D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
By popular request (well... by request of schmeee 
)
Right, suddenly the discourse around here is that Joy Seppala's interview is 'just a PR stunt'. There's been some interesting positioning on this board to position the interview as 'just a PR stunt' too. Now, I could make no absolute judgement about that, but there is a certain theoretical position that says you can skew the reading of other texts, by the use of subsidiary texts around it. You do, as it were, come to the main text already read. Lots of case studies about this, one of the more famous ones is about the James Bond producers, and how the very meanings of the films change over time and re-releases, despite being the same films. Here, we have similar, and let's be honest had that interview been done at the beginning of SISU's reign, it would have been received very differently.
Now, that's PR
As for the interview itself, now on the one level of course it's PR. It's a public interview, using the media to reach out to a wider audience than Joy Seppala's husband and cat. It's not really an interview filtered through the PR prism for the benefit of the club and success for the club however. Had it been, then there are various messages within that interview which would have been presented in a different way, a way that would have been easier for fans to get onside with the aim. Instead of it being a PR campaign, instead I'd prefer to see that interview as a very public statement of intent, and a re-affirmation of what SISU are. Somewhat chillingly from our point of view, we should be more worried about the latter, as if we're talking a PR message, the message sent out is one that asserts the essence of SISU, and in a wider context threatens us... it gives little hope. If it is PR, it's SISU PR for the benefit of getting the people onside who matter to SISU... rather than the people who matter to the club.
So what do I mean by that? Quite simple really, two things in particular that really aren't a PR campaign revolving around the club. The first is the sell us the Ricoh freehold or nothing. Now, there was no reason for Seppala to say that. In fact, Labovitch had made a point of denying she'd said that before! Now even if it was the freehold or nothing, that could have been easily presented in public in more vague terms, that said she'd love to do a deal for the club to go back to the Ricoh if possible, it could have been flat batted that it would have to be the right deal for the club, and details of that should respect ACL's privacy by discussing direct with them, assuming they were open to discussing deals of benefit to the club. Says similar, but puts the onus on ACL to talk, attempts to keep fans onside. Instead, we have a very divisive message that any PR campaign would stop ASAP.
We can, incidentally, contrast that with ACLs PR statements, where certain statements (such as the famous rent offers) are phrased ve-ry carefully to attempt to appeal to its audience, the fans, while being just as inflexible as the above.
However, what we do get with that statement is a reaffirmation of what Joy Seppala is and what SISU are. It's not like this is the first interview she's done, ever (a reason indeed to disregard the 'panicking so backed into a corner' idea. It's just time for her to assert who she is and this happens occasionally - not often, but occasionally). It's the idea that she sets a position, she makes a play for that position. What really should concern us as city fans is the consequences of this in the past. in the past she either succeeds (in which case all will be better for the club) or it fails, and she's not afraid to write off a certain amount of cash in making the play for success. Remember, for example,the phlegmatic approach in the past to deals that haven't come off, have cost money when accepting an alternative deal was an offer - from our POV this is why I have grave concerns if this doesn't come off, the club dies. It's part of the game, it *is* good business sense as you gain a reputation for playing hardball, you improve your negotiating position elsewhere. This, as much as anything, is why this isn't a sign of panic. What SISU are, what Joy Seppala is, is a 'brand' that doesn't back down. This interview merely sends that statement out there.
So... if it's PR anywhere, it's an assertion of SISU strategy, rather than an assertion of club strategy.
Furthermore, why it isn't an attempt to whitewash the fans is the eagerness to say how she cannot work with Coventry City Council anymore. Now, we had some ill advised comments from John Mutton in the past, that set an ideological battle between public council and private investment fund. Here, we have that in reverse, and in spades! If you're wanting to get fans onside, you don't distance yourself from local community and set yourself up in opposition to them, what you don't do is distance yourself by re-emphasising your status in opposition to the local. There was of course no need for her to say that in the slightest, it serves no purpose on a local level. What it does do is assert your beliefs in the merits of the free market vs public service red tape. The worrying conclusion from our point of view is couple that with the comments Mutton has made in the past, and it appears we're at impasse because of ideological values from both sides, as much as any need to benefit the entity in question, namely the club.
So, in conclusion? Desperate PR offensive? Not in the slightest. Any PR is aimed not at us either, but it's aimed at the people that matter to SISU, those who work in finance, those they need to negotiate with in the future. Frankly, given the interview is with a local paper, it's difficult to claim that either, as most people won't read that! So in conclusion all we see is a bog standard re-assertion of Seppala and SISU values, which happens from time to time. No reason to read desperation from them into it, no reason to read whitewash into it.
It is, ultimately, what it is and no more, no less.
