[moondog]

Zorro, on 06 September 2016 - 04:25 PM, said:

Mark, you could also say that AC & CT have nothing to do with the PPP so why should they attend?

Rob

Not when we are told both have recently invested substantial funds to keep it going

[Zorro]

dim view, on 06 September 2016 - 04:19 PM, said:

What makes you think the DT did not check thoroughly?
I doubt very much that they published before asking for comments. It looks like you got more detail from Malta than they got from Whitt Moor.

As azul pointed out, there was nothing wrong with the content, but why should the DT publish something that again gives the club a bad name. Don't you think we've had enough bad publicity over the years without printing something that again shows up incompetence? I have gone along with a lot of the reports Grahame has printed but this to me is yesterdays news and more chip paper. Why does everything have to be brought into the public domain?

Somebody either at the PPP or CFC wants a severe b****k**g for this cock up, at least a warning but shouldn't that be a club issue and not a public issue?
How many companies in the Chesterfield area have been hit with CCJ's during the last month? Why haven't the DT published those stories?

Building bridges? I think you need to build wicker baskets and burn certain people on Beeley Moor.

I won't defend the club on the Rafflegate, Ernie Moss issue or the fact that CFC employed someone that should never have stepped foot in the place, but I don't mind cutting a little bit of slack when I feel that we are going overboard with this one, namely the CCJ

Z

[The Black Triangle]

Zorro, on 06 September 2016 - 01:17 PM, said:

Sorry, I don't understand your question here in reply to my message.
I have no idea of the current financial situation at the PPP, the CCJ is for an old debt from last year when the PPP hired mini-buses from a hire company that had their offices at the the old Royal Hospital in Town (if that helps).

Z

If the club was incorrectly invoiced for services, wouldn't someone question what it was about? A letter would arrive demanding payment. It would have been opened by club staff. After reading it, surely someone would have said hey boss, what's this? If the reply was nowt to do with us we don't hire vans then perhaps it went in the bin. Once bailiff letters arrived, someone would have, surely, rung the hire company to enquirer what the debt was and who to, who booked the vehicles etc. Once court proceedings were issued the it would have been passed to "upper management" to address? It's inconceivable no one, at any point thought hang on, this needs to be looked at and dealt with.
Did no one, at any point on receipt of letters first from the company, then from debt collection, and finally from the court, act upon them? Did no one pick up a phone? Are we really to believe the club and its staff knew nothing about this?
One man held senior positions at both enterprises, so it's not as it it's a simple admin error as PPP bills wrongly sent to CFC could not simply be passed to CT for closure.

Also, didn't CT and LS say to spireitenag all debts were paid and no monies were outstanding?

At best, it's gross incompetence. At absolute best it's gross incompetence. Does CT have any idea at all of what is going on? Because it seems that lurching from gaff to disaster to cock up is the normal situation at CFC while ever this man has been in position.
Successful businessmen often make best headway when the appoint good people to key positions and delegate responsibility accordingly- we know DA is a successful businessman - why is he tolerating such incompetence? It's baffling, mind bogglingly so baffling. I don't understand it at all, considering the short shrift he gave to Mr Hubbard and Carol W. There has to be more to it behind the scenes as it defies any logic.

[Zorro]

moondog, on 06 September 2016 - 04:30 PM, said:

Not when we are told both have recently invested substantial funds to keep it going

They both have a vested interest due to their personal loans, but one is employed as the CEO & the other as a director of CFC, so I think DA has every right to say if they should appear in a public forum.

[Zorro]

The Gimp, on 06 September 2016 - 04:39 PM, said:

If the club was incorrectly invoiced for services, wouldn't someone question what it was about? A letter would arrive demanding payment. It would have been opened by club staff. After reading it, surely someone would have said hey boss, what's this? If the reply was nowt to do with us we don't hire vans then perhaps it went in the bin. Once bailiff letters arrived, someone would have, surely, rung the hire company to enquirer what the debt was and who to, who booked the vehicles etc. Once court proceedings were issued the it would have been passed to "upper management" to address? It's inconceivable no one, at any point thought hang on, this needs to be looked at and dealt with.
Did no one, at any point on receipt of letters first from the company, then from debt collection, and finally from the court, act upon them? Did no one pick up a phone? Are we really to believe the club and its staff knew nothing about this?
One man held senior positions at both enterprises, so it's not as it it's a simple admin error as PPP bills wrongly sent to CFC could not simply be passed to CT for closure.

Also, didn't CT and LS say to spireitenag all debts were paid and no monies were outstanding?

At best, it's gross incompetence. At absolute best it's gross incompetence. Does CT have any idea at all of what is going on? Because it seems that lurching from gaff to disaster to cock up is the normal situation at CFC while ever this man has been in position.
Successful businessmen often make best headway when the appoint good people to key positions and delegate responsibility accordingly- we know DA is a successful businessman - why is he tolerating such incompetence? It's baffling, mind bogglingly so baffling. I don't understand it at all, considering the short shrift he gave to Mr Hubbard and Carol W. There has to be more to it behind the scenes as it defies any logic.

Totally agree with your reasoning regarding how it got through, somebody is responsible for this shambles, who? I don't know but I hope the club will find out and take action.

Z

[The Black Triangle]

Zorro, on 06 September 2016 - 04:37 PM, said:

As azul pointed out, there was nothing wrong with the content, but why should the DT publish something that again gives the club a bad name. Don't you think we've had enough bad publicity over the years without printing something that again shows up incompetence? I have gone along with a lot of the reports Grahame has printed but this to me is yesterdays news and more chip paper. Why does everything have to be brought into the public domain?

Somebody either at the PPP or CFC wants a severe b****k**g for this cock up, at least a warning but shouldn't that be a club issue and not a public issue?
How many companies in the Chesterfield area have been hit with CCJ's during the last month? Why haven't the DT published those stories?

Building bridges? I think you need to build wicker baskets and burn certain people on Beeley Moor.

I won't defend the club on the Rafflegate, Ernie Moss issue or the fact that CFC employed someone that should never have stepped foot in the place, but I don't mind cutting a little bit of slack when I feel that we are going overboard with this one, namely the CCJ

Z

Were it one isolated incident I would agree. But it's not.
There is a conveyor belt of gaffes, cock ups and incompetence - with more to come. It needs highlighting, every single time until action is taken to stop it.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

moondog, on 06 September 2016 - 04:30 PM, said:

Not when we are told both have recently invested substantial funds to keep it going

Clearly the cash injection hasn't touched the sides.

1) 25-30 parents required refunds of between £650 to £690 each

2) Claims from F/T & P/T staff that they went without pay for 4 months which needed paying

3) Did I recall seeing that AC had said that the rent was in arrears too?

4) A CCJ "incorrectly" issued against CFC on 27/07/16 for £6,327.00

5) A further CCJ issued on 23/08/16 for £4,334.00. We'll have to assume that this was correctly issued as there has been no comment.

6) Rental refunds due to parents.

[The Black Triangle]

Zorro, on 06 September 2016 - 04:44 PM, said:

Totally agree with your reasoning regarding how it got through, somebody is responsible for this shambles, who? I don't know but I hope the club will find out and take action.

Z

If it's an individual then they are dealt with and perhaps their supervisor reprimanded. A second time and then the supervisor and his manager. A third it's the manger and so on. How many gaffes are we into now before questions about senior management and their suitability to be able to actually manage are asked?
A company I worked for had similar situations. Allow me to explain.
Time sheets were regularly submitted late or not all meaning overtime payments were missed and staff not being paid the correct amounts. After a while HR started asking questions. The reply was always the same. I submitted my time sheet to Mr P. Mr P was called in for questioning and eventually spoken to.
It stopped for a while and then started to creep back in. At the same time, an employee handed in his notice. After 7 months HR asked about the employee and why no time sheets had been submitted.
It turns out Mr P had failed to notify HR that he had left. The employee had even emailed Mr P after asking why he was still being paid!
Mr P cost the company something like £18,000.
Mr P is no longer the manager.
So why is CT still CEO?

This post has been edited by The Gimp: 06 September 2016 - 04:56 PM

[moondog]

Zorro, on 06 September 2016 - 04:39 PM, said:

They both have a vested interest due to their personal loans, but one is employed as the CEO & the other as a director of CFC, so I think DA has every right to say if they should appear in a public forum.

and thus ties the club to the PPP when it suits.

It's about time Allen commented on the venture then and explain why he allowed club employees to set it up

[The Black Triangle]

moondog, on 06 September 2016 - 04:55 PM, said:

and thus ties the club to the PPP when it suits.

It's about time Allen commented on the venture then and explain why he allowed club employees to set it up

I don't think the PPP is a bad idea. In principle, it's a good idea. It's the personnel and execution of the idea that is lacking.

[Forever a Spireite]

Zorro, on 06 September 2016 - 04:25 PM, said:

Mark, you could also say that AC & CT have nothing to do with the PPP so why should they attend?

Rob

They have lent the PPP £30k each haven't they or have I missed something. That to me says INVOLVED!

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Zorro, on 06 September 2016 - 04:37 PM, said:

As azul pointed out, there was nothing wrong with the content, but why should the DT publish something that again gives the club a bad name. Don't you think we've had enough bad publicity over the years without printing something that again shows up incompetence? I have gone along with a lot of the reports Grahame has printed but this to me is yesterdays news and more chip paper. Why does everything have to be brought into the public domain?

Somebody either at the PPP or CFC wants a severe b****k**g for this cock up, at least a warning but shouldn't that be a club issue and not a public issue?
How many companies in the Chesterfield area have been hit with CCJ's during the last month? Why haven't the DT published those stories?

Building bridges? I think you need to build wicker baskets and burn certain people on Beeley Moor.

