underdog

Well folks. I had to do the draw this week. Apologies to singe as I think I have messed up his template - don't tell him it was me

and now.....the lottery launch http://www.trustoldham.org/oasf-1895-lottery/

He has been invaluable and instrumental in getting an idea of a lottery, to the point of launching later on today. However, poor sod has draw the short straw and landed me as his partner on this project.hahah...#pray4singe. Team OASF thanks Singe and anyone who can support the work we are doing. Even the basics of becoming a member, using the online shopping app Easyfundraising is a massive help. Dave, I have also tapped into your knowledge occasionally too - so personal thanks from me

we could have played guess who for a bit hahah

Today we wanted to give you an update on one of our Blue and white volunteers Welcome Mark, Intro on Mark and the OASF 1895 lottery

I posted this in the pinned Trust page the other day. Might be more relevant here Today's BP alert podcast mentions Trust Director's Philippa work on a project. Trust Oldham has been given special permission to publish an insight on the project with the FSA governance and finances Cheers

its a tough ask, Oldham is in a deprived area, we have a saturation of EFL clubs doing better than us, Covid has hit us all in some capacity. We took on board what foundation of hearts said with "give what you can". We are looking at all funding streams. We have two already (easyfundraising and membership), one to be launch (latics lottery with clubforce and run by a volunteer - thanks volunteer), I am researching a fundraising platform for donating what you can - I have found 15 so I have to look what its going to cost for each £10 donated Looking at "leave a latics legacy" - in your will, Canaries Trust has this, think Dale fan who left 1/2 million. DCMS grant for supporter ownership. It matches what you have in the account. Upto £250k Other grant research too. I have made a start but there are only so many hours in the day But we have to think outside the box and this is where the partnership with OMBC and Oldham college comes in. Philippa observations is that most fan owned clubs have a glass ceiling of league one. The partnership we hope will push through that We need a total image re-vamp as well and have engaged with profession agency to look at how we market and attract investment. Its going to take many hands, many hours of work....But we have made a start. We will be ratifying the strategy and rollout soon

We are a dysfunctional setup and this will probably put most investors off. However, there are options that need to be exhausted for fan investment/ownership. Club - increase shareholding. A big no-no on the FSA list really Asset - BP our home. Trust are the holder of the ACV, this gives a right to bid if the asset became available. Or even, to trigger it ourselves. There is a pre-trigger ACV checklist that the Trust needs help with. It includes sourcing a RICS Surveyor for a valuation and condition report, sourcing a commercial and corporate solicitor, preparing a business plan of at least three years, looking at what grants are available too. DCMS in the budget have been allocated funds for fan ownership and applications start in June....lots of research that needs to be completed and will be costly if we cannot source or use any skillsets within the fanbase. You have to ask yourself what is currently, for sale, or open to offers to sell. IMO, it is the stadium. So is it a viable option for fans to become the landlords of OAFC? Is it better fans are the landlords than the current company Brassbank? The Trust strategy is now completed and we will be discussing it with PTB soon with a rollout shortly after. We have to try or be as best ready as we can be if either club, stadium or both becomes available. It is literally, in our hands

In the week leading up to Xmas the Trust are helping to promote the easyfundraising app for the Academy (was playershare new name TBA) Please check out the Trust guess who advent calendar for the link to the App. 4,000 plus retailers at no extra cost to you if you buy online. Think Xmas shopping, online insurance, booking at holiday, or getting the Missus some flowers after you have proverbially, kicked the cat after a latics loss. Advent Xmas cracker link - guess who? Or if you want to find out more first. Link to the playershare page on website and continuing Opinions4Uwork - thanks

Today Trust announced on behalf of playershare, a future partnership with the Academy Below is an article Official news support of the Academy And the dedicated website page. This includes a message from Opinions 4 U son and his support of the switch. Academy.Playershare main page with message from Chris Stringer Watch this space with regards to how we will be honouring Opinions on a yearly basis Sorry I missed the Club update too https://www.oldhamathletic.co.uk/news/2020/december/27112020-academy-trust-oldham/

Cheers Matt, you beat me too it.

