razza699 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-fea...nancial-rethink OLDHAM SCOTLAND is at it again really laying into Hardy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Thats cool, its just a suggestion that may appeal to some, more importantly could 1000 people afford to invest £1000 or is there a level that this could work on and if so is there the stomach to put it in practice Certain people would have to devalue there own shares to make it happen... Good luck with convincing them of that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 DS the scheme that you mention may have some legs - maybe though its with SC involved as he probably has more financial clout than any one individual on here. However if we can get substantial investment from a scheme like this - with some benefits/powers to the group then maybe it would interest the club. If it was interesting enough could we get 1000 people to invest £1000 including standard season ticket via dd on a monthly basis, it would help the revenue somewhat(Minimum of 5yr commitment maybe) It would rely on 25%+ of the current home support investing and t's and c's being agreed. Any ideas on how we could move it forward, £1m a year could not be ignored or do people think its a non-starter If you're saying do I think over 25% of the current home support would commit themselves to paying £5000 over 5years (including 5 season tickets) into a Club controlled by a separate owner, the answer would be a resounding NO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) This is the real crunch for me... The club wants more from the fans but won't give them more control / say... What is the danger of giving each shareholder one vote instead of a "share" of the vote... E.G. the majority vote wins and not the majority shareholder... This can be done in the article of associations... What is the REAL danger to the business... I don't believe for a second the fan base is not capable of coming up with the right answers from a majority decision made by 500 people who love the "club"... Edited November 9, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oh Heck C-Beck Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 I am sure a scheme could be tailored towards meeting the needs of Oldham Athletic and its fans. You could adjust the figures to make it an attractive proposition to a large proportion of the fanbase I am sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) So that's you and help_shiny among the founder members. ....and razza699.... that makes three amigos! Edited November 9, 2010 by Diego_Sideburns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EASTLEY Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 If you're saying do I think over 25% of the current home support would commit themselves to paying £5000 over 5years (including 5 season tickets) into a Club controlled by a separate owner, the answer would be a resounding NO! No sorry, I wasn't clear it was for a share of ownership of say 49% giving a controlling interest to the current incumbent(previous investor etc)but giving a substantial piece of the club to the 1000 owners Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) No sorry, I wasn't clear it was for a share of ownership of say 49% giving a controlling interest to the current incumbent(previous investor etc)but giving a substantial piece of the club to the 1000 owners I think its voting rights rather the ownership that needs to be thought about... I would happily take a VERY low piece of the pie for a reasonable investment... It is the REAL voting rights and togetherness I would hopefully be buying... e.g. low share but equal voting rights... Edited November 9, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 This is the real crunch for me... The club wants more from the fans but won't give them more control / say... What is the danger of giving each shareholder one vote instead of a "share" of the vote... E.G. the majority vote wins and not the majority shareholder... This can be done in the article of associations... What is the REAL danger to the business... I don't believe for a second the fan base is not capable of coming up with the right answers from a majority decision made by 500 people who love the "club"... Interestingly, the concept of MyFootballClub (Ebbsfleet United) is to allow every member to vote on every decision. The membership subscription was only £35 per year and thousands joined. Success came straight away with the F.A. Trophy victory at Wembley, with those thousands now having commemorative merchandise in their wardrobes. Content with that, they did not renew their subscription and relegation from the Conference followed. MyFootballClub is still in business and the manager has not deserted the sinking ship. The subscription is now only £50 per year but getting new people to join is proving very difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) Interestingly, the concept of MyFootballClub (Ebbsfleet United) is to allow every member to vote on every decision. The membership subscription was only £35 per year and thousands joined. Success came straight away with the F.A. Trophy victory at Wembley, with those thousands now having commemorative merchandise in their wardrobes. Content with that, they did not renew their subscription and relegation from the Conference followed. MyFootballClub is still in business and the manager has not deserted the sinking ship. The subscription is now only £50 per year but getting new people to join is proving very difficult. The "problem" with Ebbsfleet is no one has life long connection with the club... These schemes we are talking about are taken up by people who aren't ever going to call another club, "their club"... I am talking about board room / AGM voting... Not voting on decisions best taken by the employees of the club (which I understand did happen with Ebbsfleet ? ) Its more about