Sky Blue Trust Secretive Meeting(s) with SISU (1 Viewer)

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 18, 2014

Like it or not, SISU's way of doing things is quite private. And yes, it's been a complaint since the start, and yes it's not an ideal situation for a football club that thrives on public awareness. But in this instance, I'm not sure it needs building up to a statement. A chat can just be a chat. Fine, if it's going to cause an issue for the trust they can mention it, but not sure it benefits the football club that much really, as it just builds up to let down - let's face it, very few believe anything the club will say until it actually happens, anyway!

Sub · Aug 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
Like it or not, SISU's way of doing things is quite private. !

untill it starts mudslinging in public when it suits them, they were the ones that said they were going to be more open and transparent were they not ? they have made a rod for their own backs with their lies and constant bullshit to be honest.

Mary_Mungo_Midge · Aug 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
Like it or not, SISU's way of doing things is quite private. And yes, it's been a complaint since the start, and yes it's not an ideal situation for a football club that thrives on public awareness. But in this instance, I'm not sure it needs building up to a statement. A chat can just be a chat. Fine, if it's going to cause an issue for the trust they can mention it, but not sure it benefits the football club that much really, as it just builds up to let down - let's face it, very few believe anything the club will say until it actually happens, anyway!

The stance - from SISU's side - goes wholly against the grain. What they evidently don't understand is the importance of football in people's lives. It's a huge thing in the lives of many, and to ring-fence the club's operation in a cloak of secrecy is profoundly frustrating to fans who - rightly or wrongly - feel a moral if not material 'ownership' of the club. Still, 'SISU don't understand football' - is a line we've heard on here a few times....

duffer · Aug 18, 2014

RFC said:
Making assumptions once again, the key word is "confidentiality" in all this and I don't have a problem with it.

Ps. Guess you trust those who drove CRFC from Coundon Road, the Sky Blues from Highfield Road (& iderectly from the Ricoh) and closed Livingstone Road swimming baths yesterday (was there) and are about to close the only Olympic size pool in the West Midlands?

There's no doubt the Council do things that I disagree with, but I'd rather stick to the facts. The Rugby club chose to leave Coundon Road. When the previous owners got into trouble at Butts Park Arena it was looking bleak for a while, but guess what - the new owners at the club negotiated a deal to buy a 125-year lease.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/butts-park-arena-deal-secures-3067399

As for CCFC, they chose to leave both HR, and the Ricoh - they weren't evicted from either site. As far as swimming goes, I'd much rather both Livingstone (and more importantly I'd say) the Olympic pool were kept open, but they're not even slightly relevant to what we're discussing here.

oldbloke · Aug 18, 2014

Like a lot of people I read this forum (probably spend too much time on it tbh) but don't post comments. But I know a couple of people involved in the Trust and some of what is being said on here is not 100% right. The problem with thee Trust Board at the moment is long standing chairman John Fletcher didnt stand down as chairman but was pretty shabbily treated and demoted. Another long standing Board member Lionel Bird said at the AGM he had resigned because some members of the Board were having secret meetings and not telling the rest of the Board, never mind ordinary Trust members. Apparently this happened with Seppala and also Preston Haskell. Some of the Board member's just get on and do the grafting but there are now at least 2 disgruntled people and mutterings about there being a Board within the Board. There is also unhappiness about a lack of strategy. I used to help out a bit with signing up sessions but when they stopped having regular meetings it all got a bit hit and miss. Seems a shame it has ended up like this.

mds · Aug 18, 2014

I went to a meeting, paid my pound for membership.
It seemed to me that it was more of an ego stroking session than anything else.
Best part of the night, the beer wasnt too crap!

LB87ccfc · Aug 18, 2014

Skyblueweeman said:
The trust 'are a joke' but you 'applaud their efforts' ?! Do you hear voices LB?!?!

WM

I mean I applaud they have tried to do something, but have been far too up SISU's arse and turned into a joke outfit, having started off quite well.

Nick · Aug 18, 2014

LB87ccfc said:
I mean I applaud they have tried to do something, but have been far too up SISU's arse and turned into a joke outfit, having started off quite well.

How have they been up their arse?

duffer · Aug 18, 2014

Isn't this a kind of 'damned if you do, and damned if you don't' thing?

As a member of the Trust, I want them to engage with the current owners at every opportunity. However I'd expect those meetings to be as public as possible, and minuted so that everyone can see what's gone on. If the choice though, is having a meeting with the owners which at their request is kept confidential, or not having a meeting at all - then I'd much prefer that they met.

For what it's worth, as a member of the Trust I'm happy to trust the people elected to the board to make that call.

Astute · Aug 18, 2014

The big problem that anyone has with talking to SISU is that if you don't seem to be on their side they will either blag you to believe what they are saying or they won't talk to you. They have never seemed to have serious talks and meant what they were saying with anyone who matters. But they seem to love stringing people along who they can have a bit of control over.

Astute · Aug 18, 2014

Nick said:
How have they been up their arse?

