This Conway Out Group is a Hoax

On the topic of Mr Q, I think this theory might be better placed on 8kun than here

 

1000% no. That's closing down open debate. The very thing this thread has condemned. Just ignore the thread mate.

 

At the end of it all, they're dyed in the wool fans, same as us. I don't want to see them be made to look or feel daft.

 

The groups got off to a bad start but all mainly due to that one admin guy who used a false name and has been kicking folk. Why are people on here surprised that Facebook one of the biggest social media platforms in the world is being used as a tool gain supporters of their movement against the owners. I don’t see it unprofessional to use Facebook.

 

I think the broad view is that it's the execution and handling of it all that's come across as unprofessional. That it's been even possible to launch and moderate this through a fake persona, and gain support as quickly as it did, is reason enough for me personally, to suggest Facebook groups may not be the right platform to instigate an ownership challenge.

 

I was trying to be diplomatic

 

Is it though? If you take your 'I hate the owners' glasses off and look at what we actually know, as of today, hoax might be a bit too strong but there's definitely valid reasons for questioning the credibility.

- A multi-million pound takeover of a Championship club, with revenue over £20m a year, is being 'launched' via a Facebook group under a 'Conway Out' banner
- Upon launch that group was closed to certain supporters who were kicked out of the group (but later rectified)
- The person who was claiming to have set this group up (Martin Nettleton), on behalf of these potential new owners (I'm not using investors anymore), was openly claiming he was just the go between and was only involved because he knew someone, who in turn knew these potential owners, and his role was just setting up a Facebook group because he'd done one before. These potential new owners didn't know how to setup a Facebook group or have someone within their network of businesses who could do it for them?
- They started referencing 'The 10' as a way to describe the potential new owners and the fans that were involved and backing them. No background was given on why those fans were asked to join a group that included our prospective new owners. Who chose those fans to be involved? Were they self-appointed? What was it based on? What makes them best positioned to manage a buyout of the current owners?
- Without actually telling people to do something they were actively suggesting that supporters turn their back on the club. Despite providing zero insight in to why this would be a good thing long term. This included suggesting posting back the vouchers which they said was a 'good idea'
- They put forward their questions for the Q&A after BFCST had reached out to them. We suggested setting up a call the night the Q&A with this group to try and understand some of their background, what their plans were, whether it's something the Trust could/should support. The response we got was 'we want you to prove yourselves first' so they refused to have that call. The call was only going to be with myself and Gally rather than the whole Trust at this stage, so we could report back to the Board, and really informal and supportive of their frustrations and objectives.
- Also, some of the questions they put forward had already been answered by the club and available online. Surely people behind a multi-million pound takeover would be forensically reading all previous updates from the club? They're not hard to find.
- Despite being told to 'prove ourselves' the Trust defied predictions from the 'Conway Out' group by doing exactly what we said we'd do. Ask every question supporters wanted to know with an unedited video shared for free online
- At the point that many supporters, not just myself and Gally, started to ask for any info and background on what we're being asked to support. Despite this being asked in a really respectable way, the group essentially got out of control, threads and comments were deleted, people kicked out again and blocked from the group
- The answers given to these questions were 'we don't know these people', 'we haven't met them'. etc.
- Insults were then launched at fellow supporters with the message loud and clear that if you don't agree with their stance you're not welcome. Even suggesting that supporters not backing the campaign would be on the wrong side of history
- It was then discovered that Martin Nettleton was a fake account. Potentially deliberately setup knowing people would associate it with the Director of a local business who isn't on Facebook
- Other fake Facebook accounts have been setup to act as backers of the campaign, such as 'Red Neilfearn'
- Follow up videos have then been released explaining some of the above to the Conway Out Facebook group. Without passing comment on the content of these videos, again you would have to have serious reservations that this is how a multi-million pound takeover a football club think things should be carried out. It's not at all professional
- Supporters continue to be blocked and banned from having visibility of what gets said in this group. Meaning the videos mentioned above, which included apologies, won't actually reach the supporters harshly treated

Now I'm not daft. I know there's eyes everywhere online from people who don't post on the BBS, who are part of the group, who aren't part of the group, etc. But the above is just to reinforce why there isn't wide reaching support for the campaign yet and why questions are being asked. Using phrases like 'vast majority' and 'most supporters' is disingenuous because there's no credibility behind that claim - yet. This isn't the Trust giving any official opinion or asking anyone to pick a side, make a decision, act in a certain way. It's just wanting really clear and transparent info to be made available in a credible way.

Nothing would make me happier than to feel more connected to the club through a more local ownership model rather than sometimes feeling like a pawn within a multi-club network. I don't want to see £750k of money suspiciously leaving the club accounts and for that to go unexplained for so long. I'd rather not see Mowatt replaced with Benson and Gomes. Or players signed from Europe in suspicious circumstances. But I also want Barnsley FC to be around for another 100+ years, so if someone's suggesting a hostile and forced takeover/buyout of the club, then essentially 'show me the money' and give me a reason to believe it's for the best.

And for those reading who throw comments our way that we never criticise the club because we don't want to lose our 'free perks' or our 'insider contacts'. What does that even mean and why do you see giving up hundreds of hours a year outside of a full time job and life as a perk? Why is trying to improve the Fan Experience with Redfearn's Bar and the FanZone, getting to Oakwell at 7am sometimes for a lunchtime kick off, and carrying kegs of beer and cases of soft drinks around Oakwell in the rain, seen as a perk? I can assure you there's many a time all of us would rather have stayed in bed or joined our friends in the Number 7. It's clear you've not watched the Q&A, haven't attended previous Fans' Forums, and have ignored our quick and decisive updates on Stendel's 21 word statement, the club finances and the court case, the rumours of moving away from Oakwell, and the closure of the West Stand.

Reading the above storyboard of events surely shows there's a valid reason for questioning this car crash of a situation?