IS NOPM WORKINGr (1 Viewer)

[hill83]

I don't think he's saying they alone got the ball rolling, just that they should also get a mention.

 

---

[lewys33]

or the fact that 30 people stand on a hill.

woooooooooo go hillers u maid mi dreamz cum tru

 

[lewys33]

I don't think he's saying they alone got the ball rolling, just that they should also get a mention.

Well I am sure most of you have a grasp of the English language. Maybe by "trying" to say something you should actually say it? Rather than say it in a half-arsed way by attacking others. Stupidity.

 

[SIR ERNIE]

I am saying nobody knows what has caused it. Everybody is saying oh it was NOPM or the hill and I just said well what about the protest as the first Council statement came out just after this which sort of set the ball rolling which you dismissed straight off.

It is all well and good saying people on the hill have done this etc but people turning up outside the council house did give the council a kick to release the first statement in this game of statement tennis, didn't it?

The Ten Thousand did it.

 

[ajsccfc]

Actually scrap that, people not going to games in Northampton has helped. Using my dad as an example, he doesn't even know about NOPM but refuses to go. As I'm sure the majority of people staying away are doing. NOPM has just been tacked on to the stayaways.

I'm in a similar boat as your old fella in that I'm never going so it's a boycott of sorts, but I'm not party to any of the campaigns either as they all have elements I don't like.

I bet he's also a debonair man about town too.

 

[_brian_]

This argument is reminding me of a story that my dad used to tell:

There once was a pond at the bottom of a farm where many creatures used to live. They all loved the pond, but with regards to the actual farm some felt it was too big, some felt the atmosphere wasn't the best, some preferred the old farm where they all used to live and would harp on about it a lot even though they were never going to be able to return there because it was no longer a farm but a motorway. Whatever their feelings and opinions about the farm, they all loved that darn pond.

One day, an evil witch came along and moved the pond 36 miles away to another farm, and cackled something about moving the pond back to original farm if the farmer sold her this farm. Some of the creatures went to find the new location of pond as they just wanted to enjoy being in the pond; some of the creatures didn't want the witch to benefit from them being in the pond, but still loved the pond, so they went and lived on a hill overlooking the new location of the pond and looked on fondly; some refused to go to the new location of the pond and grumbled to themselves; some just flipped and flopped in the dry hole where the pond used to be because they were creatures that couldn't walk or fly, such as fish.

All of the creatures wished for the pond to return to the farm, but even though they had this common ground, they would just argue amongst each other about who loved the pond the most. Then some of the creatures protested against the witch; some of the creatures protested against the farmer; some of the creatures didn't protest against either and were abused by other creatures for not caring enough about the pond; some of the creatures didn't know what to do and just flipped and flopped in the dry hole where the pond used to be.

Neither the farmer nor the witch paid any notice to the creatures. The farmer talked about putting a greenhouse where the pond used to be; the witch talked about building a new farm for the pond. The local journalist reported on the situation and called for the farmer and the witch to talk about moving the pond back to the original farm - he was accused of being a witch rent boy for his slightly skewed take on things. The creatures protesting against the farmer and the creatures protesting against the witch also called for the farmer and the witch to hold talks.

One day, the farmer and the witch agreed to talk. The journalist, the witch protesters and the farmer protesters all claimed the victory was independently theirs. They started fighting amongst themselves, even though not one of them had any evidence to prove that they had brought about the talks.

The End

 

[covcity4life]

This argument is reminding me of a story that my dad used to tell:

There once was a pond at the bottom of a farm where many creatures used to live. They all loved the pond, but with regards to the actual farm some felt it was too big, some felt the atmosphere wasn't the best, some preferred the old farm where they all used to live and would harp on about it a lot even though they were never going to be able to return there because it was no longer a farm but a motorway. Whatever their feelings and opinions about the farm, they all loved that darn pond.

One day, an evil witch came along and moved the pond 36 miles away to another farm, and cackled something about moving the pond back to original farm if the farmer sold her this farm. Some of the creatures went to find the new location of pond as they just wanted to enjoy being in the pond; some of the creatures didn't want the witch to benefit from them being in the pond, but still loved the pond, so they went and lived on a hill overlooking the new location of the pond and looked on fondly; some refused to go to the new location of the pond and grumbled to themselves; some just flipped and flopped in the dry hole where the pond used to be because they were creatures that couldn't walk or fly, such as fish.

All of the creatures wished for the pond to return to the farm, but even though they had this common ground, they would just argue amongst each other about who loved the pond the most. Then some of the creatures protested against the witch; some of the creatures protested against the farmer; some of the creatures didn't protest against either and were abused by other creatures for not caring enough about the pond; some of the creatures didn't know what to do and just flipped and flopped in the dry hole where the pond used to be.

