Agenda items for FAN -Thursday 1st September

[Up The City!]

I am in a association/committee and it drives me bloody bonkers. Sometimes 5 turn up and sometimes over 30 turn up. When it is very few of us we quickly get through the agenda and set actions etc and proper decisive decisions are made.

When there is a big turn out it is a night mare. Each agenda item takes an age to be discussed without a solution being found.

We then get people bringing up odd things such as size and colour of cups which will be discussed in great detail for a long time. Often leaving the important issues unresolved. 

Sounds like this group is the same.

[CyderInACan]

A special "weekender" in Newcastle eh. I vote @Never to the dark side be put in charge of arranging flights. 

[Carey 6]

Disappointing how they just dropped Billy Wedlocks name from a stand & just replaced it with 'Dribuild' shows how much regard they have for former legends. Won't be long until the Atyeo is gone. 

[Lack of Action Man]

14 hours ago, Sixtyseconds said:

Eddie Shoestring could not solve that one

 To quote Radio 1: Eddie Shoestring WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

That's some serious retro tv there.  

[pongo88]

3 hours ago, Up The City! said:

I am in a association/committee and it drives me bloody bonkers. Sometimes 5 turn up and sometimes over 30 turn up. When it is very few of us we quickly get through the agenda and set actions etc and proper decisive decisions are made.

When there is a big turn out it is a night mare. Each agenda item takes an age to be discussed without a solution being found.

We then get people bringing up odd things such as size and colour of cups which will be discussed in great detail for a long time. Often leaving the important issues unresolved. 

Sounds like this group is the same.

This is a valid point about the size of the meeting. Can anyone who's involved explain (a) why FAN meetings have so many attendees and (b) more importantly, are there any plans to reduce it to a manageable number? If there are no plans, perhaps this should be an agenda item for the next meeting. With the current format it seems to be a hopeless, and thankless, task in trying to have discussion and agreement on meaningful issues. This isn't a criticism of those who attend 

[elhombrecito]

1 hour ago, Carey 6 said:

Disappointing how they just dropped Billy Wedlocks name from a stand & just replaced it with 'Dribuild' shows how much regard they have for former legends. Won't be long until the Atyeo is gone. 

They didn't replace it with Dribuild though, it was replace by 'South'. The stands have always been sponsored. Even the aforementioned Atyeo Stand is officially the 'Atyeo Stand sponsored by Lancer Scott'.

Anyway, pedantry aside, I do agree with you. Don't see why they needed to drop his name. 

[RedM]

23 minutes ago, pongo88 said:

This is a valid point about the size of the meeting. Can anyone who's involved explain (a) why FAN meetings have so many attendees and (b) more importantly, are there any plans to reduce it to a manageable number? If there are no plans, perhaps this should be an agenda item for the next meeting. With the current format it seems to be a hopeless, and thankless, task in trying to have discussion and agreement on meaningful issues. This isn't a criticism of those who attend 

Or in the age of modern technology, why do people have to be there in person? Wouldn't a conference call type thing be more appropriate? 

[Welcome To The Jungle]

19 minutes ago, RedM said:

Or in the age of modern technology, why do people have to be there in person? Wouldn't a conference call type thing be more appropriate? 

Conference calls are no where near as good as a real life meeting imo.

[RedM]

8 minutes ago, Welcome To The Jungle said:

Conference calls are no where near as good as a real life meeting imo.

No obviously not, but if it allows people to participate when otherwise they couldn't, which seems to be a difficulty, it might be an answer for the occasional meeting? I think it all depends on who chairs the call, in meeting it should only be one person talking at once anyhow.

[Bristol Rob]

4 hours ago, Up The City! said:

I am in a association/committee and it drives me bloody bonkers. Sometimes 5 turn up and sometimes over 30 turn up. When it is very few of us we quickly get through the agenda and set actions etc and proper decisive decisions are made.

When there is a big turn out it is a night mare. Each agenda item takes an age to be discussed without a solution being found.

We then get people bringing up odd things such as size and colour of cups which will be discussed in great detail for a long time. Often leaving the important issues unresolved. 

Sounds like this group is the same.

Sounds like it needs to be chaired properly.

They 'chair' of course could just be a facilitator with no vested interest in the meeting. 

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, RedM said:

Or in the age of modern technology, why do people have to be there in person? Wouldn't a conference call type thing be more appropriate? 

 

41 minutes ago, Welcome To The Jungle said:

Conference calls are no where near as good as a real life meeting imo.

I'll just leave this here.

