Trust Letter to AL

[Andy b]

34 minutes ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

I would imagine that fans will be looking to move sooner than that if there's no response. There will probably be a protest at the Mansfield match.

The trust, as advised by supporters direct, will take steps post 12th April in the event of no response. There is an agreed course of action. I will have to leave that there until after 12th.

 

We are not promoting a physical protest at this point.

 

Sorry if that’s not as exciting as some would like. The aim remains to bring the owner to the table and we are pursuing the course of action which is most likely to achieve that.

 

That approach has a natural time limit in the event of continued no response 

[kowenicki]

Just now, Andy b said:

The trust, as advised by supporters direct, will take steps post 12th April in the event of no response. There is an agreed course of action. I will have to leave that there until after 12th.

 

We are not promoting a physical protest at this point.

 

Sorry if that’s not as exciting as some would like. The aim remains to bring the owner to the table and we are pursuing the course of action which is most likely to achieve that.

 

That approach has a natural time limit in the event of continued no response 

 

Correct approach. 

 

 

 

[kowenicki]

8 minutes ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

Hence why I'm pointing out that a meeting on the 25th will probably be too late 

 

I know why you are saying it, don’t need to explain it to me. 

 

[jorvik_latic]

15 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

I know why you are saying it, don’t need to explain it to me. 

 

 

So why were you pulling me up on it then?

[kowenicki]

2 minutes ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

So why were you pulling me up on it then?

 

I wasn’t. I was agreeing with you. If there is to be a protest then there would need to be a meeting for an organised protest. Otherwise it will look a bit silly and a bit shit. 

[jorvik_latic]

5 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

I wasn’t. I was agreeing with you. If there is to be a protest then there would need to be a meeting for an organised protest. Otherwise it will look a bit silly and a bit shit. 

 

Ok, fair enough. Definitely.

[underdog]

1 hour ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

Hence why I'm pointing out that a meeting on the 25th will probably be too late 

We get that Jorvik.

 

We have to make sure we have "ticked all the boxes" so there is no come back to some extent, or that we have exhausted all possible avenues with the owner so we can justify the next step.

 

Andy B has taken up the mantle of having those steps in place and the on going dialogue with Supporters Direct. As an organisation they have experience of owner/Trust/fan relationships and the ear of the EFL....you know this as you were instrumental in our membership with them, so I am feeling that I am teaching you to suck eggs and all....sorry my friend.

 

Logistic wise of a the next fan meeting, its Easter next week/week after so Kids are off and fans might be away or even away at Cheltenham for the Friday 19th match so returning Sat for a meeting (if we could get a venue) might be a push and then to organise for Monday 22nd April. Would there still be an appetite for arranging something Easter weekend meeting/action? I know myself I will be away for two weeks so it could impact the numbers. Thats my view, slightly negative and all but its timing. Maximum effect or damp squib?

 

We have to factor in the team are winning with a slim chance of promotion, so fan appetite is my concern..l know I am a natural worrier but there are those that do and those that are all hot air and no trousers.

 

Minimum, the Trust will continue to fight for its board level entitlement for the Rep to the board and I hope and pray, with the weight of the Trust members who have joined and fans in general behind it.....strength in numbers (by the way I need to get your Trust membership card to you at some point).

 

Personally, lets see if there is any movement by the deadline of 5pm Friday 12th April. I hope there is. Ball is in Mr Lemsagam's court

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 9, 2019 by underdog

[Clifford]

Team are winning, fans aren't arsed that the owner is meddling, until the next time it becomes an issue. At that point we may be where Bury are and it will be too late. 

 

Did we not know Easter was coming? The Sky game was an ideal game to target and you've let it pass. Shame really. 

 

Could be worth the trust trying to contact Sky and see if they will make comment on the situation. 

 

[Andy b]

3 minutes ago, Clifford said:

Team are winning, fans aren't arsed that the owner is meddling, until the next time it becomes an issue. At that point we may be where Bury are and it will be too late. 

 

Did we not know Easter was coming? The Sky game was an ideal game to target and you've let it pass. Shame really. 

 

Could be worth the trust trying to contact Sky and see if they will make comment on the situation. 

 

We are not promoting a match day protest as previously advised. There are good reasons for that, at the heart of which is the fact that we are currently focused on trying to be cordial with the owner with a

view to engaging with him in a positive manner. 

 

Lets see that process out first. There is a logical order of events in our efforts to hold the owner to account.

 

The Mansfield game and it being live on television is an irrelevance in that context.

 

 

 

[Clifford]

3 hours ago, Andy b said:

We are not promoting a match day protest as previously advised. There are good reasons for that, at the heart of which is the fact that we are currently focused on trying to be cordial with the owner with a

view to engaging with him in a positive manner. 

 

Lets see that process out first. There is a logical order of events in our efforts to hold the owner to account.

 

The Mansfield game and it being live on television is an irrelevance in that context.

 

 

 

 

We don't really have a local paper and the other local clubs are in turmoil so GMR won't be too arsed. IMO there should have been plans in place for when AL does not reply to the letter. The TV coverage could have been quite a tool to spread the word and apply pressure.

 

A protest at a dead rubber home game won't cut it. 

 

[pk200]

Alas.... procrastination is the thief of time.

[TheBigDog]

3 hours ago, Clifford said:

 

A protest at a dead rubber home game won't cut it. 

 

 

Dead rubber?  What does that even mean?

[Clifford]

29 minutes ago, TheBigDog said:

 

Dead rubber?  What does that even mean?

 

A game with no meaning, our last few home games once Easter ends our 'play off push'.

[kowenicki]

Edit. Wrong thread. 

Edited April 9, 2019 by kowenicki

[wiseowl]

8 hours ago, underdog said:

Minimum, the Trust will continue to fight for its board level entitlement for the Rep to the board....

Please can you clarify this for the fans?

 

I understood that the Trust rep had a position on the board but didn't want to take it up because of fears of personal liability for anything untoward that may be going on in the background. That person then resigned because they did not agree with the recent, more assertive approach with AL. I may have misunderstood but would like to know the position please i.e. who is now entitled to the position on the board (from the Trust), are they willing to take it up immediately or are they too concerned about personal liability etc.? Is it that personal concern that is holding up them taking their position on the board or is AL simply not having a board?

 

One thing is for sure - with the timescales as now proposed by the Trust, the season will nigh on be over and this fans' initiative will peter out.

 

I find it strange that, initially, the Trust endorsed a fans' led protest (scheduled for the postponed game) yet now they are not advocating one. As already stated, a huge missed opportunity for a properly co-ordinated protest at the televised Mansfield game, where it could also have been arranged for a Trust rep to be interviewed by Sky (thereby ensuring a professional and reasoned message to the world).

 

I understand the liaison with Supporters Direct but I cannot see what Earth shattering revelations they come up with that would trump national/international media exposure of the fans' concerns.

 

I promise this will be my last comment on the matter (in fact, on the Trust) as I am distinctly unimpressed with it as an organisation (i.e. there are, for sure, some very well meaning individuals but unless it becomes independent it will remain impotent).

 

This is not a criticism of any individual - think of it like slagging Parliament off at the moment for being as much use as a chocolate fireguard, yet respecting the integrity/ability of certain MP's within it.

 

 

[Kusunga_Is_God]

Missed the boat on this big time. No chance you can mobilise anyone now with the play offs still a chance. 

[underdog]

11 hours ago, wiseowl said:

Please can you clarify this for the fans?

 

I understood that the Trust rep had a position on the board but didn't want to take it up because of fears of personal liability for anything untoward that may be going on in the background. That person then resigned because they did not agree with the recent, more assertive approach with AL. I may have misunderstood but would like to know the position please i.e. who is now entitled to the position on the board (from the Trust), are they willing to take it up immediately or are they too concerned about personal liability etc.? Is it that personal concern that is holding up them taking their position on the board or is AL simply not having a board?

 

One thing is for sure - with the timescales as now proposed by the Trust, the season will nigh on be over and this fans' initiative will peter out.

 

I find it strange that, initially, the Trust endorsed a fans' led protest (scheduled for the postponed game) yet now they are not advocating one. As already stated, a huge missed opportunity for a properly co-ordinated protest at the televised Mansfield game, where it could also have been arranged for a Trust rep to be interviewed by Sky (thereby ensuring a professional and reasoned message to the world).

 

I understand the liaison with Supporters Direct but I cannot see what Earth shattering revelations they come up with that would trump national/international media exposure of the fans' concerns.

 

I promise this will be my last comment on the matter (in fact, on the Trust) as I am distinctly unimpressed with it as an organisation (i.e. there are, for sure, some very well meaning individuals but unless it becomes independent it will remain impotent).

 

This is not a criticism of any individual - think of it like slagging Parliament off at the moment for being as much use as a chocolate fireguard, yet respecting the integrity/ability of certain MP's within it.

