oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 And you aren't even slightly worried that it seems to be the council (who previously wouldn't have pissed on us if we were on fire) have suddenly facilitated this move by the transferring of land etc? Apparently we will be renting the land... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 who said we were looking to minimise costs....i was posting a reply to why we brought these players in recently if we wasnt going for promotion. Fair enough, but would you not say Sheehan is a cut above the standard needed for the third division? Hills is as well if what I’m told about him is true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhunteruk Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Fair enough, but would you not say Sheehan is a cut above the standard needed for the third division? Hills is as well if what I’m told about him is true. and your point is??? they are not getting games at there present or host clubs and with a link via warnock has given us a break by allowing them to come here on loan... they may well be a cut above our current players,but it still doesnt equate to us going on a promotion drive..its a necessity. yes you could throw the fringe players or kids into the team and see what happens,but they are either not ready not fit to be in the first team at present. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 yes you could throw the fringe players or kids into the team and see what happens,but they are either not ready not fit to be in the first team at present. This is what we did in Ritchie's first season. It was only because Reading were going through the motions during the last game of the season that we didn't get relegated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhunteruk Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Apparently we will be renting the land... so at present we own our own club and we own our own land(via tta) and we are willing to piss off half our current fan base and drag us screaming and kicking 4 miles down the road to an area not really wanted or desired,then we are going to have to pay the council rent for the forseeable future...the same council we have had a very bad relationship with for ever and a day and if they get another black hole in there budget could quite easily say to the club..ok this year your rents going up 75%...because we own the land and you need it!!! great buisness accumen that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Apparently we will be renting the land... Tell him which land we will be renting, so he doesn't give the impression it's the land on which the stadium is proposed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhunteruk Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Tell him which land we will be renting, so he doesn't give the impression it's the land on which the stadium is proposed. why couldnt you of told us or him which land it is we will be renting from the council???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 why couldnt you of told us or him which land it is we will be renting from the council???? I told him at great length yesterday and I get criricised for repeating myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 (edited) Tell him which land we will be renting, so he doesn't give the impression it's the land on which the stadium is proposed. I get confused myself... Isnt it the gateway land ? The land that will be the entrance to the site ? Edited November 11, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stitch_KTF Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Who are they going to sell to?............Would you buy a football club with a 12,000 capacity stadium located within 6 miles of the two richest clubs in Europe. I really don't think TTA will be able to sell the club. There has to be the potential for success for any investor to show an interest but I just don't think we would be a viable proposition in our intended location. With the gradual decline in attendances over the last 15 years I fear that without promotion to the championship in the next few years this club will not survive! But the arabs weren't put off City by United being 3 miles away. I actually think being a 'Manchester' club could work in our favour when it comes to seeking investement from people with no affinity to Latics. They badly wanted to buy a football club, probably looked at the land potential and the fact that we had premiership on our CV!! We had, and have, no land. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 And you aren't even slightly worried that it seems to be the council (who previously wouldn't have pissed on us if we were on fire) have suddenly facilitated this move by the transferring of land etc? I never said I wasn't worried, Dan - 'worried' is my middle name where Latics are concerned. However, taking the word of a politician at face value (I know, I know), Howard Sykes, Council Leader, said: “A forward-looking Oldham needs a successful professional football club with 21st century facilities and that is the vision this scheme is designed to deliver.” “Oldham Athletic in its present state is haemorrhaging money in a crumbling stadium and is not financially viable in the long-term. The club’s owners have long sought a solution and we were happy to work with them when they approached us with this innovative plan. ”There’s still a long way to go but the beauty of this scheme is that it could be the catalyst to regenerate two areas that badly need it – namely, the Lancaster club area of Failsworth, and the Boundary Park site – creating new jobs and investment opportunities. It may just be that the thought of the kudos for the Council from the regeneration of the areas, new jobs and investment opportunities is making it bend over backwards, but this will also make it a more difficult position from to piss on us if we are on fire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc1955 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 But the arabs weren't put off City by United being 3 miles away. I actually think being a 'Manchester' club could work in our favour when it comes to seeking investement from people with no affinity to Latics. We had, and have, no land. City and United have always been in close proximity and have a huge fan base, anyway that is a silly argument and in no way relevent to our situation. We sold the land to cover our debts but it was always available to be bought back by the club in the future. TTA bought it back so again I don't understand your point! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 We had, and have, no land. It really isn't sinking in is it haha Still there is 2 of us at least Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhunteruk Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 I never said I wasn't worried, Dan - 'worried' is my middle name where Latics are concerned. However, taking the word of a politician at face value (I know, I know), Howard Sykes, Council Leader, said: “A forward-looking Oldham needs a successful professional football club with 21st century facilities and that is the vision this scheme is designed to deliver.” “Oldham Athletic in its present state is haemorrhaging money in a crumbling stadium and is not financially viable in the long-term. The club’s owners have long sought a solution and we were happy to work with them when they approached us with this innovative plan. ”There’s still a long way to go but the beauty of this scheme is that it could be the catalyst to regenerate two areas that badly need it – namely, the Lancaster club area of Failsworth, and the Boundary Park site – creating new jobs and investment opportunities. It may just be that the thought of the kudos for the Council from the regeneration of the areas, new jobs and investment opportunities is making it bend over backwards, but this will also make it a more difficult