I won't defend the club on the Rafflegate, Ernie Moss issue or the fact that CFC employed someone that should never have stepped foot in the place, but I don't mind cutting a little bit of slack when I feel that we are going overboard with this one, namely the CCJ

Z

Rob - you're starting to sound like Les Ashmore, now.

You've admitted the club is run terribly from top to bottom. You've admitted there's a record of incompetence. You've admitted someone needs a severe b*ll*cking for yet another shambolic cock-up.

Yet the DT are somehow wrong to expose it?

The CCJ awarded against CFC is fact. Another CCJ awarded against PPP is fact (though I understand they've still time to pay that one and see it expunged from record). Indeed everything the DT have reported is fact.

We can only wait and see if the Club's version of events turns out to be fact - are you confident of that being the case given previous conversations you've taken part in?

As for the stuff about other CCJ's awarded against other companies, how many companies in Chesterfield enjoy the free publicity supplied to CFC on a weekly basis? How many share such a high profile? How many are the subject of an emotional attachment on the part of thousands of locals?

Besides, if firms or political parties are involved in scandals I'm pretty sure they will be exposed.

Here's the thing; if those running Town did things properly and offered a version of events that tallied with reality, the DT would have nothing to report.

Unfortunately they've given not just the local but the national media far too much to report for far too long.

[moondog]

The Gimp, on 06 September 2016 - 04:59 PM, said:

I don't think the PPP is a bad idea. In principle, it's a good idea. It's the personnel and execution of the idea that is lacking.

Agreed but the question remains valid

[dim view]

Zorro, on 06 September 2016 - 04:44 PM, said:

Totally agree with your reasoning regarding how it got through, somebody is responsible for this shambles, who? I don't know but I hope the club will find out and take action.

Z

They could send CT on a training course with other young upstarts.

Clearly you don't think any action will include his removal as you've already said he'll be around until DA sells up. I'm secretly hoping that AC suddenly acquiring shares is an omen. It might mean that they might soon take on a value because DA has found a buyer. Call me a cynic.

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

MDCCCLXVI, on 06 September 2016 - 05:26 PM, said:

Rob - you're starting to sound like Les Ashmore, now.

You've admitted the club is run terribly from top to bottom. You've admitted there's a record of incompetence. You've admitted someone needs a severe b*ll*cking for yet another shambolic cock-up.

Yet the DT are somehow wrong to expose it?

The CCJ awarded against CFC is fact. Another CCJ awarded against PPP is fact (though I understand they've still time to pay that one and see it expunged from record). Indeed everything the DT have reported is fact.

We can only wait and see if the Club's version of events turns out to be fact - are you confident of that being the case given previous conversations you've taken part in?

As for the stuff about other CCJ's awarded against other companies, how many companies in Chesterfield enjoy the free publicity supplied to CFC on a weekly basis? How many share such a high profile? How many are the subject of an emotional attachment on the part of thousands of locals?

Besides, if firms or political parties are involved in scandals I'm pretty sure they will be exposed.

Here's the thing; if those running Town did things properly and offered a version of events that tallied with reality, the DT would have nothing to report.

Unfortunately they've given not just the local but the national media far too much to report for far too long.

Equally the local successful companies probably don't get press coverage like the clue does when it is successful. The club will always be in the press because people in large numbers are interested.

[Tha Knows...]

Its all a waste of effort in that CT is here to stay while DA is in charge. If not something would have been done by now.

[shaun1866]

valemadness, on 06 September 2016 - 01:21 PM, said:

Not this month.....

Yeah so it appears from his reply.

[spireitenag]

Zorro, on 06 September 2016 - 04:37 PM, said:

As azul pointed out, there was nothing wrong with the content, but why should the DT publish something that again gives the club a bad name. Don't you think we've had enough bad publicity over the years without printing something that again shows up incompetence? I have gone along with a lot of the reports Grahame has printed but this to me is yesterdays news and more chip paper. Why does everything have to be brought into the public domain?

Somebody either at the PPP or CFC wants a severe b****k**g for this cock up, at least a warning but shouldn't that be a club issue and not a public issue?
How many companies in the Chesterfield area have been hit with CCJ's during the last month? Why haven't the DT published those stories?

Building bridges? I think you need to build wicker baskets and burn certain people on Beeley Moor.

I won't defend the club on the Rafflegate, Ernie Moss issue or the fact that CFC employed someone that should never have stepped foot in the place, but I don't mind cutting a little bit of slack when I feel that we are going overboard with this one, namely the CCJ

Z

Rob,why blame the DT ?

The only people giving the club a bad name are those that are running it.

[Security66]

spireitenag, on 06 September 2016 - 07:40 PM, said:

Rob,why blame the DT ?

The only people giving the club a bad name are those that are running it.

Bang on Nige,how can anyone defend the undefendable?Sick to the back teeth of this shower running our club,cue the be careful what you wish for brigade.

[Spireite-Karl]

This ↑

And that's from top to bottom!