PR battles (5 Viewers)

[James Smith]

We've learnt some interesting stuff though:

They moved for money pure and simple
A club DOES need it's own stadium and 24-7/365 revenue
They lied about avoiding playing on Sundays and affecting CRFC and CCFC
They have no intention of sharing any of ACL with the football club
They have no intention of taking over the football club

Simon really is managing to drip-feed these daily PR pieces magnificently from a 40 minute phone conversation.

Without wanting to sound like I'm defending Simon/Les/CT/Observer etc. the fact that there will be column inches to fill means that were I in their shoes I'd probably string out what I had over several days. Especially if only one side is making any noise. Did anyone actually seriously think that they didn't move for the financial reasons and wanted all of ACL but not our club?

What annoys me more than anything else about this is the fact that this could and should have been us not some poxy rugby team.

 

---

[RFC]

two questions. How do you know and evidence?

Just a thought but the 14m is an ACL liability that was being met prior to Wasps landing or CCFC returning. Since then ACL/Compass/IEC income has increased we are told certainly by the extra trade from sporting events (Wasps/CCFC) but apparently events etc too. Might suggest that ACL can afford to make the payments? :thinking about:

Aren't ACL owned by Wasps?

 

[oldskyblue58]

Aren't ACL owned by Wasps?

Here's a novelty for you. Answer my two questions clearly and properly and I will explain how it works. I think we would all agree that is fair

 

[chiefdave]

There's a clear difference between the way Wasps are reported on and CCFC. The club says something and FOIs are being fired off, independent experts call up etc. Wasps make statements, some of which are clearly false and don't stand up to the slightest scrutiny and the appearance is that they have been accepted as fact.

Lets face it the majority look at a CT headline or article and accept that version of events, it doesn't even cross their mind to question it.

Look at this weeks articles, fair play to Simon he's got some good information in there and obviously there's a limit on what he can do with the time and resources he has. Would the response to the articles have been different if the general narrative being established or the tone of them was different?

The headlines could easily have been 'Richardson confirms Wasps moved for the money, fans not considered', 'Wasps backtrack on agreement not to play on Sundays regardless of potential damage to CRFC', 'future bleak for Sky Blues as Wasps refuse to consider partnership in ACL'. The content of the articles could be identical but frame it differently and it tells a very different story.

The issue is that where CCFC are concerned it is framed to highlight the negative, with Wasps the positive.

Look at when they had the independent finance expert in, dig into the details and essentially he confirmed what Fisher had said, above L1 we can't compete without our own stadium and 365 revenue. However the headline was 'new CCFC stadium plan seems crazy'. Sub headline was 'Sky Blues would be better off staying at the Ricoh'. It creates a very different picture overall and the CT, no matter what anyone thinks of it, does have influence.

 

[James Smith]

Here's a novelty for you. Answer my two questions clearly and properly and I will explain how it works. I think we would all agree that is fair

Good luck with that!

 

[Captain Dart]

There's a clear difference between the way Wasps are reported on and CCFC. The club says something and FOIs are being fired off, independent experts call up etc. Wasps make statements, some of which are clearly false and don't stand up to the slightest scrutiny and the appearance is that they have been accepted as fact.

Nothing to stop you writing to the CT pointing the falsehoods out then. I believe Simon Gilbert encouraged that in one of his recent postings.

 

[The Gentleman]

There's a clear difference between the way Wasps are reported on and CCFC. The club says something and FOIs are being fired off, independent experts call up etc. Wasps make statements, some of which are clearly false and don't stand up to the slightest scrutiny and the appearance is that they have been accepted as fact.

Lets face it the majority look at a CT headline or article and accept that version of events, it doesn't even cross their mind to question it.

Look at this weeks articles, fair play to Simon he's got some good information in there and obviously there's a limit on what he can do with the time and resources he has. Would the response to the articles have been different if the general narrative being established or the tone of them was different?

The headlines could easily have been 'Richardson confirms Wasps moved for the money, fans not considered', 'Wasps backtrack on agreement not to play on Sundays regardless of potential damage to CRFC', 'future bleak for Sky Blues as Wasps refuse to consider partnership in ACL'. The content of the articles could be identical but frame it differently and it tells a very different story.

The issue is that where CCFC are concerned it is framed to highlight the negative, with Wasps the positive.

Look at when they had the independent finance expert in, dig into the details and essentially he confirmed what Fisher had said, above L1 we can't compete without our own stadium and 365 revenue. However the headline was 'new CCFC stadium plan seems crazy'. Sub headline was 'Sky Blues would be better off staying at the Ricoh'. It creates a very different picture overall and the CT, no matter what anyone thinks of it, does have influence.

