Supporters Trust - Questions.

[Bristol Rob]

 

 

Probably an oversight, but from the website I have some questions about the work they do.

Firstly, no mminutes since July have been uploaded (assume close season/holiday means no meetings were held)?

Milestones - from the old and new sites it isn't clear what the trust have achieved recently. 

How much money has been raised for the club year on year? (Remeber when I was a youngster, the supporters club handing over outsized cheques to the club)

A large part of the membership benefit is that excess cash will be used to buy shares, the minutes from July suggests that the trust are looking for an email from SL that confirms that. Really? Surely something this fundamental would have been in place back when the trust was launched, or is this just a formality as shares have already been purchased.

Finally, some of the minutes are far too vague to know if I'd be for or against some of the topics under discussion.  E.g, David Lloyd has approached us with a proposal which we will follow up (July 2015)

That could be absolutely anything,  from people who attend FAN having to wear a flower in their hair to we are not going to meetings anymore. 

AApologies for gaps and typos, my Samsung tablet doesn't like the new forum (pastes quotes at the top of the reply box for example!).

 

 

[Abraham Romanovich]

I am very uncomfortable with the the thought there is a designated area for SC & T members;even more so when I read the joining information - if you pay the minimum Red membership ( £1 per month ) whilst being a member you would not be allowed to gain access - however if you pay the Gold (£2.50) a month you can.

If my understanding is correct it all seems a bit Orwellian "some are more equal than others" 

[Bristol Rob]

I am very uncissue with that, mfortable with the the thought there is a designated area for SC & T members;even more so when I read the joining information - if you pay the minimum Red membership ( £1 per month ) whilst being a member you would not be allowed to gain access - however if you pay the Gold (£2.50) a month you can.

If my understanding is correct it all seems a bit Orwellian "some are more equal than others" 

I dont have issue with that, I would only have a problem with it if the trust/supporters club paid for the space and used monies from people with a more basic membership to facilitate a bar for others, but they don't suggest that is the case.

[Blagdon red]

I can help with some of these.

Re the space on the mezzanine floor of the sports bar: after the War, the Supporters Club did a great deal to help City access the steel to expand the main grandstand (latterly called the Williams). As a gesture of thanks, Harry Dolman provided the SC with a bar in the stand for their members to socialise and carry on their fundraising activities for the football club. I understand that he was so keen that they should have this facility, that he gave it to them on a 99-year agreement at £1 a year.

Since then, due to various redevelopments of the ground the faciltiy has moved a number of times. The small area on the mezzanine (capacity for SC&T members yesterday was just 50) is in effect the continuation of Harry Dolman's generous appreciation of the value that an organised supporters group can bring to the football club.

Minutes: we're a couple of meetings behind with uploading them. We had meetings throughout the summer. All are open and everyone is very welcome to attend. Details here.

Milestones: need updating. Most effort recently has been focussed on funding and organising the commissioning of the Atyeo statue (a photo of the sculptor with a miniature of the statue can be seen here). The 'Initiatives' section of our website also reports on other activities over recent months.

Raising money for the club: unlike the former policy of giving the club money with nothing particular gained in return, our policy since the ST launched and now as the SC&T is to purchase shares in return (even though given the club's ownership structure, that is really just a token gesture). Over the last few years, we have raised over £60,000 for that purpose.

Atyeo statue: there is an ongoing dialogue with SL etc. about the precise way in which the money that members have contributed to the fund earmarked for shares will be passed to the club in order to pay for the Atyeo statue. Having a 'written contract' might have seemed appropriate to some. However, our relationship with SL has been one of trust and mutual respect over the years and I'm sure we will end up doing as verbally planned, i.e. the SC&T gives the club the money in return for shares and the club uses that money to pay for the statue (in the commissioning of which they have been fully involved).

Vagueness: point noted. Will look our for any vagueness in future minutes and ask the minutetaker to rewrite.

PS: Anyone who wishes to join the SC&T can do so here.

 

[Bristol Rob]

Thanks Blagdon, I'll keep an eye on future updates and if I think the trust share similar views and values to myself I'll consider joining.

[WTMS]

I can help with some of these.