Neither the farmer nor the witch paid any notice to the creatures. The farmer talked about putting a greenhouse where the pond used to be; the witch talked about building a new farm for the pond. The local journalist reported on the situation and called for the farmer and the witch to talk about moving the pond back to the original farm - he was accused of being a witch rent boy for his slightly skewed take on things. The creatures protesting against the farmer and the creatures protesting against the witch also called for the farmer and the witch to hold talks.

One day, the farmer and the witch agreed to talk. The journalist, the witch protesters and the farmer protesters all claimed the victory was independently theirs. They started fighting amongst themselves, even though not one of them had any evidence to prove that they had brought about the talks.

The End

Will there be a happily ever after ending?

 

[italiahorse]

This argument is reminding me of a story that my dad used to tell:

There once was a pond at the bottom of a farm where many creatures used to live. They all loved the pond, but with regards to the actual farm some felt it was too big, some felt the atmosphere wasn't the best, some preferred the old farm where they all used to live and would harp on about it a lot even though they were never going to be able to return there because it was no longer a farm but a motorway. Whatever their feelings and opinions about the farm, they all loved that darn pond.

One day, an evil witch came along and moved the pond 36 miles away to another farm, and cackled something about moving the pond back to original farm if the farmer sold her this farm. Some of the creatures went to find the new location of pond as they just wanted to enjoy being in the pond; some of the creatures didn't want the witch to benefit from them being in the pond, but still loved the pond, so they went and lived on a hill overlooking the new location of the pond and looked on fondly; some refused to go to the new location of the pond and grumbled to themselves; some just flipped and flopped in the dry hole where the pond used to be because they were creatures that couldn't walk or fly, such as fish.

All of the creatures wished for the pond to return to the farm, but even though they had this common ground, they would just argue amongst each other about who loved the pond the most. Then some of the creatures protested against the witch; some of the creatures protested against the farmer; some of the creatures didn't protest against either and were abused by other creatures for not caring enough about the pond; some of the creatures didn't know what to do and just flipped and flopped in the dry hole where the pond used to be.

Neither the farmer nor the witch paid any notice to the creatures. The farmer talked about putting a greenhouse where the pond used to be; the witch talked about building a new farm for the pond. The local journalist reported on the situation and called for the farmer and the witch to talk about moving the pond back to the original farm - he was accused of being a witch rent boy for his slightly skewed take on things. The creatures protesting against the farmer and the creatures protesting against the witch also called for the farmer and the witch to hold talks.

One day, the farmer and the witch agreed to talk. The journalist, the witch protesters and the farmer protesters all claimed the victory was independently theirs. They started fighting amongst themselves, even though not one of them had any evidence to prove that they had brought about the talks.

The End

Another Grimm Fairy Tale

 

[lewys33]

This argument is reminding me of a story that my dad used to tell:

There once was a pond at the bottom of a farm where many creatures used to live. They all loved the pond, but with regards to the actual farm some felt it was too big, some felt the atmosphere wasn't the best, some preferred the old farm where they all used to live and would harp on about it a lot even though they were never going to be able to return there because it was no longer a farm but a motorway. Whatever their feelings and opinions about the farm, they all loved that darn pond.

One day, an evil witch came along and moved the pond 36 miles away to another farm, and cackled something about moving the pond back to original farm if the farmer sold her this farm. Some of the creatures went to find the new location of pond as they just wanted to enjoy being in the pond; some of the creatures didn't want the witch to benefit from them being in the pond, but still loved the pond, so they went and lived on a hill overlooking the new location of the pond and looked on fondly; some refused to go to the new location of the pond and grumbled to themselves; some just flipped and flopped in the dry hole where the pond used to be because they were creatures that couldn't walk or fly, such as fish.

All of the creatures wished for the pond to return to the farm, but even though they had this common ground, they would just argue amongst each other about who loved the pond the most. Then some of the creatures protested against the witch; some of the creatures protested against the farmer; some of the creatures didn't protest against either and were abused by other creatures for not caring enough about the pond; some of the creatures didn't know what to do and just flipped and flopped in the dry hole where the pond used to be.

Neither the farmer nor the witch paid any notice to the creatures. The farmer talked about putting a greenhouse where the pond used to be; the witch talked about building a new farm for the pond. The local journalist reported on the situation and called for the farmer and the witch to talk about moving the pond back to the original farm - he was accused of being a witch rent boy for his slightly skewed take on things. The creatures protesting against the farmer and the creatures protesting against the witch also called for the farmer and the witch to hold talks.

