderstandings like this don't happen?

1. Will the club confirm that talks are underway with someone for takeover of the club, as CUOSC call it "Succession"?

2. Will the club be taking action regarding the incident involving S. Pattinson, that was ckearly seen and reported by fans?
We cannot have individuals like him connected to the club.

In the 10 years since the ‘reluctant’ custodians have owned the club, do they associate themselves in the fall from League One play offs to bottom of League Two?
And if they don’t recognise that, why not?

They're in denial. They remind me of the band on the Titanic playing while it sank,futile

Waltero wrote: They're in denial. They remind me of the band on the Titanic playing while it sank,futile

According to a CUOSC Board member, they have done nothing because they don't know what to do.

At last, a bit of honesty from them. Other clubs trusts seem to be doing ok,why can't they liase with them

How often do the Holdings Company and the 1923 boards meet and when were the last four meetings for both held.?

Why are the trust so ineffective?

What are the clubs ambitions? Now, in 3 years time, in 5 years time etc.

Any progress whatsoever on the stadium plans? It's been about 10 years now with absolutely nothing other than a project name. Are any other club as bad as us at moving forward with something like this?

What exactly will it take to get a change of ownership? How much money? How quickly could it happen? How much will is there to work with interested parties and other supporters over this? - even folk who have been rejected previously?

Anyone fancy a game of snooker?

Update on the trusts site:

I've been working on my local copy - I've tried to migrate over to there's but its failed a couple of times. I've now got the FTP details to do that - but ain't done it yet - my fault been busy - no excuses.

I've done the basics, i'll need to get the trusts payment gateway details.

I could do with a couple of things, to enhance - if anyone has any to donate?

A high res picture of Brunton Park

Also when i've migrated over, I could do with a couple of testers to test the contact form,the electronic voting form and when i gate the gateway details signing up - hopefully with an electronic voting form it'll mean more people vote etc.

Mullen103 wrote: Also when i've migrated over, I could do with a couple of testers to test the contact form,the electronic voting form and when i gate the gateway details signing up - hopefully with an electronic voting form it'll mean more people vote etc.

I can maybe have a look at that.

BoardAdmin wrote: CUSG have agreed to delay publication of Minutes and Q&A’s until Sunday due to us playing tomorrow (Friday).

Thanks,

Admin.

Are the 1st team doing the minutes or is Bumble playing up front?

Odd!

Just to add - when there's a game on a Tuesday night, they still get them out for a Friday.

Amutures come to mind doesn't make any difference if we have a game on the Saturday.

Or is there some interesting news to come from the club

BoardAdmin wrote: CUSG have agreed to delay publication of Minutes and Q&A’s until Sunday due to us playing tomorrow (Friday).

Thanks,

Admin.

No reason to delay at all.

Mullen103 wrote:

BoardAdmin wrote: CUSG have agreed to delay publication of Minutes and Q&A’s until Sunday due to us playing tomorrow (Friday).

Thanks,

Admin.

Are the 1st team doing the minutes or is Bumble playing up front?

Odd!

Just to add - when there's a game on a Tuesday night, they still get them out for a Friday.

Never a striker, always a right back or in goal, and if I had anything to do with writing the minutes they would be out a week on Friday and run to 50 pages with ten typos per page (yes I know that would be better than my norm).

BoardAdmin wrote: CUSG have agreed to delay publication of Minutes and Q&A’s until Sunday due to us playing tomorrow (Friday).

Thanks,

Admin.

This delay feels rather disrespectful towards fans who are waiting for answers from the so called voice of the fans. It doesn't matter that we have a match tomorrow, the minutes can still be published. What is their justification for the delay?

Bit of censorship perhaps???

Arragorn wrote: Bit of censorship perhaps???

Hopefully not, but I think they need to realize that if they delay publishing the minutes with no valid explanation why, people will probably speculate and come up with their own ideas for why that delay happened. It's possible that like the directors seating at Plymouth there is a valid explanation, but if that's the case we need to know what that is. They can't just say they delayed it because of the match tomorrow, because the match is not relevant to minutes being published.

CCU wrote: No conspiracy, just a live TV game, 300 miles from Home is taking priority...

Who has told you this CCU? All they need to do is upload the document which has their answers on it. That just takes a minute or two at most. Are all of them really going to be so busy tomorrow they can't spare one minute of their time? If so, then maybe they should publish the answers tonight instead. Saying the match tomorrow is "taking priority" isn't a valid reason, because it doesn't impact their ability to spend one minute publishing a document. So why does there need to be a delay?

Then you release them a day before.

The explanation is fair enough and no disrespect to "the media team" but you envisage these things. The club at the minute is all "can't be arsed", "No rush" and delay and delay. Again no disrespect of "the media team" its just the club in general and excuses for not getting things done.

That's me not buying a ticket to the next home game as I need to have a poo on the Monday after.

Maybe they haven't typed them up yet?

Mouldy wrote: There will be items on club site that are automated to launch.

