LP Corney shock news?

[Dave_Og]

Cheers Tamar... was the company this one?

 

Andrew of Beverley writes ..... DISASTER?

I do not understand how the board of our club cannot see that the proposed (almost definite by the sounds of it) decision to sell Boundary Park to 'Hiretarget' will have nothing but disasterous consequences for our clubs future. £2 million plus purely on the basis that revenue does not cover the running costs of the club (its not as though we have taken a finincial risk by stepping into the transfer market), how does a deal which means that in future our running costs are going to increase as a result of paying rent help us at all.

Ok money from the sale may clear some of/all of our debts - but as the club is still losing money, and will due to rent, continue to lose money at a greater rate, surely in a short time the club will be in debt again. This time there will be no assets to sell to bale us out. `They have been guaranteed a long lease as long as they pay the rent.' - but what if we can't afford the rent because of mounting debts. Also they guarantee a long lease, but is there any guarantee on the size of the rental payment?? It would be very easy for 'Hiregate' to get us out by upping the rent to a level the club could obviously not afford - this guarantee doesn't appear to be worth anything.

"HIRETARGET, the company stepping in to help to save Latics, ironically began life rescuing rugby league in Oldham.....Hiretarget bought the Watersheddings rugby ground, with the council guaranteeing a loan, and the deal threw a financial lifeline to the club. Eventually, the land was sold for housing, and Hiretarget made a slight profit" BUT Oldham RLFC went bust!! They now play there home games (after re-forming) at Spotland. Didn't Hiretarget promise to provide Oldham RLFC a new ground but instead moved them out of watersheddings before there was anywhere to go. Whilst a RLFC club going bust, and re-forming means they play in a slightly lower league than they did - if Latics go bust and reform, how many divisions would we be forced to drop?? The end of football in Oldham?

"Although the income from the sale of land will help to ease the current financial situation, I would like to assure fans that the agreement will not be concluded unless the directors consider it to be in the best long-term interest of Oldham Athletic and its supporters, and the running of Boundary Park remains with the club". Mr Brierleys version of long-term interest and mine seem to differ, and I presume from these statements that the fans will be consulted about this deal? (stop laughing at the back). Perhaps the 'new buyers' of the club (Mr Ajit Medtia or -heaven forbid City supporting Bernard Manning jnr), think that by selling the ground and clearing the debts will allow them to take over a club that's in the 'black'. This way the large amount of capital that they are going to invest can be spent on the team rather than interest payments. We can only hope - but I'd have thought that some mention of this would have been made in the released statement to appease the fans. I hope my doom and gloom mongering proves to be unfounded, and the sale of the ground will provide a sound financial base from which investments in the team will improve results. This will result in higher attendances/more revenue from programmes, pies etc. which leads to more investment in the team, further improvements, more revenue - and eventually to a respectable 1st Division side at least (you at the back, I've already told you once). from 1999.

 

The sale of the ground was what essentially led to the formation of SAFE - which as I have said before was a hugely dispirting experience on almost every level.

[Stevie_J]

18/04/2001

Corney & Co. may well be asking questions of their diligence teams.

[LaticsPete]

Corney & Co. may well be asking questions of their diligence teams.

 

Or of the Trustees of the scheme more reasonably. The situation seems to have been that in recent years clubs have been asked to pay less per month - whilst at the same time the Fund was running up deficit.

[Lukers1]

Or of the Trustees of the scheme more reasonably. The situation seems to have been that in recent years clubs have been asked to pay less per month - whilst at the same time the Fund was running up deficit.

 

Surely the club would have an IFA to look after the scheme?

[danoafc]

 

 

Or of the Trustees of the scheme more reasonably. The situation seems to have been that in recent years clubs have been asked to pay less per month - whilst at the same time the Fund was running up deficit.

 

It's not just the Football League Scheme which in deficit. The combined deficit of schemes across the UK is in excess of £200bn, and has jumped sharply during the economic downturn.

 

I don't fully understand the exact reasons, but it has something to do with the way that schemes calculate what needs to be paid out to their members v investment income which funds the scheme from things like investment bonds.

