Boundary Park buy out

[Lags]

1 minute ago, Dave_Og said:

Yes, but saying what? 

It looked like it was written by a bitter person whose first language is English. Answers on a postcard. 

 

I've no idea who wrote it, maybe SC, it was similar.

[yarddog73]

Common denominator?

[Crusoe]

14 minutes ago, latics22 said:

We start winning, people wont be interested in the FLG. Big problem with the plan, they then plan to sell to someone who can take the club forward. Who is this knight in shining armour, that corney couldn't find? Admittedly a whole club is a more attractive proposition. 

 

I can’t quite believe it, but I agree with pretty much all of this. First time for everything!

[deyres42]

30 minutes ago, Crusoe said:

 

I can’t quite believe it, but I agree with pretty much all of this. First time for everything!

We won't start winning though...

[Dave_Og]

40 minutes ago, Lags said:

 

I've no idea who wrote it, maybe SC, it was similar.

Well I think we can discount him. 

[Lags]

5 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

Well I think we can discount him. 

 

Yes possibly, perhaps Alan Hardy then, we had similar stuff back in his day too 

[Dave_Og]

6 minutes ago, Lags said:

 

Yes possibly, perhaps Alan Hardy then, we had similar stuff back in his day too 

I don't really care but it's a pathetic statement. 

[Lags]

3 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

I don't really care but it's a pathetic statement. 

 

You may well be right, but ain't surprised by a fight back

Edited July 19, 2019 by Lags

[nzlatic]

4 minutes ago, Lags said:

 

You may well be right, but ain't surprised by a fight back

I wouldn’t class it as a fight back given some of the childish language used. 

 

Are the FLG going to get their hair pulled next Saturday?

[Bristolatic]

59 minutes ago, nzlatic said:

I wouldn’t class it as a fight back given some of the childish language used. 

 

Are the FLG going to get their hair pulled next Saturday?

We've re-signed Moimbe?

[wiseowl]

4 hours ago, al_bro said:

The question is, would AL sell to the FLG, or would he throw his toys out and relocate elsewhere. I think, the way he has behaved so far, he would opt for the latter, and do everything possible to stop the FLG getting their hands on his team. 

In theory, if AL is not willing to sell "the badge/team" to the FLG couldn't they just start with a "new Latics" (similar to Wimbledon or FC United) - with a ready made home at BP? (which they would then own).

 

I realise this would mean starting way down the footballing food chain but, as I`ve mentioned before, I have heard the idea of Latics starting again via non-league mooted several times.

[wiseowl]

On 7/18/2019 at 7:33 PM, GlossopLatic said:

 

Which is how? 

 

What can't the Trust do now that they could if they relinquished the 3% (something they won't get anything for) and seat on the board?

 

On 7/18/2019 at 7:35 PM, deyres42 said:

I'd wager most supporter trusts would give anything to have the level of involvement we (should) have.

Glossop - to answer your question would be going over old ground. It's about where to focus energy and the fact that as an independent group (i.e. no umbilical chord to AL) it may have much more support than its present low numbers and not be hindered by the current need to "tread carefully" with every step. If what is being said is correct, then the Trust support the FLG wholeheartedly, and the FLG are on a clear collision course with AL. How can it be healthy, therefore, having a Trust rep on the board in any event? Massive conflict surely?

 

deyres - can't agree. Other supporters can see the absolute mess we are in and can see that the Trust's treasured position on the board has had no positive impact at all. Many outside the Trust can see it as clear as day that the 3% shareholding is nothing but a millstone. Those close to it seem to view it as the Holy Grail - it's so very obviously not. If the fans are to speak with a united voice would it not be better for the Trust to unhinge from the club and give their full backing (with increased memebership numbers) to the FLG?

 

I know it's all about opinions but there is another way. If you do what you've always done - you'll get what you've always got.

 

I have always thought a change of direction by the Trust would have benefit and I outlined some ideas to Simon Brooke when he was Trust Chairman (Diane was also at the meeting) and re-iterated them to a Trust director earlier this year (I only say that to show that I have tried to do something positive to influence change rather than just spouting off on a message board like this). 

[mcfluff1985]

17 minutes ago, wiseowl said:

 

I realise this would mean starting way down the footballing food chain but, as I`ve mentioned before, I have heard the idea of Latics starting again via non-league mooted several times.

No thanks

[wiseowl]

Just now, mcfluff1985 said:

No thanks

We are in agreement - but there are those that feel it would be no bad thing - short term pain... and all that

[singe]

3 hours ago, Dave_Og said:

And people think Boundary Park can get a bit chilly! 

It's Baltic up there. 

Ideal place for a ski slope!

[mcfluff1985]

3 minutes ago, wiseowl said:

We are in agreement - but there are those that feel it would be no bad thing - short term pain... and all that

They also the same people who felt relegation wouldn't be a bad thing we'd be rejuvenated, or that nobody would be worse than SC?

[JoeP]

13 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said:

They also the same people who felt relegation wouldn't be a bad thing we'd be rejuvenated, or that nobody would be worse than SC?

 

I've never thought relegation would be a good thing or that nobody could be worse than SC, but the idea of starting again from the bottom, with none of those in control of the club in it's current guise associated, doesn't seem like the worst thing in the world...

[unsworth blue]

10 hours ago, unsworthlatic said:

Okay, so after letting the dust settle and having quite a rant on twitter against one side in particular, I’ve decided to try, TRY and do a piece that is balanced and fair. Despite it being balanced though, it will show my opinion throughout as I do, as many others do, feel passionately regarding Oldham Athletic. So here goes.

 

The club inevitably was in major crisis following the Moore era back in 2003/04. The Three Amigos (“TTA”) came in and saved us…celebration Sunday was a great day against Grimsby and all of a sudden we had a future again. I’m sure they came in for their own benefit which would come off the back of the club benefitting. Not a problem in itself to me. The proposed move to Failsworth ultimately didn’t come to fruition and what happened thereafter has contributed massively where we find ourselves today.

 

Corney decided to sell the club, well, what I mean by club, is the badge, players and staff to the ‘right person’ in Abdallah. Again no issue. At this stage, anything was better surely than the club being starved and slowly being taken into oblivion. I did however question, why has he only bought the club as it is and not the rest of what the club should be (in my opinion, everything) and that still remains to today.

 

My theory – Abdallah believed in his players and the players that he could showcase in England. Not a problem. He brought a few, then more and more and more. If they are good enough, they can give us 6/12 months, help Oldham Athletic progress and move them on for a decent sum of money before doing this again. After all it’s a pool of players no other League One/Two club delve into. Not a bad business model in itself. This however, has not worked. We haven’t sold any of them on and to my recollection we have had 14 including the current crop.

 

Now, over the past 18 months, Abdallah has apparently tried to agree a price to purchase Boundary Park and the Car Park but stated that the asking price was too high in his opinion. I’d love to know what he offered. Since he came in 18 months/2 years ago, the club has gone backwards. Literally speaking too, suffering relegation back to the 4^th tier of English football for the first time since 1971, even Corney didn’t manage this (more by luck than judgement granted!).

 

During his tenure of 2 years as I believe he was pulling strings at the start of 2017/18 season whilst the sale was going through, we have had 5 different managers (6 if you include Banide) as well as staff being hired and fired at what seemed a weekly basis! Since then, we have seen a countless number of outcrys on social media regarding how poorly he treats his staff. This was clear with treatment of players such as Davies, Gerrard, Fane, Byrne, Hunt and seemingly in the end Peter Clarke as well as staff such at Steve Cross and Tony Philiskirk taking the club to an Employment Tribunal over the reasoning of their dismissals.

 

Abdallah, to my knowledge, still hasn’t published the accounts, season tickets are down by 800+ from last year and we limped to a pitiful 14^th placed finish in League Two during our first season in there. There is, to my knowledge, no finance option available anymore to purchase a season ticket (I have bought one in blind faith up front so not required for myself!) and we currently have 17 players which includes 2 first year pro’s, 2 players who didn’t go with the club to Morocco leaving us with the only striker at present being Urko Vera. Sadly, this is nothing short of laughable.

 

Now, onto the FLG. Do I think they provide all of the answers? No, I don’t sadly. Their intentions sound too good to be true. However, the club has and is being run in a shambolic manner, I can’t see how anybody can disagree. Now, I am aware of at least 1 person who is involved in the FLG and know that he is a staunch Latics fan who attends both home and away games. He loves the club just like you and I do. As I’ve stated before, I’ve been told by Pete Wild, who knows what both parties has to offer that FLG is the way to go and to support them in their quest.