So let me get this straight, what you are saying is that every single story the telegraph puts out about CCFC is framed to highlight the negative?

 

[torchomatic]

People shouldn't have to should they. If things are clearly false or if promises are being reneged on then it's up to the paper and the interviewer to interject and question, surely?

Dave is spot on with the CT coverage. As I pointed out, the "dwindling support" headline is a prime example.

Nothing to stop you writing to the CT pointing the falsehoods out then. I believe Simon Gilbert encouraged that in one of his recent postings.

 

[oldskyblue58]

so how do CCFC counter that, given that they have contributed greatly to the air of mistrust that surrounds the club, directors and owners ?

We should be looking at positive solutions for the club ....... what comes across time again is that it is easier to hide behind someone else's fault.

PR is something that the club should have positive control of no matter what Wasps do. Simply put they do not have that but they have always had the opportunity to.

 

[chiefdave]

Nothing to stop you writing to the CT pointing the falsehoods out then. I believe Simon Gilbert encouraged that in one of his recent postings.

Indeed but I would suggest the impact of a highlighted headline piece is significantly higher than a comment tucked away on the letters page. Does the letters page even appear on the online version?

So let me get this straight, what you are saying is that every single story the telegraph puts out about CCFC is framed to highlight the negative?

No that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying the general tone is that Wasps stories where possible are given a positive spin, CCFC a negative spin. As with the examples I supplied.

 

[martcov]

I would like to see a clearly laid out plan with factual backing from TF. I cannot see the CT refusing an interview with TF if he asked for one as a response to Wasps reported refusal to buy CCFC or alter the ownership structure to allow CCFC to buy in. If Wasps can afford 40 minutes of their time to put across their ambitions, then I am sure TF could find 40 minutes to update us on his plans. But he won't......

 

[Captain Dart]

What happened to that top PR agency SISU were signing up?

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-fc-owners-recruit-8373441

 

[Ian1779]

Look at when they had the independent finance expert in, dig into the details and essentially he confirmed what Fisher had said, above L1 we can't compete without our own stadium and 365 revenue. However the headline was 'new CCFC stadium plan seems crazy'. Sub headline was 'Sky Blues would be better off staying at the Ricoh'. It creates a very different picture overall and the CT, no matter what anyone thinks of it, does have influence.

The majority of fans think that a new stadium is a nonsense idea... and why wouldn't they when the club have produced very little evidence to the contrary.

The reality is that to go forward we need it, and it was confirmed as such in these articles, and it was the argument that Wasps produced for coming here in the first place.

These articles could have been pitched as 'financial expert confirms need for Sky Blues to have own stadium', or even 'Sky Blues must now follow Wasps vision and secure own stadium' and that would have put a different spin on it, more positive to CCFC and also provide a clear platform to challenge the club on.

I get the feeling that they either do not wish to do this, or care to.

 

[The Gentleman]

Indeed but I would suggest the impact of a highlighted headline piece is significantly higher than a comment tucked away on the letters page. Does the letters page even appear on the online version?



No that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying the general tone is that Wasps stories where possible are given a positive spin, CCFC a negative spin. As with the examples I supplied.

Really? Why did you say then on the Gilbert thread "everything has a negative spin on it"?

You see, some might say that you are waging a PR war against the Telegraph, you know with you saying one thing and meaning another........

 

[torchomatic]

I agree. And if he does then it will be FOI-ago-go. We know how any such interview will be received before it's even conducted.

I would like to see a clearly laid out plan with factual backing from TF. I cannot see the CT refusing an interview with TF if he asked for one as a response to Wasps reported refusal to buy CCFC or alter the ownership structure to allow CCFC to buy in. If Wasps can afford 40 minutes of their time to put across their ambitions, then I am sure TF could find 40 minutes to update us on his plans. But he won't......

 

[The Gentleman]

The majority of fans think that a new stadium is a nonsense idea... and why wouldn't they when the club have produced ANY evidence to the contrary.

The reality is that to go forward we need it, and it was confirmed as such in these articles, and it was the argument that Wasps produced for coming here in the first place.

These articles could have been pitched as 'financial expert confirms need for Sky Blues to have own stadium', or even 'Sky Blues must now follow Wasps vision and secure own stadium' and that would have put a different spin on it, more positive to CCFC and also provide a clear platform to challenge the club on.

I get the feeling that they either do not wish to do this, or care to.

It's ok Ian, I've changed that for you

 

[oldskyblue58]

Isnt at least part of the truth that Wasps control their PR and CCFC no longer do (it can even come across at times as no longer care). That is not a good situation what ever business you are in but especially one that was so prominent with the local public. What ever you may think of bias of local press a good part of that lack of control has been achieved by their (CCFC) own actions or inactions.

