Trust Letter to AL

[whittles left foot]

15 hours ago, wiseowl said:

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).

Based on your post from 2 hours ago you are about as good as AL at keeping your promises-this above was from 15 hours ago.

[yarddog73]

2 hours ago, whittles left foot said:

Based on your post from 2 hours ago you are about as good as AL at keeping your promises-this above was from 15 hours ago.

He's got history......

[al_bro]

6 hours 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.

 

 

 

 

Even if his £200k was correct wouldn't it all be lost if AL walked and the club put into admin? That's what has happened to the shareholders of Debenhams. Mike Ashley is spitting feathers at having lost £150m. when he has desperately been trying to take over the company.

Edited April 10, 2019 by al_bro

[wiseowl]

10 hours ago, Dave_Og said:

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

 

10 hours ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

Abdallah paying the Trust £200k       

 

4 hours ago, al_bro said:

Even if his £200k was correct wouldn't it all be lost if AL walked and the club put into admin? 

AL bought Corney's 97% shareholding. My point was that, with a new owner coming in, there was the opportunity for the Trust to sell their 3% to him as well (so he would be 100% shareholder). If the Trust got their initial investment of circa £200,000 back - great. Once the shares were sold to AL , then Administration/Liquidation of the club would not see the Trust's money "lost" as they would already have got it out - part of my logic.

 

As it is, The Trust made a decision, in the past, to invest circa £200k of money raised by fans in a 3% shareholding of the club. In the precarious position the club now finds itself in, that doesn't look like the most astute investment of our money does it? (and yes I contributed to it as well as bucket shaking at various grounds).

 

And that's the kind of decision making that makes me very wary of an organisation of volunteers in charge of money (sometimes large sums). 

 

I`m meeting a member of the Trust tomorrow and I`ll see where that takes me. Apologies for my comments - as I said I would comment no more - but I was only responding to a question from League One Forever.

 

Yes I know....... I fell for the bait.

[Dave_Og]

3 minutes ago, wiseowl said:

 

 

AL bought Corney's 97% shareholding. My point was that, with a new owner coming in, there was the opportunity for the Trust to sell their 3% to him as well (so he would be 100% shareholder). If the Trust got their initial investment of circa £200,000 back - great. Once the shares were sold to AL , then Administration/Liquidation of the club would not see the Trust's money "lost" as they would already have got it out - part of my logic.

 

As it is, The Trust made a decision, in the past, to invest circa £200k of money raised by fans in a 3% shareholding of the club. In the precarious position the club now finds itself in, that doesn't look like the most astute investment of our money does it? (and yes I contributed to it as well as bucket shaking at various grounds).

 

And that's the kind of decision making that makes me very wary of an organisation of volunteers in charge of money (sometimes large sums). 

 

I`m meeting a member of the Trust tomorrow and I`ll see where that takes me. Apologies for my comments - as I said I would comment no more - but I was only responding to a question from League One Forever.

 

Yes I know....... I fell for the bait.

 

It was a donation for which a token shareholding was given.  The majority of the money came from the legends game which was effectively organised by the club (by big Gordon really) and put through the trust to keep it out of the hands of the administrators.

 

The club had virtually nothing in assets at the time - I'm pretty sure TTA didn't pay £6.4m for the 97%

Edited April 10, 2019 by Dave_Og

[latics22]

Question ? So 200k was raised , when and who decided to use that money to buy 3% for a vastly over priced rate? 

[Dave_Og]

7 minutes ago, latics22 said:

Question ? So 200k was raised , when and who decided to use that money to buy 3% for a vastly over priced rate? 

 

See above!

 

[underdog]

48 minutes ago, wiseowl said:

 

And that's the kind of decision making that makes me very wary of an organisation of volunteers in charge of money (sometimes large sums)

Our accounts are yearly audited and I would not say they are vast.  Books are currently in and will be ready for the July AGM

 

So you would be wary of the current Trust volunteer set up who have in their ranks:

• one co-optee's who is a MD at JP Morgan, another who is a retired university business school lecturer and chartered Accountant who worked at KPMG, a third who is a retired Director of various housing services throughout the Birmingham/West Midlands housing and ran their own Consultancy services.

• Four Trust directors who either run their own business or part of other businesses 

 

Wow What standard of volunteer were you expecting?......ye gods.

 

Previous directors have been of a similar quality 

 

 

 

Edited April 10, 2019 by underdog

[wiseowl]

7 minutes ago, underdog said:

Our accounts are yearly audited and I would not say they are vast.  Books are currently in and will be ready for the July AGM

 

So you would be wary of the current Trust volunteer set up who have in their ranks:

• one co-optee's who is a MD at JP Morgan, another who is a retired university business school lecturer and chartered Accountant who worked at KPMG, a third who is a retired Director of various housing services throughout the Birmingham/West Midlands housing and ran their own Consultancy services.

• Four Trust directors who either run their own business or part of other businesses 

 

Wow What standard of volunteer were you expecting?......ye gods.

 

Previous directors have been of a similar quality 

Underdog - you know my comments largely related to past events. Whatever the circumstances, nobody could argue that £200k of fans' money "spent" on a 3% shareholding was shrewd. The Trust would now have around £1Million in the bank if it had invested it in gold (for example). It's not about integrity either - I was talking about decision making - sounds like you have some excellent members - and I genuinely hope none of them "jump ship" again to join the club. Can't you see that fact alone might be a problem (i.e. the fact it has happened with 2 previous Chairmen of the Trust).

 

I`m meeting Andy tomorrow, so let's leave it there - just wanted to put to rest any suggestion of "integrity" issues - there aren't any - it's about decision making - thanks.

[underdog]

11 minutes ago, wiseowl said:

Underdog - you know my comments largely related to past events. Whatever the circumstances, nobody could argue that £200k of fans' money "spent" on a 3% shareholding was shrewd. The Trust would now have around £1Million in the bank if it had invested it in gold (for example). It's not about integrity either - I was talking about decision making - sounds like you have some excellent members - and I genuinely hope none of them "jump ship" again to join the club. Can't you see that fact alone might be a problem (i.e. the fact it has happened with 2 previous Chairmen of the Trust).

 

I`m meeting Andy tomorrow, so let's leave it there - just wanted to put to rest any suggestion of "integrity" issues - there aren't any - it's about decision making - thanks.

You are questioning decision making that was 15 years ago, on people who are no longer in situ. why and why again now?

 

TBH, the money was raised for the fans for the club to remain alive, not gold otherwise yes not the shrewdist business decision at the time if profit was the goal but it was not. 

 

Lets face it the £200k investment is long depreciated now and long spent. I am sure we have even discussed a re-assessment of the value to a lower sum.

 

If it makes you feel any better it is alledged the current owner bought OAFC for £1.

 

Good luck with Andy tomorrow. He is far more decisive than me

 

 

Edited April 10, 2019 by underdog

[wiseowl]

14 minutes ago, underdog said:

You are questioning decision making that was 15 years ago, on people who are no longer in situ. why and why again now?

Context Underdog, that's why.

 

It was relevant to my point about having an opportunity to "cash in" the 3% shareholding when AL was buying Latics. He has form for "splashing cash around" (e.g. remember the "gift to the fans", with a lot of money spent on Queensy Menig?). It's distinctly possible that the Trust could have jumped on his initial feelgood factor and generosity - and as a gesture of goodwill to show the fans how genuine he was, he may happily have shelled out £200k for your shareholding (particular if, as you state is alleged, he bought the other 97% for a quid). Would have been a very shrewd move by the Trust, wouldn't it?

 

Surely it was worth a try - that's all - did the Trust even enquire if he wanted to buy the 3%? You honestly don't have to answer.

[League one forever]

38 minutes ago, wiseowl said:

Underdog - you know my comments largely related to past events. Whatever the circumstances, nobody could argue that £200k of fans' money "spent" on a 3% shareholding was shrewd. The Trust would now have around £1Million in the bank if it had invested it in gold (for example). It's not about integrity either - I was talking about decision making - sounds like you have some excellent members - and I genuinely hope none of them "jump ship" again to join the club. Can't you see that fact alone might be a problem (i.e. the fact it has happened with 2 previous Chairmen of the Trust).

 

I`m meeting Andy tomorrow, so let's leave it there - just wanted to put to rest any suggestion of "integrity" issues - there aren't any - it's about decision making - thanks.

Nobody is interested in the past. 

 

Is there a reason you haven’t replied to my previous post? 

 

I’ll put it more simply. 

 

What are you offering that is it tangibley different to what we’ve got? The answer is nothing. 

 

I will keep bringing this up until you acknowledge your complete double standards. You protested last time.  An you backed off because in your own words ‘you didn’t like the people involved’ My view is,  you were to weak to follow through on what you truly wanted and/or didn’t like the flack.  (Fair enough) 

 

On the opposite side of that. Underdog for example has taken so much stick over the years it’s not true. Culminating with recently being harassed right in front of her face. However she has remained progressional, and articulate and good humoured. 

 

You on the other hand, did the rallying call- (fair enough) didn’t like the heat (fair enough) but then you have the audacity to come on and question in depth the people who do stay, and in the main are doing the things you want anyway.

 

You have zero credibility in regards to change for two reasons. 

 

1. You had a chance, and didn’t like it. Yet still you criticise. 

 

2. You offer nothing, that A, it’s different. An B, would actually affect the club at all. 

 

 

[OAFC1958 South]

21 minutes ago, League one forever said:

Nobody is interested in the past. 

 

Is there a reason you haven’t replied to my previous post? 

 

I’ll put it more simply. 

 

What are you offering that is it tangibley different to what we’ve got? The answer is nothing. 

 

I will keep bringing this up until you acknowledge your complete double standards. You protested last time.  An you backed off because in your own words ‘you didn’t like the people involved’ My view is,  you were to weak to follow through on what you truly wanted and/or didn’t like the flack.  (Fair enough) 

 

On the opposite side of that. Underdog for example has taken so much stick over the years it’s not true. Culminating with recently being harassed right in front of her face. However she has remained progressional, and articulate and good humoured. 

 

You on the other hand, did the rallying call- (fair enough) didn’t like the heat (fair enough) but then you have the audacity to come on and question in depth the people who do stay, and in the main are doing the things you want anyway.

 

You have zero credibility in regards to change for two reasons. 

 

1. You had a chance, and didn’t like it. Yet still you criticise. 

 

2. You offer nothing, that A, it’s different. An B, would actually affect the club at all. 

 

 

Spot on League One Forever..

 

The real fans are aligned in wanting our club to have a future. Future being the operative word.

 

We are stronger together. I have just joined the Trust....have supported Oldham for 40+ years. Joined to show support. As for you Underdog...a huge thanks for your focus and tenacity...and to the other Directors too. Be easy to give up with these folks who seem intent on 'Grandstanding' and offering 'hindsight management'. Yawn...

[wiseowl]

League one - we disagree - not unusual on a board like this.

 

I found it despicable that Underdog was abused by a fan - and expressed the same in that thread.

 

I have also said to Underdog (elsewhere) not to take things personally; I have respect for the individuals involved, it's just I don't happen to be a great fan of the organisation (The Trust).

 

As for "nobody is interested in the past" - sorry but I am - simply because it is possible to learn from past mistakes.

 

 

[League one forever]

2 minutes ago, wiseowl said:

League one - we disagree - not unusual on a board like this.

 

I found it despicable that Underdog was abused by a fan - and expressed the same in that thread.

 

I have also said to Underdog (elsewhere) not to take things personally; I have respect for the individuals involved, it's just I don't happen to be a great fan of the organisation (The Trust).

 

As for "nobody is interested in the past" - sorry but I am - simply because it is possible to learn from past mistakes.

 

 

Yet, you don’t seem to reflect on your past mistakes. If you want to talk the past, then it isn’t selective. 

 

If you said-

 

‘I had a go, it wasn’t for me. However I’m open minded enough to support in any way I can’  I wouldn’t have a problem. (In fact, remembering what you posted about your career and achievements, I’m sure you could add value) 

 

Instead, you are coming across as

 

I had a go, but I didn’t like the heat.  I still want my way to work, despite me not following it through last time. I will keep posting my displeasure until somebody agrees to meet me, so my way can be heard again. . . . You want to be heard, but not questioned. 

 

You posted a long reply to my question, ‘how is an independent trust different?’

 

I replied at length to your points, and why I disagreed.  You didn’t reply. I asked again. You didn’t reply. 

 

Do you see the pattern here owl? I’m just trying to ask somebody with such passionate views to articulate your point. An you can’t/won’t. It’s not a good sign for somebody that wants to be involved. Again. 

[Dave_Og]

8 hours ago, wiseowl said:

Underdog - you know my comments largely related to past events. Whatever the circumstances, nobody could argue that £200k of fans' money "spent" on a 3% shareholding was shrewd. The Trust would now have around £1Million in the bank if it had invested it in gold (for example). It's not about integrity either - I was talking about decision making - sounds like you have some excellent members - and I genuinely hope none of them "jump ship" again to join the club. Can't you see that fact alone might be a problem (i.e. the fact it has happened with 2 previous Chairmen of the Trust).

