Jump to content

BPAS PODCAST: 31st May '21 Episode 37: KC & The Suspect Stand


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, PeteG said:

Agree with most of what you have said except you say the FLG say they are running the OEC, in what official capacity? If you were renting a house and some random guy knocked on your door and said i'm now running the house on behalf of your landlord and i'm putting your rent up would you just accept that or would you contact your landlord and fail to recognise said random guy until they are acting in some official capacity?

That’s a poor example, but taking your metaphor it would go like this. 
 

You ring the landlord, and say- this guy has showed up saying he’s acting on your behalf, and what’s to charge an additional cost for using the conservatory. 
 

The landlord says ‘yeah I’ve got tired of dealing with it, so I’ve appointed a company to look after for me, you’ll have to go through them now’ 

 

But the conservatory has always been part of the rent for the house!? 
 

Not anymore, listen I’ve got to go. But you either pay the additional cost or don’t use it. 
 

Right fine, go fuck yourself I don’t even like it anyway. (Wife sits quietly crying in the corner) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, League one forever said:

That’s a poor example, but taking your metaphor it would go like this. 
 

You ring the landlord, and say- this guy has showed up saying he’s acting on your behalf, and what’s to charge an additional cost for using the conservatory. 
 

The landlord says ‘yeah I’ve got tired of dealing with it, so I’ve appointed a company to look after for me, you’ll have to go through them now’ 

 

But the conservatory has always been part of the rent for the house!? 
 

Not anymore, listen I’ve got to go. But you either pay the additional cost or don’t use it. 
 

Right fine, go fuck yourself I don’t even like it anyway. (Wife sits quietly crying in the corner) 

That's it! Except the bit where you said you now have to go through this company. The FLG haven't set up a company as far as i can see to run the OEC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, League one forever said:

That’s a poor example, but taking your metaphor it would go like this. 
 

You ring the landlord, and say- this guy has showed up saying he’s acting on your behalf, and what’s to charge an additional cost for using the conservatory. 
 

The landlord says ‘yeah I’ve got tired of dealing with it, so I’ve appointed a company to look after for me, you’ll have to go through them now’ 

 

But the conservatory has always been part of the rent for the house!? 
 

Not anymore, listen I’ve got to go. But you either pay the additional cost or don’t use it. 
 

Right fine, go fuck yourself I don’t even like it anyway. (Wife sits quietly crying in the corner) 


If your tenancy hasn’t come to an end - tell your wife to perk up and the landlord and his mate to fellate you as you are still under contract 

 

If it has he can just kick you out as the OEC, FLG, The Sun God Ra and anyone else involved have effectively done 

Edited by Chaddyexile84
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PeteG said:

I went back and listened to it a 2nd time and you both did. You said the club could rake it in. Unfortunately that isn't the case is it? OEC take the profits. The club had an SLA a couple of seasons ago for the exec. boxes that the OEC charged "cost price" for meals and the club then sold the packages. After paying the OEC for the meals, staff etc. they were left with the price of a normal match ticket. Hardly worth it is it. The club should have tried to secure a full 7 day lease allowing them to earn money 7 days a week from the stand as it was intended for.

Actually Pete, if the club were paying “cost price” for meals to the OEC, surely it was their own mismanagement that they were left with no profit on top of “normal match ticket price”.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Pidge said:

Actually Pete, if the club were paying “cost price” for meals to the OEC, surely it was their own mismanagement that they were left with no profit on top of “normal match ticket price”.

 

That's a fair point. However, i'd imagine there is a ceiling price for corporate hospitality in League 2. If the "cost price" is quite high it's going to cut into any potential profit the club could have made. Also, could the club have asked me a cheaper menu, staffed it themselves? I'd imagine there could have been many ways to re-negotiate the SLA but ultimately neither party has engaged. I still think it's difficult with 2 parties involved but when there is 3 it's almost impossible and so it has proved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PeteG said:

The FLG haven't set up a company as far as i can see to run the OEC

 

The only people I can recall that have been identified with the FLG are Paul Whitehead, Simon Brooke, and Simon Wood. As far as I'm aware the latter two are still involved in running the OEC. To put it another way, some of the people who run the OEC are also 'members' of the FLG! That's about it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LaticMark said:

 

The only people I can recall that have been identified with the FLG are Paul Whitehead, Simon Brooke, and Simon Wood. As far as I'm aware the latter two are still involved in running the OEC. To put it another way, some of the people who run the OEC are also 'members' of the FLG! That's about it!

