Matt Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 I dont think they need guidance, I think they need to grow up. I think the two can be the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc_lover Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 I think the two can be the same thing. Maybe so. Can't help those who don't want to be helped though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philliggi Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 The sad thing is I believe they do have the club at heart. They obviously love the club and are willing to fight to see it prosper, sadly unlike many latics fans we have seen drift away over the years. Unfortunately by their own admission they don't really know what they are doing or how to go about it which is why so many of you are against them. They are crying out for a spokesman, and a business leader preferably with PR experience to step up and offer their knowledge. This group has probably lost the backing of the masses now which is sad, the best way forward that I can see is for the numbers involved to push on by the side of the trust and have strength in numbers. I believe they are asking the right questions and have the same concerns as the masses, but it needs the professionalism to work in hand with the passion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc_lover Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 The sad thing is I believe they do have the club at heart. They obviously love the club and are willing to fight to see it prosper, sadly unlike many latics fans we have seen drift away over the years. Unfortunately by their own admission they don't really know what they are doing or how to go about it which is why so many of you are against them. They are crying out for a spokesman, and a business leader preferably with PR experience to step up and offer their knowledge. This group has probably lost the backing of the masses now which is sad, the best way forward that I can see is for the numbers involved to push on by the side of the trust and have strength in numbers. I believe they are asking the right questions and have the same concerns as the masses, but it needs the professionalism to work in hand with the passion. Can't argue with a single word of that to be fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 The sad thing is I believe they do have the club at heart. They obviously love the club and are willing to fight to see it prosper, sadly unlike many latics fans we have seen drift away over the years. Unfortunately by their own admission they don't really know what they are doing or how to go about it which is why so many of you are against them. They are crying out for a spokesman, and a business leader preferably with PR experience to step up and offer their knowledge. The Trust then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 The Trust then? Yup, without the forelock pulling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Why should they be willing to make a loss? They can, and probably will eventually make there money back one way or another. As fans, we might not like it that people are putting money above the club. But TTA aren't fans, or at least not to same extent. They invested money and want at least the invested amount back eventually which is fair enough. Yeah, that's fine. The club should be held back and suffer to wither whilst the land owners recoup the losses caused by their own bad decisions. Glad you are ok with that, but I don't agree and want a different outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueatheart Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Yeah, that's fine. The club should be held back and suffer to wither whilst the land owners recoup the losses caused by their own bad decisions. Glad you are ok with that, but I don't agree and want a different outcome. The club going under by the sounds of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latics and England Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 It saddens me to see how this protest is causing fans to turn on each other but sadly I think it is inevitable. I find myself unable to support what the protesters are doing despite having many concerns about the way that the club is being run. This is because I feel that it is a group without clear objectives and also because I am not clear in my own mind as to what the best thing for the club is right now. The mismanagement of the club over the last two years is disgraceful. The whole Ched Evans situation did so much harm. That caused huge divisions within the fan base and ultimately did nothing other than damage the image of the club. Whether you were disgusted at the thought that we would offer a contract to a then convicted rapist or you thought we should sign him up only to see us pull out, I don't think anyone could believe that the club didn't score a massive own goal. The failure to replace Johnson when we were having a decent season was ridiculous. The recruitment of two managers who were well out of their depth was something that suggested that the Board had taken their eye off the ball. Simon Corney has enough experience in the game now to not make decisions like that. We never received any kind of explanation either as to why they felt that Kelly and Dunn were the right people to take the club forward. Bringing Shez back was, however, a masterstroke and saved us from what looked like certain relegation. This looked like a sign that maybe someone was taking a renewed interest in the footballing side and the feel good factor at the end of last season was something that could easily have been built on. Whilst we don't really know the story behind losing him in the summer, it did show that things are far from rosy at the club and that he didn't believe that we could build on last season. The seemingly repeated rejections over the summer back this up. I have no idea whether we have got ourselves a decent manager in. Hopefully we have but only time will tell. Likewise we will have to wait and see how good a squad we build. What I do know is that even if we have got the best people possible in now, it does not excuse everything else that has gone on in recent years. We need to completely get behind the manager and his team but that should not be something that stops us asking questions of the owner. Whilst I understand the fact that questions are being asked about what generates funds for the club, I am not sure the protest group