 

I`m meeting Andy tomorrow, so let's leave it there - just wanted to put to rest any suggestion of "integrity" issues - there aren't any - it's about decision making - thanks.

Did you read my earlier post about how most of the £200k came about?

[Andy b]

6 hours ago, wiseowl said:

League one - we disagree - not unusual on a board like this.

 

I found it despicable that Underdog was abused by a fan - and expressed the same in that thread.

 

I have also said to Underdog (elsewhere) not to take things personally; I have respect for the individuals involved, it's just I don't happen to be a great fan of the organisation (The Trust).

 

As for "nobody is interested in the past" - sorry but I am - simply because it is possible to learn from past mistakes.

 

 

The trust is not some faceless impenetrable organisation. It is a collection of oldham fans who want to achieve a better future for the club. You and everyone of those on this board are exactly the same in that regard. 

 

Give constructive feedback but unless you are prepared to step up and make the changes you champion (which you may we’ll be willing to do), I would urge you to be a be a bit more respectful in your critique. Posts like this do harm and achieve little. 

 

Get involved in the trust and the you may find that the trust takes the direction you think it should.

 

Half the people on here spend hours thinking about OAFC and posting. That time and those ideas end up being dumped into the black hole that is this message board. Put your energies and wisdom to better use and get involved in the trust. Your ideas might just have an effect then. 

 

Surely thats a better use of your time

 

 

[underdog]

Dear all. 

 

Apologies as I posted the below in the Trust pinned thread last night and forgot to add it to this one. It is dated yesterday 10/04/2019

 

Please find below the link to the Trust Oldham site with an update with regards to the letter to Mr Lemsagam

 

https://trustoldham.co.uk/update-on-fans-letter-to-abdallah-lemsagam/

 

Thanks

[League one forever]

3 hours ago, Andy b said:

The trust is not some faceless impenetrable organisation. It is a collection of oldham fans who want to achieve a better future for the club. You and everyone of those on this board are exactly the same in that regard. 

 

Give constructive feedback but unless you are prepared to step up and make the changes you champion (which you may we’ll be willing to do), I would urge you to be a be a bit more respectful in your critique. Posts like this do harm and achieve little. 

 

Get involved in the trust and the you may find that the trust takes the direction you think it should.

 

Half the people on here spend hours thinking about OAFC and posting. That time and those ideas end up being dumped into the black hole that is this message board. Put your energies and wisdom to better use and get involved in the trust. Your ideas might just have an effect then. 

 

Surely thats a better use of your time

 

 

This. 

Edited April 11, 2019 by League one forever

[Monty Burns]

Stop clamouring after him!!

He’s shit and he doesn’t like you because you are better at what you do than him.

He is arguing a theory based around a point he made up himself and is completely hypothetical.

He has got form for flaking when it matters.

He changed his name to try and keep his non agenda going.

Waste of time attention seeker.

[wiseowl]

10 hours ago, League one forever said:

You want to be heard, but not questioned. 

 

You posted a long reply to my question, ‘how is an independent trust different?’

 

I replied at length to your points, and why I disagreed.  You didn’t reply. I asked again. You didn’t reply. 

 

Do you see the pattern here owl?  

Really? 

 

You do nothing but ask questions (or pass disparaging remarks) about whatever I post - I provided a detailed reply - and you just come back with more questions. So, it's impossible to see out to a sensible conclusion on a message board. I agree with you that I may not have learnt from past mistakes e.g. a message board is probably not the best forum to debate - people misinterpret things, get the wrong context etc. so I will take Andy B's (and your) advice and steer clear of this kind of debate now.

 

I look forward to meeting Andy later today.

[wiseowl]

10 minutes ago, Monty Burns said:

Stop clamouring after him!!

He’s shit and he doesn’t like you because you are better at what you do than him.

He is arguing a theory based around a point he made up himself and is completely hypothetical.

He has got form for flaking when it matters.

He changed his name to try and keep his non agenda going.

Waste of time attention seeker.

No I didn't - I tried joining again umpteen times - was refused.

 

Used a different name recently - and was accepted.

[pk200]

Who decides to accept or reject an application ?

[lookersstandandy]

2 minutes ago, pk200 said:

Who decides to accept or reject an application ?

 

I don't think anyone is rejected - subject them not being banned for being abusive - it was just an admin backlog that the mods hadn't got through.....? @Matt @Ackey @Zorrro @Stevie_J

[pk200]

Perhaps my question was not properly directed.I was asking re Trust membership ,not Board membership.

Thanks for your prompt reply