TOPIC: FAO Admin

How the hell was Mullens post creepy? May as well just lock the board if your locking threads for that.

The muppets at BP HQ are the creepy ones, that includes "all who sail in her"

Been interesting to see the s p here if it was about a bloke. Give some people power mind and christ they will Lord it.

I agree with the decision to lock the thread. Insulting or trying to find things out about staff of the club who generally are doing a solid job is overstepping the mark in my opinion.

Wouldn't necessarily say it was creepy but still fairly unsavoury.

I too agree. Mullen and his mate 'Barry' spoil every thread on this board with their bullshit.

Dancingbear wrote:
Unfortunately (like the Trust) the Moderators are doing their best, but are out of their depth. They were struggling to cope with the innocent jestings of Markredfox. The recent arrival of NORTHERNSOUL must have tipped them over the edge. They should chill and wait for libel laws to kick in as and when appropriate.

It's the admins board and the admins decision to close the thread.

It maybe didn't come across right but as I said i didn't want a life history - just if someone knew her and knew her true opinion of things. Nothing creepy there.

She's putting herself on the front line so has to expect some backlash. I feel sorry for her as deep down I don't think it's her decision.

Well i cant disagree with that mate but if that post was about any other director nothing would have been said.

Mashie Niblick wrote:
That's why you've liked a few posts lately - must be bad!

I've never met Barry ever!

Mullen103 wrote:
So there is a God Mullen

Mullen103 wrote:
Me?

Dancingbear wrote:
True - I'm bamboozled still as to why SK is realising these statement, it isn't the 1st one.

Just a question but is there maybe a sexist feeling around the place. Making SK do it will stop the abuse as well as having a female fans rep. I'm maybe we'll off the mark but why couldn't Andy hall or Phil King do the press release.

When putting a press release together, it's generally the media/communications officer that writes it, but they'll include a quote from someone else, usually someone in a senior position. Not sure if a quote from AH would have been seen as appropriate in the circumstances (and plenty would have said so).

Edit to add - I know this because it's my job to do the same! You could argue it should come from someone senior but as JN's role as MD isn't "official", either Phil or Suzanne are the most senior people in the day-to-day roles. I guess the question everyone is asking is who should be taking responsibility for these things.

howoldboy wrote:
Did you offer to take on the board from deano, howoldboy?

MerseysideBlue wrote:
Sounds like a man who writes press releases a fair bit... ?

MerseysideBlue wrote:
No... he was an impossible act to follow.

Mouldy wrote:
As added to the edit above - correct!

There's nothing really wrong with the press release - and for what it's worth, if there was only three candidates I kind of agree it was pointless running the role - I've applied for jobs in the past where I was probably under qualified and after the deadline for applications, they've re-advertised the role due to the lack of decent applicants in the original run.

The big issue for me is the fact that there needs to be recognition as to why there's been so few applicants - and that recognition has to come from the very top, not Suzanne or Phil. It's the way the owners handled the role in the first place that has put off people.

howoldboy wrote:
So you weren't prepared to take on the potential libel implications?

howoldboy wrote:
Your cheque is in the post

MerseysideBlue wrote:
I was under the impression the libel implications should be for the posters.

MerseysideBlue wrote:
What if the 3 applicants were of outstanding quality?.

howoldboy wrote:
Best Advice i.ve seen posted on here for a while. Story tried it and failed so if anyone wants to bring it on i.m more than happy so long as theyre happy to take what theyll get back and it wont be in the libel courts believe me.

Simple solution ..............Buy the insurance..............Put an over 16 warning on..............And let people get on with it

NORTHERNSOUL wrote:
Yeah, I guess that's why Kate's so active with the Trust now. Oh, wait, sorry...............

If that's winning, i'd hate to see losing.

All he asked was why she seems to be issuing communications like that. Hardly the role of a finance director is it. Legitimate question.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Yep that's the point I was making. I was on about this to AL that the club seems to be a free for all - jobs for boys rather than a holscratic structure. There's no accountability in the structure which AL was going to change. The right people for the right job springs to mind.

It certainly wasn't an attack on SK certainly not by the standards some elsewhere are attacking her. but why a finance director releasing statements like this?

SK has been employed as she's good in the finance roll. So let her do finance!

