New PTB and OASF joint statement.

[deyres42]

6 minutes ago, League one forever said:

Just holding you to account in the same way you do to others pal.

 

Like you said earlier, it’s a forum. Not sure why you think it’s personal, strange comment that. Unless your a bit over sensitive to be challenged? 

This thread is a case in point, I make a perfectly reasonable point at the start and it descends into jibes towards me. But I'll not lose too much sleep over it.

[LightDN123]

Just now, deyres42 said:

This thread is a case in point, I make a perfectly reasonable point at the start and it descends into jibes towards me. But I'll not lose too much sleep over it.

It’s not personal it’s more you sit here and criticise, you had an opportunity on the pod to voice concerns but kind of said nothing given you clearly have strong views. Yet you can’t offer any form of alternative ?

 

You just result back to I have no alternative but that doesn’t mean I can’t criticise. Which is what I think annoys posters on here, especially given you constantly bang that drum. 

[League one forever]

7 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

This thread is a case in point, I make a perfectly reasonable point at the start and it descends into jibes towards me. But I'll not lose too much sleep over it.

 

Legend in your own lunchtime.

 

Think you need to get over yourself a bit pal. No one cares about you - personally.
 

We do care about the constant criticism you give the osfa and the PTB, and as much you post your view I will continue to challenge it. Because I completely disagree with everything you say on this issue.
 

 

[deyres42]

8 minutes ago, basilrobbie said:

 

Again, this is a very strange and poorly informed way of looking at things, for me. 

 

I don't know anything about how the Foundation worked previously, but if it really had membership of around 200 at a time when the club's fortunes were deteriorating, that suggests to me that it was struggling for relevance (and not alone in that, as all Trusts face that challenge, even the successful ones). You describe growing the membership as a "small win", but in reality that enhanced "reach" is where the Foundation derives its mandate and moral authority from. I know from personal experience that this is very, very important.

 

Does all that sound a bit highbrow? I suppose it does. But at some point in this electoral cycle there is a good chance that

 

* Supporters Trusts will hold a "golden share" in respect of heritage issues

 

* there will be a Shadow Board made up of supporters of the club who the latter has to deal with whether it likes it or not, and

 

* there should be an independent regulator looking at the way owners and Directors behave, and at the manner in which they run their business

 

All of which suggests that critically evaluating what your club does, how it does it and what it achieves will become the norm, rather than the exclusive preserve of the fans of clubs who are in trouble. 

 

On the issue of money ; yes, trying to raise £1m is hugely ambitious (do you want them not to be?). But the fans of Pompey raised three times that amount. Even the fans at Exeter, who are arguably a smaller club than Oldham, have managed to own and sustain their club for a generation now. It can be done. And while all the changes that are coming  (which I described above), will represent a huge change, they are not going to come soon enough to help you deal with the crisis you face NOW. The new Foundation and PTB seem to understand that while they wait for the cavalry to arrive they have to pursue a policy of self help. And raising money gives you options for achieving this.

 

You have a perfect right to criticise, but I think a number of people are saying that what you do say is rarely constructive. And you consistently lay yourself open to the question - what would you do instead? To which you seem to have absolutely no answers.

 

 

 

 

You are much smarter and clued up on these things than me pal so I won't try to argue with you at that front.

 

Pompey are in a different league fanbase wise and in the current economic climate I don't think we could raise a million pounds in 5 years let alone one, I don't wish to diminish the idea, I just don't think it is realistic.

[deyres42]

5 minutes ago, League one forever said:

 

Legend in your own lunchtime.

 

Think you need to get over yourself a bit pal. No one cares about you - personally.
 

We do care about the constant criticism you give the osfa and the PTB, and as much you post your view I will continue to challenge it. Because I completely disagree with everything you say on this issue.
 

 

No problem, maybe I'll start calling everyone I disagree with a troll, see how boring it gets.

[deyres42]

17 minutes ago, LightDN123 said:

It’s not personal it’s more you sit here and criticise, you had an opportunity on the pod to voice concerns but kind of said nothing given you clearly have strong views. Yet you can’t offer any form of alternative ?

