Right come on then, how do we get rid of them?

[League one forever]

1 hour ago, GlossopLatic said:

This argument that hes putting money in how much do we believe hes putting in I I don't think its that much. We have drastically reduced the wage bill each season hes been here our club captain has been ostracized for not accepting the fact hes not been paid money he is contractually owed.

 

Weve had the £700k from the Edmondson sale plus the FA cup money which will have got us through 2019 and at the end of 2019 we still £2million of trade creditors i.e. unpaid bills which is something Phillipa from the Trust highlighted as a rather large concern. Thats just the stuff we know about. Im not buying it that hes bailing us out anymore than Corney was between 2010 and 2018.

There is a difference between having no money, and choosing what you want to spend your money on. The best example was when Blitz took him to court. He huffed and puffed but ultimately he paid up. Why? Because it was in his interest, and he had to.  It’s clear that to get money out of him, you have to go to court. Something that players/small business owners maybe reticent to do. In addition, if he’s that hard up, why turn down two separate offers for the club? 

[GlossopLatic]

5 hours ago, League one forever said:

There is a difference between having no money, and choosing what you want to spend your money on. The best example was when Blitz took him to court. He huffed and puffed but ultimately he paid up. Why? Because it was in his interest, and he had to.  It’s clear that to get money out of him, you have to go to court. Something that players/small business owners maybe reticent to do. In addition, if he’s that hard up, why turn down two separate offers for the club? 

 

So pretty much where we were at with Corney circa 2010-2018 who at the time was putting the club up for sale for way beyond its value and putting buyers off with an overinflated price and was only paying bills if people took him to court or we were under embargo where he would beg steal or borrow and pay up.

 

But either way neither properly funded the football club. I think we are in a much more precarious position than some people realise.

[Midsblue]

9 hours ago, GlossopLatic said:

This argument that hes putting money in how much do we believe hes putting in I I don't think its that much. We have drastically reduced the wage bill each season hes been here our club captain has been ostracized for not accepting the fact hes not been paid money he is contractually owed.

 

Weve had the £700k from the Edmondson sale plus the FA cup money which will have got us through 2019 and at the end of 2019 we still £2million of trade creditors i.e. unpaid bills which is something Phillipa from the Trust highlighted as a rather large concern. Thats just the stuff we know about. Im not buying it that hes bailing us out anymore than Corney was between 2010 and 2018.

Did we ever get hard evidence that he is pumping £50k in a month just to cover losses?  
 

That said, have we seen evidence that we’re losing £50k a month?  Who are the creditors?  Exclude the paying off of players he’s dumped (as this is his doing) but HMRC aged was paid off, he was forced to pay Blitz rent and wage bill has dropped dramatically during his tenure.

 

I just don’t believe we’ve ever been in the debt to the level he’s suggesting and it’s convenient that he doesn’t have the funds to strengthen the team because he’s committed to paying off these debts.

 

My opinion is that he’s never had the funds to run this club or maintain a realistic playing budget.  He bought it for a nominal fee in return for paying of historic debt (not the amounts alleged) believing he could capitalise from flooding the club with connected signings to sell on.  He may have some wealth but he was assisted financially to buy the club solely for that project but that project failed dismally as performances warranted his buys with no resale value.  Without cash and the original project failing, the club is now reliant on favours - hence acquiring players from a limited number of agencies or connections to the incumbent manager who also joined for pittance repaying an earlier favour.  We’re toxic to other agencies plus the handling of our more seasoned/experienced players on higher wages won’t get the calibre of player we need fired up to join our club.
 

Clearly he’s heavily reliant on matchday cash flow so it’s hitting him hard now and it wouldn’t surprise me that we’ll shortly be dragged back into court by HMRC or Blitz.

 

The bloke, his brother and the rest of the board are frauds banked by short-term funds peddling a long-term promise of promotion after promotion.  
 

It’s inevitable to end only one way and the faintest of silver linings is that Blitz said he’d support the club through administration until a new owner is found.  Hopefully the FLG emerge again to buy the ground.

[Monty Burns]

15 hours ago, League one forever said:

Pride?

 

If you bought something, and your own ignorance lead to you being shafted. Would you give money to the person who is more clever than you are? 
 

 

Price.

Blitz (cunt) wants back every penny he has ever put in, whilst pretending he hasn't sold off loads of land to build houses and hospitals on.

AL has brought some fuckinshit players in and is a massive bell end, but he shouldn't have to pay for all TTA's fuckinshit players, and a load of land AL won't get and TTA have already been paid big money for.

[al_bro]

17 hours ago, League one forever said:

There is a difference between having no money, and choosing what you want to spend your money on. The best example was when Blitz took him to court. He huffed and puffed but ultimately he paid up. Why? Because it was in his interest, and he had to.  It’s clear that to get money out of him, you have to go to court. Something that players/small business owners maybe reticent to do. In addition, if he’s that hard up, why turn down two separate offers for the club? 

But did he pay up, or did the chap introduced by a member of staff (later sacked) loan him the money?

 

He also had the transfer mobey for the lad who went to Brighton. 

 

I have said before that he won't sell, but may walk away. The season ticket money will most likely have gone to paying off debts already incurred. He must be putting a fare amount in now for players and staff wages, matchday expenses, travel expenses, daily running costs etc. Yet it looks like he's still looking for more players.

 

Does anyone know if the wage cap has actually been introduced by the way?

[GlossopLatic]

Just now, al_bro said:

But did he pay up, or did the chap introduced by a member of staff (later sacked) loan him the money?

 

He also had the transfer mobey for the lad who went to Brighton. 

 

I have said before that he won't sell, but may walk away. The season ticket money will most likely have gone to paying off debts already incurred. He must be putting a fare amount in now for players and staff wages, matchday expenses, travel expenses, daily running costs etc. Yet it looks like he's still looking for more players.

 

Does anyone know if the wage cap has actually been introduced by the way?

 

It might have might not have been but don't assume just because we are losing money hes covering it Id say its more likely things are not being paid. Id be surprised if we avoid administration or multiple winding up petitions by the end of this season probably sooner.

[al_bro]

1 minute ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

It might have might not have been but don't assume just because we are losing money hes covering it Id say its more likely things are not being paid. Id be surprised if we avoid administration or multiple winding up petitions by the end of this season probably sooner.

We may know this week whether or not the PL have come to an agreement with the EFL to hand over some cash. That may stave off admin. and bale him out this season.

[oafcmetty]

6 minutes ago, al_bro said:

We may know this week whether or not the PL have come to an agreement with the EFL to hand over some cash. That may stave off admin. and bale him out this season.

National League clubs getting govt money - maybe they'll give us some too?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54352735

[Canada_latic]

Has anyone thought that the Lemmies are running the club this way deliberately? In order to move the club out of Oldham like in the model of MK Dons. Because if the fan base drops low enough and they've pissed off all the sponsors. Being as they don't own any infrastructure, they can literally just pick up and leave.

[GlossopLatic]

5 hours ago, Canada_latic said:

Has anyone thought that the Lemmies are running the club this way deliberately? In order to move the club out of Oldham like in the model of MK Dons. Because if the fan base drops low enough and they've pissed off all the sponsors. Being as they don't own any infrastructure, they can literally just pick up and leave.

 

Again that viewpoint seems far fetched at best.

 

Im putting it down to the fact that they are just shit.

[Dave_Og]

7 hours ago, Canada_latic said:

Has anyone thought that the Lemmies are running the club this way deliberately? In order to move the club out of Oldham like in the model of MK Dons. Because if the fan base drops low enough and they've pissed off all the sponsors. Being as they don't own any infrastructure, they can literally just pick up and leave.

No

[Monty Burns]

8 hours ago, Canada_latic said:

Has anyone thought that the Lemmies are running the club this way deliberately? In order to move the club out of Oldham like in the model of MK Dons. Because if the fan base drops low enough and they've pissed off all the sponsors. Being as they don't own any infrastructure, they can literally just pick up and leave.

Go where? The area is saturated w clubs as it is..

[100milesaway]

There are 1500 people in Macclesfield looking for a team to watch.     Which is probably more than we would get in Oldham when fans are allowed in again.  

 

I think that there will be shock waves when they realize how many fans have decided to stay away, until the clowns have left the circus.

[BP1960]

28 minutes ago, 100milesaway said:

There are 1500 people in Macclesfield looking for a team to watch.     Which is probably more than we would get in Oldham when fans are allowed in again.  

 

I think that there will be shock waves when they realize how many fans have decided to stay away, until the clowns have left the circus.

