Statement by Chairman

[Worcester Owl]

13 hours ago, Horlicks said:

Nice bit of spin from AL which seems to have placated a lot of the fans but he must have been aware of the creditors if not it is gross incompetence.

1. You agree a price for the “business” - say £1m for Latics
2. You work out what the usual level of your ‘current’ assets and debts based on say the average of the last 12 months. This would include all creditors, HMRC debts for things like VAT, PAYE, National insurance etc.
3. If at the point of the sale the debts are higher than normal, you adjust the sale price by that amount... so if there’s an extra £500,000 of HMRC debts the sale price would reduce by £500,000. It’s to avoid exactly this type of problem.
4. If there were genuinely debts (HMRC or otherwise) that Corney has hidden from AL, he would have legal recourse under the sale agreement to get that money back from Corney. It would be extremely clear and simple that that is the case.
5. If the above hasn’t been done in this case, then it would lead me to believe the debts were genuine and AL is commercially very poor.

 

This is before you look at issues like signing foreign players on financially crippling salaries, suspending the only player who can tackle for the last two games of the season etc

Point 4 is very naive. Firstly, AL has to incur considerable legal fees and time in going after Corney. Secondly, you assume that recovery of said debts would be achievable, i.e. Corney would have the assets to pay up.

Get a grip.

[Ryan]

57 minutes ago, Bristolatic said:

Please tell me this, someone. How does anyone know that AL is freezing Byrne out to save his wages? Has someone seen it in writing, perchance? And who (Lemsagam) would agree a long term contract with a player and then decide not to play him just to save the wage you've already agreed upon? Just doesn't add up.

 

And how about "he's only broken two club rules" I think someone said? How do you know? Have you been told by FB, AL or JB themselves? 

 

How do you know he's on £6k a week? Has anyone seen his contract? Or was it once suggested and it's now gone beyond folk lore? 

 

How do you know that Maouche is on £4k a week?  Same scenario as Byrne's wages which, by the way, we will still be paying, so that again kills the idea that he's frozen out to save the wage.

 

If anyone has concrete, confirmed, sighted proof of all this, fine. I'll accept it. If not, it's all pure speculation in my eyes. Let's just wait and see what happens. In the meantime, let's just get behind the club, the team, the staff and crack on with being supporters.

1. Agree on that. Initially when the ITKers were saying he was 'suspended' I thought they meant from employment, pending investigation, rather than being made to train with the kids. I could understand the cynicism when that was the information available.

2. "Jack has breached a couple of discipline rules." Frankie Bunn in today's press-conference.

3. "Deals for three key loan players had to be renegotiated in January. The weekly bill for the three, one of whom signed permanently, went from £3,750 to around £16,000." Doyle, Bryan and Byrne were costing us £16,000 p/w so I'd say £5,000 p/w seems about right for JB. 

4. "Many were signed on wages previously well outside Oldham's budget. Midfielder Mohamed Maouche was given £4,000-a-week. He subsequently played 10 minutes of League One football (and remains on the payroll)." Both from Keegan's article.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Ryan

[Worcester Owl]

8 hours ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

No he didn’t. Once Blitz/Gazal fooked off - with their back up Plan siphoned off into Brassbank - Corney’s Plan extended to keeping the wolves from the door and providing enough funds for him to live the lifestyle he enjoyed & had become accustomed to. Which is precisely the reason why our club is in such a dilapidated state. So no, I most certainly didn’t like it. But then, there was no merit in attempting to lobby him to put a Plan in place. He had no interest in anything beyond the short term. How to pay wages. How to evade creditors.

 

Mr. Lemsagam is a fresh start. An opportunity to do things differently. Better. What better time than now to attempt to encourage him to Plan well & properly? What better time than now for him to open up clear and effective comms with the Trust. What better time to ensure wages are always paid on time, there isn’t an unhealthy fear of being sacked? What better time than now, to ka-myoo-ni-kate his Plans - not just release statements - with the proletariat?

Just to clarify, must there be a Plan, or will a plan suffice? Just asking.

[Buckshawlatic]

59 minutes ago, Bristolatic said:

Please tell me this, someone. How does anyone know that AL is freezing Byrne out to save his wages? Has someone seen it in writing, perchance? And who (Lemsagam) would agree a long term contract with a player and then decide not to play him just to save the wage you've already agreed upon? Just doesn't add up.

 

And how about "he's only broken two club rules" I think someone said? How do you know? Have you been told by FB, AL or JB themselves? 

 

How do you know he's on £6k a week? Has anyone seen his contract? Or was it once suggested and it's now gone beyond folk lore? 

 

How do you know that Maouche is on £4k a week?  Same scenario as Byrne's wages which, by the way, we will still be paying, so that again kills the idea that he's frozen out to save the wage.

 

If anyone has concrete, confirmed, sighted proof of all this, fine. I'll accept it. If not, it's all pure speculation in my eyes. Let's just wait and see what happens. In the meantime, let's just get behind the club, the team, the staff and crack on with being supporters.

shit like that won't do on here these days pal - get your razors out you've more chance

[Bristolatic]

22 minutes ago, Ryan said:

1. Agree on that. Initially when the ITKers were saying he was 'suspended' I thought they meant from employment, pending investigation, rather than being made to train with the kids. I could understand the cynicism when that was the information available.

2. "Jack has breached a couple of discipline rules." Frankie Bunn in today's press-conference.

3. "Deals for three key loan players had to be renegotiated in January. The weekly bill for the three, one of whom signed permanently, went from £3,750 to around £16,000." Doyle, Bryan and Byrne were costing us £16,000 p/w so I'd say £5,000 p/w seems about right for JB. 

4. "Many were signed on wages previously well outside Oldham's budget. Midfielder Mohamed Maouche was given £4,000-a-week. He subsequently played 10 minutes of League One football (and remains on the payroll)." Both from Keegan's article.

2. Ok, I'll go with that as I haven't yet had the chance to see FB's presser, but "a couple" could be an expression of speech, it could be very accurate

3 & 4. There'd been very mixed feelings about MK's article. Some believe all of it, some believe some of it, some believe none of it. I do believe there are elements of truth in there, but I also believe that the truth has, in places, been massaged.

 

However, I still don't see AL, or anyone else, agreeing a (lucrative?) contact at £x per week for the next two and a half years and then suspend said player to save his wages, but still have to pay them whilst he's in the reserves. It's bonkers.

 

For me, I think it's been a serious misdemeanor of some sort and employee confidentiality is preventing anyone saying any more. In my working life, I had to deal with many disciplinary issues concerning employees, and I know from experience that they have to be handled 100% by the book or you leave yourself wide open.

 

We'll find out eventually, I imagine, but right now, it's not our place to know.

[Smiler13]

3 hours ago, Worcester Owl said:

Point 4 is very naive. Firstly, AL has to incur considerable legal fees and time in going after Corney. Secondly, you assume that recovery of said debts would be achievable, i.e. Corney would have the assets to pay up.

Get a grip.

You are correct about point 4. How can you file a case against a person who is bankrupt and has sod all. Ok that person could be sent to jail for a lengthy time but getting money back is a pipe dream.

[Monty Burns]

‘Going after corney’ is absolutely pointless, more chance of getting money out of robert maxwell.

[deyres42]

7 hours ago, Bristolatic said:

2. Ok, I'll go with that as I haven't yet had the chance to see FB's presser, but "a couple" could be an expression of speech, it could be very accurate

3 & 4. There'd been very mixed feelings about MK's article. Some believe all of it, some believe some of it, some believe none of it. I do believe there are elements of truth in there, but I also believe that the truth has, in places, been massaged.

 

However, I still don't see AL, or anyone else, agreeing a (lucrative?) contact at £x per week for the next two and a half years and then suspend said player to save his wages, but still have to pay them whilst he's in the reserves. It's bonkers.

 

For me, I think it's been a serious misdemeanor of some sort and employee confidentiality is preventing anyone saying any more. In my working life, I had to deal with many disciplinary issues concerning employees, and I know from experience that they have to be handled 100% by the book or you leave yourself wide open.

 

We'll find out eventually, I imagine, but right now, it's not our place to know.

No more bonkers than the owner agreeing to an indefinite suspension of the highest earning player over 'one or two issues'.

[yarddog73]

8 hours ago, Bristolatic said:

 

However, I still don't see AL, or anyone else, agreeing a (lucrative?) contact at £x per week for the next two and a half years and then suspend said player to save his wages, but still have to pay them whilst he's in the reserves. It's bonkers.

 

He's attempting to save his wages by freezing him out even if that means paying him for three months until he can ship him out, it's a tactic used frequently within the game where life is made uncomfortable for the player until they comply, of course it's still costing AL at the moment but he's playing the long game and is probably confident Jack's desire to play football will see him move on, I'm not so sure though and if I were JB I'd sit tight and consider my options. 

[Dave_Og]

3 minutes ago, yarddog73 said:

 if I were JB I'd sit tight and consider my options. 

For two years? 

[yarddog73]

15 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

For two years? 

Why not? Should he just walk away from £6k a week because the man who signed him no longer wants him? After all the way he's being painted by the club will probably put off any potential suitors. Plenty of people in jobs outside of football who will sit in for the money particularly if it's about 3/4 of a million over two and half years, I certainly would.