[Milo]

These sessions are an opportunity for supporters to raise issues with Bristol Sport and the Football Club but it is rare that the issues result in an action. They typically result in a “this is why” or “see your point, but it can’t be changed”. It is rare that there is a take away for the Club to explore although the latest meeting had one of these. The Senior Reds reps in particular are fed up with the lack of opportunity to buy tickets in person in the Club Shop and backed by a unanimous response a commitment was made to report back at the next meeting with progress, as opposed to the constant kicking in the long grass that had preceded it.

I sound a bit grouchy, but actually you have to say that Bristol Sport have been pretty busy of late and they have to prioritise as they see fit. At least these meetings provide an opportunity for supporters to get points across and for the strength of feeling on various issues to be gauged. So although FAN is not what I’d like it to be, something is better than nothing so I support it.

The meeting runs with an agenda and if it weren’t for Jeremy’s good time keeping they could go on for hours. If there are topics not addressed they will hopefully make the agenda next time. If an issue is time critical there’s always the Match Day/Stadium Q&A forum.

[Phileas Fogg]

4 minutes ago, Milo said:

These sessions are an opportunity for supporters to raise issues with Bristol Sport and the Football Club but it is rare that the issues result in an action. They typically result in a “this is why” or “see your point, but it can’t be changed”. It is rare that there is a take away for the Club to explore although the latest meeting had one of these. The Senior Reds reps in particular are fed up with the lack of opportunity to buy tickets in person in the Club Shop and backed by a unanimous response a commitment was made to report back at the next meeting with progress, as opposed to the constant kicking in the long grass that had preceded it.

I sound a bit grouchy, but actually you have to say that Bristol Sport have been pretty busy of late and they have to prioritise as they see fit. At least these meetings provide an opportunity for supporters to get points across and for the strength of feeling on various issues to be gauged. So although FAN is not what I’d like it to be, something is better than nothing so I support it.

The meeting runs with an agenda and if it weren’t for Jeremy’s good time keeping they could go on for hours. If there are topics not addressed they will hopefully make the agenda next time. If an issue is time critical there’s always the Match Day/Stadium Q&A forum.

The meetings seem to be bi-monthly at best, if it's so tough to fit everything in - couldn't they be a bit more regular than that?

The match day QnA is ok, but it's only for OTIB members and it doesn't allow discussion, just one answer.

I don't think it really matters if Bristol Sport are 'busy' or not, the FAN process and meetings need to be improved and the club have enough members of staff to make FAN better. 

[Fat Cigar]

I went along for the first time last week. I was one of the “guests” although my name’s not on there (have told the minute taker to add me in. Need to see my name on the OS…!) Have always wanted to get involved in something like this and I do love talking…

I thought it was great. And I’ll be going back in November and hope to become a member at some point, although will have to wait until the vote at end of the season it seems.

There was a tour of the Lansdown/West Stand before the meeting. I’d never actually seen it up close until last Thursday. The view from the front few rows of the upper West is amazing, as they are in most of the Lower West. We got to see the Executive Suites and the Lounges. How the other half live. Very nice. Although I’m happy with my seat in the Lower Dolman. And it’s £100 cheaper for a similar(ish) view.

Re: people on here not getting all their questions asked, (and I can’t speak for @Dollymarie) I imagine it’s more to do with time, or lack of. If the meeting addressed every question, it’d last for days. As it was, we did well to get through so much in just 2 hours.

There were a lot of people there but it wasn’t too bad or felt too crowded, and there was time for people to ask questions. It was the first time I’d met Adam Baker and Andrew Billingham and they never shirked from answering a question.

The need to have a ticket office (or a couple of people in the shop) for people to be able to buy tickets in person is something that needs to happen. I mentioned it to Steve Lansdown at the Q&A before Forest away, but subsidised transport for away fans is one I’ll be pursuing. I asked Andrew B about the possibility of our own train to an away game. We’ll see. Not sure this will happen. Lots of variables for this one.

The “EFL Whole Game Solution” (outside of the Prem, proposal for 5 leagues of 20 teams each. Only 1 midweek game per season) worries the hell out of me, and I get the impression City aren’t overly enamoured with it.

Overall, a worthwhile meeting. I know that not everyone can/wants to go along to these meetings, and they’re not everyone’s cup of tea. Some will think ‘what’s the point, nothing’s going to change anyway??’ But, I genuinely believe our club does listen to us. Not always (not every suggestion is worth listening to, let’s be honest), but  I think we’re in good hands.  The club is run by decent people, feels far more professional, and I believe is more responsive and up front than most.