One day, the farmer and the witch agreed to talk. The journalist, the witch protesters and the farmer protesters all claimed the victory was independently theirs. They started fighting amongst themselves, even though not one of them had any evidence to prove that they had brought about the talks.

The End

F***ING Motorway!

 

[GaryPendrysEyes]

NOPM has never really been an organised campaign, to many it boils down to not wanting to give unethical bullies like Sisu your money. I think you will find many will not go to a Sisu owned Ricoh either. Maybe we'll find out soon enough...

 

[torchomatic]

What evidence suggests that? And yes, I guess we will find out soon enough.

I think you will find many will not go to a Sisu owned Ricoh either. Maybe we'll find out soon enough...

 

[SkyBlueSid]

I think the facts speak for themselves. Sisu must be getting desperate when 90% of the recent fan base is sitting at home listening to Clive Eakin. Fisher reckoned that if the team was doing well, there would be 7000 there, which would have filled Sixfields. Yet that would have meant attracting only half of what turned up last season to watch mostly dross.

Fisher was told he was wrong at the forums in Walsgrave, but he would have none of it. He has been shown to be an utterly incompetent fool and must be due for the chop. He refused to listen to what he was being told by his customers and that is why there is movement by Sisu. Had they filled Sixfields they would have maximised their income and Fisher would have been vindicated, nothing would have changed.

So, yes, of course NOPM has had some degree of success. There is a glimmer of hope, but we are still a long way from getting back to the Ricoh though, let nobody pretend otherwise.

 

[dadgad]

This farce has been orchestrated by a hedge fund who are clueless about football, pr and the public money.
They think on their feet and use the courts in ways most of us use the telephone.
If they have belatedly realised that you cannot bully Coventrians then Seppala is evolving from a crazed rhino into a skilled negotiator.
NOPM has worked!

 

[ajsccfc]

Even at the time I didn't buy that Fisher actually believed what he was saying. He's all bluster and soaking up abuse with a smile, which he's perversely good at. I'd cry and go hide under the stairs after about half an hour of being him.

 

[GaryPendrysEyes]

What evidence suggests that? And yes, I guess we will find out soon enough.

The only poll I'm aware of is Michaels kcic poll which had only 1/3 of boycotters prepared to go to a Sisu owned Ricoh. I think you underestimate the view of many fans that they will not give Sisu their money.

 

[lewys33]

Even at the time I didn't buy that Fisher actually believed what he was saying. He's all bluster and soaking up abuse with a smile, which he's perversely good at. I'd cry and go hide under the stairs after about half an hour of being him.

He's probably thinking of the pay cheque when he smiles! For all we know he may have "feelings" and may go home and cry every night, thinking about what he is doing to us poor fans.

But then again he may just be thinking of that pay cheque. The sweet sweet moneyzzzzzz!

 

[lewys33]

The only poll I'm aware of is Michaels kcic poll which had only 1/3 of boycotters prepared to go to a Sisu owned Ricoh. I think you underestimate the view of many fans that they will not give Sisu their money.

To be honest about that, I voted that I would not go to a SISU owned Ricoh. However that poll was a while ago. I think it would be a lot different. I for one would go now. Why? Because SISU are obviously not going anywhere any time fast, so there is no point in little ol'me boycotting just to spite myself really. Northampton is still another kettle of fish mind.

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

NOPM has never really been an organised campaign, to many it boils down to not wanting to give unethical bullies like Sisu your money. I think you will find many will not go to a Sisu owned Ricoh either. Maybe we'll find out soon enough...

I don't agree with this at all.

I reckon to many, it actually boils down to not being arsed to travel 70+ miles to watch 3rd division football in a shed of a ground on a Sunday.....fuck all to do with "Sisu bullies"...

I think you will find many will go to a Sisu owned Ricoh....probably more than went to the Ricoh last season....lets hope we'll find out soon enough.

 

[play_in_skyblue_stripes]

I think its a combination

1) Most people just don't want to go because its just not right
2) Some don't go because its too expensive or too much effort

I am very anti what SISU has done. Would I go to the Ricoh Arena if we were back there under SISU ownership?

I was unsure previously. I think I would now as playing in Coventry is the most important thing and I also miss watching them and the Ricoh Arena. I would totally understand anyone keeping away completely though until SUSU go.

I also think the crowds would be up on the last season we had there.

So if you want a business SISU with more than a set of skeleton customers, get back to Ricoh. That makes much more sense if SISU want to sell us on .