 

Final Salary schemes are, by and large, unsustainable for almost any/every company, which is why only a handful are still open to new entrants, many are closed to further accrual, and more and more are trying to be accepted by the Pension Protection Fund.

 

The club can't do anything to control this unfortunately.

 

 

Edited May 22, 2012 by danoafc

[LaticsPete]

Surely the club would have an IFA to look after the scheme?

 

It's not the club's scheme, it's the Football League's and it is run by Trustees. An IFA has nowt to input on past membership...

[Keepingthe Faith]

Have you been miss sold a pension? Did you receive incorrect or misleading pension advice if so contact Iwantmypensionback,com. No win No fee!

[Dave_Og]

Have you been miss sold a pension? Did you receive incorrect or misleading pension advice if so contact Iwantmypensionback,com. No win No fee!

I have a better idea - don't!

 

For those who wish to know some detail the reason that so many pesniosn schemes are in deficit is the very significant reduction in projected (not guaranteed) returns over all time periods. Lots of reasons for that but if you want something immediate look at the government's QE programme which is essentially taking money from long term returns to attempt (unsuccessfully so far) tp rovide funds to enable the banks to make shorter term funding available.

 

Longer term projections of balanced risk/reward returns have sunk from c.7%pa to c.4.8% pa which if you extrapolate over a prolonged period is a massive difference, especilly when the effect of compounding is considered.

 

That's not a criticism of the policy by the way - quite frankly there are few alternatives; the western economy is knackered and most of the last 30 years of economic policy has been a case of delaying the inevitable/making hay while the sun shines.

[Wozzer]

 

I have a better idea - don't!

 

For those who wish to know some detail the reason that so many pesniosn schemes are in deficit is the very significant reduction in projected (not guaranteed) returns over all time periods. Lots of reasons for that but if you want something immediate look at the government's QE programme which is essentially taking money from long term returns to attempt (unsuccessfully so far) tp rovide funds to enable the banks to make shorter term funding available.

 

Longer term projections of balanced risk/reward returns have sunk from c.7%pa to c.4.8% pa which if you extrapolate over a prolonged period is a massive difference, especilly when the effect of compounding is considered.

 

That's not a criticism of the policy by the way - quite frankly there are few alternatives; the western economy is knackered and most of the last 30 years of economic policy has been a case of delaying the inevitable/making hay while the sun shines.

 

This. Combined with the fact that people are living longer hence more prolonged payouts.

[danoafc]

 

I have a better idea - don't!

 

For those who wish to know some detail the reason that so many pesniosn schemes are in deficit is the very significant reduction in projected (not guaranteed) returns over all time periods. Lots of reasons for that but if you want something immediate look at the government's QE programme which is essentially taking money from long term returns to attempt (unsuccessfully so far) tp rovide funds to enable the banks to make shorter term funding available.

 

Longer term projections of balanced risk/reward returns have sunk from c.7%pa to c.4.8% pa which if you extrapolate over a prolonged period is a massive difference, especilly when the effect of compounding is considered.

 

That's not a criticism of the policy by the way - quite frankly there are few alternatives; the western economy is knackered and most of the last 30 years of economic policy has been a case of delaying the inevitable/making hay while the sun shines.

 

QE having a direct effect on projected returns on government bonds, which many UK pension funds have invested heavily in due to their (supposed) low risk/ stable returns.

 

Thanks for making the point much better than I could Dave.

[Dave_Og]

This. Combined with the fact that people are living longer hence more prolonged payouts.

Indeed, but that has been a factor for many years now while QE is a rather shorter term (so far) phenomenon.

[BP1960]

In theory this could force the Latics and other clubs into administration, what would the Football League do then ?

Edited May 22, 2012 by BP1960

[opinions4u]

Only ones who never suffer are the bankers

 

I suspect the 30,000 who used to work for the same bank I do but were made redundant since 2009 would disagree.

 

Although I survived the cull so far, I no longer have the previously promised salary pension scheme. Assuming average life expectancy I've had £130,000 removed from my income in retirement.