having a say on direction and structure... Being able to know the position the club is in and how we move it forward... Edited November 9, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhunteruk Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 The "problem" with Ebbsfleet is no one has life long connection with the club... These schemes we are talking about are taken up by people who aren't ever going to call another club, "their club"... I am talking about board room / AGM voting... Not voting on decisions best taken by the employees of the club (which I understand did happen with Ebbsfleet ? ) Its more about having a say on direction and structure... Being able to know the position the club is in and how we move it forward... its a very good idea and concept in principle. but being realistic you would only be aiming this at current fans attending and not the wider circle...yes you may get upward of a dozen exiles jumping on board.... but the problem you will have is this...people begrudge paying £20 to go watch a game....so asking them to stump up more will just fall on deaf ears.... if you was talking something like the anti glazers for instance,you would find it more successfull,there is a greater goal than simply to survive. i think the idea needs the rough edges knocking off it but i think its something that could be propsed to the club,just not sure the majority would share the sentiment it is meant with Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) its a very good idea and concept in principle. but being realistic you would only be aiming this at current fans attending and not the wider circle...yes you may get upward of a dozen exiles jumping on board.... but the problem you will have is this...people begrudge paying £20 to go watch a game....so asking them to stump up more will just fall on deaf ears.... if you was talking something like the anti glazers for instance,you would find it more successfull,there is a greater goal than simply to survive. i think the idea needs the rough edges knocking off it but i think its something that could be propsed to the club,just not sure the majority would share the sentiment it is meant with I think this is something the club should do and run... It is straight forward deal... You pay x a month and you get y back... (ownership / voting rights may take x amount of time or money to earn, or for a contract to be signed) I can only speak for myself, if I would pay for something I have always wanted and I thought would be good for the "club" overall I would bite there hands off.... Always willing to put my money were my mouth is.... Even though not every fan could afford this all of a sudden the club would become VERY open... Getting information would be pretty easy... I would be a member and I would have no problem sharing with none members for example... Its how it should be... Edited November 9, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 No sorry, I wasn't clear it was for a share of ownership of say 49% giving a controlling interest to the current incumbent(previous investor etc)but giving a substantial piece of the club to the 1000 owners Whether it's a 1% or 49% share of ownership to the 1000 members, the control would still rest with someone else. The majority of fans do not trust the current owners in the current loss-making position, and I can't see that being any different with a 49% share in the Club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) Whether it's a 1% or 49% share of ownership to the 1000 members, the control would still rest with someone else. The majority of fans do not trust the current owners in the current loss-making position, and I can't see that being any different with a 49% share in the Club. Yup, the ownership thing is something of a side issue for that reason, although I think it is important someone who does such a scheme does hold a share... If it is to work then the interesting conversation to be had is on voting rights... Edited November 9, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) So assuming the typical financial gap for Latics is £500k per year (last year was exceptional) ... and the club went in to adminstration and the debts were written off, and a new owner would need to be found: That could need 1,000 supporters to pay £500 a year to "buy" real ownership of 100% of the business between them and carry on funding that sum year after year (as well as buying their season ticket etc at full or close to full price). Could it work? Doubtless I've missed something blindingly obvious, but ... Edited November 9, 2010 by opinions4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EASTLEY Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Whether it's a 1% or 49% share of ownership to the 1000 members, the control would still rest with someone else. The majority of fans do not trust the current owners in the current loss-making position, and I can't see that being any different with a 49% share in the Club. Then maybe as 0000 suggest its voting rights that are on the agenda - my thoughts are that even £1m/ year is not enough whereas the joint funidng of someone whether SC or JW or whoever would give us more of a chance at moving forward. I do understand your point though and am merely wondering if this is a real proposition that could be considered. Obivously with a larger share we may have more sway, other substantial investors maybe encouraged to come in if they also know that there are people with a vested interest also investing £1m/year. However this could also put off any investors who want total control. Who knows it may bring someone like Barry Chaytow or Mike Newton(if he's not committed elsewhere - Port Vale)back to BP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 So assuming the typical financial gap for Latics is £500k per year (last year was exceptional) ... and the club went in to adminstration and the debts were