Use your imagination Nick

Jack Griffin · Aug 18, 2014

Kingokings204 said:
Didn't Simon Gilbert say quite clearly that the appeal wont get in the way of possible talks or current talks?

No, that is not what he said. This is what was published on Friday http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-owners-apply-appeal-7623079

ACL had previously cited any appeal as a possible stumbling block to negotiations over a Ricoh Arena return for the Sky Blues. They also insisted the club must first pay money owed to ACL after it entered administration last year - an issue which was settled on Thursday.

However, the amount accepted by ACL was lower than the company originally insisted should be paid - a possible indication that there could be some room for manoeuvre over possible talks of a return.

Jack Griffin · Aug 18, 2014

RFC said:
Think he's young man, learning his trade and asking some people the right 'probing' questions and occasionally getting positive answers.

I think you are a condescending old fool.

Nick · Aug 18, 2014

Jack Griffin said:
No, that is not what he said. This is what was published on Friday http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventry-city-owners-apply-appeal-7623079

He tweeted it

duffer · Aug 18, 2014

Astute said:
The big problem that anyone has with talking to SISU is that if you don't seem to be on their side they will either blag you to believe what they are saying or they won't talk to you. They have never seemed to have serious talks and meant what they were saying with anyone who matters. But they seem to love stringing people along who they can have a bit of control over.

I think there's a fair bit of truth to this. In fairness to the trust though, if this is the game that SISU are playing, I don't think they've fallen for it. As NW has already said, it isn't as though the Trust have stopped protesting.

Always better to meet than not meet, I'd say, but it's always wise to be wary with our owners too.

stupot07 · Aug 18, 2014

Nick said:
He tweeted it

https://twitter.com/thesimongilbert/status/500328902238437378

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 18, 2014

duffer said:
I think there's a fair bit of truth to this. In fairness to the trust though, if this is the game that SISU are playing, I don't think they've fallen for it. As NW has already said, it isn't as though the Trust have stopped protesting.

Always better to meet than not meet, I'd say, but it's always wise to be wary with our owners too.

It's also not quite true. There are a fair number who, if you wanted to categorise, are virulantly anti-SISU who have had regular meetings.

It's as much how you choose to represent your criticism as anything. Calling Fisher a twat may make you feel better, but probably wouldn't result in regular consultation. There are ways to point out the twattish actions are indeed twattish however...

Jack Griffin · Aug 18, 2014

Nick said:
He tweeted it

So how come the article doesn't say that?

I think a published article probably carries more weight, plus it is approved by CET editorial, his tweets are not.

Simons tweet also starts "No official confirmation"

duffer · Aug 18, 2014

RFC said:
No, CCC who refused planning permission for further redevelopment to expand the capacity of Highfield Road ( just for the record, this club owned a row of properties in Thacknall Street ). Please ask Uncle Joe or Geoffrey Robinson MP.

No need to ask Uncle Joe, RFC. Just point us to the documents or stories where CCFC applied for planning permission, please? It's a matter of public record, planning, so it should be there somewhere. No?

And even if they did suggest that PP might be hard to come by for a major stadium redevelopment in a primarily residential area (which I suspect would be true) that isn't even nearly the same as being "forced out" of HR is it?

You're so ridiculously anti-council and pro-SISU I sometimes wonder if you even take yourself seriously.

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 18, 2014

duffer said:
No need to ask Uncle Joe, RFC. Just point us to the documents or stories where CCFC applied for planning permission, please? It's a matter of public record, planning, so it should be there somewhere. No?

tbf, and we're going down a digression that maybe isn't helpful if I wanted to plan something big such as, well... a new stand or even a new ground I wouldn't waste my time with formal talks and formal applications, I'd sound out the relevant people if it was even worth my while bothering, first.

Anyway FWIW the rationale behind Arena 2000 was kind of sound to me, and certainly wouldn't have fit where HR was. Once we downscaled however, other motivations came into play...

Astute · Aug 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
It's also not quite true. There are a fair number who, if you wanted to categorise, are virulantly anti-SISU who have had regular meetings.

It's as much how you choose to represent your criticism as anything. Calling Fisher a twat may make you feel better, but probably wouldn't result in regular consultation. There are ways to point out the twattish actions are indeed twattish however...

And what was the use of these meetings for SISU other than trying to win over us supporters?

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 18, 2014

Astute said:
And what was the use of these meetings for SISU other than trying to win over us supporters?

Well... feedback is always good.

Given certain feedback that came across very strongly seemed to be that they should re-open communications with the trust, and comms appear to have been re-opened... I'd say that's a good thing to come out of those meetings.

In effect, it's a series of semi-structured focus groups, which is a perfectly valid way of getting feedback.

Astute · Aug 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
Well... feedback is always good.

Given certain feedback that came across very strongly seemed to be that they should re-open communications with the trust, and comms appear to have been re-opened... I'd say that's a good thing to come out of those meetings.