Re the space on the mezzanine floor of the sports bar: after the War, the Supporters Club did a great deal to help City access the steel to expand the main grandstand (latterly called the Williams). As a gesture of thanks, Harry Dolman provided the SC with a bar in the stand for their members to socialise and carry on their fundraising activities for the football club. I understand that he was so keen that they should have this facility, that he gave it to them on a 99-year agreement at £1 a year.

Since then, due to various redevelopments of the ground the faciltiy has moved a number of times. The small area on the mezzanine (capacity for SC&T members yesterday was just 50) is in effect the continuation of Harry Dolman's generous appreciation of the value that an organised supporters group can bring to the football club.

Minutes: we're a couple of meetings behind with uploading them. We had meetings throughout the summer. All are open and everyone is very welcome to attend. Details here.

Milestones: need updating. Most effort recently has been focussed on funding and organising the commissioning of the Atyeo statue (a photo of the sculptor with a miniature of the statue can be seen here). The 'Initiatives' section of our website also reports on other activities over recent months.

Raising money for the club: unlike the former policy of giving the club money with nothing particular gained in return, our policy since the ST launched and now as the SC&T is to purchase shares in return (even though given the club's ownership structure, that is really just a token gesture). Over the last few years, we have raised over £60,000 for that purpose.

Atyeo statue: there is an ongoing dialogue with SL etc. about the precise way in which the money that members have contributed to the fund earmarked for shares will be passed to the club in order to pay for the Atyeo statue. Having a 'written contract' might have seemed appropriate to some. However, our relationship with SL has been one of trust and mutual respect over the years and I'm sure we will end up doing as verbally planned, i.e. the SC&T gives the club the money in return for shares and the club uses that money to pay for the statue (in the commissioning of which they have been fully involved).

Vagueness: point noted. Will look our for any vagueness in future minutes and ask the minutetaker to rewrite.

PS: Anyone who wishes to join the SC&T can do so here.

 

Is there a timescale for uploading the minutes? Specifically a recent meeting where positioning of away fans in the Atyeo was a topic.

[Blagdon red]

Is there a timescale for uploading the minutes? Specifically a recent meeting where positioning of away fans in the Atyeo was a topic.

They are all up to date now. As usual, volunteers doing their bit on a Sunday.

 

[WTMS]

They are all up to date now. As usual, volunteers doing their bit on a Sunday.

 

http://bristolcitysupporters.org/minutes-september-2015/

Interesting point -  If the away section in the Atyeo is moved back to the west end of the stand, we anticipate little resistance from Atyeo home fans.

Is this a serious consideration?

 

 

[thatcham red]

The question has been asked, so potentially.

[WTMS]

The question has been asked, so potentially.

Could you elaborate further?

[CotswoldRed]

To ensure clarity and traceability, no action within minutes should ever be allowed without:

• clearly identified output
• delivery date
• owner

If you can't provide these 3 then its too vague and shouldn't go in.

Comments such as "Steve will look into this" render minutes as toilet roll.

[Milo]

Could you elaborate further?

I had an exchange of emails with Martin Griffiths on 3rd September covering a range of topics raised at the meeting. In relation to the Atyeo, a precis of the email was a call for more stewards and a cooperative, rapport building attitude from those stewards (and a request to rethink how alcohol sales works at half time there). On the location of away supporters the email raised concerns over safety issues of supporters exiting together in a funnel with only one exit. If for safety reasons the Atyeo ends were swapped we said we thought that home supporters would not be too put out. In Martin's initial response he expresses some reluctance to change ends unless there is overwhelming support of the fans in the Atyeo, believing that being located over the tunnel was a key driver for those home fans, and the potential impact on changes to the concourse. In response, I said that fans had not stipulated a request for either side or indeed for the Atyeo (although they are now much warmer to the location) and understood the driver for being over the tunnel was SC's preference. I quoted an admittedly small sample size in response to a question on Facebook which leans towards being willing to swap ends if the Club feels it will help and the discussion on this thread about the location of away fans in general (http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?/topic/171806-positioning-of-away-fans/). There has been no update to this as yet and I sent a reminder on Friday.

[WTMS]

I had an exchange of emails with Martin Griffiths on 3rd September covering a range of topics raised at the meeting. In relation to the Atyeo, a precis of the email was a call for more stewards and a cooperative, rapport building attitude from those stewards (and a request to rethink how alcohol sales works at half time there). On the location of away supporters the email raised concerns over safety issues of supporters exiting together in a funnel with only one exit. If for safety reasons the Atyeo ends were swapped we said we thought that home supporters would not be too put out. In Martin's initial response he expresses some reluctance to change ends unless there is overwhelming support of the fans in the Atyeo, believing that being located over the tunnel was a key driver for those home fans, and the potential impact on changes to the concourse. In response, I said that fans had not stipulated a request for either side or indeed for the Atyeo (although they are now much warmer to the location) and understood the driver for being over the tunnel was SC's preference. I quoted an admittedly small sample size in response to a question on Facebook which leans towards being willing to swap ends if the Club feels it will help and the discussion on this thread about the location of away fans in general (http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?/topic/171806-positioning-of-away-fans/). There has been no update to this as yet and I sent a reminder on Friday.

Thank you.

The away fans support being located in the Dolman stand was confirmed by a Supporters Trust member as at least also being a potential consideration.

Fans were promised open and thorough consultation in 2013. Your post seems to indicate that a significant decision was based upon Mr Cotterill's preference, rather than fans / fans groups / authoritative bodies.

Shouldn't this overall theme now be part of an open discussion involving as many genuinely interested, and potentially affected fans as possible?

 

[Milo]

Shouldn't this overall theme now be part of an open discussion involving as many genuinely interested and potentially affected fans as possible?

 

I agree. Happy to hear input on how this should be done. We can survey supporters. If there are three potential locations of a) all of the Atyeo, b) Blocks A (and B?) of the Dolman or c) a corner in the second tier of the new West Stand it would be interesting to see if different supporters would set out the argument for each. Should there be other options (such as half of the Atyeo, assuming football league allocation rules permit)? Worth remembering also that the Safety Advisory Group will also have a say and it's my understanding that they consider that letting away fans have all of the Atyeo will be the safest solution.

[Guest]

I agree. Happy to hear input on how this should be done. We can survey supporters. If there are three potential locations of a) all of the Atyeo, b) Blocks A (and B?) of the Dolman or c) a corner in the second tier of the new West Stand it would be interesting to see if different supporters would set out the argument for each. Should there be other options (such as half of the Atyeo, assuming football league allocation rules permit)? Worth remembering also that the Safety Advisory Group will also have a say and it's my understanding that they consider that letting away fans have all of the Atyeo will be the safest solution.

The SAG are the governing body in any decision to allocate seats to away supporters, they can and do overrule the football authorities because their decision is based upon local circumstances and with the interests of health and safety at the top of the list.

i think it will be very difficult for BS to convince the SAG that using part of the Dolman or the upper sections of the new Williams is a safer option than giving over all of the Atyeo, it's a no brainier so far as I can see.

There may be a case for giving say 2,700 seats to away fans in the Atyeo, allowing a City presence of say 1,000, allowing for segregation. The argument for that could be based on average number of away fans visiting AG this season, but that figure is being affected by no POID for away fans.

the only argument I can see for using the Williams is that the segregation can be built in prior to construction fit out, personally I think this would not be favoured by BS, as it would detract from the flexibility of the new stand.

It's got to be the Atyeo for me, and I would limit the tickets to 10% for away fans and position them over the existing tunnel, which lets face it is only going to be used for the remainder of this season.

[WTMS]

I had an exchange of emails with Martin Griffiths on 3rd September covering a range of topics raised at the meeting. In relation to the Atyeo, a precis of the email was a call for more stewards and a cooperative, rapport building attitude from those stewards (and a request to rethink how alcohol sales works at half time there). On the location of away supporters the email raised concerns over safety issues of supporters exiting together in a funnel with only one exit. If for safety reasons the Atyeo ends were swapped we said we thought that home supporters would not be too put out. In Martin's initial response he expresses some reluctance to change ends unless there is overwhelming support of the fans in the Atyeo, believing that being located over the tunnel was a key driver for those home fans, and the potential impact on changes to the concourse. In response, I said that fans had not stipulated a request for either side or indeed for the Atyeo (although they are now much warmer to the location) and understood the driver for being over the tunnel was SC's preference. I quoted an admittedly small sample size in response to a question on Facebook which leans towards being willing to swap ends if the Club feels it will help and the discussion on this thread about the location of away fans in general (http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?/topic/171806-positioning-of-away-fans/). There has been no update to this as yet and I sent a reminder on Friday.