 

 

Posted at the same time you typed the above.

 

edited: 10/04/19 as I am crap with cut/copy/pasting from a mobile.

 

https://trustoldham.co.uk/re-appointments-at-trust-oldham/

 

Trust Rep to the board appointed on Monday and club notified emailed late yesterday. The club will then go through the legal process of Fit and proper,Directors liability insurance being sought by Trust. Once Trust rep accepted, club have to notify EFL

 

Timescales and action: Were agreed by the fans who attended the meeting and it was agreed to attempt a dialogue with the owner. The stand up for latics was the previous week before the fans meeting. The fans who attended the meeting decided to attempt dialogue with agreed timescales

 

Supporters Direct: Are the outside support we have lacked under the previous regime and they have experience with legal knowledge we can tap into.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 10, 2019 by underdog

[League one forever]

1 hour ago, wiseowl said:

Please can you clarify this for the fans?

 

I understood that the Trust rep had a position on the board but didn't want to take it up because of fears of personal liability for anything untoward that may be going on in the background. That person then resigned because they did not agree with the recent, more assertive approach with AL. I may have misunderstood but would like to know the position please i.e. who is now entitled to the position on the board (from the Trust), are they willing to take it up immediately or are they too concerned about personal liability etc.? Is it that personal concern that is holding up them taking their position on the board or is AL simply not having a board?

 

One thing is for sure - with the timescales as now proposed by the Trust, the season will nigh on be over and this fans' initiative will peter out.

 

I find it strange that, initially, the Trust endorsed a fans' led protest (scheduled for the postponed game) yet now they are not advocating one. As already stated, a huge missed opportunity for a properly co-ordinated protest at the televised Mansfield game, where it could also have been arranged for a Trust rep to be interviewed by Sky (thereby ensuring a professional and reasoned message to the world).

 

I understand the liaison with Supporters Direct but I cannot see what Earth shattering revelations they come up with that would trump national/international media exposure of the fans' concerns.

 

I promise this will be my last comment on the matter (in fact, on the Trust) as I am distinctly unimpressed with it as an organisation (i.e. there are, for sure, some very well meaning individuals but unless it becomes independent it will remain impotent).

 

This is not a criticism of any individual - think of it like slagging Parliament off at the moment for being as much use as a chocolate fireguard, yet respecting the integrity/ability of certain MP's within it.

 

 

What would an Independent trust achieve that the current one isn’t? 

[kowenicki]

1 minute ago, League one forever said:

What would an Independent trust achieve that the current one isn’t? 

 

Is that a trick question?  

[League one forever]

4 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

Is that a trick question?  

Moi? 

 

No way. .

[wiseowl]

11 hours ago, League one forever said:

What would an Independent trust achieve that the current one isn’t? 

Impossible to say without trying it but let's consider this scenario.

 

The Trust decided to go "independent" after their frustrating experiences with Mr Corney. A new owner was coming in, so here was the chance for a clean break. It was great news that the new owner was willing to hand back the Trust's initial investment of £200,000 (or thereabouts from what has been said on here) in return for their 3% shareholding (and I`ve no idea what the true valuation was at the time of the takeover - I suspect we've all got an idea what the £200,000 might be worth presently!).

 

So, a phoenix Trust is born, independent of a new owner (who, as it happens in time, the Trust find as frustrating as the previous owner). In a time of crisis (whatever you personally view that to be) then this independent entity is the single and obvious place to turn to for solidarity as fans and its membership grows very quickly. What's more, it's wisely invested its £200,000 and a safeguarded bond type scheme is devised whereby concerned fans can add to the "war chest" per chance anything dire should happen to their club in the future. If happy days are ahead, then the new Trust, via its members, can decide best how to use any funds (e.g. playershare type stuff, facilities for fans at the ground, fan events on match days, away days with Latics etc.).

 

It would be a Trust of excellence, with Oldham Athletic fans at its heart and, as such, supporters would have no need to look elsewhere - there would be no fragmenting of our support in times of need/crisis because no splinter group could come anywhere near matching it.

 

So, gone would be the days when you're constantly told "we've got a 3% shareholding and a seat on the board you know" and you scratch your head and say to yourself "yes but what use is it in reality?". Gone are the doubts you have that people may get too close to the club's inner workings/people and then "jump ship" from the Trust to go and join the board of the very club/company they are supposed to be holding to account on behalf of the fans!

