Sky Blues Trust - What Does it Stand For? (1 Viewer)

[MichaelCCFC]

7.30pm at the Squirrel.

The Trust is a democratic organisation and represents the views of members. Any member can propose ideas and have their say. So much of the discussion about the current situation gets polarised into being pro/anti sisu/acl and I don't see that gets us anywhere. I have some sympathy with all the parties because they are having to deal with the consequences of problems that started a long time ago. However, I think it can be argued that in the current situation none of the key players are necessarily covering themselves in glory. On the one hand there is the question of why acl have never made a profit net of the ccfc rent, on the other a lot of people seem to think sisu are really after the ricoh.

 

---

[Mucca Mad Boys]

7.30pm at the Squirrel.

The Trust is a democratic organisation and represents the views of members. Any member can propose ideas and have their say. So much of the discussion about the current situation gets polarised into being pro/anti sisu/acl and I don't see that gets us anywhere. I have some sympathy with all the parties because they are having to deal with the consequences of problems that started a long time ago. However, I think it can be argued that in the current situation none of the key players are necessarily covering themselves in glory. On the one hand there is the question of why acl have never made a profit net of the ccfc rent, on the other a lot of people seem to think sisu are really after the ricoh.

I'm at work 5pm-9pm so unfortunately, I can't come, when's the next meeting?

 

[ashbyjan]

Taylor - are you going to Spurs? If so happy to meet up and buy you a beer (I assume you're over 18 if not a coke) and talk the Trusts position and ambitions through with you.

 

[mattylad]

Fully agree. Think the rhetoric of late is very anti the current owners and very pro ACL.

And that is why they do not represent me.

I am no lover of SISU and except for the trolls I think you would struggle to find anyone who is (Fisher by his own admission says things have been run badly both on and off the pitch over the last ten years) but we do seem this season to now have a clear sense that we are gaining a competitive squad, engaging the fans with the football being played and putting our finances in order with wages first and now rent! so regardless of whether you like the tactics used (again I don't particulalry) I do give Fisher/Waggot the benefit of time because recent actions show they deserve it.

The truth is trusts in general want nothing less than access to the boardroom and to say how the club should be ran which with CCFC is done through the community meetings but that unfortunately does note sate the appetite for some.

 

[Steve.B50]

Why not do as suggested and come to a meeting?

Everyone has there own views but being negative towards a group who are 100% behind the supporters and continuation of a club called Coventry City is a little unfair. When I first went to an open meeting I was a little cautious but now well behind the Trust.

Mattylad Your wrong, no one at the Trust has any intererst in being on the Club Board, its never been discussed at any meeting I have been to.

 

[MichaelCCFC]

mattylad - the Trust only represents its members so unless you are a member the Trust doesn't represent you. The Trust is though by far the largest City supporters' group. I don't know what you mean by 'community meetings'. And what do you think about Swansea, who were saved by the Swans Trust who now own 20% of shares and have two board members (and have gone from fourth tier football to the Premier League)?

 

[pw362]

<p>

Why not do as suggested and come to a meeting?</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Everyone has there own views but being negative towards a group who are 100% behind the supporters and continuation of a club called Coventry City is a little unfair. When I first went to an open meeting I was a little cautious but now well behind the Trust.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Mattylad Your wrong, no one at the Trust has any intererst in being on the Club Board, its never been discussed at any meeting I have been to.

</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
Was thinking about going to an SBT Meeting. Changed my mind when I saw the childish insults posted by one of,I believe,your board members towards Grendel & Sky blue Taylor last week

 

[Nick]

The Trust is though by far the largest City supporters' group.?

How many city supporters groups are there?

 

[lordsummerisle]

According to Gary Stubbs in todays Times it stands for supporting a former Chairman who "resigned in disgust" at the actions of Sisu, however neglecting to mention how he brought them to the club after many years of association with them(fialing to take over any other club), presided over ever increasing losses and decline in performances and crowds whilst steadily increasing his wages, and "interest" on his "loan" to the club, whilst lending money to a Championship rival to buy players.

 

[fernandopartridge]

According to Gary Stubbs in todays Times it stands for supporting a former Chairman who "resigned in disgust" at the actions of Sisu, however neglecting to mention how he brought them to the club after many years of association with them(fialing to take over any other club), presided over ever increasing losses and decline in performances and crowds whilst steadily increasing his wages, and "interest" on his "loan" to the club, whilst lending money to a Championship rival to buy players.

Seriously? Got a link or is it behind the paywall?

 

[torchomatic]

So, it doesn't represent the supporters then, just its members?

mattylad - the Trust only represents its members so unless you are a member the Trust doesn't represent you. The Trust is though by far the largest City supporters' group. I don't know what you mean by 'community meetings'. And what do you think about Swansea, who were saved by the Swans Trust who now own 20% of shares and have two board members (and have gone from fourth tier football to the Premier League)?

 

[lordsummerisle]

Seriously? Got a link or is it behind the paywall?

Definitely what he said in The Times, though have to buy that because of the paywall.

To be fair to Murdoch, probably a good idea for him, as just read the Guardian and Telegraph etc online now.

 

[rupert_bear]

I know what the initials stand for. I'm SBT, the forum is SBT and the Trust, is SBT, I know that!

I mean what does the trust stand for in terms of rent, how it'll takeover the club etc. etc.

Go to a fucking meeting and find out !!

 

[rupert_bear]

I'm at work 5pm-9pm so unfortunately, I can't come, when's the next meeting?

Oh no not that old chestnut again

 

[Nick]

Go to a fucking meeting and find out !!

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.

 

[MichaelCCFC]

pw632 - Monday's guest speaker is award winning football writer and expert on football finance, John Beech, so should be good.

Nick - My understanding is that traditionally the Coventry City London Supporters Group was the biggest. There's also an Irish group and I've heard mention of a Welsh group. Disabled supporters are represented at the SCG but I'm not sure if that's an individual/s or a formal group. And of course there was sisu out, save our city and the old trust. The relaunched Sky Blue Trust has more members than any of these other groups have/had, and this was from a starting point of less than 20 members last summer to around 800 now.

 

[Nick]

Nick - My understanding is that traditionally the Coventry City London Supporters Group was the biggest. There's also an Irish group and I've heard mention of a Welsh group. Disabled supporters are represented at the SCG but I'm not sure if that's an individual/s or a formal group. And of course there was sisu out, save our city and the old trust. The relaunched Sky Blue Trust has more members than any of these other groups have/had, and this was from a starting point of less than 20 members last summer to around 800 now.

Surely it would be as the others are regional based and the SBT isn't?

 

[mattylad]

Mattylad Your wrong, no one at the Trust has any intererst in being on the Club Board, its never been discussed at any meeting I have been to.[/QUOTE] yet one of the key statements is "To encourage the principle of supporter representation on the board of the Club"

I will be less negative to them when they stop being negative to the clubs current status

 

[rupert_bear]

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.

You think what you like mister but in my opinion the thread was just to annoy and antagonised a group of fans trying to make a difference in the only way open to them. If after all these months someone hasn't grasped the reasons for a Sky Blue Trust i feel sorry for them.
By the way do you go ?

 

[MichaelCCFC]

Nick - As I said in my previous post, my understanding is that traditionally the London group was the biggest and last summer the Trust was down to less than 20 members. There is absolutely no way the Trust is a clique. It's a completely open group, anyone can join, meetings are advertised etc. The reason for encouraging people to attend meetings is so they can make their own minds up rather than just following unfounded criticisms - plus ideas and suggestions are always very welcome.

 

[curlyc_]

So to clear things up- This is a thread on SBT, started by SBT about SBT.......

 

[torchomatic]

Criticisms are not unfounded. As I said the group cannot be impartial while their highest profile member slags the owners off on a public forum.

so they can make their own minds up rather than just following unfounded criticisms - plus ideas and suggestions are always very welcome.

 

[gary_ccfcforever]

my view in the times was just that... my own personal view despite what ranson did, nobody can deny that his plan was working and we were building a very strong squad, one that had it stayed together with the right manager would have easily acheived promotion, sure he took a big fat wedge out of the club, but i think we'd have been alot better off had he stayed than how we are now. Im entitled to my own personal view and thats what it is, the reporter asked me for my view. If he's portrayed that as the view of the trust them its wrong. I've not read the article so i dont know what he has done.