 

[Warwickhunt]

Yes of course 24 people turned up outside the council house and that got the ball rolling not the fact that the crowds at sixfields are half of what Mr Fisher predicted would be the lowest.

if Tim Fisher had kept his comment "We have budgeted for smaller crowds in the early stages but the supporters come back after 3/4 matches" how many would be going to sixfields? I know a lot of people were incensed with this comment and are staying away

 

[Warwickhunt]

My guess is that without the sixfields boycott sisu's cash flow/losses would not have been such a problem so they would have had more time to distress acl. sisu asking for talks suggests they are under some financial pressure and/or are not so sure they can distress acl after all. Equally, it could be that sisu are hearing that some senior councillors are allegedly saying the ricoh should be sold to sisu and are simply testing the water irrespective of whether sixfields is full or empty. And most likely it's a combination of these plus other factors we're not even aware of

Is that the same senior councillor that is allegedly involved in the Bonus for the Binmean at Xmas?

 

[skybluelee]

I don't agree with this at all.

I reckon to many, it actually boils down to not being arsed to travel 70+ miles to watch 3rd division football in a shed of a ground on a Sunday.....fuck all to do with "Sisu bullies"...

I think you will find many will go to a Sisu owned Ricoh....probably more than went to the Ricoh last season....lets hope we'll find out soon enough.

What about all the Coventry fans that live outside of Coventry who's travel distance to Shitfields is less than to the Ricoh, myself included, who refuse to go? It has everything to do with SISU's despicable action of moving our club to another town.

 

[skyblueinBaku]

He's probably thinking of the pay cheque when he smiles! For all we know he may have "feelings" and may go home and cry every night, thinking about what he is doing to us poor fans.

But then again he may just be thinking of that pay cheque. The sweet sweet moneyzzzzzz!

Didn't TF at one of the forums say that he would be paid by results (or words to that effect)? If so, he must owe Sisu a hell of a lot of money now.

 

[Warwickhunt]

This argument is reminding me of a story that my dad used to tell:

There once was a pond at the bottom of a farm where many creatures used to live. They all loved the pond, but with regards to the actual farm some felt it was too big, some felt the atmosphere wasn't the best, some preferred the old farm where they all used to live and would harp on about it a lot even though they were never going to be able to return there because it was no longer a farm but a motorway. Whatever their feelings and opinions about the farm, they all loved that darn pond.

One day, an evil witch came along and moved the pond 36 miles away to another farm, and cackled something about moving the pond back to original farm if the farmer sold her this farm. Some of the creatures went to find the new location of pond as they just wanted to enjoy being in the pond; some of the creatures didn't want the witch to benefit from them being in the pond, but still loved the pond, so they went and lived on a hill overlooking the new location of the pond and looked on fondly; some refused to go to the new location of the pond and grumbled to themselves; some just flipped and flopped in the dry hole where the pond used to be because they were creatures that couldn't walk or fly, such as fish.

All of the creatures wished for the pond to return to the farm, but even though they had this common ground, they would just argue amongst each other about who loved the pond the most. Then some of the creatures protested against the witch; some of the creatures protested against the farmer; some of the creatures didn't protest against either and were abused by other creatures for not caring enough about the pond; some of the creatures didn't know what to do and just flipped and flopped in the dry hole where the pond used to be.

Neither the farmer nor the witch paid any notice to the creatures. The farmer talked about putting a greenhouse where the pond used to be; the witch talked about building a new farm for the pond. The local journalist reported on the situation and called for the farmer and the witch to talk about moving the pond back to the original farm - he was accused of being a witch rent boy for his slightly skewed take on things. The creatures protesting against the farmer and the creatures protesting against the witch also called for the farmer and the witch to hold talks.

One day, the farmer and the witch agreed to talk. The journalist, the witch protesters and the farmer protesters all claimed the victory was independently theirs. They started fighting amongst themselves, even though not one of them had any evidence to prove that they had brought about the talks.

The End

And the creatures were still flip flopping about on the site of the old farm because it took that long to decide the water dried up in the Pond that was moved as well.

 

[torchomatic]

So you base your evidence on one poll? How many voted in the poll? Michael, do you know? I think you overestimate the view of many fans. I believe (my opinion only, of course) that fans would welcome a return to the Ricoh regardless of who the owners were.

The only poll I'm aware of is Michaels kcic poll which had only 1/3 of boycotters prepared to go to a Sisu owned Ricoh. I think you underestimate the view of many fans that they will not give Sisu their money.

 

[kingharvest]

This may be slightly controversial but it does make me laugh that there are people who are trying to claim credit for something that as of yet, hasn't even happened!

If you stand on the hill - fair feckin play to ya, that is a serious commitment to your cause and I admire every one of you and am glad you are there.

