Guest nonaenever Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 why is there an apostrophe on "who's directors" ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusoe Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 Badly thought out, appallingly written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristolatic Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 There's also a few commas where there should be full stops but, aside from that: They really expect the club to make public what percentage or profit is made from programmes, pies and beer? They honestly expect SC to say how much he takes? How the :censored: do they know he takes anything at all for himself? They really think they're entitled to know what the club makes out of the shop? And to top it all, they intend disrupting ordinary folks' events at the OEC and affecting those who may, or may not, have any affiliation or love for the club. I hope they all get arrested for Public Order offences if they go that far. I've been restrained about the comments I've made thus far in various threads, but now I simply view them as <insert any or all profanities that you wish>. They would do the club and themselves a favour if they simply buggered off into the sunset. That's not to say I think everything is rosy at BP. It isn't, but for Christ's sake, have some common sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 Neither have I. But I am 200 miles away. In all seriousness though, I would like to hope against hope that they've scrapped the whole idea. I'm all for being passionate about the club and wanting the best for it, but this just isn't the way in my eyes. If so, I fail to understand how depriving the club of money helps SC to sell to A N Other. I assume that is what they're after, but surely it weakens the club's worth. That, to me, is skewed thinking. It's aiming and shooting at your foot (or, even both feet) and hitting with unerring accuracy. Can someone please explain to me how such a boycott actually benefits anyone and helps to oust the current regime, if that's the aim. It's also a bloody funny way of encouraging investment into the club. It's more likely to make prospective investors run away. I'll stand corrected if I've got the basis of the boycott wrong. Maybe they are simply suggesting people focus their financial contribution on things that they know benefit the football club directly. Nobody at the club or trust came out and told people that revenue from car parking on matchdays (and non matchdays) wasn't going to the club. It took direct questions to get a clear answer. The revenue from land which TTA acquired using a clause which was only operable by the football club is not going into the football club. TTA are using the land to make profits and saddling the club with debt on a stand which has not increased net revenue. Boycotting spend is a legitimate consumer choice in this kind of situation - if the revenue isn't clearly the football clubs then it won't impact on the saleability of the football club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 Some they're looking to ruin peoples wedding receptions and Christmas parties or maybe just business conferences which will ruin the clubs reputation ruther. Clever. Imagine them turning up at a Wedding Reception ruining some poor couples big day and there being a few guests present not taking too kindly to such an occurence - it'll be :censored:ing carnage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 why is there an apostrophe on "who's directors" ??? Why haven't you used a capital letter at the start of your statement? Why do you expect "who's" to exclude the apostrophe, when in fact it should be "whose". I have to say that I don't agree with all of what's in that leaflet, especially the suggestion of disrupting events, particularly as the attendees are likely to be fellow fans, but I do agree that action is needed to get a clearer view of the arrangements between the club, OEC and SC. I don't expect to know every detail but I think there's too much being hidden, so I will choose where I spend my money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 Maybe they are simply suggesting people focus their financial contribution on things that they know benefit the football club directly. I reckon what they're suggesting is the stuff they're suggesting via those words they've had printed, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 Idiots. Blimey they are thick. Hopefully they get arrested when they try to spoil someone's event at OEC. Do these pillocks understand what a private limited company is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nonaenever Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 Why haven't you used a capital letter at the start of your statement? Why do you expect "who's" to exclude the apostrophe, when in fact it should be "whose". I am fully aware it should have been whose - I was, of course, being a little sarcastic in my remarks for which I alopogise! I`ve supported Latics through thick and thin - and actually think we'd be buggered without Mr Corney. Fail to see what such disruption achieves when we are trying to re-build after a torrid time. The team and club need support - not slagging off all the time. My family and I spent £200 on the Father's Day event at OEC. It's nice to have such a venue at long last in Oldham - if we all get behind the club - everything will be fine and a buyer will come along - trust me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 Anyone else hearing they've had a whipround and drafted this lad in as a consultant?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 The Trust has had confirmation that all car park revenue DOES go the the club and has always done so. If there is any evidence to the contrary then please let the trust know and we will investigate. This message was passed onto the protest group from your representative to one of the senior admin people of the protest group but I believe, it was too late to remove from the flyer and I am lead to believe, will no longer be part of the boycott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristolatic Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 The Trust has had confirmation that all car park revenue DOES go the the club and has always done so. If there is any evidence to the contrary then please let the trust know and we will investigate. This message was passed onto the protest group from your representative to one of the senior admin people of the protest group but I believe, it was too late to remove from the flyer and I am lead to believe, will no longer be part of the boycott. I'm pretty sure that it was posted on here some time ago that car park revenue went to the club. Once the protest group were made aware of this fact, they should have withdrawn the leaflet until it could be re-written instead of handing it out, knowing that people will be misled. I wonder what else they've got wrong with regards revenue streams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh_latics Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 Some of these questions have been answered before, ie. where the car park money goes, but they refuse to accept the answer because it doesn't fit their ridiculous agenda. Also, absolutely deplorable that they plan to go to other OEC events and cause trouble. Morons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 (edited) I'm pretty sure that it was posted on here some time ago that car park revenue went to the club. Once the protest group were made aware of this fact, they should have withdrawn the leaflet until it could be re-written instead of handing it out, knowing that people will be misled. I wonder what else they've got wrong with regards revenue streams.Cheers Bristol, I can't remember if it had. It might have been in one of Simons Brooke's blogs. But being blonde and all, I have my moments. Ha Oh and Josh too...as I missed your confirmation too Edited July 16, 2016 by underdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 If they're planning to disrupt people's events whether it be business or personal then they're a set of :censored: and I hope someone takes exception to it in a big way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disjointed Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 I'm pretty sure that it was posted on here some time ago that car park revenue went to the club. Once the protest group were made aware of this fact, they should have withdrawn the leaflet until it could be re-written instead of handing it out, knowing that people will be misled. I wonder what else they've got wrong with regards revenue streams.TBF Bristol we have just had a EU referendum based on lies and mistruths, so the standard has been set. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 Well putting my fan hat on and trust hat off.... .I might be planning the works Xmas bash at the OEC again and if they are out there freezing then so be it. If however, they scare my taxi away at the end of the night after I have had a few sherbets.....then they will get some harsh language off a woman whose worn high heels for most of the night...I won't be messed with if I need to get to my bed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longtimeblue Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 That's really bad. Not helped their cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCM35 Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 (edited) Double post Edited July 16, 2016 by OAFCM35 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueatheart Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 but they refuse to accept the answer because it doesn't fit their ridiculous agenda. I believe there is a lot of this going on. They get answers, they don't like answers, they ignore answers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L1onheartNew Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 I believe there is a lot of this going on. They get answers, they don't like answers, they ignore answers. That sounds like my wife Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCM35 Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 That sounds like my wife Haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlossopLatic Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 We need to accept 2 things about OEC 1. We have no idea what exactly the deal is between OEC and OAFC and we won't because such deals are confidential and you don't let them out in the public domain. 2. I will keep banging the drum on this one. It's very common for football clubs to outsource their hospitality to private companies who pay them rent to use the football clubs facilities this is pretty much what is happening here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 If there is any evidence that contradicts what the club is saying and what the trust has been told/found? The group may not want to speak to the trust about it, so release the information to all. Once the information is out there, then I am sure myself and other trust directors will take it further. Until evidence is found it's more or less what we know, or will ever know I'm afraid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcfluff1985 Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 I don't understand the bit about the shop. It's a sports direct shop. In no way am I surprised that sports direct take most of the profit. It's their merchandise. I can't for the life of me see why this is an issue. 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.