Sky Blue Trust - A Critical Evaluation (1 Viewer)

[PorkyCovvy]

Since the regeneration of the Sky Blue Trust what have the organisation achieved?

They have increased their membership and if this were a business this would probably be their key performance indicator. They have certainly become more active and public compared to the previous directorship of the Trust. This can only be considered a success.

Like any evaluative piece you should always go back to your aims and objectives.

The main aim of the Trust is to gain an ownership stake at the club. This now seems further away for the Trust than ever. With SISU being the preferred bidder and the Trust directly opposing the them it seems unlikely that the Trust will even be invited to the boardroom again. Which further scuppers the Trust's main statement of methodology to work in partnership with the club.

The Trust's secondary aim is to advocate financial stability. Surely if they were to look at this logically the group could see that regardless who owns us we need access to revenue and the cost of the playing venue is not the main issue. Until we achieve this we can't move towards the Trust's financial objective. So surely, the Trust should have chosen to act as a mediator between ACL and CCFC in order to make the Ricoh Arena financially viable or they should (cautiously) aid with the temporary re- location and ultimately play a part with the new stadium? Take all emotion out of this debacle and these are the two most logical routes to the Trust's financial objective.

The third objective is to get the fans recognised as the life blood of the club. This is a tough one to evaluate. Unfortunately I have to marginally side on this objective not being met thus far. The various protests have done little to prove to CCFC that the fans are key. Seems we are not staying in Coventry (unless the situation changes) and SISU are seemingly not going anywhere.

So, despite the various PR disasters of conflicting and poorly communicated statements, we need to remember that the Trust are just volunteers who give up their free time with the noble intentions of making CCFC better for us all. The obvious demand would be to remove the Trust board as its clear they can't ever work constructively with SISU again following the second coming of the Save Our City movement. However, as they have always said, they are a democracy and only act on the wishes of their members (the wider Coventry City fan group). So actually the Board should remain but they must now change their communication and positioning to better align with their own objectives, otherwise fan ownership will never happen.

What do you think ate the Trust's successes/failures? How can it improve? Has it been an overall success?

The feeling on GMK is the Trust is becoming too much like Save Our City (SOC). I'm interested to hear whether the regulars on Sky Blue Talk concur - and if they do, then perhaps my regular haunt of GMK represents the 1% rather than the 99%.

 

---

[Broken Hearted Sky Blue]

At the first meeting of the Trust last year with the threat of liquidation the first thing that was urged was that if we did get liquidated the we would try to buy the name.

 

[Moscowskyblue]

too critical, not objective enough

too critical and not objective enough and that is just about Porkycovvy..... You must look at their stated aims by all means but the trust is just a side show to the main players in this sorry saga and I believe they have done as much as they could and should be commended for their efforts so far, but that is all they have been -efforts. Results have been non existent and will continue to be so until one the main players want something from the fans and that is when the trust becomes an ally to them.
I hope that the Sky Blue Trust is ready and willing to play a full part in achieving its stated aim of keeping the club in the city and getting back to 22 players a ball and two goals.
I wish the trust had more resources and influence but the pissing from the outside of psgm and others detract from the good intentioned work of the fans representatives of the trust.
Galvanising the best brains and influencing the situation is best done when all are working together, how about doing that Porky rather than your critique that would hold some weight if you offered your advice, influence or support to the process

 

[Jack Griffin]

Oh frag, Porky is on here, can we start a special room for him & pgsm1 (that is if they are not the same person)

 

[PorkyCovvy]

too critical and not objective enough and that is just about Porkycovvy..... You must look at their stated aims by all means but the trust is just a side show to the main players in this sorry saga and I believe they have done as much as they could and should be commended for their efforts so far, but that is all they have been -efforts. Results have been non existent and will continue to be so until one the main players want something from the fans and that is when the trust becomes an ally to them.
I hope that the Sky Blue Trust is ready and willing to play a full part in achieving its stated aim of keeping the club in the city and getting back to 22 players a ball and two goals.
I wish the trust had more resources and influence but the pissing from the outside of psgm and others detract from the good intentioned work of the fans representatives of the trust.
Galvanising the best brains and influencing the situation is best done when all are working together, how about doing that Porky rather than your critique that would hold some weight if you offered your advice, influence or support to the process

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on what those successes or achievements have been thus far.

I am a supporter of the Trust and I have tried to be constructively critical by holding them against their promises - the same expectations the Trust place on SISU.

 

[PorkyCovvy]

Oh frag, Porky is on here, can we start a special room for him & pgsm1 (that is if they are not the same person)

I don't know who that other user is. Rarely come on here to be honest but have ventured over in pursuit of a fresh perspective. What is your concern with my presence?

