Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Some good, some questions.  

 

I’ll get the moan out of the way first.  Considering one of the three is supposed to be in PR, he doesn’t seem to understand how to run a positive and grown up campaign (I guess that’s the way these days). Having PWild there to trot out the same old accusations and “woe is me” was a mistake for me.  It is pointless and was irrelevant in the context of the event. The FLG is on a journey regardless of the past, good or bad.  It just serves to wind up the other side and potentially divide the fan base further.  

 

Please don’t say you are happy to negotiate and at the same time have the event as a mouthpiece for someone to stick the boot in. Move on.  Don’t play to the crowd. Don’t be cocky. Take the high morale ground, be better than them, just deliver on what you say you are going to do in a professional and serious manner.  Have a word with the two Simons and tell them to wind their necks in on social media, it’s a basic that any company would insist upon.

 

 

I’m comforted and relieved that it’s not just the builder and the two Simon's. Those three simply don’t have the funds to splash out £7m.  Thank god there are others involved is all I will say on that as if it was just those three it would be a major problem imo.  (Don’t insult my intelligence by stating you are doing it for nothing either)

 

So the other people, who still don’t want to be named, must have some serious cash, good.  They want to remain anonymous, not so good... but we will have to respect that... for now.  But it shouldn’t go on a minute longer than it needs to.  It’s VERY counter productive to be secretive, it gives room to rumour and accusations.  Anyone got any ideas why someone would need to be incognito in this? Is getting involved in Latics THAT controversial?

 

I’m also a bit puzzled why they didn’t move on this earlier and I’m a bit puzzled why they aren’t trying to buy the club. The timing and the approach does raise a question about their funding. Is this the approach because they need an asset to raise funds against.  In other words,  are they having to mortgage the ground to buy it?  Was that covered at the meeting? 

 

Anyhow. They seem to have a decent plan, but they will need to deliver on it quickly and visibly  to win over the whole fan base.  I’ll certainly support them if it begins to comes through, but I’ll also support the team on the pitch.  

 

One question. How does just the North Stand generate £500k a year for the club from match day activity?  Have I misread that?  I’m sure those ‘in the know’ on here told me we made “feck all” from it and it was a “white elephant”😁

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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 t

I’ve met Corney (SC) a few times and had decent chats about the club.  Also met ex-managers who worked under SC and chatted about their time under him open and honestly.  Don’t know any of the FLG, ne

I know there are frustrations with how the club is being run and Billy is representing the club here, but he's definitely not the one to take it out on.

Posted Images

21 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said:

Everything is for sale. Just depends on the offer

What? 

 

It that a line from a film? 😂

 

Clearly,  that’s bollocks. If AL doesn’t want to sell the badge and the team he doesn’t have to. 

 

He’s already turning down 500k of free money to help run the club. Why? Because he’d rather cheese grate his own knees than ask for help off the FLG. They could offer him 20 million for the lot and he wouldn’t take it. 

 

This is about his pride and his ego. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, League one forever said:

What? 

 

It that a line from a film? 😂

 

Clearly,  that’s bollocks. If AL doesn’t want to sell the badge and the team he doesn’t have to. 

 

He’s already turning down 500k of free money to help run the club. Why? Because he’d rather cheese grate his own knees than ask for help off the FLG. They could offer him 20 million for the lot and he wouldn’t take it. 

 

This is about his pride and his ego. 

 

No it’s not a line from a film, it’s a very well know saying.

 

Don’t be ridiculous. 

Edited by kowenicki
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

Some good, some questions.  

 

I’ll get the moan out of the way first.  Considering one of the three is supposed to be in PR, he doesn’t seem to understand how to run a positive and grown up campaign (I guess that’s the way these days). Having PWild there to trot out the same old accusations and “woe is me” was a mistake for me.  It is pointless and was irrelevant in the context of the event. The FLG is on a journey regardless of the past, good or bad.  It just serves to wind up the other side and potentially divide the fan base further.  