In effect, it's a series of semi-structured focus groups, which is a perfectly valid way of getting feedback.

The biggest amount of feedback that they would have got would have been about bringing our club home. If they did listen what have they done about it other than pay the money to ACL that they tried their best to get away without paying?

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 18, 2014

Astute said:
The biggest amount of feedback that they would have got would have been about bringing our club home. If they did listen what have they done about it other than pay the money to ACL that they tried their best to get away without paying?

Perhaps they have listened, perhaps they have actually moved position because of feedback.

I understand your bias, but you let it shine through all too much while claiming objectivity

WHo knows if any feedback has an effect, certainly nobody is claiming the kudos for bringing the club back but it's utterly insulting to categorise anybody who meets a representative of SISU as an idiot who just buys into what's said, and sits there meekly, not offering opinions and views.

skybluetony176 · Aug 18, 2014

I'm boiling over with the rage. I've just checked the SBT website and none of the board members have disclosed what they had for breakfast or lunch.

Astute · Aug 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
Perhaps they have listened, perhaps they have actually moved position because of feedback.

I understand your bias, but you let it shine through all too much while claiming objectivity

WHo knows if any feedback has an effect, certainly nobody is claiming the kudos for bringing the club back but it's utterly insulting to categorise anybody who meets a representative of SISU as an idiot who just buys into what's said, and sits there meekly, not offering opinions and views.

You and a few others call it me and others being biased. But would you like to point out the last time I was wrong about what SISU have done since I got it wrong about them moving us to Northampton?

There is a bit of difference about being right and making up crap. So should I be making up things I don't believe to balance out my comments?

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 18, 2014

Astute said:
You and a few others call it me and others being biased. But would you like to point out the last time I was wrong about what SISU have done since I got it wrong about them moving us to Northampton?

There is a bit of difference about being right and making up crap. So should I be making up things I don't believe to balance out my comments?

You do have a tendency towards selective reading... usually when accusing others of bias

Jack Griffin · Aug 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
Well... feedback is always good.

Given certain feedback that came across very strongly seemed to be that they should re-open communications with the trust, and comms appear to have been re-opened... I'd say that's a good thing to come out of those meetings.

In effect, it's a series of semi-structured focus groups, which is a perfectly valid way of getting feedback.

Tell me what feedback you think they've found of use or taken action on?

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 18, 2014

Jack Griffin said:
Tell me what feedback you think they've found of use or taken action on?

The feedback to actually talk to the Trust, as opposed to set in opposition to them, for a start.

'SISU canvas opinion' does not equal 'all is rosy in the garden of SISU'

Astute · Aug 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
You do have a tendency towards selective reading... usually when accusing others of bias

Selective reading? I suggest you read it again

And you will find that I never accused anyone of being biased whereas.....

And if you look further back in this thread you will see that I am happy for the trust to talk to SISU. It is the only chance we have considering SISU keep mentioning about talks and offers with ACL/CCC but do nothing seriously about either.

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · Aug 18, 2014

Rationalizer said:
In another thread it was stated that Trust leadership met with Joy and the details have been kept secret from Trust Members at the request of SISU.

There may be nothing to these meetings but as representatives of the members they should not be concealing information from the members they represent. They Trust should circulate to members:

Details of the meeting date/time, attendees and duration.

Document the minutes of the discussion

The meeting was held as you represent the membership and as such this information should be with the members. This fails to provide confidence in the leadership providing a communication between the members/fans and the owners and breaks the Trust constitution rules.

:thinking about:

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · Aug 18, 2014

oldbloke said:
Like a lot of people I read this forum (probably spend too much time on it tbh) but don't post comments. But I know a couple of people involved in the Trust and some of what is being said on here is not 100% right. The problem with thee Trust Board at the moment is long standing chairman John Fletcher didnt stand down as chairman but was pretty shabbily treated and demoted. Another long standing Board member Lionel Bird said at the AGM he had resigned because some members of the Board were having secret meetings and not telling the rest of the Board, never mind ordinary Trust members. Apparently this happened with Seppala and also Preston Haskell. Some of the Board member's just get on and do the grafting but there are now at least 2 disgruntled people and mutterings about there being a Board within the Board. There is also unhappiness about a lack of strategy. I used to help out a bit with signing up sessions but when they stopped having regular meetings it all got a bit hit and miss. Seems a shame it has ended up like this.

:thinking about:

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 18, 2014

Astute said:
And you will find that I never accused anyone of being biased whereas.....

Not quite true...

Godiva in particular has been accused by you of being biased.

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · Aug 18, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
Not quite true...

Godiva in particular has been accused by you of being biased.

Why has nobody accused me of being biased?

Deleted member 5849 · Aug 18, 2014

Broken Hearted Sky Blue said:
Why has nobody accused me of being biased?

It's an interesting question in its own way

Sky Blue Trust Secretive Meeting(s) with SISU (1 Viewer)

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Jack Griffin

Guest

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Jack Griffin

Guest

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency