04 Apr 2025 11:06:38
Interesting things at Strasbourg with their Ultras and fans moaning about the ownership of Blue Co saying they are Chrlsea's B team and that there is a distinct lack of communication from the owners (where have we heard that before) .
They also say that they are a nursery for our club inorder to buy cheaper and then to bring the players back over to us.
It's interesting as they were struggling financially and they are currently well placed to qualify for Europe which could cause more issues gor them if we are in the same competition.
I guess somebody needs to let them know that we have a B team already.
Imagine the reaction if we set up a CPO system at their club.
04 Apr 2025 13:49:29
Is the Strasbourg ground being threatened for housing development?
I’m not sure but it would appear that owners of most clubs are not very good at communicating. My guess would be that if they starting answering questions all the time it would never stop and anyway it’s impossible to make all fans happy. I assume that may be different if there is part fan ownership.
04 Apr 2025 18:53:15
Is ours mow Tom.
What happened was many years ago and o think the CPO have been I'm place for far too long and they have too much power.
04 Apr 2025 19:26:58
The CPO was important at the time of KB and potential development of SB. It may well have important decisions to make in seasons to come.
The CPO has a membership with views and is probably a reflection of our broader supporter base.
The CPO didn’t invent its articles that was done by KB. I personally think the 75% threshold to pass a vote is way too high but that’s the CPO’s fault.
Of course this may have all been mute had the only time the CPO have voted on a potential move issue it was reported as an attempted vote rig.
04 Apr 2025 19:49:16
That should be “thats NOT the CPO’s fault. ”.
05 Apr 2025 09:24:41
Fair enough Tom.
With the new SB project supposedly coming up for a decision in the summer, how about the CPO let the wider CFC fanbase vote on something that is of great importance to the club.
05 Apr 2025 11:26:39
Bill, while I think it would be a fantastic idea for all members and season ticket holders a chance to vote on such an important issue unfortunately they are not the owners of the name or pitch.
Also and I think unfortunately there is in my opinion a significant percentage of CPO’s who will always vote against moving away from SB. I just cannot see there ever being a 75% vote in favour of a move away from our present home.
Maybe more people should buy CPO shares.
05 Apr 2025 15:43:13
Very interesting Tom.
From what you say, the only thing the CPO will agree to is stay at the Bridge.
To me that is a totally ricidilous view and makes me more pointed towards moving away and calling ourselves differently.
It amazes me that the CPO would make us change our name just because the owners ate not playing ball with the COO.
It's no wonder RA gave up trying with an organisation just set on hoding the club back.
Thecowners should just have a referendum amongst the wider fan base and go with whatever decision is made regardless of the CPO.
05 Apr 2025 19:46:11
The CPO did NOT create the articles that form its existence. We can thank KB and probably his solicitors for that.
As far as any vote is concerned I just find it hard to imagine 75% of CPO members agreeing on anything.
RA didn’t give up because of the CPO. He gave because he was refused the right to do business in the UK. He and his sidekick Bruce Buck f@caked up royally when it was put to the vote. So again don’t blame the CPO.
06 Apr 2025 08:40:19
Tom
If we have an organisation like the CPO not been able to agree on anything, what is the point in having them around.
All they do is to hinder the clubs future progress and that is not the reason KB set them up in the first place.
They are thin place to protect the club, not to hinder it's development.
You say RA mucked things up but I bet the CPO were in the front row cheering him when we were winning trophy's.
06 Apr 2025 12:36:23
Bill, the current owners didn’t create the CPO, it was a KB invention.
I doubt legally that the current owners can unwind the articles of the CPO. Of course they could just ignore them but it would make sense to at least attempt to bring them in line with any plans that our current owners have.
Of course they could just CPO members were cheering on the club when they were winning trophies under RA’s ownership, they are supporters of the team not necessarily the owners.
I was happy to trust the RA proposal given how much of his own money he had pumped into the club but the fact it is the vote in my opinion failed when it became obvious at an attempt to skew the membership.
It’s now up to our current owners to build bridges and be transparent in its plans for the future.
I have said before that it’s my opinion that the CPO do NOT hold a strong hand. For example, they have no money to support the general maintenance of the pitch let alone any of the surrounding area.