 

Please don’t say you are happy to negotiate and at the same time have the event as a mouthpiece for someone to stick the boot in. Move on.  Don’t play to the crowd. Don’t be cocky. Take the high morale ground, be better than them, just deliver on what you say you are going to do in a professional and serious manner.  Have a word with the two Simons and tell them to wind their necks in on social media, it’s a basic that any company would insist upon.

 

 

I’m comforted and relieved that it’s not just the builder and the two Simon's. Those three simply don’t have the funds to splash out £7m.  Thank god there are others involved is all I will say on that as if it was just those three it would be a major problem imo.  (Don’t insult my intelligence by stating you are doing it for nothing either)

 

So the other people, who still don’t want to be named, must have some serious cash, good.  They want to remain anonymous, not so good... but we will have to respect that... for now.  But it shouldn’t go on a minute longer than it needs to.  It’s VERY counter productive to be secretive, it gives room to rumour and accusations.  Anyone got any ideas why someone would need to be incognito in this? Is getting involved in Latics THAT controversial?

 

I’m also a bit puzzled why they didn’t move on this earlier and I’m a bit puzzled why they aren’t trying to buy the club. The timing and the approach does raise a question about their funding. Is this the approach because they need an asset to raise funds against.  In other words,  are they having to mortgage the ground to buy it?  Was that covered at the meeting? 

 

Anyhow. They seem to have a decent plan, but they will need to deliver on it quickly and visibly  to win over the whole fan base.  I’ll certainly support them if it begins to comes through, but I’ll also support the team on the pitch.  

 

One question. How does just the North Stand generate £500k a year for the club from match day activity?  Have I misread that?  I’m sure those ‘in the know’ on here told me we made “feck all” from it and it was a “white elephant”😁

Mmm.

 

Thats a fair point about professionalism Kow. While I want to hear what wild has got to really say. This wasn’t the time, or paltform. More simply just don’t give him the mic, it does make them look bitter. Which I understand, but rise above it publicly.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is impossible to understand why these people bought the club. The whole pantomime is under thought and under funded. 

 

I would be amazed if there wasn’t a hidden agenda. That may well be going very nicely for them - but not for us. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

No it’s not a line from a film, it’s a very well know saying.

 

Don’t be ridiculous. 

No. You don’t be ridiculous. 😂

 

Come off it Kow, you really think that If FLG made him a bid even with a healthy return he’d sell to them? I say them as they are what we are talking about, and the only interested party. If you want to speculate what he what accept from made up third party. Go ahead. 

Edited by League one forever
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BP1960 said:

 

If I was in the FLG I wouldn't want a penny of my money handing over to AL. Let him pay for his own costs and put the cash into the bank for rainy day.

 

Perhaps we just see it as it is?  FLG providing c£500k pa to club for strengthening.

 

If this Clown is refusing to accept this then surely - and even BoundaryBlue80 cannot dispute this - this should set alarms ringing with the Clown’s motives?

 

If the FLG was dictating that the club must play Paul Whitehead’s grandson up front for 90 minutes every game then understandable.  If however it’s recommending the acquisition of Callum Lang then why turn it down?  

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but it’s not £500k in return for 5% stake in club each season and voting rights?!  There may be conditions but if it’s to the benefit of the club then why refuse?

 

Serious questions now need asking by Trust, by supporters on mass and by local media -

 

1. Why won’t you engage with the FLG?

2. What is the actual £ playing budget for 2019/20 season

3. What of this budget has been spent and how proportioned on each and every player?

4. Do you honestly believe we’ve strengthened the team from last season despite an increase on budget?

 

I strongly believe if you got the truth on points 2 and 3, you’ll understand his motive.

 

Some may say we have no right to answers to these questions as he’s owner.  However if budget is being wasted on these imports and to detriment of the squad this season and immediate future if club then we have every right.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, League one forever said:

Mmm.