 

Like I say, League one - we'll never know because it will probably not now happen. Incidentally, the independent idea is what I discussed at length with the Trust Chairman and a director a couple of years ago during the Corney turmoil. I was looking to set up an independent supporters' group under a Fans' Charter. After meeting the said members of the Trust, I decided not to do so because I had the club at heart and didn't want to fragment the support any further.

 

I really do wish I had pressed ahead, or at least joined the Trust to influence it from within, as my honest view is that independence, together with a reasonable start to a financial war chest by having sold the 3% shares to the new owner would have seen us in a much better position than the one we now find ourselves in.

 

 

 

 

[Andy b]

6 minutes ago, wiseowl said:

Impossible to say without trying it but let's consider this scenario.

 

The Trust decided to go "independent" after their frustrating experiences with Mr Corney. A new owner was coming in, so here was the chance for a clean break. It was great news that the new owner was willing to hand back the Trust's initial investment of £200,000 (or thereabouts from what has been said on here) in return for their 3% shareholding (and I`ve no idea what the true valuation was at the time of the takeover - I suspect we've all got an idea what the £200,000 might be worth presently!).

 

So, a phoenix Trust is born, independent of a new owner (who, as it happens in time, the Trust find as frustrating as the previous owner). In a time of crisis (whatever you personally view that to be) then this independent entity is the single and obvious place to turn to for solidarity as fans and its membership grows very quickly. What's more, it's wisely invested its £200,000 and a safeguarded bond type scheme is devised whereby concerned fans can add to the "war chest" per chance anything dire should happen to their club in the future. If happy days are ahead, then the new Trust, via its members, can decide best how to use any funds (e.g. playershare type stuff, facilities for fans at the ground, fan events on match days, away days with Latics etc.).

 

It would be a Trust of excellence, with Oldham Athletic fans at its heart and, as such, supporters would have no need to look elsewhere - there would be no fragmenting of our support in times of need/crisis because no splinter group could come anywhere near matching it.

 

So, gone would be the days when you're constantly told "we've got a 3% shareholding and a seat on the board you know" and you scratch your head and say to yourself "yes but what use is it in reality?". Gone are the doubts you have that people may get too close to the club's inner workings/people and then "jump ship" from the Trust to go and join the board of the very club/company they are supposed to be holding to account on behalf of the fans!

 

Like I say, League one - we'll never know because it will probably not now happen. Incidentally, the independent idea is what I discussed at length with the Trust Chairman and a director a couple of years ago during the Corney turmoil. I was looking to set up an independent supporters' group under a Fans' Charter. After meeting the said members of the Trust, I decided not to do so because I had the club at heart and didn't want to fragment the support any further.

 

I really do wish I had pressed ahead, or at least joined the Trust to influence it from within, as my honest view is that independence, together with a reasonable start to a financial war chest by having sold the 3% shares to the new owner would have seen us in a much better position than the one we now find ourselves in.

 

 

 

 

Wiseowl and I are meeting to discuss his ideas and future vision for the trust. Nothing is off the table but let’s go about considering changes of such magnitude in the right manner.

 

Chucking things out on message boards won’t get us very far and it’s not the forum for such big ticket items. I would encourage wiseowl to consider being coopted on the trust board as a first step

[Dave_Og]

14 minutes ago, wiseowl said:

Impossible to say without trying it but let's consider this scenario.

 

The Trust decided to go "independent" after their frustrating experiences with Mr Corney. A new owner was coming in, so here was the chance for a clean break. It was great news that the new owner was willing to hand back the Trust's initial investment of £200,000 (or thereabouts from what has been said on here) in return for their 3% shareholding (and I`ve no idea what the true valuation was at the time of the takeover - I suspect we've all got an idea what the £200,000 might be worth presently!).

 

So, a phoenix Trust is born, independent of a new owner (who, as it happens in time, the Trust find as frustrating as the previous owner). In a time of crisis (whatever you personally view that to be) then this independent entity is the single and obvious place to turn to for solidarity as fans and its membership grows very quickly. What's more, it's wisely invested its £200,000 and a safeguarded bond type scheme is devised whereby concerned fans can add to the "war chest" per chance anything dire should happen to their club in the future. If happy days are ahead, then the new Trust, via its members, can decide best how to use any funds (e.g. playershare type stuff, facilities for fans at the ground, fan events on match days, away days with Latics etc.).

 

It would be a Trust of excellence, with Oldham Athletic fans at its heart and, as such, supporters would have no need to look elsewhere - there would be no fragmenting of our support in times of need/crisis because no splinter group could come anywhere near matching it.

