Guest sheridans_world Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 I attended the forum tonight and took all my own notes, I tried to keep up with writing and speaking at the same time but it was not always possible so there may be a gap or two. I have generally grouped things together. Some comments didnt ask a question as such, more wanting re-assurances. In Attendance: Cllr Mark Allcock (MA), Cllr Mohib Uddin (MU), Alan Hardy OAFC CEO (AH), Simon Corney OAFC MD (SC), Ian Hill OAFC Director (IH), Barry Owen Director of OAFC and Chairman of Trust Oldham (BEO) Abbreviations used: FD - Failsworth Dynamo's FR - Failsworth Residents OMBC - Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council AG - Allotment Group CC - Cricket Clubs BP - Boundary Park Failsworth Dynamo's Q's: Many comments from the FD's regarding the local community and the loss of football pitches over the last 20 years. Comments aimed at the OMBC Cllr's in regards to this. Comments from the FD's revolving around 56 teams in Failsworth and only two football pitches to accommodate these teams. FD's critical of OMBC and their decisions to cull football pitches. A's: SC assured the FD's that there would be an additional three pitches on the site. 2 x 3G Pitches and 2 x Full size grass pitches in addition to 10 five-a-side courts. The pitch inside the stadium makes five pitches. Q's: FD's asked a question regarding a letter of intent they received from OMBC about their proposed plans to develop the site. They have been working on plans for the last two years revolving around adding an extra three pitches themselves. Although they had not entered any plans for planning permission they claim they had received re-assurances from the council that the loop-holes they jumped through constituted a passed planning application once submitted. The asked why they have now been denied outright and why latics' plans have been "fast-tracked"? Also asked what process had been followed and why the FD's have now been denied outright. A's: MU said he was unsure of the planning process but a solution must be found that satisfies all involved parties including the AG's, FD's and FR's. Talks would be guaranteed, OMBC must work with FD's and he offered to pass his contact number onto the FD's at the meetings conclusion. Q's: FD's are not against OAFC building a stadium but want more community facilities, strong emphasis on more facilities, not just upgraded facilities. Look at the Colchester model, their community status is built on having 3G pitches, bowling greens, tennis courts, the OAFC proposed development does not take into account the 56 team's needs. A's: AH - we are providing more facilities than the existing site, re-iterated pitch figures as above. Q's: FD's were looking at their own commercial ventures, they are hoping to attain IPS status in a similar way as FC United of Manchester and AFC Wimbledon have. FD's claim that the FA are interested in their proposals for the site without and OAFC involvement. A's: SC - We have had 2 x 2 hour meetings with FD's - what has changed? You were reasonably happy leaving those meetings. OAFC said they would upgrade more pitches, as we have built into our plan. FD went away happy from those meetings and OAFC said they would work in partnership with FD's from day one, as we have. The first meeting with FD's you said you were in partnership with Oldham Town, the second meeting you said you had broken that partnership and wanted to be partners with us. FD Response: The land is important to the kids of the community, *comments regarding Oldham being the worst developed area for football in the country* FD's claim they would have six pitches. FD's felt they were being rushed into things as this was an amateur club being run by volunteers. FD's claimed that the second meeting was all about finance. FD's mentioned their plans again. SC questioned why no phone call had taken place as he believe he had a good relationship with FD's, he was disappointed that this has come out after the previous meetings and nothing had been communicated. AH noted that OAFC does lots of work in the community employing full-time members of staff and catering for over 3500 local children per year. He also noted that OAFC would be providing brand new facilities for grass roots football as that is very important to OAFC. OAFC have several players in their academy that have come from grass roots football and it is essential that grass roots is looked after. MU noted that the FA were looking at several sites over the borough, not just the FD's site. The council work as facilitators to make sure all parties are happy, the land is the key. If you can find a suitable site, give us the suggestion. Q's: FD's - No issue with OAFC (my cousin actually plays for them!!), re-iterates point about OMBC slowly getting rid of football pitches in the Oldham area, the fact that this development gives two new pitches doesnt make up for the 13 that have been lost. *Comments about crime and football being a cure for crime* A's: SC - British Aerospace owned the land, this land was out to open tender, they were already in discussion with an interested party when we joined the table. The other interested party would have built industrial units on the land had OAFC not expressed an interest. SC stated it would have happened as BA have been desperately trying to sell the land for some time and it would have been sold within the next few years. However, OAFC would not have got to this stage had the council not been satisfied that OAFC would fulfil the requirements of the local people. Q's: FD's want a meeting with OAFC and OMBC and FD's will take a list of suitable areas. A's: OMBC & OAFC: Fine. BEO also commented that the pitches would be used all day and all night, unlike the current arrangement with FD's only being a part-time organisation. Q's: FD's stated that FC United of Manchester are currently looking at a site not too far from the proposed development, with the COMS just up the road there could potentially be three clubs within three miles of each other. A's: AH - City rarely play on a Saturday afternoon when Oldham do. Failsworth Residents & Cricket Club Q's: FR's and CC's expressed several concerns about the local environment, asking a question about a grant the area has received from an arm of the forestry commission (Newlands Trust) and that the funding covered a large area around Moston-brook. Concerns about people having to walk through wildlife areas from local transport links. Concerns about traffic levels at an already busy junction at the end of Broadway and asked how the cricket clubs we be accomadated as nothing had been mentioned about the three cricket clubs that currently use the facilities on the site. A's: MA - OMBC is keen on the local environment and looking at trying to minimise the impact the development would have on the local wildlife. AH stated that traffic issues would be picked up in the planning process and that OAFC may have to improve some junctions in the local area as a part of the development. AH also stated that OAFC are in touch with metrolink to see if a match-day stop can be incorporated into the line that runs right past the development. Q's: FR's restated the question about the CC's. A's: MU - Land is the key, the issue is size, there are very few areas that a development the size of the proposed OAFC development can happen. Finding one or two cricket or football pitches is much easier than trying to find a 30 acre site that fits in with the needs of this development. MU stated he would keep talking with all concerned parties to find a solution. Q's: FR's stated that they have not been consulted with by OMBC. A's: MU stated that planning had not been submitted yet and as soon as details have been submitted OMBC will contact FR's. Oldham Fans Q's: Why would the club move now, given the recession and the fact that real estate values have hit rock bottom? Why not stay at BP? A's: IH - Correct, times are not good for house prices, the initial plan was to stay at and improve BP. It took several years to draw up the plans and get planning permission and by this point they were at December 2007 when the world hit rock bottom. BP is unlikely to be improved for a long time, taking several years where precious 100's of thousands of pounds would be being spent on the up-keep of BP. Developers are not willing to buy 10 or 20 acres outright as they were just two/three years ago. AH stated that land values everywhere had fallen making the Failsworth site cheaper. IH stated that the opportunity was raised at the Lancaster club. Q's: Is this the only site available, is there nothing in Shaw or closer to the town centre? A's: SC stated that the Fernyfield's site had been talk about, it was always preferred to stay at BP but because of situations beyond OAFC's control they could not. SC invited anyone that knew of any other area to come forward but stated that OMBC does not have much available land. Q's: Travel - its a long way for fans from Delph, Diggle and Denshaw to travel. A's: AH restated the metrolink option, stated there is a bus service every ten minutes into the centre of Oldham and a good bus service along Broadway to the current site. Also stated that parking would be provided at the new site. MU stated that it is OAFC's decision regarding transport, also stated there is no land closer to the town centre. AH restated SC's earlier statement: If anyone knows of any 30 acre sites, let them know. Q's: The Failsworth site is cheap, that means a lower price for BP, it makes economic sense to stay at BP and redevelop that site slowly, supporters do not want to travel the extra distance to Failsworth and especially given the lower crowds, can the club afford to move to an area where support is scarce? A's: AH - There have been lots of changes, staying at BP is no longer a viable option. By moving, building costs have come down recently, we cannot stay at BP. Land at BP gives us value we would otherwise not have. We can now sell the land the current stadium lies on. It costs too much to maintain BP considering it is a very old ground. Supporters of Bolton and Wigan will have said the same when they moved to their new grounds. The Reebok is 12 miles away from where Burden Park was situated. These clubs have done well and are now not only surviving in the premiership but challenging for the top half. Q's: Bolton and Wigan were not built at a capacity of 12 thousand seats though. A's AH - No they were not, but the capacity can be increased, if you look at our attendances when we were last in the premiership we were getting 18 thousand maximum, we would increase the capacity if we got there. Q's: Where will the money come from to build the new stadium considering we are not moving out of BP until it's built. *Comments about the change in capacity and change in value of the redevelopment.* What happened to the club earning money 364 days a year? A's: IH - we will develop part of BP to bring some capital in, we are also working with some partners. Other facilities will be bringing money into the club, clubs cannot survive on 26 games a season any more. Q's: Will the ground be owned by Oldham Athletic Football Club (2004) Limited? A's: SC - YES Q's: What if the new stadium does not happen, would TTA leave the club in administration? A's: SC - We would not leave the club in administration, we would work the budgets down so that the club can be self-sufficient with the level of income it is attracting. If that means working on an attendance of 3000, the club may get relegated but we cannot afford to continue subsidising the club to the tune of £40k per month. Q's: Will TTA make any money out of this? A's: SC - Yes. SC went on to state the following: Purchase of OAFC and BP - £5.2M Running costs per year - £1M (7 years = £7M) Value of New Stadium only - £14M Meaning they will have spent £26.5M or so on OAFC if the new ground goes ahead. Sale of BP: Sell 16 acres at £800k per acre - £12M, lost lots of money and if someone was willing to come in a write a cheque to buy the club or BP tomorrow they would accept, if it was the right value and the interests of the club were looked after. Q's: Simon Corney stated on a five live interview that consultation with the fans has already taken place, I've not seen any. What consultation with the fans will take place in regards to stadium names and stand names etc.? A's: SC - Consultation will be done. Things cannot be guaranteed at this point in time though. We do not want a "flat pack" stadium, we want to build something that looks unique or at least has the potential to look unique, we will have parts of the new stadium that will not be seen commonly elsewhere. Q's: What assurances can you give the fans about this development happening, especially given the amount of hard work that went into getting planning permission last time with the march etc.? A's: SC - I can give no assurances, all I can say is we will explore every option. Q's: You mentioned about the budget for the playing side being cut if we were not to move, why? A's: SC - We cannot keep losing money. When we played Leicester last season, we drew with them twice but three of their players were on more than our entire playing squad. It can only be sustained for a certain amount of time. Leeds' playing budget last season was 8.9M ours was 1.7M (plus loanee's). You can only sustain huge over-spending for a maximum of two years. OAFC will be run in a prudent manner and has always been run in that way. The reason for failures and administration is that clubs over-extend themselves. Q's: When will this happen? A's: SC - We want to be in the new stadium by 2011/2012 but a delay of two months could put us back a year. We have to get through architects, council meetings, planning, environmental issues before any building starts. We have already moved very quickly to get to the stage we are at. Q's: How far can the expansion go? A's: AH - How far do you want it to go? Q's: 18K as our premiership attendance? A's: AH - easy - the architects know that we have to be able to expand if we need the room, expansion is at the forefront of the stadium design. Rugby Q's: Can the Rugby use the new stadium? A's: MU - I believe the Rugby are in consultation with Chadderton FC Q's: Why has it taken so long for the Rugby to sort anything but OAFC have been fast tracked, Rugby have been discussing since February, OAFC have been for 6 weeks. A's: AH - Its been a lot longer than 6 weeks, dont believe everything you read in the press. The Rugby can be accomadated at Chadderton Football club as that ground has a capacity of 1500-2000 and that is more than enough for the Rugby's needs. AH stated he would be happier if the Rugby had their own stadium. There is alot in there. I can appreciate some of it is repetitive but that was the nature of the questions. I may have got one or two things incorrect or said by the wrong person but I cant help that! I've grouped some questions and answers together as they relate to each other. Two hours its taken me to type this out! Dont gripe about speeling mistakes please!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tindall Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 I attended tonight and you got pretty much of the stuff spot on, Just one question?, where abouts did you sit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Bolton and Wigan were not built at a capacity of 12 thousand seats though. A's AH - No but the capacity can be increased, if you look at our attendances when we were last in the premiership we were getting 18 thousand maximum, we would increase the capacity if we got there. Surely the aim of an ambitious club that reaches the PL would be to get the biggest attendances possible, not look at what happened last time, in a different era. Wigan don't even get 18000 now (do they even average 15000?), but their stadium holds considerably more than that. However, we have our answer regarding the vaunted possibilities of extending capacity: 'we would increase capacity if we got there.' So that's never then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tindall Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 TBH if the failsworth lot didnt turn up, I would say around 50 Oldham fans would have attended. Pretty poor turn out on a whole, load of empty seats and fair play to the club for returning the 2quid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetman Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Thanks for taking the time to fill us all in. Reading it, I am quite pleased with how it went. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 that was a great read thank you very much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
another fan Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 I attended tonight and you got pretty much of the stuff spot on, Just one question?, where abouts did you sit Best question of the night Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnoid Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Good summary, cheers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tindall Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Best question of the night sush, you didnt go, since you thought the irish lady was going on about the 24 bus after the dale game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Bolton is 12 miles away from where Burden Park was situated. These clubs have done well and are now not only surviving in the premiership but challenging for the top half. The Reebok is nowhere near 12 miles from where Burnden Park was situated. I'd be surprised if it was even half that distance. Also misses the point that, as they were aiming to challenge for the top half of the PL, they didn't build a ground with a lower division capacity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bensonio Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 I didn't go but it sounds like they definately have a plan and it's for the benefit of all included in it. Goes to show that FD having the chron page saying they've been left out in the cold about it when they hadn't been making phone calls after previous meetings was typical last minute hum drumming of flase info for their own gain. How many people turned up do you have an idea? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stitch_KTF Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Cheers mate, appreciate the feedback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 IMO the Dynamos sound like they are being a bit cheeky. I'm sure they would love for the Council to have worked to give them 4 full sized pitches with top facilities, but in the interests of fairness why would they set up just one none-league side in this way? Were Oldham Town going to get a swimming baths and Chadderton a ski slope? It's not their land, why should they be put in charge of valuable facilities when presumably they have nothing financial to put into the project? If they get a nice well maintained pitch with clean changing rooms and use of a bar, catering facilities for big games and places for club events then they should think they have done very nicely indeed out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
another fan Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 sush, you didnt go, since you thought the irish lady was going on about the 24 bus after the dale game Actually I DID but fulll credit to you I did not realise that the lady was Irish even though she was only a few seats away from me, She was sat on the front ror right in front of AH Also FULL CREdit to te club for giving a refund to ticket purchasers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yard Dog Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 It all sounds, erm, good, I suppose...but I just wish it wasn't that location...sounds like we have no choice but to move to F/w though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Thanks for that SW. One point, and it's a very minor and completely hypothetical concern...but when there's talk of room for expansion, I would hope that if when () that time comes, the room for expansion is upwards (i.e. building extra tiers etc) rather than just filling in the corners. The fact that it's a four-sided ground is important I feel and it would be a shame if that's what would be sacrificed for any on-pitch success in the future. Seems like the councillors and OAFC officials handled everything well, well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
another fan Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 It all sounds, erm, good, I suppose...but I just wish it wasn't that location...sounds like we have no choice but to move to F/w though. Spot on.like many others I believe the location is debatable but Fxxxed if I can think of an alternative Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 SC went on to state the following: A's: SC - We cannot keep losing money. When we played Leicester last season, we drew with them twice but three of their players were on more than our entire playing squad. It can only be sustained for a certain amount of time. Leeds' playing budget last season was 8.9M ours was 1.7M (plus loanee's). You can only sustain huge over-spending for a maximum of two years. OAFC will be run in a prudent manner and has always been run in that way. The reason for failures and administration is that clubs over-extend themselves. Q's: When will this happen? A's: SC - We want to be in the new stadium by 2011/2012 but a delay of two months could put us back a year. We have to get through architects, council meetings, planning, environmental issues before any building starts. We have already moved very quickly to get to the stage we are at. Q's: How far can the expansion go? A's: AH - How far do you want it to go? Q's: 18K as our premiership attendance? A's: AH - easy - the architects know that we have to be able to expand if we need the room, expansion is at the forefront of the stadium design. Clubs might go into administration when they over-extend themselves, but there are also clubs that become successful without doing this. The above narrative is pointless in that, as 'OAFC will be run in a prudent manner,' all talk of having to extend capacity is pie-in-the-sky. Why do TTA talk as if they're surprised that they've had to subsidise the club? Surely they knew they'd have to do this when they purchased it. The reason why the club continues to lose money is that they have failed to take it forward in any discernible way. Thanks for that SW. One point, and it's a very minor and completely hypothetical concern...but when there's talk of room for expansion, I would hope that if when () that time comes, the room for expansion is upwards (i.e. building extra tiers etc) rather than just filling in the corners. The fact that it's a four-sided ground is important I feel and it would be a shame if that's what would be sacrificed for any on-pitch success in the future. Seems like the councillors and OAFC officials handled everything well, well done. For God's sake read between the lines. There will be no need for expansion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tindall Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Actually I DID but fulll credit to you I did not realise that the lady was Irish even though she was only a few seats away from me, She was sat on the front ror right in front of AH Also FULL CREdit to te club for giving a refund to ticket purchasers did you find that if it wasnt for the failsworth side turning up only around 50-75 Oldham fans would have been there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 A's: SC - We would not leave the club in administration, we would work the budgets down so that the club can be self-sufficient with the level of income it is attracting. If that means working on an attendance of 3000, the club may get relegated but we cannot afford to continue subsidising the club to the tune of £40k per month. A's: SC - We cannot keep losing money. When we played Leicester last season, we drew with them twice but three of their players were on more than our entire playing squad. It can only be sustained for a certain amount of time. Leeds' playing budget last season was 8.9M ours was 1.7M (plus loanee's). You can only sustain huge over-spending for a maximum of two years. OAFC will be run in a prudent manner and has always been run in that way. The reason for failures and administration is that clubs over-extend themselves. Where is all this talk of 3000 crowds and relegation suddenly coming from? What happened to the vaunted ambitions of only a short time ago? Presumably the vaguely mentioned 'additional income streams' will not be enough to generate the vast sums that enable us to compete financially with the likes of Leicester and Leeds, and so the future looks like a 'prudently run' club, 'self-sufficient with the level of income it is attracting.' I can't see that crowds will be significantly higher for a club that sees itself as unable to compete, and so I can't see that income will be vastly greater in the new stadium. Crowds might even be significantly lower if those who say on here that they won't go to Failsworth represent a portion of the current hardcore fanbase. As I've been saying, the aim is to be a permanently lower division club, hence the lower divison capacity of 12000 (a figure we still occasionally manage to surpass.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Where is all this talk of 3000 crowds and relegation suddenly coming from? What happened to the vaunted ambitions of only a short time ago? Presumably the vaguely mentioned 'additional income streams' will not be enough to generate the vast sums that enable us to compete financially with the likes of Leicester and Leeds, and so the future looks like a 'prudently run' club, 'self-sufficient with the level of income it is attracting.' I can't see that crowds will be significantly higher for a club that sees itself as unable to compete, and so I can't see that income will be vastly greater in the new stadium. Crowds might even be significantly lower if those who say on here that they won't go to Failsworth represent a portion of the current hardcore fanbase. As I've been saying, the aim is to be a permanently lower division club, hence the lower divison capacity of 12000 (a figure we still occasionally manage to surpass.) Interesting line of thought. Would you care to expand on it, please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Q's: FD's stated that FC United of Manchester are currently looking a site not too far from the proposed development, with the COMS just up the road there could potentially be three clubs with three miles of each other. A's: AH - City rarely play on a Saturday afternoon when Oldham do. It would be interesting to see how many times both clubs have been at home on Saturday afternoons since City have been at Eastlands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetman Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 IMO the Dynamos sound like they are being a bit cheeky. I'm sure they would love for the Council to have worked to give them 4 full sized pitches with top facilities, but in the interests of fairness why would they set up just one none-league side in this way? Were Oldham Town going to get a swimming baths and Chadderton a ski slope? It's not their land, why should they be put in charge of valuable facilities when presumably they have nothing financial to put into the project? If they get a nice well maintained pitch with clean changing rooms and use of a bar, catering facilities for big games and places for club events then they should think they have done very nicely indeed out of it. Totally agree. Don't like to push the little guy around as we are generally the little guy, but quite frankly it seems to me they are getting a good deal and are being very cheeky about it too. I say play ball only cause we have to, I don't care about them one bit, and I am a local. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 A's: SC stated that the Fernyfield's site had been talk about, it was always preferred to stay at BP but because of situations beyond OAFC's control they could not. SC invited anyone that knew of any other area to come forward but stated that OMBC does not have much available land. Ferney Fields was more than 'talked about', wasn't it? A's: SC - Consultation will be done. Things cannot be guaranteed at this point in time though. We do not want a "flat pack" stadium, we want to build something that looks unique or at least has the potential to look unique, we will have parts of the new stadium that will not be seen commonly elsewhere. What does 'having the potential to look unique' mean? If a structure is going to look unique, then surely it generally looks unique from the start? If not, how will the club be gradually building uniqueness into the stadium? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peanuts Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 corp may i ask you a question ? did you used to post on the old oldham athletic board as number twenty ? cos your starting to sound just like him with your 12.000 lower division club mantra weve got your point now move on come on YOU suggest somwhere viable with in the borough for the club to build a stadium and facilitys that wont end up costing us more than we can raise . and remaining at B.P is not an option 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.