Jump to content

Boundary Park buy out


Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, League one forever said:

Depends what you mean by supporting?

 

Do I think it’s a positive. Yes. 

 

Do I think it will alter the football side of things. . . not one iota. 

 

 

 

It’s wont be a positive if people are going to be boycotting games. 

 

I mean actively supporting by being a customer of it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, kowenicki said:

 

It’s wont be a positive if people are going to be boycotting games. 

 

I mean actively supporting by being a customer of it.  

But where does that money go? 

 

Surely they wouldn’t just give it to Marco?

 

Does it start a pot to oust him eventually? 

 

I will wait to see more detail. 

 

IF I knew for fact that Marco got nowhere near it, I would consider it yes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given what we know my view is that offering any financial support to Abdallah is effectively condoning his behaviour, of course I still support my team, always have and always will even if the clown takes us out of existence. I will probably look to go to some games next season (away) but I will do my best to limit the amount of money I have to give the club by paying on the day where possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, League one forever said:

But where does that money go? 

 

Surely they wouldn’t just give it to Marco?

 

Does it start a pot to oust him eventually? 

 

I will wait to see more detail. 

 

IF I knew for fact that Marco got nowhere near it, I would consider it yes. 

 

Well.  I don’t know, but the “good people” (to quote LeeSinnott) behind this scheme think it’s a good start and the best approach...so I will support them by spending my money in there.  

 

Boycotting will do nothing but continue the decline. Undeniable. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, yarddog73 said:

Given what we know my view is that offering any financial support to Abdallah is effectively condoning his behaviour, of course I still support my team, always have and always will even if the clown takes us out of existence. I will probably look to go to some games next season (away) but I will do my best to limit the amount of money I have to give the club by paying on the day where possible.

 

You won’t support the team if it goes out of existence because it won’t exist.  

 

In reality, you and I (and all of us) would have as much affinity with a Phoenix club as We would with any other club.... none! 

 

 

 

Edited by kowenicki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if Im wrong but the current arrangement is the OAFC pays the landlord a flat rate circa 100k to use Boundary Park? And OAFC sublet out the hospitality to OEC for a sum of Circa £200-£250K This charge doesn't change based on attendances?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GlossopLatic said:

Correct me if Im wrong but the current arrangement is the OAFC pays the landlord a flat rate circa 100k to use Boundary Park? And OAFC sublet out the hospitality to OEC for a sum of Circa £200-£250K This charge doesn't change based on attendances?

 

Probably. Why does that matter? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

Probably. Why does that matter? 

 

Well by choosing to boycott you can argue that you are not against or harming the fans group directly buying the land, but against the current owner as season tickets/match tickets go to him. Money which ofcourse he will waste on more of his rubbish players.

Edited by GlossopLatic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Well by choosing to boycott you can argue that you are not against or harming the fans group directly buying the land, but against the current owner as season tickets/match tickets go to him. Money which ofcourse he will waste on more of his rubbish players.

 

I would think they will want it to be a successful venture.  I think you probably will be harming them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

I would think they will want it to be a successful venture.  I think you probably will be harming them. 

 

Ideally yes but if that doesn't happen then they have positioned themselves to potentially take over the club.

 

The other side to this is how it sits with the current owner I can see it causing conflict. He falls out with everyone it seems and by moving the awards do to Manchester it suggests it's already started. That could potentially lead to a Coventry style situation where owners of the stadium are different and a clash occurs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Ideally yes but if that doesn't happen then they have positioned themselves to potentially take over the club.

 

The other side to this is how it sits with the current owner I can see it causing conflict. He falls out with everyone it seems and by moving the awards do to Manchester it suggests it's already started. That could potentially lead to a Coventry style situation where owners of the stadium are different and a clash occurs.

 

The problem for the owner, though, is he is alienating people left, right and centre so he has very limited options where to move the team to play.
The non league grounds all have too few seats. Bury, Dale & Stockport have rugby sharing. United & City obviously no chance. The non League teams have too few seats as we are not a promtoed club. 

Were we to be relegated it would mean ground sharing permitted...And if we get back in the League

4,000 capacity 500 seats at promotion but the min ability to go 5,000/1,0000. 1,000 seats in place by 1st May.

3rd year after promotion 5,000/2,000 seats

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, singe said:

 

The problem for the owner, though, is he is alienating people left, right and centre so he has very limited options where to move the team to play.
The non league grounds all have too few seats. Bury, Dale & Stockport have rugby sharing. United & City obviously no chance. The non League teams have too few seats as we are not a promtoed club. 

Were we to be relegated it would mean ground sharing permitted...And if we get back in the League

4,000 capacity 500 seats at promotion but the min ability to go 5,000/1,0000. 1,000 seats in place by 1st May.

3rd year after promotion 5,000/2,000 seats

 

Not a chance in hell. 

 

Even for AL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, singe said:

 

The problem for the owner, though, is he is alienating people left, right and centre so he has very limited options where to move the team to play.
The non league grounds all have too few seats. Bury, Dale & Stockport have rugby sharing. United & City obviously no chance. The non League teams have too few seats as we are not a promtoed club. 

Were we to be relegated it would mean ground sharing permitted...And if we get back in the League

4,000 capacity 500 seats at promotion but the min ability to go 5,000/1,0000. 1,000 seats in place by 1st May.

3rd year after promotion 5,000/2,000 seats

 

 

Unlikely I know A rational human being would see this as a bad idea.

 

This isn't a rational human being it's a clown.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Ideally yes but if that doesn't happen then they have positioned themselves to potentially take over the club.

 

The other side to this is how it sits with the current owner I can see it causing conflict. He falls out with everyone it seems and by moving the awards do to Manchester it suggests it's already started. That could potentially lead to a Coventry style situation where owners of the stadium are different and a clash occurs.

iirc the awards do has been held at the sheridan suite before so its not a new thing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Unlikely I know A rational human being would see this as a bad idea.

 

This isn't a rational human being it's a clown.

 

 

When he was shiny and new and the future, and Brass Bank were the worst moving was very much an option.But that was long erm. He is hemmed in for the short term. It's still a danger. Clearly this is one short move on a long series though. Pride mght come before a fall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Lee Sinnott said:

Why...?

 

Why not?  What’s the problem?  I thought the fans demanded disclosure and openness. Or is that only when it suits? 

 

 

Edited by kowenicki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...