 

Brings me on to my next point, what is their quest? – Well, I’ve been advised (this may well be incorrect, only going off what I have been told) that their quest is to bring Oldham Athletic from a broken football club back to ONE entity. This means its entirety including badge, pitch, stands, floodlights, car park, players and staff. This to me can only be a positive. I have also been told that they could very well afford to buy the lot but running the club to a L1/L2 level may be tricky. As such, I am of the understanding, that they would buy the ground first, acquiring the land before offering “x” amount for the club (part that AL) currently owns. At this stage, they would look to sell to a person/party that they believe could take Oldham Athletic forward. This person/party would then own the lot, everything, but surely that is a better prospect from a business point of view than owning this or that.

 

How long will this take? – Remains to be seen. However, the 27^th July event I am hoping will outline their intentions with a plan of how this will work and timescales to boot. Again, I was told by Wild, after the Northampton game “Support the FLG, they are good people who love the club. They have the club’s best intentions to heart. The next 18/24 months will be extremely tough but stick with it, they will and the club we all know and once fell in love with will return”

 

Now, this is where it has got/could get/will get tricky! AL is rattled by this. I would be too, if somebody threatened my business model. He is being asked to pay rent on a building that allows his business to function/live (shouldn’t be this way in the first place but it is) after deciding not to take up the option on acquiring the ground when offered it. As with any tenancy agreement, rent has to be paid. Has it been? Debatable. Some say yes, others say no. Who knows? But ask yourselves this, Why do the FLG exist? Do you believe they exist to make money on the back of Oldham Athletic Football Club despite being lifelong supporters? Do you believe that they are being unreasonable? I’m not sure I do.

 

The issue here is. Abdallah paying rent to have use of the North Stand. He doesn’t want to do this. Understandably so. Why? Because, he is then funding the next part of FLG’s plans. There is a purchase agreement in place to buy not only the North Stand but the ground, car park etc so why would he want to do that when the FLG’s initial plan is seemingly to buy the club at the end of all of this.

 

This could force an issue of Abdallah taking us away from Boundary Park. This suits absolutely nobody. The FLG will be left with a ground that nobody uses other than the North Stand hospitality etc. The fans lose out as we lose a major part of the club as we’d have to choose whether to watch Oldham Athletic at Spotland/Gigg Lane every other week and AL would have to pay rent to Bury/Rochdale to use this facility. Nobody wins!

 

How does this get resolved? I have absolutely no idea!

 

However, what I will say is that, I am glad that we have a FLG in place preparing for the worst. It is clear Bolton nor Bury had this and that very nearly and possibly should have cost them their respective clubs! They do care about the club, I am certain of that.

 

What are everybody else’s thoughts?

 

Sorry this is ridiculously long but there’s been a lot to cram in. 

 

Easy for you to say this mate (lol) but what is the solution?

 

Seriously though, the two / possibly three groups at the helm are seriously disconnected and any opportunity for the club to be reconfigured as one has got to be the way forward. I would like to see the end of Blitz's involvement at the club & Corney & t'other lad who were TTAs so their tenure can be put to an end. I would love one entity to control the lot - still far from convinced about AL and don't know who FLG are at present but would accept what PW advised you on the evening of the Northampton game.

 

Just want the club to move forward as one and all this bloody infighting and shenanigans to end so we can get back to trying to reclaim a spot higher in the league standings      

[jorvik_latic]

1 hour ago, wiseowl said:

I have always thought a change of direction by the Trust would have benefit

 Have you? You’ve not mentioned it before. 

[latics22]

Anyones owtb just turned a really cool black? Ps I'm soba

[deyres42]

1 hour ago, wiseowl said:

 

Glossop - to answer your question would be going over old ground. It's about where to focus energy and the fact that as an independent group (i.e. no umbilical chord to AL) it may have much more support than its present low numbers and not be hindered by the current need to "tread carefully" with every step. If what is being said is correct, then the Trust support the FLG wholeheartedly, and the FLG are on a clear collision course with AL. How can it be healthy, therefore, having a Trust rep on the board in any event? Massive conflict surely?