 

[TheParsonsHose]

Taylor - are you going to Spurs? If so happy to meet up and buy you a beer (I assume you're over 18 if not a coke) and talk the Trusts position and ambitions through with you.

I can now see how your match day bar bill is so high!!

 

[dongonzalos]

I have heard Jan on the radio three times now.

Each time he has put across a very balanced sensible opinion.

He has focused on whatever your view point the fans just want the two parties to talk and come to an agreement.

He comes across to me as a very good representative of the fans.

If you can't be arsed to organise anything yourself.

Then don't have a pop at those who do.

 

[torchomatic]

I think you mean as a representative of fellow SBT members. We've already read that they only represent their own members.

He comes across to me as a very good representative of the fans.

 

[ashbyjan]

Torchy whilst the Trust can only and would only claim to ever represent its members by having a decent number of them they are fairly representative of the majority of fans so the matters that bother them will more than likely be those that bother non members as well. It would be presumptious and inaccurate to claim to represent city fans in general but hopefully we are all working towards a common goal - a succesful ccfc.

 

[TheParsonsHose]

I would pay £1.50 to be a member of ths forum per year which could come with a free SBT membership??

 

[MichaelCCFC]

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.

 

[Grendel]

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.

He sees him has having a balanced and sensible opinion. I don't so does that answer your point? What great job is he doing? Personally I think as a member of a supporters trust he would have to engage and work with the owners. Making playground type insults is hardly concussive for a good working relationship.

 

[dongonzalos]

He sees him has having a balanced and sensible opinion. I don't so does that answer your point? What great job is he doing? Personally I think as a member of a supporters trust he would have to engage and work with the owners. Making playground type insults is hardly concussive for a good working relationship.

Jan do you engage with TF and Wag.
Do you speak to them?
Do you speak to ACL
Do you get our plight in the media?

 

[ashbyjan]

Speak to TF on regular basis, SF from time to time, the staff at club regularly, ACL, Council and Charity representatives regularly since rent row started. The Trust has a good working relationship with the club and I don't see being critical of aspects of the way the club is run as being a bad thing. It may come as a shock to some but the people running the club haven't exactly been doing a brilliant job for the last 20 years.

 

[dongonzalos]

Speak to TF on regular basis, SF from time to time, the staff at club regularly, ACL, Council and Charity representatives regularly since rent row started. The Trust has a good working relationship with the club and I don't see being critical of aspects of the way the club is run as being a bad thing. It may come as a shock to some but the people running the club haven't exactly been doing a brilliant job for the last 20 years.

Good and it is nice to have an additional insight to what is going on.

Rather than waiting to be drip fed very limited propaganda in the press only when the info is released for a reason.

That reason is never let's update the fans.

Keep it up.

 

[Grendel]

Jan do you engage with TF and Wag.
Do you speak to them?
Do you speak to ACL
Do you get our plight in the media?

Given that the view is and I quote "all they want to do is get their grubby little mitts on the Ricoh (or was it greedy, can't remember) I would suggest if they speak to them or not is material.

If they are a sisu out organisation fair enough. Lets be honest and say that is what they stand for.

I think the non payment of rent is generating more than enough attention by itself.

 

[lordsummerisle]

my view in the times was just that... my own personal view despite what ranson did, nobody can deny that his plan was working and we were building a very strong squad, one that had it stayed together with the right manager would have easily acheived promotion, sure he took a big fat wedge out of the club, but i think we'd have been alot better off had he stayed than how we are now. Im entitled to my own personal view and thats what it is, the reporter asked me for my view. If he's portrayed that as the view of the trust them its wrong. I've not read the article so i dont know what he has done.

A squad that would easily have achieved promotion? Even with Dann, Fox, Westwood, Gunnarsson, Eastwood(when still rated) managed one point more than the previous squad.

That squad should have achieved more, but stuck with Coleman( his appointment), who he still persevered with for a total of 2 1/2 years, to then appoint "no long ball" Boothroyd who was taking us down until he was removed at about the same time as Ranson.

During the time he was in charge Ray" debt free" Ransom oversaw bigger and bigger losses whilst increasing his own wedge.

Performance bonus do you think?

The Ranson Cult is ridiculous.

Possible misspelling there!