[Dave_Og]

4 minutes ago, yarddog73 said:

Why not? Should he just walk away from £6k a week because the man who signed him no longer wants him? After all the way he's being painted by the club will probably put off any potential suitors. Plenty of people in jobs outside of football who will sit in for the money particularly if it's about 3/4 of a million over two and half years, I certainly would.

Because his chances of a good career are diminishing. 

[yarddog73]

5 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

Because his chances of a good career are diminishing. 

Probably but the only way that will change is if he plays so it's a shit situation all round for all concerned, okay the lad probably regrets some of his behaviour and was probably badly influenced or advised but if there are no grounds for sacking him what the hell is AL playing at and for that matter FB who is getting dragged into it.

[lookersstandandy]

9 hours ago, Worcester Owl said:

Just to clarify, must there be a Plan, or will a plan suffice? Just asking.

 

Just to clarify, I’m using capitalisation rule #5 as I believe the Plan should be a publication; https://www.scribendi.com/advice/capitalization.en.html. Just saying.

[deyres42]

4 minutes ago, yarddog73 said:

Probably but the only way that will change is if he plays so it's a shit situation all round for all concerned, okay the lad probably regrets some of his behaviour and was probably badly influenced or advised but if there are no grounds for sacking him what the hell is AL playing at and for that matter FB who is getting dragged into it.

Not reflecting well on Bunn IMO, lets be honest if it wasn't for the Free Byrne stuff then he'd still be peddling the no comment line.

[yarddog73]

46 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

Not reflecting well on Bunn IMO, lets be honest if it wasn't for the Free Byrne stuff then he'd still be peddling the no comment line.

Especially when he's had three games and to be honest we've not looked like winning with an obvious lack of quality in the centre of the park.

[Horlicks]

11 hours ago, Worcester Owl said:

Point 4 is very naive. Firstly, AL has to incur considerable legal fees and time in going after Corney. Secondly, you assume that recovery of said debts would be achievable, i.e. Corney would have the assets to pay up.

Get a grip.

 

According to my friend who works in mergers and acquisitions for BDO UK LLP it would be quite easy to go after Corney if he had hidden anything, his finances are a different issue, although I wasn't aware he was bankrupt unlike many on here.

[kowenicki]

5 minutes ago, Horlicks said:

 

According to my friend who works in mergers and acquisitions for BDO UK LLP it would be quite easy to go after Corney if he had hidden anything, his finances are a different issue, although I wasn't aware he was bankrupt unlike many on here.

 

If course it’s easy to go after him, he will have signed warrants.  But is there any point, has he got anything to go after? 

[UsedtobeWozzer]

Disappointing that the trust statement released following the recent meeting with AL adds precisely nothing to the debate.

[TheBigDog]

20 hours ago, youngen said:

 

Trainining? Is that even a word?

[jorvik_latic]

25 minutes ago, UsedtobeWozzer said:

Disappointing that the trust statement released following the recent meeting with AL adds precisely nothing to the debate.

 

Except it does. It shows that there are open lines of communication, that the Trust will monitor going forward and improve their communications to the fans. 

Edited August 17, 2018 by jorvik_latic

[UsedtobeWozzer]

3 minutes ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

Except it does. It shows that there are open lines of communication, that the Trust will monitor going forward and improve communications. 

As an example of improving communications repeating what the Chairman said two days earlier isn’t an auspicious start. 

[jorvik_latic]

1 minute ago, UsedtobeWozzer said:

As an example of improving communications repeating what the Chairman said two days earlier isn’t an auspicious start. 

 

If that's what you want to take from it.

[Smiler13]

12 hours ago, Ryan said:

1. Agree on that. Initially when the ITKers were saying he was 'suspended' I thought they meant from employment, pending investigation, rather than being made to train with the kids. I could understand the cynicism when that was the information available.

2. "Jack has breached a couple of discipline rules." Frankie Bunn in today's press-conference.

3. "Deals for three key loan players had to be renegotiated in January. The weekly bill for the three, one of whom signed permanently, went from £3,750 to around £16,000." Doyle, Bryan and Byrne were costing us £16,000 p/w so I'd say £5,000 p/w seems about right for JB. 

4. "Many were signed on wages previously well outside Oldham's budget. Midfielder Mohamed Maouche was given £4,000-a-week. He subsequently played 10 minutes of League One football (and remains on the payroll)." Both from Keegan's article.

So hearsay again. Unless Keegan can prove where he got those figures from they mean shit all. I could pluck figures out of the air as well and say it’s true. I don’t believe we payed anywhere near those figures quoted and if we did if I was AL I would be more than agreived that those players underperformed in the later part of last season.  I See Doyle is not playing well at Bradford. They might want to put him on loan come January if he fails to score.

[youngen]

35 minutes ago, TheBigDog said:

Trainining? Is that even a word?

 

I rushed it on my lunch