 

Thats a fair point about professionalism Kow. While I want to hear what wild has got to really say. This wasn’t the time, or paltform. More simply just don’t give him the mic, it does make them look bitter. Which I understand, but rise above it publicly.  

 

One of the most important rules in business. 

 

Your own message should be good enough that you don’t need to denigrate the opposition. Again, this is basic stuff.  You simply don’t slag off your opposition in business. It shouldn’t be necessary unless you actively want a conflict.  If that’s the case then have the balls to say it. 

 

 

Edited by kowenicki
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, League one forever said:

Alright, I am allowed to exaggerate to make my point? 

 

4 minutes ago, League one forever said:

No. You don’t be ridiculous. 😂

 

Come off it Kow, you really think that If FLG made home a bid even with a healthy return he’d sell to them? I say them as they are what we are talking about, and the only interested party. If you want to speculate what he what except from made up third party. Go ahead. 

 

Make your mind up. 😁

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

Some good, some questions.  

 

I’ll get the moan out of the way first.  Considering one of the three is supposed to be in PR, he doesn’t seem to understand how to run a positive and grown up campaign (I guess that’s the way these days). Having PWild there to trot out the same old accusations and “woe is me” was a mistake for me.  It is pointless and was irrelevant in the context of the event. The FLG is on a journey regardless of the past, good or bad.  It just serves to wind up the other side and potentially divide the fan base further.  

 

Please don’t say you are happy to negotiate and at the same time have the event as a mouthpiece for someone to stick the boot in. Move on.  Don’t play to the crowd. Don’t be cocky. Take the high morale ground, be better than them, just deliver on what you say you are going to do in a professional and serious manner.  Have a word with the two Simons and tell them to wind their necks in on social media, it’s a basic that any company would insist upon.

 

 

I’m comforted and relieved that it’s not just the builder and the two Simon's. Those three simply don’t have the funds to splash out £7m.  Thank god there are others involved is all I will say on that as if it was just those three it would be a major problem imo.  (Don’t insult my intelligence by stating you are doing it for nothing either)

 

So the other people, who still don’t want to be named, must have some serious cash, good.  They want to remain anonymous, not so good... but we will have to respect that... for now.  But it shouldn’t go on a minute longer than it needs to.  It’s VERY counter productive to be secretive, it gives room to rumour and accusations.  Anyone got any ideas why someone would need to be incognito in this? Is getting involved in Latics THAT controversial?

 

I’m also a bit puzzled why they didn’t move on this earlier and I’m a bit puzzled why they aren’t trying to buy the club. The timing and the approach does raise a question about their funding. Is this the approach because they need an asset to raise funds against.  In other words,  are they having to mortgage the ground to buy it?  Was that covered at the meeting? 

 

Anyhow. They seem to have a decent plan, but they will need to deliver on it quickly and visibly  to win over the whole fan base.  I’ll certainly support them if it begins to comes through, but I’ll also support the team on the pitch.  

 

One question. How does just the North Stand generate £500k a year for the club from match day activity?  Have I misread that?  I’m sure those ‘in the know’ on here told me we made “feck all” from it and it was a “white elephant”😁

 

Happy to be proved wrong on this as I didn’t attend and again, I stress, I’m not in the FLG or know any of them.

 

1. Pete Wild.

I too felt PW was inflammatory and probably hindered any progress with club rather than helping.  However, it’s the horses mouth.  Informing the attendees and wider audience that the Clown is interfering to the point a fan who’s dream was to manage the club found his position untenable.