Crap....ny memory is really on the fritz..cheers

I have that mans shirt...literally, well his GK ,match worn shirt that is Liverpool when he went up for that last minute corner and caused havoc for Matty smith to score....how was that goal not disallowed hahah

I like that idea good shout, I think Philippa did ask for a number of key roles to be filled. One being a HR role and maybe this sits there...a training budget? we will have to see what happens cheers

that's it, forget people/personalties for the moment.....look at what it is....... It's a seat at the table a legal right to information......your not banging on the door like other supporters organisations where owners can just ignore you. see quote below from FSA document issued on 31st July "use people with skills to understand the depth of problems at your club" 1) Ownership - who owns what 2) Financial - accounts, debts, balance sheet charges, on going cost, creditors - (Share hold give access to FULL accounts and they have to be presented to Trust by club). 3) Legal 4) Real estate and planning - (Trust has ACV, but it is up for renewal and we have to factoring in the loss of little wembley to club and community. Now for the health warning....this is me typing by the way it has to recruit the right quality skills and experience and that is where is has failed, round pegs, square holes. Time restricted/managed by people's commitment to it. An example, Your working full time, had a crap day, need to spend some time with the family. You log on for a latics update looking for a crumb of good news and wham something has hit the fan and you need to rally the troops...lets face it this is almost daily occurrence for a good three plus years. The shear turn over of staff is a massive concern, you are in the never ending circle of de ja vue.....I had this last year over the account trauma and released we were in the exact same position with Corney 3 years earlier. There is now no-one there longer than 2 years that would realise stuff like this to prevent it happening again. Goldfish in a bowl going around and having its memory erased springs to mind. You literally have given blood, sweat and tears.....and I did cry when the fan bar was pulled from us by the club that boxing day. We spent days rescuing furniture from an old con.club, transporting it, cleaning it and the area and then I had listened to how it was going to be sabbotagged too. Been at the end of some face to face and online fan abuse when you just think why do I bother...(and its still going on with social media mud slinging to discredit good folk...even now today) On top of that. Its not a "happy" organisation. IT wants to be, but its always fire fighting something, owner, landlord whilst trying to manage fans expectations. It will fight you, sap your energy, its unrewarding, chew you up, spit you out....in most jobs you are not happy you find another....but its football, its passion, its our "church", our Saturday sanctuary and you want to protect that to the best of your ability, if not for you, for future generations. It's a bitch of a supporter organisation,, working with or trying to hold to account a bigger company (club) with a dysfunctional set up club/land split.....You can stuff Owners and directors test, fit and proper malarkey...you need a mental health cert just to volunteer in an organisation where you are slap bang in the trenches. I bet the FSA have seen nothing or work with nothing like it to be honest Soooooo, anyone up for a mental fight and standing at the EGM/AGM when announced? anyone?

You mean that they were leaked before they were published? That is a concern And I get what you are saying but you have to remember that there was a fan meeting at the time. and the consensus was that an attempt at a dialogue was to be made with the owner and the 6 fan expectations was created. The trust met the owner on 3rd May, he formed a board and issued a 3-5 yr plan. You have to remember we are a diverse set of fans with different views sometimes, some will want to march down sheepfoot lane, some will want a more diplomatic approach. What you have now are two supporter organisations that can offer fans both options. Trust - Legal entitlement, accountability at board level. The diplomatic route - well until it fails PTB - the vocal, pro-action group Fans have a choice and can be part of both

no need to apologies at all. As an organisation it has to make available its meeting notes. The Trust publishes them for all to see on its website. The last 12 months is then there for members to look at the decisions made, struggles ect and to make informed decisions on elections when voting. However this is now blown out of the water with resignations that an EGM will have to be called in order for it legally, to get through everyday business stuff

spot on......Its David V Goliath......you are entering a pro-owner selected board. Andy B, who no longer poss on here, suggested that the supporter rep ideally should NOT be a fan first but a business person with board room skills. And like every company, it should be advertised, job spec, interview ect and then voted on by the membership. I would have loved to have seen Jason Flynn (businessman and MD at JP Morgan) give it a bash, but he sadlly resigned over summer. It has failed because of unpaid, volunteers working a few hours a week, with a varied skills set (not necesarily the right skillset), trying to hold a bigger business to account. Ball juggling on three fronts 1) Club via share holding entitlement 2) ACV via with the landlord - note the loss of little wembly is impending and the ACV needs reneweing 3) FLG and their proposed buyout of the landlord It is now in danger of being infiltrated and the shareholding becoming totally useless, the ACV NOT being renewed which helps the landlord too Forgot to add: FSA suggest the supporter rep to the board role should between two people

No they have to pass an AGM, a members vote...or as the case now an EGM thats crucial, how many members will join to influence voting?