 

[phantom]

43 minutes ago, Milo said:

I sound a bit grouchy, but actually you have to say that Bristol Sport have been pretty busy of late and they have to prioritise as they see fit. At least these meetings provide an opportunity for supporters to get points across and for the strength of feeling on various issues to be gauged. So although FAN is not what I’d like it to be, something is better than nothing so I support it.

The meeting runs with an agenda and if it weren’t for Jeremy’s good time keeping they could go on for hours. If there are topics not addressed they will hopefully make the agenda next time. If an issue is time critical there’s always the Match Day/Stadium Q&A forum.

Just a few points that I would raise @Milo

What are the staff busy doing, that they wouldn't be doing normally?

Yes the meetings SHOULD be of use, but it doesn't go much futher than what our SLO SHOULD be doing already

Better than nothing, yes that is true - but has ANY point raised by a supporter, been taken to a meeting and addressed?

As for the timing issue, unless it is going late into the night why would there be the need for a cut off time? This has happened at previous meetings, if it is all about running into the late night then the OBVIOUS thing is to rearrange the meeting say for a Sunday ?

As good as the Q&A section is, there is no interaction with it, I've read numerous questions/ answers that could have had more dialogue in them

9 minutes ago, Fat Cigar said:

I thought it was great. 

There was a tour of the Lansdown/West Stand before the meeting. I’d never actually seen it up close until last Thursday. The view from the front few rows of the upper West is amazing, as they are in most of the Lower West. We got to see the Executive Suites and the Lounges. How the other half live. Very nice. Although I’m happy with my seat in the Lower Dolman. And it’s £100 cheaper for a similar(ish) view.

Re: people on here not getting all their questions asked, (and I can’t speak for @Dollymarie) I imagine it’s more to do with time, or lack of. If the meeting addressed every question, it’d last for days. As it was, we did well to get through so much in just 2 hours.

There were a lot of people there but it wasn’t too bad or felt too crowded, and there was time for people to ask questions.

In response to your message @Fat Cigar

The first thing that really jumps out is, if it was a FAN meeting, why are people being shown around the ground? This is not the time or the place to be doing this

You mention that "There were a lot of people there but it wasn’t too bad or felt too crowded, and there was time for people to ask questions" - I would query why NONE of the questions raised on here were asked, this is not the first meeting that this has happened. 

----------------------

Just to add, like others have said above - this is in no way critical of the people that make the time to attend, it's just month after month the same issues are raised about the set up of the FAN and in the past we've heard it was to be addressed but the same problems are still there

[Bristol Rob]

21 minutes ago, Fat Cigar said:

I went along for the first time last week. I was one of the “guests” although my name’s not on there (have told the minute taker to add me in. Need to see my name on the OS…!) Have always wanted to get involved in something like this and I do love talking…

I thought it was great. And I’ll be going back in November and hope to become a member at some point, although will have to wait until the vote at end of the season it seems.

There was a tour of the Lansdown/West Stand before the meeting. I’d never actually seen it up close until last Thursday. The view from the front few rows of the upper West is amazing, as they are in most of the Lower West. We got to see the Executive Suites and the Lounges. How the other half live. Very nice. Although I’m happy with my seat in the Lower Dolman. And it’s £100 cheaper for a similar(ish) view.

Re: people on here not getting all their questions asked, (and I can’t speak for @Dollymarie) I imagine it’s more to do with time, or lack of. If the meeting addressed every question, it’d last for days. As it was, we did well to get through so much in just 2 hours.

There were a lot of people there but it wasn’t too bad or felt too crowded, and there was time for people to ask questions. It was the first time I’d met Adam Baker and Andrew Billingham and they never shirked from answering a question.

The need to have a ticket office (or a couple of people in the shop) for people to be able to buy tickets in person is something that needs to happen. I mentioned it to Steve Lansdown at the Q&A before Forest away, but subsidised transport for away fans is one I’ll be pursuing. I asked Andrew B about the possibility of our own train to an away game. We’ll see. Not sure this will happen. Lots of variables for this one.

The “EFL Whole Game Solution” (outside of the Prem, proposal for 5 leagues of 20 teams each. Only 1 midweek game per season) worries the hell out of me, and I get the impression City aren’t overly enamoured with it.

Overall, a worthwhile meeting. I know that not everyone can/wants to go along to these meetings, and they’re not everyone’s cup of tea. Some will think ‘what’s the point, nothing’s going to change anyway??’ But, I genuinely believe our club does listen to us. Not always (not every suggestion is worth listening to, let’s be honest), but  I think we’re in good hands.  The club is run by decent people, feels far more professional, and I believe is more responsive and up front than most.

 

Without a stadium tour, I'm guessing more could have been covered.

[Phileas Fogg]

Agree @Bristol Rob, @phantom

Feels like there's an attitude of 'at least we're doing something and that it is comparable to competitors' - without there being hard evidence of that being the case.

In my opinion it should be 'what can we do to make FAN the best out of our competitors'.

Taking nothing away from those who attend, and it's not a criticism of them, it feels to me like FAN is a box ticking exercise.

[Bristol Rob]

7 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Agree @Bristol Rob, @phantom

Feels like there's an attitude of 'at least we're doing something and that it is comparable to competitors' - without there being hard evidence of that being the case.

In my opinion it should be 'what can we do to make FAN the best out of our competitors'.

Taking nothing away from those who attend, and it's not a criticism of them, it feels to me like FAN is a box ticking exercise.

Again, not a criticism but with such a huge list of attendees it would be interesting to know the occupations and professions of the FAN members, so that should anyone be thinking of raising a question they could ask the most qualified person to represent their view to the club.

Might be that the FAN representative already has the answer which would save time.

[Milo]

27 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

The meetings seem to be bi-monthly at best, if it's so tough to fit everything in - couldn't they be a bit more regular than that?

The match day QnA is ok, but it's only for OTIB members and it doesn't allow discussion, just one answer.

I don't think it really matters if Bristol Sport are 'busy' or not, the FAN process and meetings need to be improved and the club have enough members of staff to make FAN better. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not here to make excuses for them and as I said, it's not what I'd like it be. What I think you are describing is what I want; a football club that puts its supporters at the heart of every decision. That's not what we have. We have a football club that grapples with the aims of seeking profitability and being competitive on the pitch. Rightly or wrongly depending on your viewpoint, both of those aims trump customer service and supporter engagement, though everyone there does know that getting these right will help them achieve the main aims.

As an example, decisions like contracting to a system that charges booking fees for buying tickets are made in the full knowledge that this is not what its customers want. Other examples, when season ticket terms were discussed they didn't mention the booking fee to FAN nor the £25 charge for the "interest free" pay monthly deal. These are examples of not seeking confirmation that what they're planning to do will be unpopular because they're going to do it regardless.

As I see it, this is the backdrop to supporter consultation at our Club at the moment and I believe we're powerless to do anything about it other than to keep trying to influence. Dissatisfied with the status quo you either disengage entirely or you do your best. Some engagement is better than none.  

[Phileas Fogg]

1 minute ago, Milo said:

Don't get me wrong, I'm not here to make excuses for them and as I said, it's not what I'd like it be. What I think you are describing is what I want; a football club that puts its supporters at the heart of every decision. That's not what we have. We have a football club that grapples with the aims of seeking profitability and being competitive on the pitch. Rightly or wrongly depending on your viewpoint, both of those aims trump customer service and supporter engagement, though everyone there does know that getting these right will help them achieve the main aims.

As an example, decisions like contracting to a system that charges booking fees for buying tickets are made in the full knowledge that this is not what its customers want. Other examples, when season ticket terms were discussed they didn't mention the booking fee to FAN nor the £25 charge for the "interest free" pay monthly deal. These are examples of not seeking confirmation that what they're planning to do will be unpopular because they're going to do it regardless.

As I see it, this is the backdrop to supporter consultation at our Club at the moment and I believe we're powerless to do anything about it other than to keep trying to influence. Dissatisfied with the status quo you either disengage entirely or you do your best. Some engagement is better than none.  

Agree, think we're on the same page about this. I feel sometimes the club just doesn't think about things logically and creates issues for itself as a result.

We're lucky we've got some really involved and passionate supporters who genuinely care about the club and attend these meetings. I can't put in that time myself so am grateful to those that do - such as yourself and everyone who attends FAN etc.

I feel though that sometimes the club acts needlessly covertly and it seems underhand. A while back I suggested FAN meetings be streamed, even if people can't interact directly, it makes the club more accountable and makes initiatives like this more accessible. I was told this was impossible to do and I feel that's a shame. Little steps like this would be a positive step for these meetings and it would take the pressure off one person to write up (voluntarily) minutes.

9 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

Again, not a criticism but with such a huge list of attendees it would be interesting to know the occupations and professions of the FAN members, so that should anyone be thinking of raising a question they could ask the most qualified person to represent their view to the club.

Might be that the FAN representative already has the answer which would save time.

Agree, little steps like this could make FAN a really effective tool for accountability and improvement.

[Dollymarie]

Just to add, the tour was at 6pm and the meeting started at its usual time of 7pm

[Snufflelufagus]

15 hours ago, Bristol Rob said:

I SAID. I. WAS. RIGHT.

