boundaryblue80 Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 (edited) Actually you've cleared nothing up, and I don't recall you having posted on the matter before. If you have I'm sorry not to have noticed this message from on high. Mea culpa. Just listen to what you're saying. The club is said to be financially self-sufficient for off the field matters (although it is far from clear what self-sufficient means here), but not on the playing side. This would be all very well if it wasn't for the inconvnient fact that this is a football club, and that the playing costs far outweigh all others. Therefore, the club is dependent on weekly subsidies from the owners pockets. I believe their promise to be sincere, but matters may not always be in their hands. Businesses have been known to go under or see dramatic falls in profitability, sometimes suddenly. In these momentous and in many ways unprecedented times, economically speaking, things could take a sudden turn for the worse, and few businesses are immune, including TTA's. So, too, could the cost of those things you claim the club is self-sufficient in rise dramtically as the cost of the emergency measures keeping the economy afloat begins to bite and oil prices continue to fluctuate dramatically. In any case, wasn't TTA's promise based on the idea that the club would move towards complete self-sufficiency through the stadium redevelopment? I never said that we are in dire financial straits in comparison with the rest of this division; I said that the idea that we are financially secure is a myth. To be secure in relation to many clubs at this level isn't saying a lot when you think about it, either. Depends where you stand...after July 2003 I know under TTA we'll never ever be in that state again. Nor be able to have c***s like Ridsdale come and pronounce us dead before the event. I think it's very very comforting to know the Taxman (the man liability that is usually the Grim Repear to clubs) is well paid up should TTA go...and that as all off the field debts are nil, a new owner has a fresh crack at it with fresh money. I believe this is what John Wardle would've been (by joining TTA than taking over) but I'm told it had to be with Big Joe. That wasn't going to happen. Some things will never change in Oldham like the apathy and red c***s. But to be only asking for TTA's money for the playing side, one they've always said they'll cover till the day comes that they leave, is the best we can hope for pre-stadium etc. And the money they've thrown at the squad budget it can't be criticised either (and potentially should've got us up)...unless you're John Sheridan! The dick! Edited June 30, 2009 by boundaryblue80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Depends where you stand...after July 2003 I know under TTA we'll never ever be in that state again. Nor be able to have c***s like Ridsdale come and pronounce us dead before the event. I think it's very very comforting to know the Taxman (the man liability that is usually the Grim Repear to clubs) is well paid up should TTA go...and that as all off the field debts are nil, a new owner has a fresh crack at it with fresh money. I believe this is what John Wardle would've been (by joining TTA than taking over) but I'm told it had to be with Big Joe. That wasn't going to happen. Some things will never change in Oldham like the apathy and red c***s. But to be only asking for TTA's money for the playing side, one they've always said they'll cover till the day comes that they leave, is the best we can hope for pre-stadium etc. And the money they've thrown at the squad budget it can't be criticised either (and potentially should've got us up)...unless you're John Sheridan! The dick! I'm not disputing that there's truth in what you're saying. I just don't think it adds up to financial security, particularly when the playing side-the most expensive part of the operation and the very purpose of the club-is the one that depends entirely on subsidies from owners who may not always be immune to financial troubles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 So, yes, while we need that £10k injection every week we cannot claim to be financially secure. But we're in a better position than many, and if TTA were to bale out for any reason, we're in a far better position than when they arrived. Yes-but not financially secure. In financial trouble is the more accurate description. Whether it is greater or lesser trouble than the fiasco last time is neither here nor there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I'm not disputing that there's truth in what you're saying. I just don't think it adds up to financial security, particularly when the playing side-the most expensive part of the operation and the very purpose of the club-is the one that depends entirely on subsidies from owners who may not always be immune to financial troubles. Fair do's...splitting hairs on this bit...call it financially stability then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I'm sorry but I have to agree with the Corp on this one..... any business can only really be said to be on a sound footing when it is sustainable. Without TTA it isn't and can only be when the redeveloped stadium delivers an income. It is however (I think) true to say that we are in a better position than many fottball clubs at this time. Thanks TTA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losesome Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 (edited) I never said we were financial secure - just said were not in the same mess as a lot of others , Also one big plus for Latics now is that we own the ground and the land , not TTA as they kindly negotiated it back for us into a position that even if they leave it belongs to the club. SC