PK is marketing. It's quite a broad area marketing but he's very quiet for someone in marketing. It looks like he's using his old contacts. No issues really with PK

JN was rediculed as MD of Pirelli and I believe he left on sick leave. He soon come well enough to become MD for the club.

There's no structure and no accountabilities at the club. SK has released a couple of statements now that isn't her role to do.

Is it only PK and SK on the operational board now ?

Could just be that they played rock paper scissors to decide who's name went with it.

DeckchairBlue wrote:
And Norman of course dont forget Norman but from what were told he might as well not be there for what he does and says.

The applications had to be sent to SK. Therefore it is kind of appropriate she issue the statement cancelling it. Who made that decision is another matter but it doesnt take a rocket scientist to work it out. Think to much is being read into nothing.

loser wrote:
I don't see any reason why a Director (overseeing any area) shouldn't communicate with customers. It is more commonly the work of the MD or GM, since the club doesn't have that and they have PK and SK both sharing the 'day to day running' - however true or untrue we believe that to be - I think it's perfectly reasonable for her name to be on it.

If it was signed off by Andy Hall, everyone would criticise the club for hiding behind him and using him as a mouth piece. On this occasion a director has directly communicated and it's still criticised!

Legitimate question? Personally, I'd disagree, and would say Mullen along with others is reading far too much into it, but each to their own.

Mouldy Would you expect your accounts person at Window World to make windows?

A far fetched example, but you know what i'm getting at.

Mullen103 wrote:

Mullen103 wrote:
She's a Director and she was organising the Fans Rep role, so it makes perfect sense. Her role clearly covers a lot more than a bean counter Mullen.

Mullen103 wrote:
We expect all employees, Directors included, to do what is required to benefit World Group.

I personally see it as more than a far fetched example - it's completely different. Director's are, and should be, expected to communicate with customers as required. That is all that has happened here. I'm sure it doesn't explicitly say in Suzanne's Job Des that she is to only focus on things that involve numbers and or £ figures.

Another far fetched example then Mouldy. If you required a new window fitter and we're gonna draw up a four person shortlist but there were only three applicants would you spit the dummy out and blame the worlds window fitters for not being arsed or would you interview the three and see if they were any good?

Dancingbear wrote:
I'd have a look see if they were/I thought they could be any good. But, that is of course the prerogative of the person/company advertising the role - others may spit the dummy or look at other areas based on initial impressions of applicants.

I'm not saying I don't think the decision to pull the role wasn't a bit feeble, all I'm saying is Mullen started a thread questioning SK all due to the fact she had her name on a statement released. I don't think it's actually that big of a deal that her name is on the bottom. I get the opinion that some hold of it needing to come right from the top, but as mentioned above, she has been the one advertising this role and taking a front seat, so to speak.

***We do need more joiners in our ranks if anybody is interested.

Mouldy wrote:
Theres people been sacked from very high profile jobs for having their name at the bottom of emails and press releases.

I see what your saying Mouldy and yes SK did take the lead, strange decision though. Therefore she needs to expect the criticism that was directed at her.

Mullen103 wrote:
Well I don't necessarily think it's any more a Sales & Marketing issue, Mullen. So other than that, we're left with either:

No comms - fan uproar
Nixon - fan uproar

I disagree that she should "Expect the criticism that was directed at her", it isn't her sole decision, but she is the one informing fans. Surely the criticisms should be of the club and it's governance, but...each to their own.

Mouldy wrote:
Yep agree, therefore it should of been done by the chairmen or the fans liason officer. I suppose none of them were going to happen were they!

Did you not just think to look at her LinkedIn account Mullen? The best place to look when wanting to find out about people's work history really, helps if you have a log in of your own though - tend to see little without one.

Granted some peoples has loads on mind but others has very little.

A While ago I checked when i first met her - wasn't much on.

Interestingly John Nixon is on there! whether its actually him is another question.

Some real romancing goes on that thing by some people of the truth like! Amazing how many people seem to start jobs as heads of departments instantly!

Wasn't going to bother replying to this but king and kidd are just well paid puppets in the nixon jenkins long game since their appointments with the exception of a few Mickey mouse ideas nothings changed nothings improved a we as a club are going backwards.

Alan wrote:
I think that may be a little harsh Alan, they probably are very capable and probably have good ideas and initiatives. The problem is, the"not MD anymore" MD who will have the final say on the purse strings. Where we agree totally is nothing will change.