leeslover Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Given that it's Barry's long term strategy for SC to hand over to the Trust, I'm not so keen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 I would be more surprised if you could tell us. Somewhere between feck all and not a lot would be my guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeroyboy Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 It's not their club, they're just temporarily "running" it. I think you may be drifting back to days of yore when the lads had a whip-round to pay for the tea. Football, cricket, social, tennis... clubs were set and funded by the members. Professional football 'clubs' these days are invariably owned by someone. Oldham Athletic clearly come into the 'owned' category, no matter how much it hurts. It is possible that Corney is only a steward of the club and can therefore resign and be off, to be replaced by??? If he is the owner or more likely part owner the consequences of him walking are dire with the data we have at hand. A Social Club is a simple comparison (in most cases) to a Football Club, if, you want imply we are being 'run temporarily'. The members own the club and are responsible for its financial viability - they hire a steward - they or the steward may seek sponsorship and income creating events - they encourage non-members to attend to subsidise growth - who can damn well please themselves about patronising the establishment if they are not happy. Many of our older fans are well aware what has happened to the Social Clubs. We cannot grow or even tread water without outside investment and we have no entitlement to such investment. I can't recall seeing blogs to save our Service Stations, Newsagents, Family Butchers, Social Clubs or our Professional Rugby Club. I don't know anyone with millions to invest. I don't know how to identify a winning manager with a skill for identifying a winning group of players. And I am certainly don't know how anyone can look a 'gift horse in the mouth'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcmetty Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Without wishing to sound too wanky, I agree with what someone said earlier - they "own" the balance sheet etc. The soul? That's ours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boboafc Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 hope we don't go down but if we do i just hope sc stays at latics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luis Enrique Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 this is probably a really naive comment but if corney stepped down and handed over the running, even ownership, of the football club to the fans, presumably he and the others would still own all the land and would be the club's landlord? is he literally saying he would hand over the ground, the facilities and the surrounding land for absolutely nothing to the fans? this seems really unlikely? confused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) My understanding is... this is probably a really naive comment but if corney stepped down and handed over the running, even ownership, of the football club to the fans, presumably he and the others would still own all the land and would be the club's landlord? Yes is he literally saying he would hand over the ground, the facilities and the surrounding land for absolutely nothing to the fans? this seems really unlikely? confused. No At worse we would have to pay rent... At best it would be rent free... Edited March 20, 2014 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted March 20, 2014 Author Share Posted March 20, 2014 Would Blitz and Gazal be happy with him handing it over to the fans? Would they not rather find and install a new Chief Executive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) Would Blitz and Gazal be happy with him handing it over to the fans? Would they not rather find and install a new Chief Executive? What do they really care? From their prospective they have the land and a £6 million charge on the club. An amount of money they will never get back. They club isn't costing them anything. Its just a block to making money out of the land. So at best (worse for them) they wish us well, say we can stay on a low rent / or rent free and keep the club ticking along.... or at worse (best for them) we fold within five mins and they can get on with the business of building some lovely Semis... Edited March 20, 2014 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pukka Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 The land is owned by Blitz and Gazal, that is the real issue - not SC. If the whole lot is handed over - the trust or we the fans could look for a buyer. But it wont be. If SC's intentions are to go on relegation he should resign - now. Let someone else come in, but the real issue is the land, not SC. The club needs selling to someone who can invest in it. Not this limp towards oblivion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) The land is owned by Blitz and Gazal, that is the real issue - not SC. If the whole lot is handed over - the trust or we the fans could look for a buyer. But it wont be. If SC's intentions are to go on relegation he should resign - now. Let someone else come in, but the real issue is the land, not SC. The club needs selling to someone who can invest in it. Not this limp towards oblivion. Its going to require some serious coin though isn't it.... £6 million (our debt) + the asking price for the land = very few buyers Edited March 20, 2014 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarddog73 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 so in a nutshell they have the potential to shaft us and leave us in more :censored: than what chris moore did. So much for the saviours!!!!! we could always groundshare with fc united on the outskirts of failsworth!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rigsby Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 No suprise to many fans this latest statement. So,he will hand over the club to the fans,but not koukash Yeh right simon,kind of tells its own story really dont you think.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 As has been mentioned, people need to be very careful what they wish for Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 The £6M is only ever going to be asked for if we reach the Premier League again......... so never basically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 The £6M is only ever going to be asked for if we reach the Premier League again......... so never basically. You do understand though any potential investor would have to deal with the debt before they could invest ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 so in a nutshell they have the potential to shaft us and leave us in more :censored: than what chris moore did. So much for the saviours!!!!! we could always groundshare with fc united on the outskirts of failsworth!!! Well...they did save us And I'm not sure how they could "leave us in more :censored: than what chris moore did". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 You do understand though any potential investor would have to deal with the debt before they could invest ? Accept it's there yes, deal with it in terms of paying it off no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Well...they did save us And I'm not sure how they could "leave us in more :censored: than what chris moore did". They can call in the debt anytime they like, Corney has said that they won't unless we get to the Prem (which might as well be never), but unless that is written down on an air-tight contract it certainly isn't proof they won't. They could also start charging us, or increasing the rent for the land. It won't take much for us not to be able to afford it. However, doing either will in all probably leave the club bankrupt and therefore mean they don't get as much money back as they might eventually. But £600,000 (at a rate of 10p in the £) would be better than nothing if they need the money for whatever reason. When Mo**e left the council owned the land and there was an agreement that the club could buy back the land for less than its then current market value. That made the club an attractive proposition for potential buyers. If the landlords properly pull the plug the club won't even have that, plus some of the land has already been built on. The landlords can definitely leave us in a worse state than Mo**e did. I don't believe they will but they can, especially as whilst not being as rich as Moore was in his heyday, their wealth is quite a bit more stable, so are unlikely to need the money urgently enough to warrant calling the debts in. In fact getting some written guarantees from Corney, and the other two would be a good use of Barry's time now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pukka Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 If this is incorrect please do tell me: As far as I am aware The "debt" is money invested in the club isn't it? I.e. Money TTA paid in. Why should they get that back?! In any other business, if you invest X amount and it goes belly up - you lose it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) Accept it's there yes, deal with it in terms of paying it off no. OMG.... So you would buy a business that had a £6 million charge against it, invest millions sorting the business out... and all the time some other party had the ability of at any time calling in the debt and putting you out on your arse ? You might get to the point where you have £6 million in assets and all of sudden calling the debt becomes attractive. Any new investor would need to pay off the debt or at least come to a cast iron legal position that the debt won't be called unless we get into the Prem. I am not just talking about some comment in a newspaper. It would have to be cast iron. I can't believe how naive some fans are being about all this Edited March 20, 2014 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) If this is incorrect please do tell me: As far as I am aware The "debt" is money invested in the club isn't it? I.e. Money TTA paid in. Why should they get that back?! In any other business, if you invest X amount and it goes belly up - you lose it. Its very normal for someone to lend money to a business... Rather then directly invest it via issuing shares etc... If the club went belly up, regardless of it was a loan or directly invested, they would lose their money... Of course you can go to the administrators but in our case that isn't going to result in much. Edited March 20, 2014 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 OMG.... So you would buy a business that had a £6 million charge against it, invest millions sorting the business out... and all the time some other party had the ability of at any time calling in the debt and putting you out on your arse ? You might get to the point where you have £6 million in assets and all of sudden calling the debt becomes attractive. Any new investor would need to pay off the debt or at least come to a cast iron legal position that the debt won't be called unless we get into the Prem. I am not just talking about some comment in a newspaper. It would have to be cast iron. I can't believe how naive some fans are being about all this "Any new investor would need to pay off the debt or at least come to a cast iron legal position that the debt won't be called unless we get into the Prem. I am not just talking about some comment in a newspaper. It would have to be cast iron." And the bit about the legal position is the point, if that's part of the deal with any new investor then why would it hamper it if it's agreed. I am far from naive, I am a business man myself, you are merely speculating and passing off as fact a hypothetical scenario. It's just scare mongering to provoke the usual outrage on here. Those of us that actually bother to still go don't need it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Yes I very much remember that as well... But it seems lost on many.... It is a fair point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 (edited) "Any new investor would need to pay off the debt or at least come to a cast iron legal position that the debt won't be called unless we get into the Prem. I am not just talking about some comment in a newspaper. It would have to be cast iron." And the bit about the legal position is the point, if that's part of the deal with any new investor then why would it hamper it if it's agreed. I am far from naive, I am a business man myself, you are merely speculating and passing off as fact a hypothetical scenario. It's just scare mongering to provoke the usual outrage on here. Those of us that actually bother to still go don't need it. I will show my arse on the town hall steps the day they do that... As for scare mongering... Its the same charge I have faced since I started posting on the web back in the 90s and I was asking difficult questions with a 100% attendance home and away... right through to the point my attendance stop due to the ongoing disaster at the club about four years ago... while others like you carry on sucking happily at the nipple of disaster slagging off the ones asking the difficult questions. Water off a ducks back basically. I was "scare mongering" when I pointed out the unsustainable position we was in under Moores. In fact, I got some nasty abuse during those days for daring to slag off the situation and the lack of concern. Edited March 20, 2014 by oafc0000 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.