I agree. Happy to hear input on how this should be done. We can survey supporters. If there are three potential locations of a) all of the Atyeo, b) Blocks A (and B?) of the Dolman or c) a corner in the second tier of the new West Stand it would be interesting to see if different supporters would set out the argument for each. Should there be other options (such as half of the Atyeo, assuming football league allocation rules permit)? Worth remembering also that the Safety Advisory Group will also have a say and it's my understanding that they consider that letting away fans have all of the Atyeo will be the safest solution.

The highlighted sections of text appear inconsistent. The former omits fans being the driver. The latter had to be a driver in the former.

I agree .. Is that now the Supporters Club and Trust's view? Bristol City - Bristol Sport would expect the Supporters Trust's to be backing fans looking to create common goals now, rather than waiting till the end of the season.

 

[Milo]

 

The highlighted sections of text appear inconsistent. The former omits fans being the driver. The latter had to be a driver in the former.

I agree .. Is that now the Supporters Club and Trust's view? Bristol City - Bristol Sport would expect the Supporters Trust's to be backing fans looking to create common goals now, rather than waiting till the end of the season.

 

Sorry, not really sure I follow. The Club's objectives and those of the SAG are different - the Club want a good atmosphere and to deliver an experience for home supporters that makes AG a great place to watch football (because that's what will ultimately drive revenue) whereas the SAG are principally acting in a way that they simply want to avoid any problems occurring which they have oversight for. I think it's fair to say that the SAG view has to be factored in to every decision the Club makes but I sense that the Club want the right decision for all concerned rather than the safest, providing that the safety of supporters is not compromised.

It's not my place to determine the SC&T's views I'm just saying, in a personal capacity, that I agree that now is a good time to start discussing next season. Up until now, when raised with the Club, they have said the 2016/17 season is too far in the future and all efforts have been on getting this season working. Time has passed and now feels like the right time to help the Club make a fully informed decision on the location of away fans for next season. In my personal capacity as a SC&T board member I can put the topic on the agenda for the next meeting (7th October) and so any thoughts, comments or ideas would be useful.

[Welcome To The Jungle]

Personally I'd be in favour for swapping side in the Atyeo. Let their noise get lost to the Williams expanse and keep ours in.

[WTMS]

Sorry, not really sure I follow. The Club's objectives and those of the SAG are different - the Club want a good atmosphere and to deliver an experience for home supporters that makes AG a great place to watch football (because that's what will ultimately drive revenue) whereas the SAG are principally acting in a way that they simply want to avoid any problems occurring which they have oversight for. I think it's fair to say that the SAG view has to be factored in to every decision the Club makes but I sense that the Club want the right decision for all concerned rather than the safest, providing that the safety of supporters is not compromised.

It's not my place to determine the SC&T's views I'm just saying, in a personal capacity, that I agree that now is a good time to start discussing next season. Up until now, when raised with the Club, they have said the 2016/17 season is too far in the future and all efforts have been on getting this season working. Time has passed and now feels like the right time to help the Club make a fully informed decision on the location of away fans for next season. In my personal capacity as a SC&T board member I can put the topic on the agenda for the next meeting (7th October) and so any thoughts, comments or ideas would be useful.

Quoting has gone haywire..

Your earlier posts gave the impression that Mr Cotterill's views took preference over fans, and other bodies.

The creation of the current area within the Atyeo was not the result of lengthy joined up consultation because detail such as dangerous % of rakes was not revealed to Supporters - Mr Cotterill's view does appear to be that section of the grounds driver.

The positioning of the away fans for 2016/17 affects that experience for home supporters that makes AG a great place to .. Possibly for the the long term for a significant proportion of Support. That should be on the agenda for October 7th. 