Ok so if the club site has a feature to automatically publish like that, is there a reason why they can't do this with the minutes? If they are going to be busy tomorrow, can't they upload the minutes today when they do have the time, and schedule it to release automatically on the club site tomorrow?

Mouldy wrote: For what it’s worth, CCU did say in an email chain that he felt it best not to delay as we had not previously advised folk of it. To that, the media team replied ok well we’ll just delay OS launch then, so you guys publish to groups accordingly. The CUSG chairman then decided we would delay all publication of minutes until the weekend. I can see it from both sides - Andy and Amy have a busy day, fans want to see what’s been said.

Yeah I can see it from that point of view as well, I just think right now with how fans are feeling, delaying publication is a step in the wrong direction. People feel they are being ignored or fobbed off, so when we ask questions to the people supposedly representing our voice and they delay responding, it looks bad. If there is ever a valid reason to delay then fair enough. But from what you said it seems like the club site has a feature where things can be scheduled to automatically publish at a certain time. If that's the case, then surely it doesn't matter if everyone will be too busy to manually publish tomorrow, as they can just upload the document tonight and have it scheduled to auto publish tomorrow?

Kessler wrote:

Mouldy wrote: There will be items on club site that are automated to launch.

Ok so if the club site has a feature to automatically publish like that, is there a reason why they can't do this with the minutes? If they are going to be busy tomorrow, can't they upload the minutes today when they do have the time, and schedule it to release automatically on the club site tomorrow?

Mouldy wrote: For what it’s worth, CCU did say in an email chain that he felt it best not to delay as we had not previously advised folk of it. To that, the media team replied ok well we’ll just delay OS launch then, so you guys publish to groups accordingly. The CUSG chairman then decided we would delay all publication of minutes until the weekend. I can see it from both sides - Andy and Amy have a busy day, fans want to see what’s been said.

Yeah I can see it from that point of view as well, I just think right now with how fans are feeling, delaying publication is a step in the wrong direction. People feel they are being ignored or fobbed off, so when we ask questions to the people supposedly representing our voice and they delay responding, it looks bad. If there is ever a valid reason to delay then fair enough. But from what you said it seems like the club site has a feature where things can be scheduled to automatically publish at a certain time. If that's the case, then surely it doesn't matter if everyone will be too busy to manually publish tomorrow, as they can just upload the document tonight and have it scheduled to auto publish tomorrow?

Mouldy wrote: There’s no censorship, no disrespect meant and nothing untoward. I’d say the majority of fans are more arsed about the match on Friday than the CUSG minutes - but admittedly could be wrong.

They might not mean any disrespect, but I think some people will feel they are being fobbed off with excuses yet again. If the club site has a feature where things can be queued to automatically publish at a certain time, then the claim about being too busy to do it tomorrow falls apart. Fans are entitled to know why the club didn't use this auto publish feature.

YOU NEED TO GET SOME PERSPECTIVE.

Moylesey wrote: YOU NEED TO GET SOME PERSPECTIVE.

I think it's a fair question to ask. If the reason CUSG have given for delaying publishing the minutes tomorrow is that everyone will be too busy, why not use this feature on the club site where things can be scheduled to automatically publish at a certain time?

You cannot make a statement like 'Fans are entitled to know why the club didn't use this auto publish feature' and expect to be taken seriously.

There is an awful lot wrong with the way the club is run but you seem to have some sort of idiotic bent to pick up on the tiniest inadequacies and go on and on and on and on.

Really. Catch onto yourself.

The issue is as usual the club, have gone about things the wrong way. Everyone knew on Monday when you had the meeting that there was a Friday night game this week that would take up most people's time on Friday. So surely rather than telling everyone today, the day before said game, it should have been raised at the meeting, even minuted and then everyone would be aware from the end of the meeting that the minutes would be slightly later than normal for understandable reasons, its not like tomorrow night has snuck up on them out of the blue

The problem is no-one at the club seems to have any idea about managing expectations, the minutes coming out late is a minor issue but its further highlighting the lack of planning and forward thinking at all levels within the club at the moment

Moylesey wrote: You cannot make a statement like 'Fans are entitled to know why the club didn't use this auto publish feature' and expect to be taken seriously.

There is an awful lot wrong with the way the club is run but you seem to have some sort of idiotic bent to pick up on the tiniest inadequacies and go on and on and on and on.

Really. Catch onto yourself.

It might seem like a small thing, and at any other club small issues probably wouldn't be too much of a problem. But this club is dying because there are a lot of small issues which have collectively built up and pushed so many fans away week after week, year after year. There is a general feeling among fans that our voices are simply not listened to, that we get fobbed off. These meetings are important because they give us a chance to make our voices heard. Delaying their response to those questions seems very disrespectful unless there is a valid reason for the delay. They say it's because they are too busy to publish tomorrow. But if the club site has a feature where things can be automatically set to publish at a certain time, why can't they use that and schedule it for automatic release tomorrow?