 

[honestken]

Since the regeneration of the Sky Blue Trust what have the organisation achieved?

They have increased their membership and if this were a business this would probably be their key performance indicator. They have certainly become more active and public compared to the previous directorship of the Trust. This can only be considered a success.

Like any evaluative piece you should always go back to your aims and objectives.

The main aim of the Trust is to gain an ownership stake at the club. This now seems further away for the Trust than ever. With SISU being the preferred bidder and the Trust directly opposing the them it seems unlikely that the Trust will even be invited to the boardroom again. Which further scuppers the Trust's main statement of methodology to work in partnership with the club.

The Trust's secondary aim is to advocate financial stability. Surely if they were to look at this logically the group could see that regardless who owns us we need access to revenue and the cost of the playing venue is not the main issue. Until we achieve this we can't move towards the Trust's financial objective. So surely, the Trust should have chosen to act as a mediator between ACL and CCFC in order to make the Ricoh Arena financially viable or they should (cautiously) aid with the temporary re- location and ultimately play a part with the new stadium? Take all emotion out of this debacle and these are the two most logical routes to the Trust's financial objective.

The third objective is to get the fans recognised as the life blood of the club. This is a tough one to evaluate. Unfortunately I have to marginally side on this objective not being met thus far. The various protests have done little to prove to CCFC that the fans are key. Seems we are not staying in Coventry (unless the situation changes) and SISU are seemingly not going anywhere.

So, despite the various PR disasters of conflicting and poorly communicated statements, we need to remember that the Trust are just volunteers who give up their free time with the noble intentions of making CCFC better for us all. The obvious demand would be to remove the Trust board as its clear they can't ever work constructively with SISU again following the second coming of the Save Our City movement. However, as they have always said, they are a democracy and only act on the wishes of their members (the wider Coventry City fan group). So actually the Board should remain but they must now change their communication and positioning to better align with their own objectives, otherwise fan ownership will never happen.

What do you think ate the Trust's successes/failures? How can it improve? Has it been an overall success?

The feeling on GMK is the Trust is becoming too much like Save Our City (SOC). I'm interested to hear whether the regulars on Sky Blue Talk concur - and if they do, then perhaps my regular haunt of GMK represents the 1% rather than the 99%.

why dont you state this at the next trust meeting and put youre name forward in the next election if you think you can do any better.

no.

thought not.

now fuck off back to gmk you troll, already got 1 fruitcake on here, ta.

 

[Jack Griffin]

I don't know who that other user is. Rarely come on here to be honest but have ventured over in pursuit of a fresh perspective. What is your concern with my presence?

I've seen your posts on GMK, though I've not posted there for a year or two.

And as for pgsm1, you'll soon know him, he has already quoted a fragment of your post, somewhat out of context, in support of his one man campaign against the trust. LOL

 

[PorkyCovvy]

I've seen your posts on GMK, though I've not posted there for a year or two.

I'd hate for any pre-conceptions you may have to prevent a valuable conversation occurring about the Sky Blue Trust.

 

[PorkyCovvy]

A number of GMK regulars are discussing going to the AGM on July 1st.

All I am doing is discussing the value of the Trust. So are you saying the Trust have not made errors which have put them into a position where they cannot achieve their primary aim of gaining ownership of the football club.

 

[Moscowskyblue]

my response Porky

I too know of you from GMK and although tiresome at times for always forcing a point home I always found you thought provoking and contrary to the usual posters. That said I think you are being a tad harsh on the trust and maybe should refrain from criticising a group that has been fighting to gain a foothold in a fight that they weren't invited to.
The Sky Blue Trust is a well meaning bunch and for a pound you can have your say and as a fellow poster has said try and influence them.
I will nail my colors to the mast straight away I hope that something can be done to remove these odious owners and until that happens I will be witholding my support in all ways, which after a very long time is not an easy thing to contemplate.
You may say that is easy from Moscow but I have worked all around the world and still had a season ticket, bought merchandise, spread the Sky Blue gospel and travelled at great cost to see games. I have been to the vast majority of historic games since the mid sixties, taken a beating for being a City fan and feel that I dont want to be associated with SISU and therefore my support is on hold in every way shape or form until they have exited the equation.

 

[PorkyCovvy]

I disagree with your point on the Trust being a battle they did not wish to attend. The reinvigorated Trust has strong Save Our City (SOC) links. The Trust re-started in the public domain in order to join this battle. Where you are close to being right is the Trust should NOT be involved with the intra-party politics between ACL and SISU and should position themselves to be able to work with whoever the owners of the club are in the pursuit of their main aim - part ownership of the club or a seat in the Boardroom. They should be available, if needed, to act as mediators in the sitution. Instead they have strongly committed towards an anti-SISU mantra, and whilst we all would ideally like a more Coventry caring owner at the helm, SISU are the owners and there are no other serious alternatives out there.