 

It's possible though when things return to normal fans will want to watch live football again and attendances will increase as happened after WW2.

[Chaddyexile84]

1 minute ago, BP1960 said:

 

It's possible though when things return to normal fans will want to watch live football again and attendances will increase as happened after WW2.

In world war 2 they didn’t have ifollow reminding you on a weekly basis how shit it is 

[BP1960]

1 minute ago, Chaddyexile84 said:

In world war 2 they didn’t have ifollow reminding you on a weekly basis how shit it is 

 

The point is people will watch anything to get out rather than be stuck at home, 47,000 at BP in 1947, I think we would be delighted with a massive 5,000 now.

[Chaddyexile84]

31 minutes ago, BP1960 said:

 

The point is people will watch anything to get out rather than be stuck at home, 47,000 at BP in 1947, I think we would be delighted with a massive 5,000 now.

45,000 of them are probably dead.  And the flip side is people may have found something cheaper and more enjoyable* than going to BP like the 5 or so thousand we have bled the last 10 years.
 

* like boiling their own heads 

[LaticMark]

17 hours ago, oafcmetty said:

National League clubs getting govt money - maybe they'll give us some too?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54352735

 

The article also says: "On Tuesday the Premier League held what were described as "measured" talks over a possible £250m bail-out of the English Football League (EFL), but no agreement was reached."

 

"Clubs are known to have concerns over their own finances, and will hold a further meeting next Tuesday."

[Canada_latic]

6 hours ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Again that viewpoint seems far fetched at best.

 

Im putting it down to the fact that they are just shit.

 

4 hours ago, Dave_Og said:

No

 

3 hours ago, Monty Burns said:

Go where? The area is saturated w clubs as it is..

I thought it would be a bit far fetched. But I thought I would pose the question. I think a lot of it is being run by their own egos, with a good amount of incompetence thrown in. 

[peanuts2]

4 hours ago, Monty Burns said:

Go where? The area is saturated w clubs as it is..

wasn't there someone looking at moving a club to the Isle of man around the time of the MK Dons move and there is an Isle of man team just entered the football pyramid ? 

[Frankly Mr Shankly]

I think the longer we as a club lurch on, the more I'm thinking our actual future is a fan-owned club bobbing around between the upper echelons of non-league. And you know what, I wouldn't mind that one bit.

 

Fuck professional football. It'll just be three divisions max once Covid-19 is finished with anyway. May as well get used to that now.

[TheBigDog]

2 hours ago, LaticMark said:

 

The article also says: "On Tuesday the Premier League held what were described as "measured" talks over a possible £250m bail-out of the English Football League (EFL), but no agreement was reached."

 

"Clubs are known to have concerns over their own finances, and will hold a further meeting next Tuesday."

 

As City fork out £65m for a centre-back, Liverpool spend £41m on a forward and Wolves spend £27.6m on a full-back... oh and Man Utd are linked with a £90m ( ninety million pounds) deal for a forward.

[underdog]

2 hours ago, TheBigDog said:

 

As City fork out £65m for a centre-back, Liverpool spend £41m on a forward and Wolves spend £27.6m on a full-back... oh and Man Utd are linked with a £90m ( ninety million pounds) deal for a forward.

Did I read that Macclesfield debt that sent them under, was equivalent to the reported weekly wage of Gareth Bale?

[Dave_Og]

25 minutes ago, underdog said:

Did I read that Macclesfield debt that sent them under, was equivalent to the reported weekly wage of Gareth Bale?

£500k vs. £600k.  Although to be fair the latter is pre-tax.

[al_bro]

5 hours ago, LaticMark said:

 

The article also says: "On Tuesday the Premier League held what were described as "measured" talks over a possible £250m bail-out of the English Football League (EFL), but no agreement was reached."

 

"Clubs are known to have concerns over their own finances, and will hold a further meeting next Tuesday."

They were asking the other day, why they should hand over money to clubs like Birmingham and Exeter, which have raked in £30m. and £4m. in one transfer fee. The EFL clubs replied that the clubs concerned had developed those players and shouldn't be penalised for it. Some clubs like Bolton are paying big wages, whilst others are run well like Accrington and Rochdale. I guess it would be up to the EFL how much each club got, but whatever happens clubs will say it's not fare on them. That's if they even get money from the PL or the Government.