But you can't just run a company for someone else. Are you saying the OEC employ Paul Whitehead, Simon Brooke and Simon Wood because legally they have nothing to do with the OEC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, BP1960 said:

 

What impact has she made? 


Probably done all right for the OEC she was always brought in for that part back when they were still pretending the club benefitted from it 

 

https://www.oldhamathletic.co.uk/news/2015/april/latics-appoint-anna-kocerhan-to-board-of-directors/

 

Edited by Chaddyexile84
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, PeteG said:

But you can't just run a company for someone else. Are you saying the OEC employ Paul Whitehead, Simon Brooke and Simon Wood because legally they have nothing to do with the OEC.

🙄  Pete this is tedious. You keep posting with assuredness but are talking absolute bollocks. 
 

 What do you mean, you can’t run a company for someone else?? Absolutely bizarre statement. That is exactly what is happening. 


Who invented the OEC? Blitz. 
 

How does Simon wood occupy a restaurant in the OEC if he doesn't pay rent to it- and ultimately Blitz. 
 

How do Brooke/Whitehead/Wood know each other? Because they just happen to be the ring leaders of FLG?

 

Why are they trying to negotiate with the club, if they have nothing to do with the OEC? 
 

What does legally even mean in your eyes, and what are the ramifications? I don’t think you know. I just think you like to imply wrongdoing without anything of note to back it up. 

 

You sound really desperate to prove/shed light on things that you think people aren’t aware of. Or that ultimately mean nothing, because no action has been taken against anybody. 
 


 


 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Glo Gym won't pay the OEC they sub let the gym from either OAFC or Brassbank. Brassbank is Blitz OEC is simon Brooke and the fella from materchef. They are 2 different entities.

GLO gym entered into a lease with Brassbank

 

and OAFC rent increases on 1st July this year too, unless it has been re-negotiated

Edited by underdog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, underdog said:

GLO gym entered into a lease with Brassbank

 

and OAFC rent increases on 1st July this year too, unless it has been re-negotiated

As you say Tracey, Blitz stated in his Q&A the rent goes up to £200k (which Abdallah signed and agreed to do) and still no negotiations regarding use or price so I would doubt there would be a change to that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, adamoafc said:

As you say Tracey, Blitz stated in his Q&A the rent goes up to £200k (which Abdallah signed and agreed to do) and still no negotiations regarding use or price so I would doubt there would be a change to that. 

Yes that is OASF understanding too. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The stand is the perfect legacy to Blitz Gazal and Corneys reign. The promise of a completely redeveloped Boundary Park which turned into a new stadium at Failsworth which turned into 1 new stand, which turned into 1 new stand which we don't own. One massive great big false dawn.

 

Its a shame we didn't have a fan on the board who could have challenged all this at the time, oh wait.....

 

And despite this the bigger problem is still the current owner who knew all about this when he bought the club. But as things started to turned to shit for him he has used this as a rather convenient excuse to mask his own incompetence.

Edited by GlossopLatic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, LaticMark said:

 

The only people I can recall that have been identified with the FLG are Paul Whitehead, Simon Brooke, and Simon Wood. As far as I'm aware the latter two are still involved in running the OEC. To put it another way, some of the people who run the OEC are also 'members' of the FLG! That's about it!

I'm not a fan of the flg, what have they actually done ? Paul Whitehouse seems a nasty piece of work on Twitter anyone questions him get a abuse. Another person who uses Twitter drunk I guess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, latics22 said:

I'm not a fan of the flg, what have they actually done ? Paul Whitehouse seems a nasty piece of work on Twitter anyone questions him get a abuse. Another person who uses Twitter drunk I guess. 