is clear about what they want to know and why they want to know it. The club has little in the way of assets. We can't expect that we are going to get paid for things we don't own. Complaining about this is pointless. If the questions are actually about why we don't own these assets or about whether the club has helped fund these assets, this is what they should be asking. If not, they need to make it clear as to what their actual concerns are. Just being angry that we are skint doesn't really cut it. Any protest needs to attract the support of a number of well known and respected fans to be successful. It also needs people who can put across the message of the group in a manner that will not alienate others. This isn't a criticism of those who have been prepared to put their head above the parapet. They have kicked something off and it is clear that they care passionately about the club. I just hope that they will be willing to listen to others who have concerns that might not appear to be exactly the same as their own and that they will do whatever is best to help the club move forward even if it means they will lose some control over what they clearly see as their own cause. It's all about wanting the best for the club at the end of the day. I genuinely don't know what the best route forward is for the club as I feel that the current structure makes it difficult for the club to succeed under the current ownership but ironically even more difficult to thrive without them. At present, the owner makes money from assets that are not owned by the club. He may or may not put some of these profits back into the club. We have no idea and have no way of finding out. If the club was owned by a different party to the assets, we would know that there was no way that we could benefit from these assets and indeed we would probably find ourselves paying more to use these assets. All in all, we need to all stick together because we all want the same thing, however, we believe it is best achieved. Don't criticise people for caring and likewise, if you want to protest, don't blame people who don't think that is the way forward right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 Yeah, that's fine. The club should be held back and suffer to wither whilst the land owners recoup the losses caused by their own bad decisions. Glad you are ok with that, but I don't agree and want a different outcome. They could fold OAFC tomorrow if they wanted to and get their investment back. Clearly there are questions that need to be asked, both over the mismanagement of the club and regarding the financial deals between OAFC, OEC and Brassbank. But our current deal is the best we are going to get for a while, as L&E says above it is currently difficult to succeed with them but harder to thrive without them. Unless you know someone happy to chuck away £10m... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted July 18, 2016 Share Posted July 18, 2016 They could fold OAFC tomorrow if they wanted to and get their investment back. Clearly there are questions that need to be asked, both over the mismanagement of the club and regarding the financial deals between OAFC, OEC and Brassbank. But our current deal is the best we are going to get for a while, as L&E says above it is currently difficult to succeed with them but harder to thrive without them. Unless you know someone happy to chuck away £10m... Why £10m? Genuine question - Is that what you think the club is worth? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Why £10m? Genuine question - Is that what you think the club is worth? Nobody thinks that is what it is 'worth' that's why nobody has bought us. However, that's how much it would cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueatheart Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Why £10m? Genuine question - Is that what you think the club is worth?You could buy the club for a lollipop and a bag of sweets. You can buy the ground (and north stand) for £xM. Ten seems a little low but not out of the ball park. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 You could buy the club for a lollipop and a bag of sweets. You can buy the ground (and north stand) for £xM. Ten seems a little low but not out of the ball park. Does the "ground", including the north stand bring enough revenue to make a reasonable return on £x million (or £10m if you like)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueatheart Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Does the "ground", including the north stand bring enough revenue to make a reasonable return on £x million (or £10m if you like)? I would have thought so, even with some coming back to the club. Every investor has a different understanding of "reasonable" though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Why £10m? Genuine question - Is that what you think the club is worth? Club is worth barely anything. They'll be looking to get back what they've invested + money for the land. I've heard £8m previously, which was about 4/5 years ago. Probably be looking £10m+ now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 (edited) Club is worth barely anything. They'll be looking to get back what they've invested + money for the land. I've heard £8m previously, which was about 4/5 years ago. Probably be looking £10m+ now. It's a vehicle for the right person/people to potentially get a big return on investment via promotion to the Championship and then an enormous return on investment via promotion to the Premier League... Unlikely but one of those scenario's could play out within just one year and the other within two years. If you've got the money, like football and want to have some fun with such a punt we'd still (just about) be a better gamble than many other clubs - at the right price. Especially if you think we could see a big increase in gates with a bit of success (which I strongly believe we would).... If, as many believe, SC's asking price is unrealistic & makes us a poor investment boycotting certain revenue streams isn't going to help remedy that.... In my opinion.. Edited July 19, 2016 by HarryBosch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie_J Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Club is worth barely anything. They'll be looking to get back what they've invested + money for the land. But that makes no sense from a buyer's perspective, does it? Which is why Corney's still here, minding the ship for the other two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 But that makes no sense from a buyer's perspective, does it? Which is why Corney's still here, minding the ship for the other two. It's as simple as this in my eyes.... - they've lost a load of money, - they've finally built a new stand (and developed other means) that will generate extra money, - that money can drip feed the clawing back of their losses to as great an extent as possible until a buyer appears - in the meantime all matchday income, TV money, Football League money, player sales can pay for the sensible (albeit often inept) running of the football club... Either they'll reduce their losses & subsequently their asking price over time or land values will shoot up - which throughout history has always happened - and their asking price will start to look more attractive... Or some multi millionaire loon will eventually appear... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 If, as many believe, SC's asking price is unrealistic & makes us a poor investment boycotting certain revenue streams isn't going to help remedy that.... In my opinion.. If those revenue streams don't benefit the club, then they don't affect turnover or valuation. If they adversely affect non-club businesses, they potentially put SC / others into a forced sale to avoid further losses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_ktf Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Why should they be willing to make a loss? They can, and probably will eventually make there money back one way or another. As fans, we might not like it that people are putting money above the club. But TTA aren't fans, or at least not to same extent. They invested money and want at least the invested amount back eventually which is fair enough. It depends which part of their investment your talking about. When they had a go on the football side for the first few seasons they ran well over budget. If I'm buying the club- do I have to pay or want to pay for their punt/gamble. Not for me. Therefore they should be willing to write off all the football loses IMO. Recouping their money for the remaining land, (which they've already made back on with the houses and dialysis unit btw) ground, and North stand is fair enough. If you added up what the asking price was without the football debt from 7/8/9 seasons ago, I would think we would be a far more attractive proposition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 But that makes no sense from a buyer's perspective, does it? Which is why Corney's still here, minding the ship for the other two. But a good deal for a buyer is poor deal for TTA, so we'll likely be stuck with them for the foreseeable as they have no immediate need to sell. Any boycott will just further harm the club. The group is right in wanting answers for the financial arrangments between OAFC, OEC and Brassbank for what goes where etc. It's as simple as this in my eyes.... - they've lost a load of money, - they've finally built a new stand (and developed other means) that will generate extra money, - that money can drip feed the clawing back of their losses to as great an extent as possible until a buyer appears - in the meantime all matchday income, TV money, Football League money, player sales can pay for the sensible (albeit often inept) running of the football club... Either they'll reduce their losses & subsequently their asking price over time or land values will shoot up - which throughout history has always happened - and their asking price will start to look more attractive... Or some multi millionaire loon will eventually appear... This. One way or another they will get their money back. It depends which part of their investment your talking about. When they had a go on the football side for the first few seasons they ran well over budget. If I'm buying the club- do I have to pay or want to pay for their punt/gamble. Not for me. Therefore they should be willing to write off all the football loses IMO. Recouping their money for the remaining land, (which they've already made back on with the houses and dialysis unit btw) ground, and North stand is fair enough. If you added up what the asking price was without the football debt from 7/8/9 seasons ago, I would think we would be a far more attractive proposition. Did they really have an option but to run over budget at the start? They still had to pay contracts from the previous regime, IIRC some players such as Appleby were on £3500 at the time. I think it was reported that Moore left us losing £50,000 a week? As much as we would like them to write off the football losses, they won't because they know they can get their money back. If there was another major recession such as when Blitz and Gazal left the club in 2010 then maybe they would write off the losses if they needed to sell quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 But a good deal for a buyer is poor deal for TTA, so we'll likely be stuck with them for the foreseeable as they have no immediate need to sell. Any boycott will just further harm the club. The group is right in wanting answers for the financial arrangments between OAFC, OEC and Brassbank for what goes where etc. This. One way or another they will get their money back. Did they really have an option but to run over budget at the start? They still had to pay contracts from the previous regime, IIRC some players such as Appleby were on £3500 at the time. I think it was reported that Moore left us losing £50,000 a week? As much as we would like them to write off the football losses, they won't because they know they can get their money back. If there was another major recession such as when Blitz and Gazal left the club in 2010 then maybe they would write off the losses if they needed to sell quickly. These things are cyclical too. 8 years since funding for the redevelopment of BP disappeared. They won't have expected to still be here under these circumstances. As unlikely as it seems at the moment we'd normally be about due a boom that could see them be able to sell up or throw real money at it again .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Sinnott Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 One of the members of the group reckons that Corney has been ringing his house phone and threatening him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueatheart Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 I call bull:censored:. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.