written off, and a new owner would need to be found: That could need 1,000 supporters to pay £500 a year to "buy" real ownership of 100% of the business between them and carry on funding that sum year after year (as well as buying their season ticket etc at full or close to full price). Could it work? Oh that is a new thing... I was thinking along the lines of the current owners still be in charge... I would be up for it... but in that situation you would want to own an equal share of the club from a share point of view... 0.1% of the club each.... and equal voting rights for all (although you would have this automatically in that situation I suppose)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) However this could also put off any investors who want total control. Good... IF it worked why would we want greedy bastards ruining the club again (Moores for example).... Some one tell me why one rich guy is better placed than 1000 supporters who love the club and are ONLY concerned about its future to make decisions on that future ? Edited November 9, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razza699 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Good... IF it worked why would we want greedy bastards ruining the club again (Moores for example).... Some one tell me why one rich guy is better placed than 1000 supporters who love the club and are ONLY concerned about its future to make decisions on that future ? 1 rich supporter ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EASTLEY Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Good... IF it worked why would we want greedy bastards ruining the club again (Moores for example).... Some one tell me why one rich guy is better placed than 1000 supporters who love the club and are ONLY concerned about its future to make decisions on that future ? I'm not suggesting that one rich guy is better placed but we could do with one or two reasonably affluent investors alongside the 1000 fan investors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 1 rich supporter ? Same principle applies though... 1 head vs the majority decision from 1000 ? Companies have thousands of shareholders all having a say... I don't understand why football fans (with the many different jobs we all do) get looked down on as some sort of idiots... What does the club have to fear from the fan base having more of a say ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losesome Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Don't know why everybody is suddenly sprouting on about finances now after he cup exit. Nothing has changed since before the cup , the budget was set this year without cup revenue. There is a big question mark over next year and was before any cup exit .Even half a decent cup run wont change that. All these arguments are about short term finance , this club has a much bigger probem than that. The only way to generate enough income is through the gate. The only way we can do that is by having a better team playing attarctive football and going for promotion. PD has too work the oracle in trying to achieve that this season, then hopefully we can get rid of the dross that is bleeding us with paying wages to players that don't even make the squad. We have one of the biggest squads in our league and it's this that is crippling us. Hopefully if that can be achieved it will give PD soemthing to work on next season and then success may attract new investors. Its the only way forward . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 I'm not suggesting that one rich guy is better placed but we could do with one or two reasonably affluent investors alongside the 1000 fan investors For that to work then they have to allow the fans to continue to have a say, a real one... Otherwise it is the usual dictatorship as someone plays games with the club... e.g. Moores.... You would do 50 / 50 shares at least between fans and investors... or maintain equal voting rights... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EASTLEY Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Absolutely, though in reality this may have to be via a mouthpiece that the fans employ(ie pay a wage)to roll out major decisions voted on by the fan investors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EASTLEY Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Don't know why everybody is suddenly sprouting on about finances now after he cup exit. Nothing has changed since before the cup , the budget was set this year without cup revenue. There is a big question mark over next year and was before any cup exit .Even half a decent cup run wont change that. All these arguments are about short term finance , this club has a much bigger probem than that. The only way to generate enough income is through the gate. The only way we can do that is by having a better team playing attarctive football and going for promotion. PD has too work the oracle in trying to achieve that this season, then hopefully we can get rid of the dross that is bleeding us with paying wages to players that don't even make the squad. We have one of the biggest squads in our league and it's this that is crippling us. Hopefully if that can be achieved it will give PD soemthing to work on next season and then success may attract new investors. Its the only way forward . I understand what you are saying , but if it is a way of raising £1m/year over 5 years then it is something the club may consider. AH, SC etc have stated that the club needs investment, this maybe a way of finding it in the short term and providing a playing budget to help us move upwards in the mid term which will hopefully in turn bring punters through the gates. You are right abt the size of the squad tho, hopefully some of our current loans can become permanent in Jan offsetting the need to sell current individuals producing for us 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.