 

2. Secrecy of FLG members

They could well be sponsors of club and declaring involvement would be counter-productive for the present.  In near future, different story.  Could well be someone we know very well who has had recent history with the Clown

 

3. £500k

My view it’s not just match day.  FLG see the OEC as instrumental to aiding club now and making club self-sustainable in future.  If off-field activities are symbiotic with the club then start now and develop over time

 

4. Free lunch

The land value of north stand/stadium will only appreciate especially as it will soon be a massive hole amongst a housing development.  It’s a fail safe for the owners, an investment.  The OEC is a going concern that currently is a loss-maker but FLG see the longer term future where off-field activities will ensure it being profit-making.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

Some good, some questions.  

 

I’ll get the moan out of the way first.  Considering one of the three is supposed to be in PR, he doesn’t seem to understand how to run a positive and grown up campaign (I guess that’s the way these days). Having PWild there to trot out the same old accusations and “woe is me” was a mistake for me.  It is pointless and was irrelevant in the context of the event. The FLG is on a journey regardless of the past, good or bad.  It just serves to wind up the other side and potentially divide the fan base further.  

 

Please don’t say you are happy to negotiate and at the same time have the event as a mouthpiece for someone to stick the boot in. Move on.  Don’t play to the crowd. Don’t be cocky. Take the high morale ground, be better than them, just deliver on what you say you are going to do in a professional and serious manner.  Have a word with the two Simons and tell them to wind their necks in on social media, it’s a basic that any company would insist upon.

 

 

I’m comforted and relieved that it’s not just the builder and the two Simon's. Those three simply don’t have the funds to splash out £7m.  Thank god there are others involved is all I will say on that as if it was just those three it would be a major problem imo.  (Don’t insult my intelligence by stating you are doing it for nothing either)

 

So the other people, who still don’t want to be named, must have some serious cash, good.  They want to remain anonymous, not so good... but we will have to respect that... for now.  But it shouldn’t go on a minute longer than it needs to.  It’s VERY counter productive to be secretive, it gives room to rumour and accusations.  Anyone got any ideas why someone would need to be incognito in this? Is getting involved in Latics THAT controversial?

 

I’m also a bit puzzled why they didn’t move on this earlier and I’m a bit puzzled why they aren’t trying to buy the club. The timing and the approach does raise a question about their funding. Is this the approach because they need an asset to raise funds against.  In other words,  are they having to mortgage the ground to buy it?  Was that covered at the meeting? 

 

Anyhow. They seem to have a decent plan, but they will need to deliver on it quickly and visibly  to win over the whole fan base.  I’ll certainly support them if it begins to comes through, but I’ll also support the team on the pitch.  

 

One question. How does just the North Stand generate £500k a year for the club from match day activity?  Have I misread that?  I’m sure those ‘in the know’ on here told me we made “feck all” from it and it was a “white elephant”😁

I take your point about right time right place for Pete Wild to air his grievances. Also interesting that you who always are asking for proof of the so called "rumours" posted on here have now heard it from "the horses mouth", just not in you preferred forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another important rule in business is to explain your motivation.  The FLG is buying the stadium and car park to protect the future of our club and one person it has to be protected against is Marco.  Marco could have entered into negotiations to buy the stadium and land but for whatever reason declined.

 

If Marco and Mo stay much longer we won't need a stadium and Boundary Park would be be sold for housing by Blitz.  Securing the stadium secures our future even if Marco and Mo do what I expect which is to take us out of the football league.

 

I would like to own a share in the future of my football team and that is what the FLG are working towards.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Hands on said:

Another important rule in business is to explain your motivation.  The FLG is buying the stadium and car park to protect the future of our club and one person it has to be protected against is Marco.  Marco could have entered into negotiations to buy the stadium and land but for whatever reason declined.

 

If Marco and Mo stay much longer we won't need a stadium and Boundary Park would be be sold for housing by Blitz.  Securing the stadium secures our future even if Marco and Mo do what I expect which is to take us out of the football league.

 

I would like to own a share in the future of my football team and that is what the FLG are working towards.

this is spot on its not about taking side its about having a side out on the pitch 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, laticsmarra said:

I take your point about right time right place for Pete Wild to air his grievances. Also interesting that you who always are asking for proof of the so called "rumours" posted on here have now heard it from "the horses mouth", just not in you preferred forum.

