dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
All I can say is thank god Ray went and we got Ken.
All I can say is thank god Ray went and we got Ken.
He did a good job of continuing Rays plan of relegation, at least he accelerated it to lessen the pain(and cost).
No need to be so aggressive is there? He was just asking a question about it, why would he have to go to a meeting to find out? Surely that just makes it look a bit cliquey that if you don't go you can't know anything. Like that secret London meeting that time.
Jan is speaking as an individual on here and not formally on behalf of the Trust. It's not that hard to understand is it?
No, it's not hard to understand; he says one thing with his meetings to Fisher and then another when he's on here. Why should Fisher take him and the SBT seriously if that's what he does?
Torch - you haven't replied to Dongonzalos's substantive point i.e. he sees Jan as having a very sensible, balanced opinion. Your opinion is different to someone like Dongonzalos and everyone else will form their own view. I can't see the basis for your criticism being well founded - it's just your opinion. Jan is the Trust's spokesman and the coverage he gets reflects the great job he is doing.
err he is representing the Trust when he is with Fisher.. are you simple?
Maybe when he said that the majority of the fans felt the same.
err he is representing the Trust when he is with Fisher.. are you simple?
Torch - I'm off to the pub now. I'm not sure how to reply to your most recent posts, and Grendel's too, without repeating what was said earlier. I would just reiterate that there is a Trust meeting on Monday where there will be an excellent guest speaker and plenty of time for discussion so why not come along? If you can't make Monday then I am always happy spending an evening talking about CCFC especially when mixed with beer. Cheers and PUSB!
I am sure that Ken was worth his salary, first class air fares to and from his home in Portugal, his suite at Coombe Abbey and his stretch XJL, that is the Sisu way. Just as Clarke is worth his £60,000 plus expenses and Fisher his £120,000 plus expenses plus his seven figure bonus: Seppala rewards her gofers. This is not about football, just as the Sisu campaign is not about rent. It is not surprising that the people paid by Sisu to answer postings on this and other threads manage to keep the lines of argument focused on their agenda. Rubbish the Trust and big up the consultative group: what else would Sisu want? Danger in independent people with open meetings at the Squirrel, much safer with handpicked "guests" who can carry on the consultative group conversations in the Board Room on match day. How many times have the SBT been guests at Clarkes bar?
It is always easy to rubbish people who try to be honest: just throw some mud, make some accusations, pour scorn on postings and then if that fails, insult and make personal attacks: all of this has been seen on this forum, not just in this thread. I will be accused of being anti-Sisu. Okay, I can live with that. I was also anti Robinson, against his dishonesty even if pitying him for his addiction to alcohol which makes him so stupid. McGinnity: drunken joke. Richardson: thief, liar, bully the list goes on. Am I just a twisted hater of anybody who wears a suit and sits in the Directors' box? No. But in the twenty five years I have supported the Club these are the abject retards that have had control over the Club. So, anti-Sisu, yes, but only because they are also lying and cheating and bullying and self serving. Their interest is not in the Club or the community (a couple of buses to Weymouth for the Olympic sailing and a family day at the Higgs are NOT community involvement) they are only interested in a return to their investors across the world. The only way they can do that is to sell the Club and Stadium, and that is their problem.
I for one support the SBT. I do it not because I agree with everyone in it, or with everything it does but because it is the only hope for any chance of a collective voice, a gathering of fans together, to take the owners (or in this case their gofers) to task. We have had our shares taken by Sisu, we can't challenge at AGMs. The SBT is the only thing we have at the moment. It is up to us either to join and help to shape that voice or to let it go. There is of course the way of some on this forum: stand outside and only contribute destructive criticism and personal attack. If they are not paid and not trolls what else do they get off on?
The majority of fans just go every game and couldn't give a stuff. How can you or anyone else assume what the majority want.
I disagree, last season most fans would not have liked SISU getting the stadium.
This season a little bit of success and many a fickle fan will mellow on that few.
Problem is I don't understand the agenda.
The type of speakers you have (Portsmouth trust for example) must be based on a belief the owners will take us into oblivion. This may be true but ultimately a minority group of people with no influence cannot change that either way.
I think the trust should be working with the club on a number if key issues.
Lets take the rent argument. It has to be in the football clubs best interests that the rent is the lowest it can be. The trust can have no interest in outside influences such as ACL as they are a totally independent organisation.
So perhaps on the speaker list you should have other council backed clubs speak such as Doncaster, Hull, Ipswich? Brighton and most interestingly of all stoke. See what their experienced are and ultimately how they overcame such issues.
After all the Sky Blue Trust must want only what's best for the club and surely if we pay £1 a year rent that suits all fans of the Sky Blues.
Strangely I don't think that will be happening.
M
Speakers at meetings have been people who have something of interest to say and from who things can be learnt. Being a democratic organisation other people would have to agree with this for it to happen, but in my own view it would be great to have a speaker from the club, or even just someone such as yourself wanting to put across a specific argument.
I'm sure everyone involved with the Trust would support working with the club even more on key issues - if people are saying there are ccfc/sisu people posting on here then just reply!
On the rent issue, I think you are perhaps simplifying things a bit. It seems to me everyone is agreeing the current rent is too high but I don't get much sense that many people think ccfc should only pay £1. Dismissing ACL out of hand ignores the reality of the situation, and there are lots of non ccfc supporting council tax payers in coventry who take a very different position to you. Any solution needs to take a more hoslistic view than you appear to be suggesting. I'm concerned by the view that seems to be growing that this isn't about the rent at all but sisu wanting to distress acl. A statement from sisu saying exactly what rent they would settle for, a clear explanation from acl as to what their offer is, plus commitment to arbitration from both parties might help move things forward.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?