Another thought is it depends where you think most stories about CCFC or Wasps originate or should originate. Is it from the clubs themselves or should it be from the local press themselves. If it were me running the club I know where I would like the origins of any story to be

 

[Covstu]

I think the PR is similar to the current elections:

Wasps (Labour, SNP, UKIP etc) - Moving into a new territory and on the charm offensive to gain enough votes to attend games in areas that they have noth operated in. Selling the dream, the stadium the 'top class rugby' etc


CCFC (Tories) - Been there for a number of years, people know what they are getting (so cannot bullshit) and the product is questionable. What they are clearly failing to do at present is to sell their manifesto for the years to come.


People are not happy so looking for a change in power hence the drop in attendances etc.

 

[skybluetony176]

I think you miss the point Torch.

There is a comparison between the PR coming out of Wasps and that coming out of CCFC.

I have some limited experience in dealing with the press - although admittedly, primarily trade press - and my experience is that if you give them a well written PR article, you've a good chance of getting it published.

Some of us have the view that the lack of PR from our club is due to 1) the lack of a credible story to tell and 2) the lack of credible people to tell it - others (while of course not supporting SISU in any way) prefer to blame the messenger.

Exactly this.

It's another failing of our owners only now being highlited because someone is on the scene who understands how to do the PR game.

 

[Esoterica]

For me, it's the same with Jan's CET piece 'Eight things Coventry City need to sort out before I renew my season ticket'.

I agree with all the actual individual points inside it except the negative tone and ultimatum over renewing the season ticket. We've barely escaped relegation and anyone wavering on the fence might also now have been pushed into not renewing. I find that damaging to the club.

An article worth reading for me would have been to take Jan's 8 points, relate them back to SISU's own 5 point plan for the future and then put that feedback in an interview with Joy saying 'here is a fan's view going forward into next season, here are your aims as stated in January' - what's been done in the last 4 months, and what are you going to do to achieve them. Neutral, factual but putting SISU on the spot and then depending on the response, it is SISU doing the damage to the club, not the CET.

 

[Ranjit Bhurpa]

Isnt at least part of the truth that Wasps control their PR and CCFC no longer do (it can even come across at times as no longer care). That is not a good situation what ever business you are in but especially one that was so prominent with the local public. What ever you may think of bias of local press a good part of that lack of control has been achieved by their (CCFC) own actions or inactions.

Another thought is it depends where you think most stories about CCFC or Wasps originate or should originate. Is it from the clubs themselves or should it be from the local press themselves. If it were me running the club I know where I would like the origins of any story to be

Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere but having being involved in PR and Marketing for a number of years, experience tells me that four basic requirements are needed for successful PR/Marketing initiatives:
1. Professional PR and Marketing staff, whether they are sourced internally or via a third party agency.
2. A dedicated PR/Marketing plan that is fully budgeted.
3. The ability of your management team to look at the longer term picture and recognise that PR and Marketing are investments and not pure costs. This is especially true in finance-led organisations
4. Especially with PR, a very good professional relationship between the company PR specialists and local media. Occasionally journo's will pick up on speculation/rumours/possible news stories and contact you for confirmation, but more often than not press releases will be circulated from the company to the media, and it is up to the media to decide on the news value of each item.
Do we know if our owners have any of these in place?

 

[SimonGilbert]

I don't think some people understand what PR is...

 

[Nick]

I don't think some people understand what PR is...

PR involves gaining understanding and support for clients, as well as trying to influence opinion and behaviour.

 

[Ranjit Bhurpa]

I don't think some people understand what PR is...

OK, I'll buy it..................
PR = Public Relations so in its basic form it is promoting and developing (favourable) relations with your public.

 

[Hobo]

The professional maintenance of a public image. So that sits with the club not the CT or anyone else.

 

[skybluetony176]

SISU. Good at the second bit, shit at the first.

PR involves gaining understanding and support for clients, as well as trying to influence opinion and behaviour.

 

[duffer]

There's no doubt that Wasps are very good at PR, to go back to the OP. That's not always a good thing though - what they've done here is what every good PR company in the world wants to achieve, hide bad news behind good spin.

Bad News I: For CRFC fans, Wasps want to start playing on Saturdays.
Bad News II: For CCFC fans, Wasps are not going to negotiate regarding a share of ACL.