reckons that 90% + of football clubs outside the premiership are insolvent - Latics are not one of them. These guys are running the club within a budget that is comfortable for them to handle , yes they have the gripes about crowds etc which they are entitled too exactly as we supporters are entitled to moan about players etc. These people that think we should be signing bigger names and/or are disappointed with the signings we have made so far are living in cloud cuckoo land. Edited June 30, 2009 by losesome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I never said we were financial secure - just said were not in the same mess as a lot of others , Also one big plus for Latics now is that we own the ground and the land , not TTA as they kindly negotiated it back for us into a position that even if they leave it belongs to the club. SC reckons that 90% + of football clubs outside the premiership are insolvent - Latics are not one of them. These guys are running the club within a budget that is comfortable for them to handle , yes they have the gripes about crowds etc which they are entitled too exactly as we supporters are entitled to moan about players etc. These people that think we should be signing bigger names and/or are disappointed with the signings we have made so far are living in cloud cuckoo land. While it might be true that TTA are running the club on a budget that is comfortable for them, as long as the club fails to achieve promotion, succeed in staying in the divison above and build better facilities, it can only ever be a money losing outfit. That is their dilemma. How can the club be solvent when, as somebody has pointed out above, it is still losing around ten grand a week? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I never said we were financial secure - just said were not in the same mess as a lot of others , Also one big plus for Latics now is that we own the ground and the land , not TTA as they kindly negotiated it back for us into a position that even if they leave it belongs to the club. SC reckons that 90% + of football clubs outside the premiership are insolvent - Latics are not one of them. These guys are running the club within a budget that is comfortable for them to handle , yes they have the gripes about crowds etc which they are entitled too exactly as we supporters are entitled to moan about players etc. These people that think we should be signing bigger names and/or are disappointed with the signings we have made so far are living in cloud cuckoo land. I think your one big plus might be a mis-conception. My understanding is that TTA own the land under a separate company. Not that this is necessarily a problem, in fact it could well be a protection in that IF the club were ever to go bust, it's main asset could not be seized. But it is a double edged sword. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I think your one big plus might be a mis-conception. My understanding is that TTA own the land under a separate company. Not that this is necessarily a problem, in fact it could well be a protection in that IF the club were ever to go bust, it's main asset could not be seized. But it is a double edged sword. Surely if the club went bust it would no longer have assets? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losesome Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 While it might be true that TTA are running the club on a budget that is comfortable for them, as long as the club fails to achieve promotion, succeed in staying in the divison above and build better facilities, it can only ever be a money losing outfit. That is their dilemma. How can the club be solvent when, as somebody has pointed out above, it is still losing around ten grand a week? A busines is insolvent when it's assets can't meet its debts. Latics are not in that position, The TTA are trying to achieve promotion on a budget that is sustainable . What do you want them to do , promotion at any cost and end up like Stockport !!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 A busines is insolvent when it's assets can't meet its debts. Latics are not in that position, The TTA are trying to achieve promotion on a budget that is sustainable . What do you want them to do , promotion at any cost and end up like Stockport !!!!!! I haven't said that I want them to do anything. I've pointed out that should the current approach fail to achieve promotion and new modern facilities the club is guaranteed to carry on being a loss-making outfit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losesome Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I haven't said that I want them to do anything. I've pointed out that should the current approach fail to achieve promotion and new modern facilities the club is guaranteed to carry on being a loss-making outfit. yes but if they can gain promotion on the budget then that will turn around . If not then the only other way is hopefully somebody can inject a lot of money and at the moment people like that are hard to find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 (edited) yes but if they can gain promotion on the budget then that will turn around . If not then the only other way is hopefully somebody can inject a lot of money and at the moment people like that are hard to find. True-but promotion, as we have seen, seems unlikely under present circumstances. Then we'd have the problem of trying to stay up on a similarly limited budget and probably one which circumstances dictate would be one of the smallest in the second tier. The question that bothers me is where all this leaves the club in the long-term, if we can assume that the stadium redevelopment-and hence the clubs financial independence-is a very long way off. Edited June 30, 2009 by Corporal_Jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 (edited) Lol....fresh bait for CJ Edited June 30, 2009 by boundaryblue80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Lol....fresh bait for CP What is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 What is? That was meant to say CJ...and meant to mean more ppl you're having the same circular discussion with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 That was meant to say CJ...and meant to mean more ppl you're having the same circular discussion with. Why's it a circular discussion if they're raising new points-or variations on what's already been said at least? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonelylaticsfaninaus Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 The more you hear of the mess these clubs are in now then we should all be extremely grateful for TTA. I know a few moan about signings etc etc but just to be in a decent financial position is fantastic. The fact we are able to sign players and have even a limited budget is fantastic for a club of our level. Thanks TTA Absolutely!! These guys must have had more than their fair share of sleepless nights over the last few years too. We owe them alot as fans. I really feel for Southampton and their fans at the moment. I remember how I felt when we nearly went out of business. Latics has been part of my whole life in one way or another. Couldn't imagine them not being around any more. I hope they find someone as committed to their club as TTA are to ours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Why's it a circular discussion if they're raising new points-or variations on what's already been said at least? The discussion here has been more interesting to follow than the way it usually goes TBH. I think the fact is that if the stadium was fully developed and covering the rntire cost of everything we currently do, we would all inside us hope that Mr Blitz would carry on shelling out another £10k a week on the players. And even if you say no to the idea in a calm summer morning, if we were a few points off automatic promotion and had the chance to get someone (who clearly was unlike any recent loanees) in at high cost not many of us would say no. It's the nature of the beast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
true blue Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 my only concern is it would mean a change to 91 in blue! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshaw Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Actually you've cleared nothing up, and I don't recall you having posted on the matter before. If you have I'm sorry not to have noticed this message from on high. Mea culpa. Just listen to what you're saying. The club is said to be financially self-sufficient for off the field matters (although it is far from clear what self-sufficient means here), but not on the playing side. This would be all very well if it wasn't for the inconvnient fact that this is a football club, and that the playing costs far outweigh all others. Therefore, the club is dependent on weekly subsidies from the owners pockets. I believe their promise to be sincere, but matters may not always be in their hands. Businesses have been known to go under or see dramatic falls in profitability, sometimes suddenly. In these momentous and in many ways unprecedented times, economically speaking, things could take a sudden turn for the worse, and few businesses are immune, including TTA's. So, too, could the cost of those things you claim the club is self-sufficient in rise dramtically as the cost of the emergency measures keeping the economy afloat begins to bite and oil prices continue to fluctuate dramatically. In any case, wasn't TTA's promise based on the idea that the club would move towards complete self-sufficiency through the stadium redevelopment? I never said that we are in dire financial straits in comparison with the rest of this division; I said that the idea that we are financially secure is a myth. To be secure in relation to many clubs at this level isn't saying a lot when you think about it, either. so you would like to be millions in debt, like MANURE, and be owned by a couple of Yanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Do you want some then? Just noticed this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 The discussion here has been more interesting to follow than the way it usually goes TBH. I think the fact is that if the stadium was fully developed and covering the rntire cost of everything we currently do, we would all inside us hope that Mr Blitz would carry on shelling out another £10k a week on the players. And even if you say no to the idea in a calm summer morning, if we were a few points off automatic promotion and had the chance to get someone (who clearly was unlike any recent loanees) in at high cost not many of us would say no. It's the nature of the beast. Who dares wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Just noticed this LaticsPete and Stitch KTF are always fishing for me. Occasionally I like to oblige... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelaticsfan Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 im really sick of the FA they only care a bout profits and no longer tthe leagues as a whole, if you drop out of prem u get "parachute payments" to help you get back up, if your a low league club who needs 100k to survive they dont want to know, even if they give lower league clubs 1/10th of what they give the prem i dont think any club would be in admin. like the setanta saga, they recieved 1 final payment which went straight to the prem boys, the spl got nothing, and they needed the money a lot more 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.