The Supporters Trust have had very clear ideas regarding the location of safe standing, and providing an area for more vocal elements of support formerly within the South Stand.

Where are currently the Supporters Trust views on safe standing, and which areas of the ground do you see as being appropriate for rails seats in the long term?

Is there currently a Supporters Club view on the location of the away support in future?

2016/17 was never very far in the future, opportunity / possibility has already gone. Answers to questions like the above can also assist fans to create more informed ideas. Possibly broad collective ideas for the longer term.

A section of fans from the Eastend - Williams - Atyeo and next up is ? Are heading around Ashton Gate like migrants, meanwhile other sections of Support already have sections of the redeveloped stadium purposely built for them. An obvious improvement can be made there.

[Milo]

Quoting has gone haywire..

Your earlier posts gave the impression that Mr Cotterill's views took preference over fans, and other bodies.

The creation of the current area within the Atyeo was not the result of lengthy joined up consultation because detail such as dangerous % of rakes was not revealed to Supporters - Mr Cotterill's view does appear to be that section of the grounds driver.

The positioning of the away fans for 2016/17 affects that experience for home supporters that makes AG a great place to .. Possibly for the the long term for a significant proportion of Support. That should be on the agenda for October 7th. 

 

The Supporters Trust have had very clear ideas regarding the location of safe standing, and providing an area for more vocal elements of support formerly within the South Stand.

Where are currently the Supporters Trust views on safe standing, and which areas of the ground do you see as being appropriate for rails seats in the long term?

Is there currently a Supporters Club view on the location of the away support in future?

2016/17 was never very far in the future, opportunity / possibility has already gone. Answers to questions like the above can also assist fans to create more informed ideas. Possibly broad collective ideas for the longer term.

A section of fans from the Eastend - Williams - Atyeo and next up is ? Are heading around Ashton Gate like migrants, meanwhile other sections of Support already have sections of the redeveloped stadium purposely built for them. An obvious improvement can be made there.

I'm not sure why home fans are at that end but as stated, I have reminded the Club that the general perception is that this was a SC request and that fans didn't ask for it. To be fair, having been at the meeting where the Club revealed their Atyeo plans to a collection of supporters, I think there's a possibility that the "it's what SC wants" comment might have been just a throw away line and that it might be the case that they thought this was what the supporters would actually want. I think they're wrong in thinking this is a key driver but they might genuinely have thought it was. Regardless, it's a position that would have been better understood by everyone if there had actually been some dialogue and discussion with affected parties before the decision was made.

It took the Trust a while to work out how to best represent supporters at our Club and maybe there are better ways (it's an open shop with a structure that welcomes fans getting involved and influencing decisions) but for many years now we have only formed a view on what supporters want after we have surveyed, analysed and understood what we think fans want. So we don't have an official position on away fan location at the moment.

I know next year is creeping up and away fan location has been raised but the response is as stated. There are three potential locations currently being considered but the Club are not yet firmly set on where. Factors that go in to the mix include the success (or otherwise) of the home fans in the Atyeo this season and whether there's an appetite on both sides to pursue it. So please don't think this hasn't been on the agenda or that it's too late.

If you'd like my personal opinion I'd like to see the central South Stand as safe standing and as our traditional home end and don't personally believe the argument about the rake is a show stopper. However I also think the Atyeo looks great this season and that as an "old" stand has the potential to be properly dressed as the City home end. But those are not firm opinions and if neither are what home fans collectively want then as long as they get an outcome that keeps the ground feeling like a proper football club then I'll support it.

[Three Lions]

If the away support was switched to the other side would the City fans in the Atyeo be able to use the Dolman concourse at half time and would it be big enough?

[WTMS]

I'm not sure why home fans are at that end but as stated, I have reminded the Club that the general perception is that this was a SC request and that fans didn't ask for it. To be fair, having been at the meeting where the Club revealed their Atyeo plans to a collection of supporters, I think there's a possibility that the "it's what SC wants" comment might have been just a throw away line and that it might be the case that they thought this was what the supporters would actually want. I think they're wrong in thinking this is a key driver but they might genuinely have thought it was. Regardless, it's a position that would have been better understood by everyone if there had actually been some dialogue and discussion with affected parties before the decision was made.