 

So, gone would be the days when you're constantly told "we've got a 3% shareholding and a seat on the board you know" and you scratch your head and say to yourself "yes but what use is it in reality?". Gone are the doubts you have that people may get too close to the club's inner workings/people and then "jump ship" from the Trust to go and join the board of the very club/company they are supposed to be holding to account on behalf of the fans!

 

Like I say, League one - we'll never know because it will probably not now happen. Incidentally, the independent idea is what I discussed at length with the Trust Chairman and a director a couple of years ago during the Corney turmoil. I was looking to set up an independent supporters' group under a Fans' Charter. After meeting the said members of the Trust, I decided not to do so because I had the club at heart and didn't want to fragment the support any further.

 

I really do wish I had pressed ahead, or at least joined the Trust to influence it from within, as my honest view is that independence, together with a reasonable start to a financial war chest by having sold the 3% shares to the new owner would have seen us in a much better position than the one we now find ourselves in.

 

 

 

 

I stopped reading at the owner hands back the & 200k

[jorvik_latic]

 

Abdallah paying the Trust £200k       

[League one forever]

1 hour ago, wiseowl said:

Impossible to say without trying it but let's consider this scenario.

 

The Trust decided to go "independent" after their frustrating experiences with Mr Corney. A new owner was coming in, so here was the chance for a clean break. It was great news that the new owner was willing to hand back the Trust's initial investment of £200,000 (or thereabouts from what has been said on here) in return for their 3% shareholding (and I`ve no idea what the true valuation was at the time of the takeover - I suspect we've all got an idea what the £200,000 might be worth presently!).

 

So, a phoenix Trust is born, independent of a new owner (who, as it happens in time, the Trust find as frustrating as the previous owner). In a time of crisis (whatever you personally view that to be) then this independent entity is the single and obvious place to turn to for solidarity as fans and its membership grows very quickly. What's more, it's wisely invested its £200,000 and a safeguarded bond type scheme is devised whereby concerned fans can add to the "war chest" per chance anything dire should happen to their club in the future. If happy days are ahead, then the new Trust, via its members, can decide best how to use any funds (e.g. playershare type stuff, facilities for fans at the ground, fan events on match days, away days with Latics etc.).

 

It would be a Trust of excellence, with Oldham Athletic fans at its heart and, as such, supporters would have no need to look elsewhere - there would be no fragmenting of our support in times of need/crisis because no splinter group could come anywhere near matching it.

 

So, gone would be the days when you're constantly told "we've got a 3% shareholding and a seat on the board you know" and you scratch your head and say to yourself "yes but what use is it in reality?". Gone are the doubts you have that people may get too close to the club's inner workings/people and then "jump ship" from the Trust to go and join the board of the very club/company they are supposed to be holding to account on behalf of the fans!

 

Like I say, League one - we'll never know because it will probably not now happen. Incidentally, the independent idea is what I discussed at length with the Trust Chairman and a director a couple of years ago during the Corney turmoil. I was looking to set up an independent supporters' group under a Fans' Charter. After meeting the said members of the Trust, I decided not to do so because I had the club at heart and didn't want to fragment the support any further.

 

I really do wish I had pressed ahead, or at least joined the Trust to influence it from within, as my honest view is that independence, together with a reasonable start to a financial war chest by having sold the 3% shares to the new owner would have seen us in a much better position than the one we now find ourselves in.

 

 

 

 

The idea of an independent supporters trust who hold fundraisers, bring fans together, and  help the club with things like a new lawnmower sounds great. 

 

The idea deal of a ‘war chest’ is for the birds. Let’s say people come together, and work their arse off to raise 500k (even that would be a monumental effort) what does that cover??? 5/6 first team wages for a year. Terrific. 

 

You say it would get rid of cliques, what happens when ‘the three leaders of independent group’ want to try and bid for the club. (With their war chest. . .  ) Suddenly they are seen as thinking there shit doesn’t stink. (As you saw from first hand) 

 

The point is a lot of you want to change already happens in some form, playershare, fundraisers, it could be argued that it could be bettered and built on. But they exist. You aren’t coming up with anything radical or new. The things you don’t like , are human nature. They will always be cliques, there will be people jostling for position, while they smile at you politely.  It's what Makes the world turn round. 

 

To use your earlier metaphor, you are like the independent group in parliment, all shiny and new. People listen for a while because you hold no power or responsibility. Then you get in power, and people realise your just like the last lot. 

Edited April 10, 2019 by League one forever