First, given the large effort involved and how much you wanted Haskell to succeed, I assume you carefully collected lots of metrics. By publishing them you could actually do Haskell and the software community at large some actual good other than just complain about incompetent management (and I've whined about management, too). You may have missed the chance in that company, but your well-researched report is sure to convince some others, so that's not a total waste at all. Second, such incompetence often works in the other direction, too, usually in companies where incompetence takes a different form, which is why a little actual information would be nice. Your technical report about a 7-10 man-year Haskell-and-then-Java project would make a great contribution! For an experiment of such non-trivial effort, and given that the project was later re-written in Java, you may even find a prestigious publication to publish your report.
Back then I would have loved to do it because of the exact reasons you mention (i.e. it would have been a perfect case study of the same project implemented in two different languages), but unfortunately I wasn't at liberty to disclose specifics.
All I could do is collect metrics like lines of code and intentionally vague experience reports from former colleagues who are still there, but I guess that's hardly gonna convince anybody.
