Takemeanywhere Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 They don't own us on a long term lease...they own us lock and stock. As well as Brassbank...the company they set up to hold the land and sell it off when required to raise the money for the redevelopment/new stadium...but this £550k goes to OAFC??? You're giving hypotheticals that aren't answering the question...why is the money being raised out of the land sale by Brassbank not being used for these costs??? I'm sorry if you're dissatisfied with my answers. Oldham Athletic were looking to develop their stadium and costs were associated with that, which had to be paid regardless of whether it went ahead or not. I can't put it any more simply than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 I've no problem with the cost coming about due to "trying" to make it happen...I'm questioning where this figure should be apportioned to. Seeing as they pulled the main asset, the land, away from the club when it was bought back off the council by TTA owned OAFC 2004 and stuck it in Brassbank why should the £550k bill go to OAFC and not to Brassbank? After all, this is where the money was coming from for the new stadium. Stitch_KTF - we're being told what losses Blitz and co have taken and talked about loans being called in, yet this £550k goes straight to OAFC. Either Brassbank and the money from selling the land around foots the then-redevelopment/now-new stadium (and thus costs like this are seperate from OAFC) or it doesn't. It seems from this, it doesn't...In essence, it's as though they've called in £550k off OAFC already! Lets assume that Brassbank Ltd owns the land (which I still say is not clear). On the companies house website it states that Brassbank have been filing dormant accounts for the last few years. According to Wikipedia: A dormant company in the United Kingdom company can be defined as dormant when its transactions have been limited to payment for shares taken by subscribers to the memorandum of association, fees paid to the Register of Companies for a change of company name, the re-registration of a company and filing annual returns and payment made in respect of civil penalties imposed by the Registrar of Companies for delivering accounts to the Registrar after the statutory time allowed for filing. Therefore I presume that if the expenditure was put through Brassbank, it would no longer be dormant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 BB80, you're so utterly obsessed with finding something that "stinks" in just about everything the club does, I'm beginning to wonder if the smell is a little closer to home. Do you have inconctinence issues? 1. No, I haven't thanks. Some IBS at times but it's all under control, ta! 2. Thanks for getting involved in the debate of why the club is being lumped with a bill that was meant to be paid through the land around Boundary Park being sold off 3. The way the club has been run by our gaurdians has, at times, stunk. Many can see this. If you're happy with how it is, then bully for you!!! Enjoy it while it lasts...it won't be for too much longer... We've enough against us to survive in football but when commerically we're an utter farce and the biggest prize that comes with the club gets pulled away from the club to pay for the redevelopment/new stadium then appears NOT TO BE DOING SO (get that bit?) then yeah, I've got a big f***ing problem with it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 I'm sorry if you're dissatisfied with my answers. Oldham Athletic were looking to develop their stadium and costs were associated with that, which had to be paid regardless of whether it went ahead or not. I can't put it any more simply than that. Yes...I've got that bit...doesn't seem that you're understanding my question. Never mind...we'll leave it there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takemeanywhere Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 1. No, I haven't thanks. Some IBS at times but it's all under control, ta! 2. Thanks for getting involved in the debate of why the club is being lumped with a bill that was meant to be paid through the land around Boundary Park being sold off 3. The way the club has been run by our gaurdians has, at times, stunk. Many can see this. If you're happy with how it is, then bully for you!!! Enjoy it while it lasts...it won't be for too much longer... We've enough against us to survive in football but when commerically we're an utter farce and the biggest prize that comes with the club gets pulled away from the club to pay for the redevelopment/new stadium then appears NOT TO BE DOING SO (get that bit?) then yeah, I've got a big f***ing problem with it! You know, all that has actually happened is that Simon Blitz's directors loan has increased. No external debt has been incurred in paying the costs relating to the failed developement of Boundary Park. I suspect that one day, Simon Blitz will have to write off his directors loan, so, in the end, he will have paid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 (edited) Lets assume that Brassbank Ltd owns the land (which I still say is not clear). On the companies house website it states that Brassbank have been filing dormant accounts for the last few years. According to Wikipedia: A dormant company in the United Kingdom company can be defined as dormant when its transactions have been limited to payment for shares taken by subscribers to the memorandum of association, fees paid to the Register of Companies for a change of company name, the re-registration of a company and filing annual returns and payment made in respect of civil penalties imposed by the Registrar of Companies for delivering accounts to the Registrar after the statutory time allowed for filing. Therefore I presume that if the expenditure was put through Brassbank, it would no longer be dormant. So the land is owned by a dormant company? Yet the land is being sold off bit by bit...has the land been moved on again to another company? How can the land be being sold off without a trace of it in OAFC or Brassbank......wherever it is, this