If as a CCFC or CRFC fan you can read the recent articles and still come away with a positive feeling about Wasps, then it's very good PR indeed.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Then again you have to have believed in assurances against bad news in the first place

Always thought that they would want to play Saturdays it is the traditional day for sport, but even then it is going to be governed by TV coverage isn't it so it wont be every Saturday. CCFC still have first call on usage for now (not sure if that's till 2016 or 2018 though) so Wasps have to work round their needs. Hopefully some sort of arrangement can be arrived at with CRFC but unless the current form improves markedly then how great will the effect be on a 3rd division rugby club. What did they actually say at the start regarding Saturdays?

As for negotiating a share of the Ricoh, never thought that was on the cards - other options might be, some things are still saleable if there is a will to do a deal - but a share in the Ricoh or ACL for the foreseeable future I just do not see it

Anyone who thought Wasps were going to anything other than look after themselves first and foremost was frankly living in cuckoo land. The olive branches offered, though welcome, are calculated and done so in self interest. It is as they say just business

 

[oldskyblue58]

It would of course be interesting and potentially reassuring to get a proper and substantiated response to all this from CCFC/SISU........... not something I am really expecting to be honest.

Just leaves the CCFC fans feeling frustrated, annoyed, let down, worn down and pessimistic as another bit of hope disappears and nothing is on the horizon to rebuild it

It seems reality is finally dawning on some - not very comfortable is it and deeply saddening

 

[Nick]

There's no doubt that Wasps are very good at PR, to go back to the OP. That's not always a good thing though - what they've done here is what every good PR company in the world wants to achieve, hide bad news behind good spin.

Bad News I: For CRFC fans, Wasps want to start playing on Saturdays.
Bad News II: For CCFC fans, Wasps are not going to negotiate regarding a share of ACL.

If as a CCFC or CRFC fan you can read the recent articles and still come away with a positive feeling about Wasps, then it's very good PR indeed.

What is it if you then try to persuade others it is positive / good?

 

[Chipfat]

It really doesn't matter what Wasps are saying now to what they said earlier,, the fact is they can say what they want having been in control for an amount of time they can see what needs changing.. Facts are they are in , we are hanging in, reporters report what they thing will create talking points and interest and by looking at this thread the reporter has done his job... I don't agree with the Wasps situation but they will make the best of the surroundings and build the business to be one if not the biggest rugby club in UK.. DO i like it,,, No but is this fact YES it is...


Sisu need to make a massive decision this summer on and off the field because we are going backwards in every aspect of the club.. Next year we might not be as lucky as having 4 teams worse than us,, and as of yet no squad has got stronger under Sisu but weaker... PR will have to be good tp get peoeple to fall for the same shit 9 years on the trot, no matter how it is reported....

 

[Ranjit Bhurpa]

It would of course be interesting and potentially reassuring to get a proper and substantiated response to all this from CCFC/SISU........... not something I am really expecting to be honest.

Just leaves the CCFC fans feeling frustrated, annoyed, let down, worn down and pessimistic as another bit of hope disappears and nothing is on the horizon to rebuild it

It seems reality is finally dawning on some - not very comfortable is it and deeply saddening

I think those feelings ring true for all fans. However, I sense that with the appointment of TM and the relative upturn in results, there is a golden opportunity - some would say the last in a long line - for our owners to finally change tack and fully realise the potential of CCFC.

Assuming we manage to stay up in Division Three and that our owners have a genuine desire to do something positive with their investment, I suggest they could do worse than embrace the '8 point plan' detailed by Jan the other day which, for me, highlights how the gulf that exists between the Club and its fans could be bridged.

It's time the last 15 years of decline and under-achievement were finally turned around.

 

[shy_tall_knight]

Don't think WASPS PR is anything special just looks so good when compared to CCFC who now lack presence in their own city run by people who having lost the Ricoh have no strategy. Yes owning your own stadium will be best in the long run but this merely an aspiration that SISU can't and won't deliver but will talk plenty about it in very vague terms - but besides RFC nobody believes them. No wonder WASPS PR machine looks so slick our owners are invisible most of the time and when they do talk nobody believes them.

Won't be renewing ST its not lack of success its loss of hope coupled with the whole matchday experience (however really enjoyed Tuesday's atmosphere). Its the General Election where politicians make plenty of empty and sometimes wild promises, SISU's bull$hit is tame compared to this.

 

[Limey]

No matter how many flags wasps would send me, nice emails, or how many stories, flyers, adverts etc they put out I have NO affiliation for that team.

 

[Ranjit Bhurpa]

No matter how many flags wasps would send me, nice emails, or how many stories, flyers, adverts etc they put out I have NO affiliation for that team.

Totally agree, I have no interest in watching Wasps and never will. If I want to see a live rugby match, then I will go and watch my local team CRFC.
However in relation to the OP, their PR machine is much more effective than that of CCFC. I would love to receive an email, flyer or whatever from the Club I have supported for 40+ years but I get or see sod all.