I was under the impression the PTB did not want the responsibility of the Shareholding However, now, who knows. I will presume they are digesting the news like we all are The Trust currently is in limbo, it cannot make any business decisions until an EGM is called to elect new directors....a mess

EFL may struggle to sanction the move as we have a lease until 2031 and a stadium Council will be loathed to see the club move too, unless there is a phoenix club

I have drafted the Memo of understanding for the Trust and with the club. IT states our shareholder rights......to summarise. This is the minimum the 3% would give with FSA questions we should be asking. a) Section 423. To view Full accounts. This will dependant of when the meetings are held and before submittal to Companies house. Or half yearly accounts minimum. b) Revenue split in appropriate major categories. c) Expenditure split in appropriate major categories. d) Outstanding debtor and creditors figures in relation to transfer fees. e) Directors’ remuneration and rewards. f) Related party transactions. g) Significant capital expenditure. h) Confirmation of any ‘significant’ arrears and how these will be repaid. i) Section 116. Shareholder’s register. To inspect a list of the organisations/ individuals with significant ownership interests at every meeting. j) Board membership and any relevant sub-committee memberships. k) A list of individuals with senior responsibility for decision-making and explanation of roles and responsibilities. l) Compliance with ‘Financial Fair Play’ obligations. m) Section 32. To be given up to date constitutional documents. IE Memorandum of association and Articles of Association. n) Section 229. Terms of Directors’ service level agreements if any. o) Section 238. Terms of Directors indemnity Provisions. p) Section 291. Copy of any written resolution proposed by directors since the last Trust/Club meeting. q) Section 744: To inspect and receive copies of the register of holders of debentures for every meeting. What is the additional and most important parts ARE 1) The right to appoint and remove our own supporter rep to the club board 2) Equal parity voting at club board level 3) Have to right to vote is there is a proposal to dissolve the business of OAFC 2004 Ltd Its the share holding that needs to be saved, not necesarily the Trust as the vehicle to drive it. Then you have to factor in the ACV with the current landlord The Trust as a vehicle is dead, it needs experienced people with the right skillset to hold a bigger company to account. It has failed because the volunteers who stepped up, did not necesarily have those skills. That is why it failed, accountability. There are fans in the EFL who would give their right arm to have what we have....Charlton Athletic Trust being one. IT works in clubs like Grimsby, why it can;t work for us I do not know. What happens next will require an EGM, there is then a real danger of it being infiltrated and the 3% is then lost to the fan base with little fight SOS......Save our Shareholding