was where the money was coming from for bills such as this £550k. Unless we've been fed lies....Who is asking these questions? I know a man who isn't...eh Mr Owen! Edited October 13, 2010 by boundaryblue80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takemeanywhere Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 So the land is owned by a dormant company? Yet the land is being sold off bit by bit...has the land been moved on again to another company? How can the land be being sold off without a trace of it in OAFC or Brassbank......wherever it is, this was where the money was coming from for bills such as this £550k. Unless we've been fed lies....Who is asking these questions? I know a man who isn't...eh Mr Owen! The land isn't being sold off bit by bit. It is being developed in partnership with a local developer. This only started in 2010, so no doubt when the accounts are filed this time next year, it will no longer be a dormant company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 (edited) You know, all that has actually happened is that Simon Blitz's directors loan has increased. No external debt has been incurred in paying the costs relating to the failed developement of Boundary Park. I suspect that one day, Simon Blitz will have to write off his directors loan, so, in the end, he will have paid. Depends if we ever get a stadium...and when we don't, how much of BP has been sold off. Simply put....that land is now owned by at least 2 people who now have nothing to do with OAFC, other than it being a company that owes them money. Can only see one ending and it isn't in Failsworth. If this was Chris Moore doing it...people would be going ape:censored:! Edited October 13, 2010 by boundaryblue80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takemeanywhere Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Depends if we ever get a stadium...and when we don't, how much of BP has been sold off. Simply put....that land is now owned by at least 2 people who now have nothing to do with OAFC, a company that owes them money. Can only see one ending and it isn't in Failsworth. If this was Chris Moore doing it...people would be going ape:censored:! If you already know for sure that it definitely isn't happening, then I bow to your greater knowledge of the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 2 words...Asset stripped... That really is comical. Asset stripped?? WHAT f*cking assets?! The only assets connected to this club are assets TTA paid for. This is why I don't understand the vehemence against them. The very WORST they can do is leave the club in exactly the state they found it - it's financially impossible for them to leave us in a worse state than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 If you already know for sure that it definitely isn't happening, then I bow to your greater knowledge of the situation. Ok...that should read if/when Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 If Failsworth happens I'll eat my own cock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takemeanywhere Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 If Failsworth happens I'll eat my own cock. Please, I beg of you, do not take pictures of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Please, I beg of you, do not take pictures of that. Problem is, I now fully expect LeesLover to demand proof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 That really is comical. Asset stripped?? WHAT f*cking assets?! The only assets connected to this club are assets TTA paid for. This is why I don't understand the vehemence against them. The very WORST they can do is leave the club in exactly the state they found it - it's financially impossible for them to leave us in a worse state than that. If I could be arsed, I'd find the thread where this has already been discussed...but simply put, when the land was sold to the council the agreement was put in that it was only OAFC who could buy it back at an already agreed price (I think it was either the value the council bought it for, or the relative value when the buy back occurred...can't remember which but it was written into the deal)...OAFC under TTA bought it back, then very swiftly took it away from OAFC and stuck it into Brassbank. In that past topic, some people said it could be for tax reasons, others felt it could be for reasons not too dissimilar to what appears to be happening now...OAFC footing bills for things which were promised would come out of the monies made from the land sale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 More conspiricy theories than the X-Files on here. It's laughable......... the P&L account is available to anyone who wants to see it, all you need to do is write to companies house for a copy and they will send you one for a nominal fee. In fact as LL found out, Simon Corney will be happy to run through them with you if you so desire! It is a legal obligation for these resulted to be filed, and if they are falsified in any way then legal proeedings will result. No conspiricies about where money has gone, and who it's been paid too, it will all be there. Oldham Athletic FC 2004 Ltd. along with nearly every other football club lose money, In the words of Rafa Benitez FACT!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_R Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 That really is comical. Asset stripped?? WHAT f*cking assets?! The only assets connected to this club are assets TTA paid for. This is why I don't understand the vehemence against them. The very WORST they can do is leave the club in exactly the state they found it - it's financially impossible for them to leave us in a worse state than that. When TTA bought us they bought the club from the Administrators. After the CVA and the beginning of OAFC (2004) Ld we were then debt free. We were averaging crowds of 6,500 and had a four sided football ground. Two of TTA have already left us and if a new stadium doesn’t happen I’d say we’re in a lot worse position than they found us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pukka Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 When TTA bought us they bought the club from the Administrators. After the CVA and the beginning of OAFC (2004) Ld we were then debt free. We were averaging crowds of 6,500 and had a four sided football ground. Two of TTA have already left us and if a new stadium doesn’t happen I’d say we’re in a lot worse position than they found us. I concur. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 (edited) When TTA bought us they bought the club from the Administrators. After the CVA and the beginning of OAFC (2004) Ld we were then debt free. We were averaging crowds of 6,500 and had a four sided football ground. Two of TTA have already left us and if a new stadium doesn’t happen I’d say we’re in a lot worse position than they found us. No we didn't, TTA purchased this. The income at that time was also less than expenditure and so without a funder such as TTA and no capital assets to borrow money against, we wouldn't have lasted long at all. Edited October 13, 2010 by jimsleftfoot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 In some respects, particularly the state of the ground, you have a point. Although my point is that ground wasn't even ours before they bought it. (Yes, technically it still isn't, please let's not go back around that circle...) What would have happened if they hadn't bought the club? Who knows. Someone else may have done in the end and we could be better or worse off for it. Or we could have gone under. TTA came in looking for a cure to a disease that had already nearly killed us. They didn't find a cure, but they did spend lots of money on respite drugs to ease the symptoms and delay the progress of the disease. The drugs don't work any more and we're now in terminal care, waiting to die in the faint hope a miracle cure will appear from somewhere over the horizon before it's too late. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancy lad Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 If you already know for sure that it definitely isn't happening, then I bow to your greater knowledge of the situation. He has reason to be doubtful though! All we ever hear is its got to happen or else, nobody is bothering to tell us why its all so quiet at the moment and I'm also starting to think it definately aint gonna happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Lets assume that Brassbank Ltd owns the land (which I still say is not clear). On the companies house website it states that Brassbank have been filing dormant accounts for the last few years. According to Wikipedia: A dormant company in the United Kingdom company can be defined as dormant when its transactions have been limited to payment for shares taken by subscribers to the memorandum of association, fees paid to the Register of Companies for a change of company name, the re-registration of a company and filing annual returns and payment made in respect of civil penalties imposed by the Registrar of Companies for delivering accounts to the Registrar after the statutory time allowed for filing. Therefore I presume that if the expenditure was put through Brassbank, it would no longer be dormant. Can that be translated to plain English please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankly Mr Shankly Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 He has reason to be doubtful though! All we ever hear is its got to happen or else, nobody is bothering to tell us why its all so quiet at the moment and I'm also starting to think it definately aint gonna happen. It could just be that it's the council that are dragging heels and continuing at their usual snails pace, but it has been very, very quiet for quite a while. When was the last official newsbite about the whole thing? 2? 3 months ago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_R Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 In some respects, particularly the state of the ground, you have a point. Although my point is that ground wasn't even ours before they bought it. (Yes, technically it still isn't, please let's not go back around that circle...) What would have happened if they hadn't bought the club? Who knows. Someone else may have done in the end and we could be better or worse off for it. Or we could have gone under. TTA came in looking for a cure to a disease that had already nearly killed us. They didn't find a cure, but they did spend lots of money on respite drugs to ease the symptoms and delay the progress of the disease. The drugs don't work any more and we're now in terminal care, waiting to die in the faint hope a miracle cure will appear from somewhere over the horizon before it's too late. David Brierley & Co sold BP to Oldham Council to save the club from going under. The amount it was sold for was to clear the debts, pay off the bank, taxman etc. It wasn’t sold for the market value, just to get us out of the :censored:. The deal was that OAFC could buy it back at the same price. TTA exercised that right, thus getting their hands on a prized piece of land at a good value. If any investor is thinking of buying the club they don’t have that option. They’ll have to negotiate a deal with Blitz and Gazal. Now I don’t know what their intentions are, but anyone looking at buying the club will probably have to pay a lot more for it than they did for a club still running up heavy losses in a dilapidated ground (far worse that 7 years ago) with a dwindling fan base of around 4k and falling. I’m not knocking TTA here. They came in and had a go, but if we don’t get a new or improved stadium, and are left in a ramshackle BP with no improvements, losing money hand over fist and supporters at an alarming rate, they’ll have failed, and left us in a worse state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshaw Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 I can see the headline now FA Cup 3rd Round Draw Manchester United v Oldham Athletic Headlines : FA Cup saves Oldham its written in the stars Manchester City v Oldham Athletic Headlines Rookie Manager stuns "old fans" 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.