Jump to content

Recommended Posts

the land is where the money is also if u have lots of cash get some good players in not waiste of space players actually buy a player over 100k god i cant remmber the last time we spent over 100k.

 

 

How much was Porter and Davies? not sure what we paid for Stephens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 281
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

How much was Porter and Davies? not sure what we paid for Stephens

 

porter was 100k davies 75k or less not sure but wasnt over 100k this is where oldham have gone wrong for years getting players on the free that no one wants we are the only team that can sign players that are worse then we allready have, if we want to get out of this div we need to atleaste spend a little cash on buying players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

obviously were still guessing,but i dont think corney has done too bad a job,i am of the opinian that it maybe corney who doesnt want to sell,he is here all the time more often than not,and gets involved a lot more than others.

My personal opinion is that Corney is too involved. But that's another issue.

 

As for Wardle+Blitz I see why Wardle would may be uninterested. Sure it's not as interesting as being the 100% holder. But it at the same time reduces your risk and increases the spending power of the club.

 

For example... if Blitz can currently afford a £50k per week loss and next season can only afford a £30k a week loss, then Wardle could make that back up to £60k, actually increasing the budget, whilst both take on a reduced financial risk than doing it alone.

 

As has been said, this is the playing side alone and so this is lost cash anyway - this isn't an investment where you need to consider the value of the assets and so forth. This is basically just paying to see your team do well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal opinion is that Corney is too involved. But that's another issue.

 

As for Wardle+Blitz I see why Wardle would may be uninterested. Sure it's not as interesting as being the 100% holder. But it at the same time reduces your risk and increases the spending power of the club.

 

For example... if Blitz can currently afford a £50k per week loss and next season can only afford a £30k a week loss, then Wardle could make that back up to £60k, actually increasing the budget, whilst both take on a reduced financial risk than doing it alone.

 

As has been said, this is the playing side alone and so this is lost cash anyway - this isn't an investment where you need to consider the value of the assets and so forth. This is basically just paying to see your team do well.

I think that is what I was trying to say in around about way. Rich people don't become rich by not seeing the ££'s. and I am ffaily confident Wardle would not just invst in the playing side. In fact it would not be an investment would it, it would jsut be chucking mpney down the drain.

So the only way to get investment in the playing side is sponsorship. Not that I know anything.

So I would imagine something in the retails side of things would be Wardle's forte. So the retails side may helpw ith the stadium, os that is the ownership side of things.

Still far too waffly.

I dont think Wardle will be buying out OLdham. Notihng to be gained.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it said that before his involvement with City he was primarily a Latics fan? Hence the past JD Sports sponsorship. (I don't know if this is true or even if he's from Oldham, although neither is a substantial portion of our support.)

 

I heard Alan Hardy speaking on Jimmy Wagg a few weeks ago (in passing as I was busy at the time). He seemed to be saying that Wardle is an old friend.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it said that before his involvement with City he was primarily a Latics fan? Hence the past JD Sports sponsorship. (I don't know if this is true or even if he's from Oldham, although neither is a substantial portion of our support.)

 

I heard Alan Hardy speaking on Jimmy Wagg a few weeks ago (in passing as I was busy at the time). He seemed to be saying that Wardle is an old friend.

I didn;t hear it. Without wishing to drag up old news, I would imagine that Alan amd JD Sports did well out of the sponsorship at the time (though admittedley best value was probably Bovis!) so a friend of Latics in that he has pumped money in, and Alan has had dealing with him in the past could maybe explain that remark?

I would not have thought he pumped huge moeny in, but even then perhaps it was JD Sports investors rather than his own money?

Hence why I have doubts Wardle would buy out. I do hope I am wrong in that it becomes ajoint venture. Nothing against TTA, but they have obvisouly not got the money to get the Stadium going, so hopefully some help.

 

That said Wardle could be being a straight business man. Sussed that the TTA might be struggling in the ecnonomic climate (not a genius thought that!), maybe even hints that they were willing to sell. Puts in an offer that is enought to show commitment, but not enough to tempt the TTA,. Bit like a silly offer on a house to see if they really are keen to sell, and more desperate than they make out? Hence the rumours have substance but not quite the whole story?

Edited by singe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After hearing recent rumblings and looking at the way things have played out and thinking over words from Simon Corney in September 2008...the above bit (in bold) would not be a surprise to me one bit.

 

I suppose the inclusion of Dr Evil and Roger Palmer within the consortium could well be a case of chinese whispers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scratch2000uk
My :sauce: informs me that , after a three hour meeting yesterday, John Wardle will not be investing in Latics.

 

Long live TTA!

 

 

What a bloody let down, :blush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a step back people, and take a deep breath.....

 

We havent even heard anything regarding Wardles investment apart from a small story in MEN and a few lines in the national bog rollchip paper news papers, and messageboard hearsay, which after the Doggygate saga, would not surprise me in the slightest if their source was the fans hearsay on here.

 

Have heard nothing officially from the club regarding this, and until we do, whether it be he is investing, hes not investing, hes taking the club over, story was BS from day 1, thats all it will be, message board hearsay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a step back people, and take a deep breath.....

 

We havent even heard anything regarding Wardles investment apart from a small story in MEN and a few lines in the national bog rollchip paper news papers, and messageboard hearsay, which after the Doggygate saga, would not surprise me in the slightest if their source was the fans hearsay on here.

 

Have heard nothing officially from the club regarding this, and until we do, whether it be he is investing, hes not investing, hes taking the club over, story was BS from day 1, thats all it will be, message board hearsay.

 

Sorry, that's just waaaaaay too reasonable.

 

We're all doing our best to whip up a bit of messageboard outrage now our season's gone up the swanee and all you can do is sit there and type sense.

 

Not good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...