First time I've been correct and NOTHING. No acknowledgement, no words of thanks. NOTHING.

At least I had no expectations when I was always wrong.

You win yourself some food vouchers..........

[Milo]

8 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Agree, think we're on the same page about this. I feel sometimes the club just doesn't think about things logically and creates issues for itself as a result.

We're lucky we've got some really involved and passionate supporters who genuinely care about the club and attend these meetings. I can't put in that time myself so am grateful to those that do - such as yourself and everyone who attends FAN etc.

I feel though that sometimes the club acts needlessly covertly and it seems underhand. A while back I suggested FAN meetings be streamed, even if people can't interact directly, it makes the club more accountable and makes initiatives like this more accessible. I was told this was impossible to do and I feel that's a shame. Little steps like this would be a positive step for these meetings and it would take the pressure off one person to write up (voluntarily) minutes.

Agree, little steps like this could make FAN a really effective tool for accountability and improvement.

Thanks PF. 

I agree about the covert behaviour. I think this comes from running a business that is a goldfish bowl with thousands looking in. There is a mindset that the Club is always under attack from one flank or another. It thinks it can never do anything right in the eyes of all supporters so it has a tendency towards no PR rather than accusations of "another PR disaster". I have some sympathy with that sentiment, but don't think it's a good enough excuse not to open up a bit more. Lee Johnson I think is a good example of getting good PR because he's communicating with us through various sources and willing to accept that like the rest of us, he's not perfect.

I also agree we should have FAN open to the wider public but when discussed, this was not the majority view of the Club or the attending supporters who feel that the four walls allow a franker exchange than a public broadcast. Personally I disagree strongly and can't particularly remember hearing anything that would damage the Club if it had been widely circulated. Maybe we should propose a trail run to see how this changes it.

All meetings suffer from diminishing returns and in my personal opinion two hours is the maximum for this type of session. I agree that stadium tours should not be part of the meeting and as Dolls said, the tour was only for those wanting to turn up before the meeting. Meetings now focus on supporter issues and for example we have not asked for Mark Ashton or Lee Johnson to talk to the group whereas previous managers have done so, not because we wouldn't find that interesting, but because we don't feel that's the best use of the limited time available.

Dolls, can you remind me that when the next agenda is drawn up that I'd like to propose there is an agenda item where questions raised on otib are discussed. Having a dedicated time slot is the best way to ensure that as many of the questions raised on the forum get addressed.

[Fat Cigar]

I take all the points above and I know you’re not criticising those who attend.  The tour was a one off (I’m guessing) and understandable given all the new developments.

As I’ve said, this was the first meeting I’ve attended, and I’ll be going to the next.  For now, I’m only a “guest,” so not sure how much influence I can have. But trust me, I’m someone who speaks up, and really hope I can be as involved as possible and get things changed for the better.

Always worth bearing in mind, the club can’t deal with every issue.

[Phileas Fogg]

Agree @Milo can't dispute any of what you've said. I think we both want FAN to be the best, and most accountable, it can possibly be.

24 minutes ago, Fat Cigar said:

Always worth bearing in mind, the club can’t deal with every issue.

 

Not sure about that, I don't think there's anything that's ever been discussed at FAN that the club cannot deal with at all. No one is asking that much, just seems like regular questions and suggestions.

 

[Fat Cigar]

30 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

 

Not sure about that, I don't think there's anything that's ever been discussed at FAN that the club cannot deal with at all. No one is asking that much, just seems like regular questions and suggestions.

 

Fair point. Maybe before November there could be a period where people on here are asked for possible agenda items, a list is kept of them all, and maybe a top 3 or 5 most popular put to the Chair for inclusion. Again, all depending on time.

Like everyone else, I had no idea Rachel was the new David Lloyd. Odd that the club never made an official announcement.  

[Up The City!]

I think in future someone needs to possibly correlate all the questions and issues and put them on a list decided by priority. Baby changing facilities being near the bottom.

[Homer Simpson]

48 minutes ago, Up The City! said:

I think in future someone needs to possibly correlate all the questions and issues and put them on a list decided by priority. Baby changing facilities being near the bottom.

It's usually the bottom causing the problems.

[T R]

It seems to me there is a need for a follow up meeting 2 weeks after the monthly meeting. Suggest 2 people from each group, perhaps an hour meeting to discuss if any progress has been made by the club on any topics raised from the main meeting.

All those in favour say aye

[Bar BS3]

@phantom @Bristol Rob

just incase you missed @Dollymarie's reply, the tour was at 6pm and optional for people to attend prior to the meeting. It didn't encroach into the allocated meeting time at all.