HCST - Away Supporters’ Initiative Fund: Where’s the money gone?

If this is the case then I believe anyone working with them is doing the wrong thing, all of the way through the FWG and through to the banner initiative. Supporters should not have to interrogate the club's officials to get to the truth of matters. We are being told lies and are being deceived on a regular basis and Mooney is a part of it - the job he has chosen to do and has (it appears) been promoted in demands he is aware. (His rise to his position has been during this whole sorry mess - so no claims of he never saw it coming).

Folk really need to understand that this is how it is; remove the benefit of the doubt.

 

I don't want this to lead to a repeat of previous conversations, but I can only treat as I find. He was very helpful with the banners.

The supporters initiative is a different issue, and on that, we've been told nothing, and that's undoubtedly wrong.

 

Does Mooney control the Away Supporters Initiation Fund? Does he decide what its spent on? Does he decide when its spent?

Until somebody tells me he's responsible for all those things then I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. I suspect he does what he's told. He most probably sees it as a dream job working for Hull City and yet he's the one expected to take the flak for stuff he has no control over.

 

This was put up earlier.
Marketing & Communications Manager
Hull City Tigers
June 2014 – Present (11 months)

Marketing and Online Commercial Manager
Hull City Tigers
April 2013 – June 2014 (1 year 3 months)Hull, United Kingdom
Marketing and Commercial manager looking after various aspects of the business including:

Ticketing
Branding
Promotions
Online content
New online revenue generation
Social Media
Retail

 

When is the next FWG meeting when Mooney can give answers? Also RH were told by the club a week before last that details would be announced!! shortly!!

 

Perhaps, but he's a huge Everton fan.

 

I agree, there is no need unless it is made necessary; he was helpful because he could appear to be helpful, but in fact he is doing very little, the rules are in place and the latest banners fall within them - he saw the designs and will monitor these threads, so he knows what will, or will not be on them - he is in a supporter created (and funded) comfort zone on that one. He is being evasive on the funding initiative because the circumstances call upon him to use his evasive skills to do his job for what he calls Hull City Tigers - that alone would be enough to cause me to ignore him.

 

He is the paid face of the company, he is the manager responsible for communications, of course he carries a level of responsibility. He fails to make any form of communication, not even an holding statement to acknowledge the concerns of those asking questions. I don't give him the benefit of the doubt at all, he is handling this very badly, or very professionally (for his masters).

 

I suppose his paymasters imagine that if the supporters complaining about the ASI money are ignored, they will eventually go away. A very erroneous assumption, as is likely to become evident quite soon ...

 

I think you're trying to link two unconnected issues into one, which runs the risk of clouding the significant one.
We chose the banner designs. You may well be right, IF they'd had Hull City on the larger ones, we maybe wouldn't have got the help we did. But people freely chose the designs they did, so the issue never arose. The current ones can certainly have whatever we want on them.
I think the fact the James Mooney was supportive, to the point of helping even on new years eve needs to be acknowledged, especially as he's volunteered his help on future schemes.

If people think I can see no wrong in him, have a look at my comments regarding the stand move.
My opinion there hasn't changed one jot, if anything it's got deeper, but I separate the two events as they're unconnected. Even within that, I acknowledge the help he did give me on it, albeit within the constraints.

The supporters fund initiative is a whole separate, and more important issue. The current lack of information reflects badly on the club and its relationship with the fans.

I think it's important to determine as best we can where the log jam is and target that rather than shooting wildly in the dark.

We need allies in the Club, targeting people we can't be sure aren't as frustrated as us, is liable to cause them to close ranks.

 

Try looking at the relationship, between supporter and club (Mooney), as a gem, something we should value.
The true quality of a gem is normally judged by cutting facets to reflect light and boast it's inner quality. A gem will have more that one facet and, if all are perfect, the gem will be high in it's value range and it will be cherished and widely appreciated; as will the skills of the cutter. Imperfections have the obvious, opposite results.
The banner initiative, the various elements of the name-change, the FWG, the AFSI, can all be considered to be facets of the relationship gem that exists between club and supporter.
James Mooney is trying to sell us the gem of club relationship, he is trying to attribute to it a value it's imperfect facets do not deserve, but how does he do that? He only demonstrates the facets he thinks folk will only see good in, he ignores or delays requests to see just how deeply flawed the imperfect facets are. Why does he do this? James Mooney is the embodiment of that gem to the supporters who feel they must be in touch, the ones who feel they need to buy-in to the club / supporter relationship.
The imperfections of the name-change, the AFSI, spoken views of the value of supporters and even the banner initiative hugely devalue the relationship gem and as the manager responsible for selling that gem to the public domain, James Mooney is using sharp sales techniques to achieve his goal.
You cannot be selective over which facet is to your liking as they are all one gem. A good salesman might wish to convince you otherwise. You might think an imperfect facet can be 're-cut and it can, but the over whole gem has lost value and at Hull City AFC, not the Hull City Tigers of James Mooneys world, the amount of 're-cutting required brings the value to a whole new low.
I don't believe we need allies in the club, I believe that is a naive and inherently weak point of view. I can see nothing that has been achieved that is due to any allies, only self-serving puppets doing, on their terms, what is right for them.
Take a closer look at that gem of a relationship, I think you'll find it's made of glass..

 

Fez,

Where do you stand with HCST then Fez. They attend the FWG and SAG on your behalf don't they. Have a go at PLT who attends the FWG representing this forum whilst you are at it.

 

Or he may be just doing what he's told. Just because you hold a responsible position doesn't mean you have the power to act responsibly.

 

An interesting post, TOM. The FWG is something that is attended to work with the club and I have often said that I do not believe it should be encouraged whilst the current situation exists. I have strongly questioned whether or not HCST attend in an official capacity and I am not aware they do, it's all kidology in my opinion. But, if they are, then I will continue to voice my dissatisfaction with that.
I be live the SAG is a different thing altogether which is a broader and more governed involvement.
Why do you want me to have a go at an individual, when I have not done that with anyone else? If PLT wants to respond to my comments, as, you, Dutch and others do, then I will reply, but I see no benefit beyond holding conversations about the principles involved - I can certainly see no benefit in 'having a go' at individuals, as it may be your style, but it isn't mine.

 

We all have options, some are harder than others to exercise, granted. I believe that someone, with the skills you expect of his position, would make a far better fist of the job he is doing. I think your generosity of spirit is excellent, but I think he does not deserve it on what we, the public can see. What I can see is a professional man who has decided to open a voluntary account on LinkedIn, this is not mandatory to his employment, but he decides to say he works for Hull City Tigers, he does not appear confused or do you believe he does?

 

I can't see anything wrong in having allies, even of the motives differ from mine. I find that a better option than generating enemies and then wondering why they won't talk to us. More so when we can't be sure they are the enemy.

 

So who are the self serving puppets you talk about? It was you who mentioned the FWG.

 

I would hardly call someone who is a paid representative of a man who lies to you and does all things possible to deceive you, as an ally; he is what he is. I cannot see how keeping them at arms length and simply asking them for the truth can possibly be interpreted as making enemies of them, nor can I see how them talking to us for the purpose of obscuration and deceit as anything useful to have achieved. The conversation seems to have adopted an enemy and ally theme, so, if, as it seems, you are happy with that, do you not find it strange that the voice of the enemy is considered an ally? I can see no purpose in collaboration (a word that fits your theme) unless the person you are talking to is showing a real sign of their ability make a real difference - I have seen nothing from James Mooney that shows that - can you offer me something?

 

Can you put that into context with something I have said, then I will be pleased to answer you.