As most of their plans centred around hospitality in the Joe Royle stand t here's not a lot that could have been done over the last 15 months 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave_Og said:

As most of their plans centred around hospitality in the Joe Royle stand t here's not a lot that could have been done over the last 15 months 

They announced they had purchased A shares in the club the 2nd big announcement after the one they had agreed to buy the ground. None of which have come to anything. Buying shares in the club were nothing to do with hospitality in the North Stand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, PeteG said:

They announced they had purchased A shares in the club the 2nd big announcement after the one they had agreed to buy the ground. None of which have come to anything. Buying shares in the club were nothing to do with hospitality in the North Stand. 

and were scuppered by the owner massively diluting that shareholding

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave_Og said:

and were scuppered by the owner massively diluting that shareholding

Perfectly legal and entitled to do given he was putting funds into the club. You'd have thought they might have done some research before making a massive announcement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, PeteG said:

Perfectly legal and entitled to do given he was putting funds into the club. You'd have thought they might have done some research before making a massive announcement. 

I'd tend to agree although I suspect they paid the square root of bugger all for those shares.  Certainly a lot less per share than Lemsagam paid for his.  It was a gesture and statement of intent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave_Og said:

I'd tend to agree although I suspect they paid the square root of bugger all for those shares.  Certainly a lot less per share than Lemsagam paid for his.  It was a gesture and statement of intent

They never actually stated that they had bought the shares, just that they were intending to. At that point AL decided to dilute the value and everything went quiet. If they did buy them at the time they will have lost quite a bit of money. They were also negotiating to buy the stadium; but decided against it when they discovered that AL was doing the same. No hope of anyone doing that until things get back to something like normal I would guess.

 

The three people who are now known as the FLG run the OEC for Brassbank and no doubt take a share of the profits. That's how I understand it anyway, but this discussion goes on and on, over and over again.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Manchester Evening News

  • 12:14, 28 JUL 2011

 

Oldham Athletic are set to stay at Boundary Park, we can reveal.

It is understood council bosses want to give the club £5.7m to redevelop the crumbling 107-year-old ground – which would end plans to move elsewhere.

The cash injection will be used to build a new North Stand, we understand.

The plans are expected to be rubber-stamped at a meeting of town hall bosses on Monday.

Oldham council leader Jim McMahon said: "We don’t want the club to leave the town on our watch.

"This mess has been going on for 10 years. It’s now down to Oldham Athletic to make this a success.

 

"We wanted to keep the club in the town and we have done that."

The League One club had hoped to sell up and switch to a brand new 12,000-capacity stadium which was to be built in Failsworth.

 

They spent around £5m acquiring land close to Broadway in preparation for the move.

But those plans dramatically collapsed in February when the Charity Commission ruled a stadium could not be built on the site thanks to a covenant dating back to the First World War.

As a result Latics were left facing financial ruin as investors in the project pulled the plug.

Other sites in the town have since been looked at for a new base.

And on Monday proposals for the council to buy the Lancaster Club, part of the land, from Latics will go before a cabinet meeting.

It is thought any funds raised would go towards the Latics redevelopment with the Lancaster Club possibly being turned into a leisure complex.

The deal, which a council source said totalled £5.7m, includes funds from the sale of the Lancaster Club, a three-year loan and a separate land sale.

Nobody at Oldham Athletic wished to comment although a club source said the agreement was verbal and that some scepticism remained.

It is thought the deal includes a clause which stipulates that it will only go ahead if the money is used to build a new facility which will replace the bulldozed Broadway stand.

That is likely to include a hotel, conference facilities and a number of retail outlets, although planning has not yet begun.

Councillor McMahon added: "We have been working hard since regarding control of Oldham Council to resolve the long running saga of Oldham Athletic.

 

*******************************************************************************************************************************************************

 

Easy to forget how long this has been dragging on for 😧

 

Edited by tGWB
spello
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...