 

deyres - can't agree. Other supporters can see the absolute mess we are in and can see that the Trust's treasured position on the board has had no positive impact at all. Many outside the Trust can see it as clear as day that the 3% shareholding is nothing but a millstone. Those close to it seem to view it as the Holy Grail - it's so very obviously not. If the fans are to speak with a united voice would it not be better for the Trust to unhinge from the club and give their full backing (with increased memebership numbers) to the FLG?

 

I know it's all about opinions but there is another way. If you do what you've always done - you'll get what you've always got.

 

I have always thought a change of direction by the Trust would have benefit and I outlined some ideas to Simon Brooke when he was Trust Chairman (Diane was also at the meeting) and re-iterated them to a Trust director earlier this year (I only say that to show that I have tried to do something positive to influence change rather than just spouting off on a message board like this). 

You are 100% wrong. The issues arise from folks expectations of the Trust could/should be doing. They should absolutely keep fighting for their rights and we should absolutely back them all the way.

[wiseowl]

46 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

You are 100% wrong. The issues arise from folks expectations of the Trust could/should be doing. They should absolutely keep fighting for their rights and we should absolutely back them all the way.

You're confusing issues. I (and others) do back the sentiments of the Trust; we just think they'd achieve a lot more as an independent group. It's been done to death - and it's clear that the majority of Trust members are just too sensitive and resistant to change. Hey ho.... it happens but we're all Latics' fans at the end of the day.

[League one forever]

4 hours ago, mcfluff1985 said:

They also the same people who felt relegation wouldn't be a bad thing we'd be rejuvenated, or that nobody would be worse than SC?

Your just making stuff up. Not one person that said either of those things.

 

What would you prefer-

 

The current status quo. 

 

Or

 

A club that’s all under one roof but perhaps in a lower league? 

 

An before you reply. Nobody wants relegation. Nobody. But that isn’t the point, we are talking about the future of the club. Look at the other thread about beer prices- a race to the bottom has already started and your more concerned about playing Crawley rather than Flyde. 

 

‘If we go down, we’ll never come back’ Is often spouted, but again that isn’t important in the grand scheme of things. It’s really, really, not.

 

What is important, is having some pride in the club again. The money club generates all going back into the club.  Everyone pulling in the same direction. A fans bar where people don’t worry where the money is going. A owner who isn’t on a ego trip. A board of some description.  No Barry. Paying our staff on time. Keeping and cherishing good staff. (Clarke) No Brassbank. No dual ownership. No awful statements. No division. 

 

But yeah your right,  let’s keep all the shite as long as we play in league two. . 

 

Edited July 20, 2019 by League one forever

[deyres42]

8 hours ago, wiseowl said:

You're confusing issues. I (and others) do back the sentiments of the Trust; we just think they'd achieve a lot more as an independent group. It's been done to death - and it's clear that the majority of Trust members are just too sensitive and resistant to change. Hey ho.... it happens but we're all Latics' fans at the end of the day.

Supporter trusts across the land fight hard for board representation and yet we'd be better off without it? I don't think so.

[deyres42]

6 hours ago, League one forever said:

Your just making stuff up. Not one person that said either of those things.

 

What would you prefer-

 

The current status quo. 

 

Or

 

A club that’s all under one roof but perhaps in a lower league? 

 

An before you reply. Nobody wants relegation. Nobody. But that isn’t the point, we are talking about the future of the club. Look at the other thread about beer prices- a race to the bottom has already started and your more concerned about playing Crawley rather than Flyde. 

 

‘If we go down, we’ll never come back’ Is often spouted, but again that isn’t important in the grand scheme of things. It’s really, really, not.

 

What is important, is having some pride in the club again. The money club generates all going back into the club.  Everyone pulling in the same direction. A fans bar where people don’t worry where the money is going. A owner who isn’t on a ego trip. A board of some description.  No Barry. Paying our staff on time. Keeping and cherishing good staff. (Clarke) No Brassbank. No dual ownership. No awful statements. No division. 

 

But yeah your right,  let’s keep all the shite as long as we play in league two. . 

 

Some folk just don't get it. It's 'all about the football' to them. Which is fine in a way but also quite sad.