If you protested at the council house - fair play to ya, you got off your arse and tried to influence something

If you walked the streets tying ribbons everywhere - fair play for making me think of the situation every time I see one.

If you go to six fields - whilst you may be cast as part of the problem, at least you are committed to doing what you think is right.

I go to sixfields but I've also pleaded with Joy Seppala and Tim Fisher to speak to the council. I've sent email after email to Martin Reeves, I've written to the football league, supporters direct and have continuously tried to understand how the situation could be resolved. So I may be a sixfields regular, but I'm still actually trying to influence a move back to coventry.

I don't agree with us being at sixfields
I don't agree with the tactics employed by SISU
I don't agree with the councils stance

But I choose to watch my team, and use other methods to show how I oppose the situation.

But if all you've done is not turn up, what exactly have you done? Can you prove the lack of revenue has caused this? Or given that SISU were only planning for 3000 anyway do you really think another 1000 less has caused this to happen?

You see this isn't about which tactic has worked, it's about a collective effort. Tim Fisher said on Wednesday that whilst he had a different opinion to a lot of fans, the one thing that he's been blown away by is the efforts and commitment of those on the hill who are prepared stand by what they believe and do that for their club.

if all you've done is nothing, what are you actually doing?

 

[hill83]

Not giving Sisu any money?

 

[ajsccfc]

If you've not gone to games that you otherwise would have, you've purposefully taken away £300+ (in the case of former ST holders that is) that the club would have had at the Ricoh. Whether it's a drop in the ocean to them or not, that definitely is something.

Action isn't just the physical.

 

[SIR ERNIE]

This may be slightly controversial but it does make me laugh that all the people who have done nothing are trying to claim credit for something that as of yet, hasn't even happened!

If you stand on the hill - fair feckin play to ya, that is a serious commitment to your cause and I admire every one of you and am you are there.

If you protested at the council house - fair play to ya, you got off your arse and tried to influence something

If you walked the streets tying ribbons everywhere - fair play for making me think of the situation every time I see one.

If you go to six fields - whilst you may be cast as part of the problem, at least you are committed to doing what you think is right.

I go to sixfields but I've also pleaded with Joy Seppala and Tim Fisher to speak to the council. I've sent email after email to Martin Reeves, I've written to the football league, supporters direct and have continuously tried to understand how the situation could be resolved. So I may be a sixfields regular, but I'm still actually trying to influence a move back to coventry.

I don't agree with us being at sixfields
I don't agree with the tactics employed by SISU
I don't agree with the councils stance

But I choose to watch my team, and use other methods to show how I oppose the situation.

But if all you've done is not turn up, what exactly have you done? Can you prove the lack of revenue has caused this? Or given that SISU were only planning for 3000 anyway do you really think another 1000 less has caused this to happen?

You see this isn't about which tactic has worked, it's about a collective effort. Tim Fisher said on Wednesday that whilst he had a different opinion to a lot of fans, the one thing that he's been blown away by is the efforts and commitment of those on the hill who are prepared stand by what they believe and do that for their club.

if all you've done is nothing, what are you actually doing?

daft post

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

if all you've done is nothing, what are you actually doing?

Well, I had a smoke and thought about buying one of those girly KCIC wrist bands for a while......but then thought it was just more non-degradable landfill & decided to have another smoke, this time with a Gin & Tonic........but then I'm a hard-core revolutionary type of fella....

 

[skybluebal]

I'm not saying it was the council protest that did anything, I guess we will never know but I just think it's strange how they protest and then starts a statement that day and then a couple of statements later they are talking?

I believe it created an opportunity for the Council to repeat that they are open to discussions and the excuse for SISU to save some face and agree to meet. I certainly hope they can come to an equitable agreement.

 

[kingharvest]

daft post

I don't expect many to agree with me, I just think some people have done a lot (a hell of a lot more than me, trust me it's much easier to go in the ground than stand on the hill) and others have done the minimum.

 

[ajsccfc]

The notion of what form action takes is seems slightly off. If someone for instance barely attended games but fires off hundreds of emails for the cause, is that somehow 'more' than someone who'd bought season tickets for years suddenly having to stay away but not take part in protests? I wouldn't say so.

Nearly everyone doing something has a case, it doesn't explicitly have to involve lifting a finger or even getting out of a chair.

 

[hill83]

.....continuously tried to understand how the situation could be resolved.

 

[Oh for an Ian Gibson.]

if all you've done is nothing, what are you actually doing?[/QUOTE]

I've been out for meals, been to my 'local' for a few beers, been shopping, visited family and friends, been to away games........everything that actually doesn't give one penny to sisu.