Summary of Questions Received - "Ask the Chairman"

[Guest nonaenever]

I confess I've only just got into this thread. To summarise: there's an offer from Corney to answer fans' questions on camera, thereby scaring the wits out of anyone who might want the kind of answers you can get only under Chatham House rules, which means anyone who wants to ask challenging questions about the absolute state we're in.

 

This offer is withdrawn, re-made, withdrawn, re-made and so on.

 

I have but a couple of questions for NNN. When did you decide that questions about Corney weren't helpful, when most people are asking questions only about Corney? And since when was Corney "The Chairman" rather than just "Corney"?

 

I reckon you'd get plenty more takers under Chatham House rules - or at least we'd get the answers we're looking for, however horrific, if you ask the questions off camera. Just a thought.

 

Edit: second question had no qn mark at the end.

 

Hi 24hours - Chatham House rules were devised such that people could release information from meetings BUT the person who had provided that information within the meeting would remain anonymous. As only the Chairman is being asked questions, it will be pretty obvious who provided the information i.e. him - so Chatham House rules aren't applicable here.

 

I think the general idea of it being filmed is that, once and for all, he can answer the questions - and people can view and hear for themselves what he​ says i.e. rather than, perhaps, constantly being misquoted.

 

Why anyone should be scared witless, as you say, I have no idea. He doesn't strike me as scary.

 

I call him "the Chairman" (mostly) because I don't want this to become personal. My aim is to achieve our objective i.e. get my mate Si (Freudian slip!) to answer the fans' questions honestly. I have called him Mr Corney too - and Simon Corney. I'm an old fashioned type of fella. When I call someone by their surname name only it's either because 1) I`ve become a megalomaniac barking out orders or I`m being disrespectful

 

I can't ever recall saying questions about "Corney" weren't helpful - I only ever said I was conscious of libel and slander. As I will be asking the questions, I could be personally liable for defamation - and as it's being filmed, you have to be careful on this front. So questions about him are fine - they will just be worded correctly - I don't want a big legal bill after doing this on behalf of the fans.

 

Please remember I am only the conduit for the fans' questions - for example, two of the questions were, "What star sign is Mr Corney?" Another was, "Which xxxxin xxnt set up xxxxin xxx to xxxxin rob Latics?" You'll start to appreciate how great pulling this together is!

 

Soon be Easter.

[oafcprozac]

Can you ask him to let home fans back into the Chaddy, The whole BP experience seems alien and I'm sure it is no coincidence we have only scored a handful of goals at that end since the switch. Give the ground its identity back. The acoustics argument has proved to be a complete crock.

[Guest nonaenever]

It's in ther mate

 

Can you ask him to let home fans back into the Chaddy, The whole BP experience seems alien and I'm sure it is no coincidence we have only scored a handful of goals at that end since the switch. Give the ground its identity back. The acoustics argument has proved to be a complete crock.

 

It's in there Prozac - it was a toss up between including that one or the equally important, "where does he buy his clothes?" - bizarre but true

[BP1960]

If SC sees the questions in advance so should the the fans, there's still a sneaking feeling some questions which would really put him on a spot won't be asked.

[Guest nonaenever]

If SC sees the questions in advance so should the the fans, there's still a sneaking feeling some questions which would really put him on a spot won't be asked.

 

BP - I can only refer you to my post on page 8, 1st Dec 5.38pm. No matter what anyone does, you cannot please all of the people all of the time. I received over 100 written questions - these have been de-duplicated and, then, merged into circa 20. The vast majority of sensible ones concern who owns what re. land, stands etc. at BP, rent paid, price of "club", price of "club" and land etc. Have no doubt, I will probe as necessary to get the answers people want regarding these major issues of concerns. If an answer raises another obvious question - I`ll ask it. So Brass Bank, OEC, rent, income, match day/non match day income/, expenditure, debts, long term vision etc will all be covered.

 

I have no problem putting the Chairman "on the spot" - personally, I see him as the custodian of the club for the future of the fans and the town - why do you think I won't put him on the spot?

 

If we're not careful, we'll end up just posting all the questions on here and simply letting someone from the club answer!

 

Please can we just crack on with it and see how it goes?

 

If it's bobbins, please feel free to crucify me afterwards

[BP1960]

I know you can't please everyone and there's bound to be some saying "why didn't you ask him that"?

Good luck with your venture, there may be a job at BBC newsnight if you can pin him down like Paxman, particularly on my question

"Have you made it plain to the manager the insipid football and lack of goals at SportsDirect.com Park is not acceptable"?

Edited December 23, 2016 by BP1960

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

 

Hi 24hours - Chatham House rules were devised such that people could release information from meetings BUT the person who had provided that information within the meeting would remain anonymous. As only the Chairman is being asked questions, it will be pretty obvious who provided the information i.e. him - so Chatham House rules aren't applicable here.

 

I think the general idea of it being filmed is that, once and for all, he can answer the questions - and people can view and hear for themselves what he​ says i.e. rather than, perhaps, constantly being misquoted.

 

Why anyone should be scared witless, as you say, I have no idea. He doesn't strike me as scary.

 

I call him "the Chairman" (mostly) because I don't want this to become personal. My aim is to achieve our objective i.e. get my mate Si (Freudian slip!) to answer the fans' questions honestly. I have called him Mr Corney too - and Simon Corney. I'm an old fashioned type of fella. When I call someone by their surname name only it's either because 1) I`ve become a megalomaniac barking out orders or I`m being disrespectful

 

I can't ever recall saying questions about "Corney" weren't helpful - I only ever said I was conscious of libel and slander. As I will be asking the questions, I could be personally liable for defamation - and as it's being filmed, you have to be careful on this front. So questions about him are fine - they will just be worded correctly - I don't want a big legal bill after doing this on behalf of the fans.

 

Please remember I am only the conduit for the fans' questions - for example, two of the questions were, "What star sign is Mr Corney?" Another was, "Which xxxxin xxnt set up xxxxin xxx to xxxxin rob Latics?" You'll start to appreciate how great pulling this together is!

 

Soon be Easter.

Cheers NNN. Yes, the Chatham House rule would be slightly absurd, but some other terms might not be. I'm just a bit uncomfortable when someone says: "You can ask this guy anything you want, but we're filming it, just to help you to stay within certain defamation, slander and libel statutes."

 

It's about as enticing as paying several million pounds for 75% of a company name.

 

I do worry about this conduit bit as well. Why can't Corney (The Chairman) just set or negotiate the terms himself? Not as if he's busy building a football club is it?

[Forte_Baby]

 

Hi 24hours - Chatham House rules were devised such that people could release information from meetings BUT the person who had provided that information within the meeting would remain anonymous. As only the Chairman is being asked questions, it will be pretty obvious who provided the information i.e. him - so Chatham House rules aren't applicable here.

 

I think the general idea of it being filmed is that, once and for all, he can answer the questions - and people can view and hear for themselves what he​ says i.e. rather than, perhaps, constantly being misquoted.

 

Why anyone should be scared witless, as you say, I have no idea. He doesn't strike me as scary.

 

I call him "the Chairman" (mostly) because I don't want this to become personal. My aim is to achieve our objective i.e. get my mate Si (Freudian slip!) to answer the fans' questions honestly. I have called him Mr Corney too - and Simon Corney. I'm an old fashioned type of fella. When I call someone by their surname name only it's either because 1) I`ve become a megalomaniac barking out orders or I`m being disrespectful

 

I can't ever recall saying questions about "Corney" weren't helpful - I only ever said I was conscious of libel and slander. As I will be asking the questions, I could be personally liable for defamation - and as it's being filmed, you have to be careful on this front. So questions about him are fine - they will just be worded correctly - I don't want a big legal bill after doing this on behalf of the fans.

 

Please remember I am only the conduit for the fans' questions - for example, two of the questions were, "What star sign is Mr Corney?" Another was, "Which xxxxin xxnt set up xxxxin xxx to xxxxin rob Latics?" You'll start to appreciate how great pulling this together is!

 

Soon be Easter.

Any chance of a reply to my earlier question?

[laticsmarra]

Any chance of a reply to my earlier question?

Why not come along to the meeting and you can ask a question without it being vetted.

[Forte_Baby]

Why not come along to the meeting and you can ask a question without it being vetted.