position from to piss on us if we are on fire. but reletively speaking,only one so called area is being regenerated with 21st century facilities..ie the failsworth site....bp is simply being sold off to a housing developer who will then line its pockets when said houses are sold Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danoafc Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 (edited) Tell him which land we will be renting, so he doesn't give the impression it's the land on which the stadium is proposed. It doesn't matter which land we will be renting (or leasing long term which is what is actually happening) does it. It's the access land as far as I know. It may as well be the land on which the bogs or the centre circle will stand for all it really matters. What really concerns me, is that for the last goodness knows how many the years, successive versions of OMBC wouldn't give us as much as the steam off their collective piss. Now all of a sudden (and I'd guess that it's got more than a little to do with the 'availabilty' of the land at BP), the council seemingly can't do enough to accommodate us, including the transferring of the lease on the land and relocation of the allotment holder who currently lease the land. If that doesn't make you want to at least question the motives of all concerned, then I'm worried for your sanity, Diego. Edit - Diego, I hadn't seen your reply above by the time I posted. I still want to know why is that council suddenly happy to help us find our 'long sought solution', when, as mentioned above, it hasn't traditionally given a rats arse about OAFC? You and I have always thought that a forward looking Oldham has always needed a successful professional football club, so why weren't the council willing to sanction any of the previous schemes (none of which required funding or favours from the council, other than the passing of planning permission?). Edited November 11, 2009 by danoafc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F.O.B. Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 As Tom Waits sang-I'll see you tonight, on that downbound train... (Actually it might have been Springsteen.) Rod Stewart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 We sold the land to cover our debts but it was always available to be bought back by the club in the future. TTA bought it back so again I don't understand your point! The land is held by a holding company owned by the TTA... The club do not own the land... To transfer the land to the club the club would have to pay £7 million... I think that is what they are getting at... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 The land is held by a holding company owned by the TTA... The club do not own the land... To transfer the land to the club the club would have to pay £7 million... I think that is what they are getting at... or at least the current market rate which could be less than £7M now I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 or at least the current market rate which could be less than £7M now I suppose. Would of been more fair if you had just explained that to him in a easy to understand way... Instead of paying games so you could willy wave... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takemeanywhere Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 (edited) Rod Stewart Hmmm. Rod Stewart and Tom Waits (separately) sang: "Will I see you tonight on a downtown train" Whereas Bruce Springsteen sang: "And I feel like I'm a rider on a downbound train" So, I'm not sure which one the good corporal meant. Not that it is relevant to anything Edited November 11, 2009 by Takemeanywhere Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 (edited) Would of been more fair if you had just explained that to him in a easy to understand way... Instead of paying games so you could willy wave... I didn't want you to tell me I was wrong, then finally admit I was right after 20 posts again. Apologies if I caused any offence to OAFC1955 though. Edited November 11, 2009 by ghostofcecere Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stitch_KTF Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 City and United have always been in close proximity and have a huge fan base, anyway that is a silly argument and in no way relevent to our situation. We sold the land to cover our debts but it was always available to be bought back by the club in the future. TTA bought it back so again I don't understand your point! The Arabs want the biggest and best club in Europe and yet weren’t put off by buying the one closest to the existing biggest and, erm, ‘best’ club in Europe. I think it’s a relevant retort to your not unfounded concern. Yes, taking over the club and its debts enabled TTA to smoothly purchase the land, but I would insist that they bought the club primarily to fulfil a dream which tempts many rich men. They are just looking to do it as cheaply as possible, or even turn a profit. I suppose you’re point was fair, it just came across as though you’re part of the school that doesn’t realise that the land is pretty much all to do with the club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 It doesn't matter which land we will be renting (or leasing long term which is what is actually happening) does it. It's the access land as far as I know. It may as well be the land on which the bogs or the centre circle will stand for all it really matters. What really concerns me, is that for the last goodness knows how many the years, successive versions of OMBC wouldn't give us as much as the steam off their collective piss. Now all of a sudden (and I'd guess that it's got more than a little to do with the 'availabilty' of the land at BP), the council seemingly can't do enough to accommodate us, including the transferring of the lease on the land and relocation of the allotment holder who currently lease the land. If that doesn't make you want to at least question the motives of all concerned, then I'm worried for your sanity, Diego. Edit - Diego, I hadn't seen your reply above by the time I posted. I still want to know why is that council suddenly happen to help us find our 'long sought solution', when, as mentioned above, it hasn't traditionally given a rats arse about OAFC? You and I have always thought that a forward looking Oldham has always needed a successful professional football club, so why weren't the council willing to sanction any of the previous schemes (none of which required funding or favours from the council, other than the passing of planning permission?). I was more worried about the Council's motive when the outline planning application for the redevelpment of BP was turned down, than I am about its willingness to co-operate with TTA by facilitating the proposed scheme. Why the sudden change of heart? I don't know but the club says it has made more progress in months under the Council's new Chief Executive thaa in years under the old one. Noted your edit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 (edited) As Tom Waits sang-I'll see you tonight, on that downbound train... (Actually it might have been Springsteen.) The song Downtown Train was written by Tom Waits and appeared on his 1985 album "Rain Dogs". Others who have released the song include: Rod Stewart Mary Chapin-Carpenter Patty Smyth Everything But The Girl There is a suggestion of a rewrite of the song for 2011 with the lyrics "Will I see you tonight, on a Failsworth Tram". Edited November 11, 2009 by opinions4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 The song Downtown Train was written by Tom Waits and appeared on his 1985 album "Rain Dogs". Others who have released the song include: Rod Stewart Mary Chapin-Carpenter Patty Smyth Everything But The Girl There is a suggestion of a rewrite of the song for 2011 with the lyrics "Will I see you tonight, on a Failsworth Tram". Haha 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.