From website published in January. mentions Direct Mark Harrington proposal under lastly, any other business https://trustoldham.co.uk/2020/01/21/trust-january-meeting-an-update-for-fans/ Trust Director: Mark Harrington proposed a formal review of the social media/communication policy and how the Trust’s OAFC Rep is engaging in the public domain using this method. Additional Concerns have been by a fans if it is the right method to use. It was agreed that two Trust directors not immediately involved with these issues will be appointed to review the concerns and will report back at our February meeting. https://trustoldham.co.uk/2020/01/30/board-meeting-january-2020/ Trust Jan meeting notes published in July. 2. Complaint a. A complaint by a Trust member against a Director had been logged by email and the member also raised the issue in person at the open forum. b. The Trust acknowledged a complaint which was registered with the Vice-Chair in the Chair’s absence. c. Further discussion after the complaint had been raised was not appropriate and would have constituted a breach of process. d. The Trust Vice-Chair applied the Trust Code of Conduct. e. There would be no further comment until the assigned team has completed an investigation and reported back to the Vice-Chair. f. AB and KB were appointed as they were independent of any aspect of the complaint. Outcome is in the Feb notes. Published in July https://trustoldham.co.uk/2020/02/28/board-meeting-february-2020/ 14. Review of Role of Trust Nominated Director a. This review had been proposed at the January Board meeting by MH. b. The initial impetus was a desire for to investigate the social media postings of DR and this had been subsumed with the investigation of the fan complaint about the same matter. c. AB had volunteered to conduct the investigation into the complaint under the Trust’s Code of Conduct. 15. Outcome of Investigation into Fan Complaint a. The investigation had been undertaken by AB and KB under the terms of the Trust’s Code of Conduct. b. The result of the investigation was that both AB and KB concluded that there was no DR ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL PW further disciplinary action should be taken and the Trust’s Club Board Director should not be removed from his position. c. AB stated that there is some evidence that the DR could have made better judgements about his social media on a number of occasions but these did not amount to critically important failings. d. DR had previously been given appropriate advice as to future conduct by EG in respect of this matter as an appropriate response to DR as an individual. e. AB recommends more prescriptive wording in the Trust Club Director job description with regards to social media presence and postings. f. TW explained that the Trust had this job description in draft form for several months and although previously on the agenda, it was never discussed or approved. g. DR pointed out that the Social Media Policy in its current format is flawed and needs more work and that Trust Directors could not sign it as it stands as it needs revision. 16. Allegation of Undeclared Conflict of Interest a. TW asked DR what work paid/unpaid he has done for the club, as his own company website lists the Club as a client under the company’s portfolio of work b. TW asked specifically what work was undertaken during Aug-October 2019 and was this work paid or unpaid? c. If paid, had it been subject to a proper tendering process? d. DR explained that it was unpaid work that involved match day promotional work and this had been explained previously in meetings. e. TW challenged whether DR had disclosed this work for the Club and stated that as Acting Chair and Secretary she did not agree that it had been and had no recollection of any such declaration and said that she would look back at notes of previous meetings to confirm this. f. JF also expressed concern that DR had done work or the Club and expected that fans would have an adverse perception of it. g. DR explained he has checked his unpaid work with the FSA and they are happy that undertaking such unpaid work is acceptable. 17. Challenge over Twitter post by the Trust’s Nominated Club Director a. TW further challenged DR over his Twitter post of 24th January 2020 in which he indicated that he was seeking legal advice about what constitutes constructive dismissal of a Director. b. This tweet was inappropriate at a time when two allegations against DR were under investigation and as the outcome was that there was no case to answer this was improper. c. The tweet had alerted fans to Board conflict and had disclosed Board confidential matters. d. KH confirmed that following the tweet he had been approached by fans concerned about what was happening on the Trust Board. e. DR stated that his tweet did not mention Trust Oldham or the Club, but reflected his concern that the multiple allegations against him were being pursued under a flawed Trust Code of Conduct. f. DR alleged that the procedure was flawed because the due process had not been outlined to him, he had not been provided with a written copy of the evidence against him and without written allegations he could not access legal representation under the Trust Directors Indemnity insurance. g. TW read out the relevant paragraph from the Code of Conduct to the Board. 18. Challenge over Restriction of Board Contact by the Trust’s Nominated Club Director a. From the chair, TW criticised DR for insisting on all communication with him from the Board being in writing and eschewing verbal contact during the period when the allegations against him were being investigated. b. KH confirmed that disappointingly DR had indicated that he wanted all communication with himself to be in writing. c. DR said that in view of the non-provision of written specification of the allegations against him he wanted all contact to be formally recorded. d. He also indicated that he wanted contact with him to be restricted to matters of critical importance whilst he concentrated on dealing with the allegations against him. AB TW 19. Immediate Actions Resolved a. After much further discussion the Board resolved that following immediate steps should be taken: i. Trust Directors Code of Conduct: All directors must read, review and sign the current Code and bring it for the next meeting. It is critically important that the Trust rep accepts this code. TW will re-circulate it before the March Trust Board meeting. ii. Trust’s Nominated Club Director Job Description: TW will re-circulate this document for review by all Directors so that it can be amended as required and the Trust’s Nominated Club Director will be expected to sign it at the March Trust Board Meeting. iii. Trust’s Nominated Club Director Three Month Probationary Period: after signing the updated job description the Trust’s Nominated Club Director will be subject to a three-month probationary period in the new role and subject to detailed review of his performance in the role and progress against targets set. b. AB asked if the whole Board agreed to the approach based on the three steps and assent by the Trust’s Nominated Club Director to them at the March Trust Board meeting. c. The majority view was that this was the appropriate way forward. d. Director MH stated that he could not agree as he no longer trusted nor supported the Trust’s Nominated Club Director and he would now need to reconsider if he could continue as a Trust Director. e. TW also stated she understood MH’s reasons and the steps proposed but she too needed review if she could continue to support the Trust’s Nominated Club Director in his role. She will advise the Board as soon as she can whether she can remain a Trust Director.

oi, we want some money....how does £6 mill sound?

I think it was mentioned in the January update on the website and then in the published Jan/Feb meeting notes (granted they were published by the trust in July after we had left). I posted them in the pinned Trust thread above. It was put on the Trust website face book page and on hear. Forgot to add, mine and Mark's resignation was not formally accepted by the Trust board, but the paper work was strangely done at Companies house before the March meeting.....it was never acknowledge by the Trust wither, which saddened me as I had served 6 years and Mark had served five years.