 

You just result back to I have no alternative but that doesn’t mean I can’t criticise. Which is what I think annoys posters on here, especially given you constantly bang that drum. 

I geniunely don't remember being asked to give my views on that particular topic so not sure where this idea has stemmed from. If I was asked and I didn't then fair play, I'm bang to rights!

[League one forever]

11 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

No problem, maybe I'll start calling everyone I disagree with a troll, see how boring it gets.

You have to do what makes you happy I guess. 

[oafcmetty]

44 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

You are much smarter and clued up on these things than me pal so I won't try to argue with you at that front.

 

Pompey are in a different league fanbase wise and in the current economic climate I don't think we could raise a million pounds in 5 years let alone one, I don't wish to diminish the idea, I just don't think it is realistic.

Plenty of Oldham fans out there with a bit of wedge. Not necessarily millionaires and the like, but if the cause was right, a million is achievable.

[tGWB]

9 hours ago, deyres42 said:

For all the back slapping apart from trashing the work of previous Trust directors and trashing any relationship with the club what has actually been achieved? Growing the membership a small win yes. Other than that it seems to consist of a few surveys, some ridiculous talk about raising a million quid and losing nearly as many directors as they recruited.

 

8 hours ago, yarddog73 said:

Must admit I find the direction they are going in a tad confusing, if all the problems we have suddenly disappear by putting a club legend in charge then they really couldn't have amounted to much, if this team had been given the support it's receiving now earlier in the season then we probably would find ourselves welcoming Northampton on Friday sitting in lower mid table.

 

I'm far from Eyres' biggest fan as he loves to go against the grain but you cannot deny any protest now will lose credibility, you cannot switch on and off a boycott because your principals have changed, if Shez was bringing investors with him I get it but as far as I am aware he is not so why are we happy to flood the club with money in relative terms because all you are doing is stabilising the Lemsagams position whether we stay up or not.

 

I'm not after an argument on here I just feel that PTB and OASF have got this one wrong and I know plenty who are involved.

 

Controversial maybe but I can see both yarddog73 and deyres42 points of view 

[League one forever]

11 minutes ago, tGWB said:

 

 

Controversial maybe but I can see both yarddog73 and deyres42 points of view 

Which is what- in your view?

 

Because as far I can see, they don’t like or agree with a changing position and it’s confusing them. 
 

So let’s go to the other side of the coin then, and give them a non confusing, and consistent position.

 

Which is- we want the owners out no matter what, and we we won’t react to anything the club says or does because our position will never change. 
 

AL- I’m selling. 
 

OASF no sorry, we’re not listening. 

AL - I thought that’s what you wanted. 
 

OASF- well it is, but the fans get confused if we react to a fluid situation so we just keep saying the same thing. 

 

Can you see the issue with this? 

 

[Matt]

1 hour ago, League one forever said:

...and as much you post your view I will continue to challenge it. Because I completely disagree with everything you say on this issue....

 

 

[General comment not directed to the quoted poster]

 

...and this is the basis of it all really. There is a mature method here which needs to be adhered to, and it's that the discourse is centred around challenges against the points of discussion - as soon as it the conversation turns aggressive, personal, and generally that of someone who can't control their emotion - I'm going to just ban folk. I don't get paid for this, but by the same token we won't allow anyone to run roughshod over the way that the site has evolved - and we think it has been managed into a pretty safe area for debate - and that's testament to all of you.

 

Stop with the goading, taunting, daft reporting of comments, threats, schoolyard insults, and think before you submit that post - does it add anything to the conversation? No, don't post it then. I'm I sub-posting something to be provocative? Yes, don't post it then. Get back to what you do best - debating.

 

Cheers.

[yarddog73]

1 hour ago, League one forever said:

Which is what- in your view?

 

Because as far I can see, they don’t like or agree with a changing position and it’s confusing them. 
 

So let’s go to the other side of the coin then, and give them a non confusing, and consistent position.

 

Which is- we want the owners out no matter what, and we we won’t react to anything the club says or does because our position will never change. 
 

AL- I’m selling. 
 

OASF no sorry, we’re not listening. 

AL - I thought that’s what you wanted. 
 

OASF- well it is, but the fans get confused if we react to a fluid situation so we just keep saying the same thing. 