I already said earlier in the thread I be happy to come to the open meeting just was speaking with another supporter today who mentioned this and wanted to clarify as I thought he was in the wrong about the questions.

[ChaddySmoker]

 

 

longtime - the Chairman's original offer was for the persistent detractors to go and meet him; and that interview to be filmed (therefore indelibly recorded) for all to view and see for themselves what was said. That can't now happen because none of them were willing or able to attend. Nevertheless, the Chairman is still willing to do this - I certainly appreciate that. As I`ve always said, this ain't about me, it's about the fans - but I am quite happy to act as a conduit and ask the questions.

[ChaddySmoker]

I have never said that i was unwilling to go, but was suspended from owtb for taking issue with a poster who was trying to justify not paying Rochdale. I will re-consider once the accounts are submitted to Companies House for both OEC and Brassbank Ltd. I will not hold my breath.

[RobOAFC]

I have never said that i was unwilling to go, but was suspended from owtb for taking issue with a poster who was trying to justify not paying Rochdale. I will re-consider once the accounts are submitted to Companies House for both OEC and Brassbank Ltd. I will not hold my breath.

Why don't you attend and ask Corney to see the accounts?

 

After all, his answer will be on camera.

[mcfluff1985]

Why don't you attend and ask Corney to see the accounts?

 

After all, his answer will be on camera.

And he's already said people can look at the books...

 

Why don't you ask to go see them before the meeting so you can prepare your questions ChaddySmoker?

[deyres42]

And he's already said people can look at the books...

 

Why don't you ask to go see them before the meeting so you can prepare your questions ChaddySmoker?

Cos he's a Rochdale fan...

[yarddog73]

If there's no objection to reading the books put them out there for every fan to peruse over, this open armed approach doesn't tie in with the way we do business, if the chairman wants fans on board maybe he should be a little more open and honest about where we stand, he may then actually gain some support, I've no real desire to see the accounts for the football club I'm sure they make pretty grim reading, it's all the associated businesses that I'm more interested in and the effect they have on my only real interest which is the football team.

[deyres42]

If there's no objection to reading the books put them out there for every fan to peruse over, this open armed approach doesn't tie in with the way we do business, if the chairman wants fans on board maybe he should be a little more open and honest about where we stand, he may then actually gain some support, I've no real desire to see the accounts for the football club I'm sure they make pretty grim reading, it's all the associated businesses that I'm more interested in and the effect they have on my only real interest which is the football team.

Very true, the only question that matters is what is happening with the OEC 'non football related' dosh.

 

If it going towards reducing club debt then most will live with that, if not then it is a problem.

[ChaddySmoker]

Why don't you attend and ask Corney to see the accounts?

 

After all, his answer will be on camera.

[ChaddySmoker]

Because i am pretty certain that he will say that i cannot see the full accounts for OEC Ltd. Ask yourself this-why are the very very basic accounts not yet at Companies House as required by statute?

[ChaddySmoker]

And he's already said people can look at the books...

 

Why don't you ask to go see them before the meeting so you can prepare your questions ChaddySmoker?

[ChaddySmoker]

Books for which company? OEC Ltd, i very much doubt it!

[ChaddySmoker]

Cos he's a Rochdale fan...

UP THE DALE!

[GlossopLatic]

I have never said that i was unwilling to go, but was suspended from owtb for taking issue with a poster who was trying to justify not paying Rochdale.

You're method of taking issue wasn't the most constructive though was it?

 

http://www.owtb.co.uk/index.php/topic/49182-not-paying-rochdale/?fromsearch=1

 

 

Merry Christmas

[RobOAFC]

Because i am pretty certain that he will say that i cannot see the full accounts for OEC Ltd. Ask yourself this-why are the very very basic accounts not yet at Companies House as required by statute?

 

Why do you want to see Brassbanks and OEC's books? Latics books will show the financial deals that have been in place, past and present.

 

Ask myself why they aren't? Why don't you ask Corney why they are yet to be filed? He'd be able to give a better answer than pure guesswork on here.

[Dave_Og]

Latics books will show the financial deals that have been in place, past and present.

 

 

No they won't . They don't need to show much more than summaries of debtors and creditors