 

I'm unlikely to starve. There are many on the planet much worse off than I'll ever be. But it really is time to differentiate between the executive dickheads who made appalling decisions (encouraged by Government and regulator) that led us to economic difficulties and those who simply turn up to do an honest day's work to pay for luxuries in life like home, food and season ticket.

[opinions4u]

In theory this could force the Latics ands other clubs into administration, what would the Football League do then ?

 

Withhold membership.

[BP1960]

Withhold membership.

 

Sell their own clubs down the river, surely not ?

[leeslover]

Dad paid £156 a month into a freestanding AVC and got a return of 56pence in a year. So the AVC went yet these boogers are expecting inflation proof pensions. Only ones who never suffer are the bankers.

 

Really? I am suffering to pay for the massive salary increases and pensions and made up jobs across the public sector.

[singe]

Yes really.

the total pot for 2012 will be “only” £2.3billion. poor souls.

 

The figure was £4.4billion in 2011 — and a huge £11.6billion in 2007, The Centre for Economics and Business Research said the City was entering the “real world”.

 

 

mmm methinks thge FL should first try and sue its investment advisors, Losing £9 billion in 5 years is a heck of an amount. WAs it a Rogue trader?

Do they use JP Morgan?

[Monty Burns]

Oxford and Wimbledon both face bills of more than £150,000

 

Wimbledon or McFranchise??????? Surely its the fake :censored:e comfy seat :censored:ers?

[BP1960]

Oxford and Wimbledon both face bills of more than £150,000

 

Wimbledon or McFranchise??????? Surely its the fake :censored:e comfy seat :censored:ers?

 

What a farce, the Football League will drive its own clubs out of existance.

Surely the Fooball and Premier leagues (and even the Latics) had an insurance scheme to protect clubs which dropped down divisions or into administation, maybe that's a question Mr Corney should ask ?

Edited May 23, 2012 by BP1960

[HarryBosch]

Final Salary schemes are, by and large, unsustainable for almost any/every company, which is why only a handful are still open to new entrants, many are closed to further accrual, and more and more are trying to be accepted by the Pension Protection Fund.

 

"the Pension Protection Fund’s main function is to provide compensation to members of eligible defined benefit pension schemes, when there is a qualifying insolvency event in relation to the employer, and where there are insufficient assets in the pension scheme to cover the Pension Protection Fund level of compensation."

 

 

Plymouth's "segregated part" of the Professional Footballers Pension Scheme applied to go into the PPF assessment period and has now come out of it.

Edited May 24, 2012 by HarryBosch

[Lukers1]

With respect O4U I mean at a higher level than the minions who do the work. My girlfriend had her mates over and one was working for Barclays in Sheffield wage wise very poor.

 

the average salary for a customer advisor at Barlcays is 15k per year,

[leeslover]

Suspect a lot of younger staff on far less ? Dont know just assume the Average is a mean one. Friend says range is £9866 to 19965 for advisors.

What do you think they should be on? Especially if you are looking at giving school leavers jobs. You could start on maybe 14k on a customer service job with my employer in SE London, and not be short of applicants. Everyone seemed to expect that they would go straight onto a massive career path, well, sorry, lots of us have to work hard for not much to make our way.

[HarryBosch]

a good few football clubs on this list

 

http://www.pensionprotectionfund.org.uk/TransferredSchemes/Pages/Nontransferringschemes.aspx

[jimsleftfoot]

What do you think they should be on? Especially if you are looking at giving school leavers jobs. You could start on maybe 14k on a customer service job with my employer in SE London, and not be short of applicants. Everyone seemed to expect that they would go straight onto a massive career path, well, sorry, lots of us have to work hard for not much to make our way.

 

Working in a bank on the front desk is not too disimilar to working in a shop. Even mortgage advice is more to do with whether the computer says 'yes' or 'no'.

[opinions4u]

 

 

Working in a bank on the front desk is not too disimilar to working in a shop. Even mortgage advice is more to do with whether the computer says 'yes' or 'no'.

If only ...