PorkyCovvy
Member
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%.
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%.