 

If Wild wanted to spill his guts why didn’t he do it of his own volition on his own time in a public way?  It’s nothing new. We already new there had been interference, Scholes said it happened. I don’t need any more proof. Thanks for your concern though. 

 

Do do you want to just keep repeating the same speculation, rumour and stories over and over or do you want to move forward and make progress? One is the mindset of the typical canteen, the other is the mindset of an effective boardroom. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else notice the new MD (think she might be called Natalie )and another OAFC employee were there . MD was taking detailed notes and I thought she might have been recording  the presentation as she kept checking her mobile. They were chatting with Simon and Broady before the meeting  started.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Clown doesn’t have funds to buy the land and stands.  He can’t even afford to pay rent to Blitz.  He can’t even fulfil his obligations as an employer on pension payments apparently.

 

The FLG will own the land and OEC.  Basically they’ll be the Clowns landlord and ultimately the main creditor if he opts to not pay rent.

 

I don’t see the Clowns tenure lasting long and he and his sibling could well be smoked out sooner.

 

Question then - will the FLG take ownership of club?  I’m forecasting more pain in months ahead but my prediction that the club could soon be owned / partially owned by a certain individual could come true.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, funkychicken said:

Anyone else notice the new MD (think she might be called Natalie )and another OAFC employee were there . MD was taking detailed notes and I thought she might have been recording  the presentation as she kept checking her mobile. They were chatting with Simon and Broady before the meeting  started.

 

Perhaps edging her bets 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Hands on said:

Another important rule in business is to explain your motivation.  The FLG is buying the stadium and car park to protect the future of our club and one person it has to be protected against is Marco.  Marco could have entered into negotiations to buy the stadium and land but for whatever reason declined.

 

If Marco and Mo stay much longer we won't need a stadium and Boundary Park would be be sold for housing by Blitz.  Securing the stadium secures our future even if Marco and Mo do what I expect which is to take us out of the football league.

 

I would like to own a share in the future of my football team and that is what the FLG are working towards.

 

Agree 100%.  Doesn’t alter the fact that they may have no choice but to do it this way as they need to secure debt. 

 

I only have 3 questions really. 

 

Source of funds?

Who are the others? (Scholes keeps cropping up)

What is the £500k generated from? 

 

 

Edited by kowenicki
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kowenicki said:

 

If Wild wanted to spill his guts why didn’t he do it of his own volition on his own time in a public way?  It’s nothing new. We already new there had been interference, Scholes said it happened. I don’t need any more proof. Thanks for your concern though. 

 

Do do you want to just keep repeating the same speculation, rumour and stories over and over or do you want to move forward and make progress? One is the mindset of the typical canteen, the other is the mindset of an effective boardroom. 

 

 

I work within many effective boardrooms and know how they work. Being a supercillious nitpicker is not an attribute that is effective in any boardroom.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, laticsmarra said:

I work within many effective boardrooms and know how they work. Being a supercillious nitpicker is not an attribute that is effective in any boardroom.

 

Ohhh I dunno. I work in a very effective one. In my experience you need all types in a boardroom. Not just ‘yes men’ and facsimiles of the MD. 

 

Anyhow, glad you agree with the overall message in my previous post. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said:

So people are saying AL and the club is guaranteed to be £500k better off due to money from North Stand?

 

Doesn't make sense

 

I’m assuming this is a projection based on something.  I can’t see any way it generates anywhere near than in total revenue now for the OEC, let alone what they can pass on to the club after costs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kowenicki said:

 

I’m assuming this is a projection based on something.  I can’t see any way it generates anywhere near than in total revenue now for the OEC, let alone what they can pass on to the club after costs. 

Exactly. And if the club will be £500k off. Why not just give him profit less his rent?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Matt locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...