 

[Hobo]

PorkyCovvy, another Tinpot General joining the ranks of psgm1. Yet more Trust bashing!

Look Guys if you are so good go and set up your own protest group..

I am not a member of the Trust but have signed 2 petitions, sent letters to the Football League, Guardian newspaper, CET, and Sky Sports News.

Why don't you protest about club issues rather than just Trust Bash.

 

[Buster]

I disagree with your point on the Trust being a battle they did not wish to attend. The reinvigorated Trust has strong Save Our City (SOC) links. The Trust re-started in the public domain in order to join this battle. Where you are close to being right is the Trust should NOT be involved with the intra-party politics between ACL and SISU and should position themselves to be able to work with whoever the owners of the club are in the pursuit of their main aim - part ownership of the club or a seat in the Boardroom. They should be available, if needed, to act as mediators in the sitution. Instead they have strongly committed towards an anti-SISU mantra, and whilst we all would ideally like a more Coventry caring owner at the helm, SISU are the owners and there are no other serious alternatives out there.

If they did anything to lengthen SISU's stay i think i'd ask for my pound back!

 

[Grendel]

why dont you state this at the next trust meeting and put youre name forward in the next election if you think you can do any better.

no.

thought not.

now feck off back to gmk you troll, already got 1 fruitcake on here, ta.

Interesting.

Are you posting from North Korea?

 

[wingy]

Interesting.

Are you posting from North Korea?

Who is the other one he refers to??:facepalm:

 

[PorkyCovvy]

That is the point. The Trust should not be a protest organisation. For the Trust to prosper it needs to be positioned not to be a hard lined protest organisation.

Why is any criticism of the Trust seen to negatively? Read the initial analysis. All I am doing is proposing a re-positioning.

 

[wingy]

That is the point. The Trust should not be a protest organisation. For the Trust to prosper it needs to be positioned not to be a hard lined protest organisation.

Why is any criticism of the Trust seen to negatively? Read the initial analysis. All I am doing is proposing a re-positioning.

It seems to have found its position ,it consults, doesn't appear to do anything extreme ,and is correct in not assisting a move to A N Other ground ,that would result in the death of the Club and a significant chunk of support> Mr fisher is going to have to solve the problems of his own Gerald Ratner moment .

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

I disagree with your point on the Trust being a battle they did not wish to attend. The reinvigorated Trust has strong Save Our City (SOC) links. The Trust re-started in the public domain in order to join this battle. Where you are close to being right is the Trust should NOT be involved with the intra-party politics between ACL and SISU and should position themselves to be able to work with whoever the owners of the club are in the pursuit of their main aim - part ownership of the club or a seat in the Boardroom. They should be available, if needed, to act as mediators in the sitution. Instead they have strongly committed towards an anti-SISU mantra, and whilst we all would ideally like a more Coventry caring owner at the helm, SISU are the owners and there are no other serious alternatives out there.

I think there are several well-documented serious alternatives; sadly SISU don't want to go.

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

That is the point. The Trust should not be a protest organisation. For the Trust to prosper it needs to be positioned not to be a hard lined protest organisation.

Why is any criticism of the Trust seen to negatively? Read the initial analysis. All I am doing is proposing a re-positioning.

And with owners as cuntish as ours, how is the Trust meant to represent fans by being pro-SISU? Anything other than an organisation that protests against their disgusting behaviour would be failing the majority of its members.

 

[simple_simon]

That is the point. The Trust should not be a protest organisation. For the Trust to prosper it needs to be positioned not to be a hard lined protest organisation.

Why is any criticism of the Trust seen to negatively? Read the initial analysis. All I am doing is proposing a re-positioning.

Can I ask why your not doing this on GMK ?

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Can I ask why your not doing this on GMK ?

That would be much better

 

[PorkyCovvy]

Why am I not doing what on GMK?

 

[jesus-wept]

A number of GMK regulars are discussing going to the AGM on July 1st.

Well that confirms it i am going too, just hope these GMK crew identify themselves instead of hiding in the shadows as usual.

 

[NorthernWisdom]

Well that confirms it i am going too, just hope these GMK crew identify themselves instead of hiding in the shadows as usual.

Do you want them to wear a pink carnation in their button hole?

 

[cashless]

Well that confirms it i am going too, just hope these GMK crew identify themselves instead of hiding in the shadows as usual.

Is your real name Jesus Wept then? I suspect not. I will be going to the AGM, will state my name and offer some genuine constructive criticism of the way the trust is going. If that is ok with you?