It took the Trust a while to work out how to best represent supporters at our Club and maybe there are better ways (it's an open shop with a structure that welcomes fans getting involved and influencing decisions) but for many years now we have only formed a view on what supporters want after we have surveyed, analysed and understood what we think fans want. So we don't have an official position on away fan location at the moment.

I know next year is creeping up and away fan location has been raised but the response is as stated. There are three potential locations currently being considered but the Club are not yet firmly set on where. Factors that go in to the mix include the success (or otherwise) of the home fans in the Atyeo this season and whether there's an appetite on both sides to pursue it. So please don't think this hasn't been on the agenda or that it's too late.

If you'd like my personal opinion I'd like to see the central South Stand as safe standing and as our traditional home end and don't personally believe the argument about the rake is a show stopper. However I also think the Atyeo looks great this season and that as an "old" stand has the potential to be properly dressed as the City home end. But those are not firm opinions and if neither are what home fans collectively want then as long as they get an outcome that keeps the ground feeling like a proper football club then I'll support it.

Thank you for your own view.

I'm not sure why home fans are at that end ... If the Supporters Trust do not know =  Yes the consultation starting in 2013 was not thorough and joined up. That can be improved upon.

If you'd like my personal opinion I'd like to see the central South Stand as safe standing and as our traditional home end and don't personally believe the argument about the rake is a show stopper .. At this point there will be no safe standing. Its a Utopian idea. Whether fans agree with the rake argument, or not, a specific, a standard is now openly apparent. 

Having details like the above does allow fans to create collective ideas. Points like rakes and capacity reductions for unreserved areas were not revealed in consultations for around eighteen months.

The Supporters Trust put forward ideas to BCFC / BS regarding the South that under the policy / guidelines / standards call them whatever, which were realistically not going to become a reality, and did not. That exemplifies why dialogue, discussion and the sharing of detail should have already widely started, in order to better reach that outcome mentioned in your last sentence.

[Cowshed]

"It took the Trust a while to work out how to best represent supporters at our Club and maybe there are better ways (it's an open shop with a structure that welcomes fans getting involved and influencing decisions) but for many years now we have only formed a view on what supporters want after we have surveyed, analysed and understood what we think fans want. So we don't have an official position on away fan location at the moment."

ST is another survey being developed?

[Blagdon red]

"It took the Trust a while to work out how to best represent supporters at our Club and maybe there are better ways (it's an open shop with a structure that welcomes fans getting involved and influencing decisions) but for many years now we have only formed a view on what supporters want after we have surveyed, analysed and understood what we think fans want. So we don't have an official position on away fan location at the moment."

ST is another survey being developed?

We are able to put together surveys at any time.

What questions would you like asked?

Please remember that they should be worded as neutrally as possible, trying hard to avoid leading respondents towards any partcular point of view.

 

[Cowshed]

What questions would you like asked?

The positioning of the away support and home fans.
Facilities.
Queuing.

Instantly appear appropriate.

[Three Lions]

regarding a survey at this point the facilities in the Dolman are a bit on the underwhelming side but are not finished, fans are paying more than the Atyeo. could the trust ask some questions regarding prices and facilities?

a simple idea would be if fans switched in the Ateyo City fans could use the concourse, will it be able to cope with extra numbers?

[Blagdon red]

Not sure I follow you. If City fans switched in the Atyeo, could they use which concourse? Do you mean the Dolman one?

 

@Cowshed: what particular questions do you have in mind about facilities and queuing? What would you like asked about those things / which particular facilities do you mean?

[Three Lions]

Not sure I follow you. If City fans switched in the Atyeo, could they use which concourse? Do you mean the Dolman one? yes it is not exactly spacious at half time. it takes an age to get served. yes its not finished but would it be large enough in future?

[Blagdon red]

OK, we'll see what we can get sorted. Hopefully the club / BS haven't already made up their minds.

[Three Lions]

If home fans swap sides in the atyeo isnt the the view from the corner block restricted? dont think it is. but if City fans were asked to swap there could be pros. using the finished concourse could be one. same again if the Atyeo was to become the home end with standing etc would fans be allowed in the Dolman concourse. it just doesnt seem large enough??