A bit brief that as I was boring myself, so it makes broad brush strokes rather than hanging on the minutiae, but you get the point
)Right, suddenly the discourse around here is that Joy Seppala's interview is 'just a PR stunt'. There's been some interesting positioning on this board to position the interview as 'just a PR stunt' too. Now, I could make no absolute judgement about that, but there is a certain theoretical position that says you can skew the reading of other texts, by the use of subsidiary texts around it. You do, as it were, come to the main text already read. Lots of case studies about this, one of the more famous ones is about the James Bond producers, and how the very meanings of the films change over time and re-releases, despite being the same films. Here, we have similar, and let's be honest had that interview been done at the beginning of SISU's reign, it would have been received very differently.
Now, that's PR
As for the interview itself, now on the one level of course it's PR. It's a public interview, using the media to reach out to a wider audience than Joy Seppala's husband and cat. It's not really an interview filtered through the PR prism for the benefit of the club and success for the club however. Had it been, then there are various messages within that interview which would have been presented in a different way, a way that would have been easier for fans to get onside with the aim. Instead of it being a PR campaign, instead I'd prefer to see that interview as a very public statement of intent, and a re-affirmation of what SISU are. Somewhat chillingly from our point of view, we should be more worried about the latter, as if we're talking a PR message, the message sent out is one that asserts the essence of SISU, and in a wider context threatens us... it gives little hope. If it is PR, it's SISU PR for the benefit of getting the people onside who matter to SISU... rather than the people who matter to the club.
So what do I mean by that? Quite simple really, two things in particular that really aren't a PR campaign revolving around the club. The first is the sell us the Ricoh freehold or nothing. Now, there was no reason for Seppala to say that. In fact, Labovitch had made a point of denying she'd said that before! Now even if it was the freehold or nothing, that could have been easily presented in public in more vague terms, that said she'd love to do a deal for the club to go back to the Ricoh if possible, it could have been flat batted that it would have to be the right deal for the club, and details of that should respect ACL's privacy by discussing direct with them, assuming they were open to discussing deals of benefit to the club. Says similar, but puts the onus on ACL to talk, attempts to keep fans onside. Instead, we have a very divisive message that any PR campaign would stop ASAP.
We can, incidentally, contrast that with ACLs PR statements, where certain statements (such as the famous rent offers) are phrased ve-ry carefully to attempt to appeal to its audience, the fans, while being just as inflexible as the above.
However, what we do get with that statement is a reaffirmation of what Joy Seppala is and what SISU are. It's not like this is the first interview she's done, ever (a reason indeed to disregard the 'panicking so backed into a corner' idea. It's just time for her to assert who she is and this happens occasionally - not often, but occasionally). It's the idea that she sets a position, she makes a play for that position. What really should concern us as city fans is the consequences of this in the past. in the past she either succeeds (in which case all will be better for the club) or it fails, and she's not afraid to write off a certain amount of cash in making the play for success. Remember, for example,the phlegmatic approach in the past to deals that haven't come off, have cost money when accepting an alternative deal was an offer - from our POV this is why I have grave concerns if this doesn't come off, the club dies. It's part of the game, it *is* good business sense as you gain a reputation for playing hardball, you improve your negotiating position elsewhere. This, as much as anything, is why this isn't a sign of panic. What SISU are, what Joy Seppala is, is a 'brand' that doesn't back down. This interview merely sends that statement out there.
So... if it's PR anywhere, it's an assertion of SISU strategy, rather than an assertion of club strategy.
Furthermore, why it isn't an attempt to whitewash the fans is the eagerness to say how she cannot work with Coventry City Council anymore. Now, we had some ill advised comments from John Mutton in the past, that set an ideological battle between public council and private investment fund. Here, we have that in reverse, and in spades! If you're wanting to get fans onside, you don't distance yourself from local community and set yourself up in opposition to them, what you don't do is distance yourself by re-emphasising your status in opposition to the local. There was of course no need for her to say that in the slightest, it serves no purpose on a local level. What it does do is assert your beliefs in the merits of the free market vs public service red tape. The worrying conclusion from our point of view is couple that with the comments Mutton has made in the past, and it appears we're at impasse because of ideological values from both sides, as much as any need to benefit the entity in question, namely the club.
So, in conclusion? Desperate PR offensive? Not in the slightest. Any PR is aimed not at us either, but it's aimed at the people that matter to SISU, those who work in finance, those they need to negotiate with in the future. Frankly, given the interview is with a local paper, it's difficult to claim that either, as most people won't read that! So in conclusion all we see is a bog standard re-assertion of Seppala and SISU values, which happens from time to time. No reason to read desperation from them into it, no reason to read whitewash into it.
It is, ultimately, what it is and no more, no less.
A bit brief that
as I was boring myself, so it makes broad brush strokes rather than hanging on the minutiae, but you get the point 
