Barryowen Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 I have read carefully the comments made on a number of threads regarding our future and in particular ground sharing. In the first instance the next Trust Meeting takes place on 17 February 2011 and it will be at this meeting that a full and frank debate will occur. After that I expect that a more detailed statement will be prepared. That will need to present a balanced and responsible viewpoint representing the clubs best interests and those of the fans. The Board of Directors of the club have carefully scrutinised current events and must consider all options. Ground share is one of those serious considerations and the long term future of the club has got to look at that as one of those options. As a Trust we need to consider everything carefully before making any rash statements and whether agreeing or not we have to recognise that the club is in private ownership with a huge financial commitment. It is correct that the covenant for the club only states that sport can be played at Boundary Park until 2014. It does not say that it must stay open for sport. In esssence the locks could be put on the door at any time. The current ownership and Board of Directors did not anticipate that football would still be being played at Boundary Park in 2011 and careful examination of the cost of football in this dilapidated stadium is becoming a major consideration. In the current climate the more spent on the ground the less there is for players. I am not preparing the path for agreement to move to a ground share, because equally we have to assess the impact on our historical club and the number of fans who would die off with the identity. Above all else the Trust wants the club to thrive and I am sure that fans will continue to rally around in our darkest moments. Whatever is discussed or expressed must not have an impact on the football side of the club which flourishes beyond our wildest dreams this season. From a personal point of view I believe that there needs to be a strong political will within the town to deliver a sports stadium. Our politics in the town have been largely impotent due to no long term power by any party and this has affected our town hugely this last decade. Barry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lags Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) It stinks Barry sorry but it does. So it's build all around the groung till 2014 with the BP gates locked. Jan 1st 2014 knock down the ground and build on it. Meanwhile back at camp Latics> nothing. Oh and don't start we can put more cash into the team at Curzon. Edited February 10, 2011 by Lags Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Would be interesting to know how much is being spent on the ground compared to the cost of renting. There should be an extremely CLEAR, OPEN AND cast iron financial case for ground sharing before any of us accept such a move. I think the board should lay open the books on this matter to make the case if it is ever to be considered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shefflatic Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) Barry, I can understand needing to ground share should we be in League one again next season, however should we be promoted to the Championship, has the club considered using some of the increased TV/League revenue that it will automatically gain for ground repairs and making the stadium usable for the next 2-3 years whilst plans are drawn up for a new stadium site etc?? Edited February 10, 2011 by shefflatic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Barry, I can understand needing to ground share should we be in League one again next season, however should be be promoted to the Championship, has the club considered using some of the increased TV/League revenue that it will automatically gain for ground repais and making the stadium usable for the next 2-3 years whilst plans are drawn up for a new stadium site etc?? Agree with this... Yup we would probably be relegated but it beats ground sharing. Don't you get something like £2 million in payments from the Prem as well if you go up ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Agree with this... Yup we would probably be relegated but it beats ground sharing. Don't you get something like £2 million in payments from the Prem as well if you go up ? £350,000 a year in League one.. £2.2m a year in Championship.. + tv revenue etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 £350,000 a year in League one.. £2.2m a year in Championship.. + tv revenue etc I am fairly confident that could keep the lights on... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryowen Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 Agree with this... Yup we would probably be relegated but it beats ground sharing. Don't you get something like £2 million in payments from the Prem as well if you go up ? Lags, I really know how you are feeling. I merely mentioned 2014 to clear the anomoly about sport MUST be played at the ground. That is correct if you use it. Please believe that every option is under careful scrutiny. I do not want to detract from the main purpose of the thread by going through the financial points but believe me ground share rental would be cheaper that running the club when considering all costs including overhead and staffing etc. That does not make it right nor advisable but as I say must be a consideration. Barry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Lags, I really know how you are feeling. I merely mentioned 2014 to clear the anomoly about sport MUST be played at the ground. That is correct if you use it. Please believe that every option is under careful scrutiny. I do not want to detract from the main purpose of the thread by going through the financial points but believe me ground share rental would be cheaper that running the club when considering all costs including overhead and staffing etc. That does not make it right nor advisable but as I say must be a consideration. Barry Can you say which clubs we are looking to groundshare with at the moment? Rochdale is a no-go, Bury is a no-go, so presume that it is Stalybridge & Curzon Ashton we are looking at? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryowen Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 Can you say which clubs we are looking to groundshare with at the moment? Rochdale is a no-go, Bury is a no-go, so presume that it is Stalybridge & Curzon Ashton we are looking at? On business grounds I cannot say at the moment. Barry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senor_Coconut Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 On business grounds I cannot say at the moment. Barry Without staying who with, have discussions started with different venues? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Thank you Barry, your post has hit home a few points, some of which had slipped to the back of my mind. If there were solid funds in some escrow account or similar then a ground share would be a little more palatable. Ground share just to save money would make me feel sick to tthe core. Although I understand the emotion 100%, and maybe it needs saying, Simon has yet again damaged relations with an outburst, I just hope that bridges have not been burned witht he Council. Their statement indicate this. I totally understand Simons feelings though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyPimp Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Lags, I really know how you are feeling. I merely mentioned 2014 to clear the anomoly about sport MUST be played at the ground. That is correct if you use it. Please believe that every option is under careful scrutiny. I do not want to detract from the main purpose of the thread by going through the financial points but believe me ground share rental would be cheaper that running the club when considering all costs including overhead and staffing etc. That does not make it right nor advisable but as I say must be a consideration. Barry Cheaper to groundshare? Are we planning on taking all our fans with us if we do this? We'll be looking at a 50% or more drop in revenue for Christ's sake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Cheaper to groundshare? Are we planning on taking all our fans with us if we do this? We'll be looking at a 50% or more drop in revenue for Christ's sake. Its a good point even if the percentage can be argued... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latic12345 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 That will need to present a balanced and responsible viewpoint representing the clubs best interests and those of the fans. As the SUPPORTERS Trust representative your sole job is to make a statement that represents the views of your members that best represents your members. The club is not a member. You should represent what you know about the club to refine and challenge the statement but the statement should represent the views of the fans that are present / those that are members. It's a real shame it has come to this. I just hope that the debate and case for moving goes beyond the financials and tries to consider some of the more qualitative aspects to the debate also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) As the SUPPORTERS Trust representative your sole job is to make a statement that represents the views of your members that best represents your members. The club is not a member. You should represent what you know about the club to refine and challenge the statement but the statement should represent the views of the fans that are present / those that are members. It's a real shame it has come to this. I just hope that the debate and case for moving goes beyond the financials and tries to consider some of the more qualitative aspects to the debate also. But in his role as a club director he has other commitments... to be fair... he has to operate in the best interest of the business... Hence one of the problems with having the chairman of the trust also the director of the club. Edited February 10, 2011 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Barry, understand you can't say who is under-consideration. However, Can you confirm that the safety certificate for the main stand is to run out soon as it has been rumoured on here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latic12345 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 But in his role as a club director he has other commitments... to be fair... he has to operate in the best interest of the business... Hence one of the problems with having the chairman of the trust also the director of the club. I don't disagree but the quote is with reference to a Trust statement that will be made after a Trust meeting. It is not a business statement. He has to wear two hats. He is a representative of the Trust first and foremost. So, for example, in the extreme example that the will of the Trust is to takeover the club, he either agrees with this and resigns his position as a Director or disagrees in which case he resigns his position as Chairman of the Trust... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 I don't disagree but the quote is with reference to a Trust statement that will be made after a Trust meeting. It is not a business statement. He has to wear two hats. He is a representative of the Trust first and foremost. So, for example, in the extreme example that the will of the Trust is to takeover the club, he either agrees with this and resigns his position as a Director or disagrees in which case he resigns his position as Chairman of the Trust... I hear you brother... The thing is... Its now more important than ever to have friendly eyes and ears in the boardroom... We can only hope Barry knows when its time to break cover... If the time ever did come... Hopefully this will all be sorted and it won't ever come to that.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peanuts Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 I am fairly confident that could keep the lights on... and what would pay the increased championship level wages of the players ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyPimp Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 and what would pay the increased championship level wages of the players ? We'd only need to compete, not win the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 and what would pay the increased championship level wages of the players ? more fans.. £2.2m is a payment just from prem league, if we go up, theirs that, and at least an extra £2m their for tv.. then from more latics fans and bigger away followings.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 and what would pay the increased championship level wages of the players ? You simply don't... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_R Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Barry Can you tell me why the subject of leaving BP at the end of the season has never been mentioned before? Even if we had got the nod from the Charities Commission there was still a long way to go before it got the final green light, so we were never going to be kicking off there in August. Prior to the announcement last week there wasn't even the slightest indication of this groundshare crap, so why is there now? Something stinks, and this stench needs cleaning up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Championship = Get the big clubs high prospects on loan.. 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.