 

Can you see the issue with this? 

 

Out of interest then are we boycotting again on Friday then given there is no apparent buyer and Mo and Shitpeas are back on the scene? I'm not really arsed what division we are in if the Lemsagams and Owen are still festering anywhere near the boardroom. 

[League one forever]

5 minutes ago, yarddog73 said:

Out of interest then are we boycotting again on Friday then given there is no apparent buyer and Mo and Shitpeas are back on the scene? I'm not really arsed what division we are in if the Lemsagams and Owen are still festering anywhere near the boardroom. 

I completely agree with your second sentence, and have said similar myself for ages. 
 

Protesting should start again- yes.  For exactly the reasons you say. They’re completely disingenuous 
 

Boycotting the last 5 games at this stage is counter productive and I think Shez deserves our support for the next five games. And anyway, going off season tickets sales, the boycott for next season has already started. 

 

 

 

[Worcester Owl]

4 hours ago, yarddog73 said:

My issue with this is AL aided by the likes of shitpeas knows exactly how to appease fans he has previous for it particularly throughout the Corney years when he lied through his back teeth to keep fans onside, bringing in Shez achieves little particularly when we are selling three thousand more tickets for fixtures than we was prior to Shez' appointment, of course a protest can be fluid but in my opinion our fanbase has been played with the Lemsagams laughing their tits off at the naivety.

Some fair points there @yarddog73but I disagree on the point in bold. If Shez keeps us in the FL then that’s a big achievement.

[tGWB]

2 hours ago, League one forever said:

Which is what- in your view?

 

Because as far I can see, they don’t like or agree with a changing position and it’s confusing them. 
 

So let’s go to the other side of the coin then, and give them a non confusing, and consistent position.

 

Which is- we want the owners out no matter what, and we we won’t react to anything the club says or does because our position will never change. 
 

AL- I’m selling. 
 

OASF no sorry, we’re not listening. 

AL - I thought that’s what you wanted. 
 

OASF- well it is, but the fans get confused if we react to a fluid situation so we just keep saying the same thing. 

 

Can you see the issue with this? 

 

I am going to the last few Home games of the season and likely Tranmere away 

 

Attending BP next season is very much dependant on who is the manager, what players we bring in and of course how the sale of the club has progressed 

 

Makes sense to me anyway 

[Chaddyexile84]

2 hours ago, Matt said:

 

[General comment not directed to the quoted poster]

 

...and this is the basis of it all really. There is a mature method here which needs to be adhered to, and it's that the discourse is centred around challenges against the points of discussion - as soon as it the conversation turns aggressive, personal, and generally that of someone who can't control their emotion - I'm going to just ban folk. I don't get paid for this, but by the same token we won't allow anyone to run roughshod over the way that the site has evolved - and we think it has been managed into a pretty safe area for debate - and that's testament to all of you.

 

Stop with the goading, taunting, daft reporting of comments, threats, schoolyard insults, and think before you submit that post - does it add anything to the conversation? No, don't post it then. I'm I sub-posting something to be provocative? Yes, don't post it then. Get back to what you do best - debating.

 

Cheers.

 

Can you please make the ignore button work both ways? It's laughable to ignore but still be given the option to see then also have them see and comment on your content 

 

For my part I will try to avoid emotional responses I'm diagnosed as mental so sorry for causing offence to anyone except a user we know 

[Mercater]

8 minutes ago, Chaddyexile84 said:

 

Can you please make the ignore button work both ways? It's laughable to ignore but still be given the option to see then also have them see and comment on your content 

 

For my part I will try to avoid emotional responses I'm diagnosed as mental so sorry for causing offence to anyone except a user we know 

Why else would you support Oldham

[Matt]

10 hours ago, Chaddyexile84 said:

 

Can you please make the ignore button work both ways?

 

We can't. There is no option out of the box, and we don't have the time/resource to code it or find an add-in that we could buy - even if we had the cash. We're not going to just throw money at it just for QOL of a couple of users.

[LaticMark]

On 4/8/2022 at 3:20 PM, kowenicki said:

 

 

It's now 3 months to the day that Abdallah Lemsagam said he would sell Latics.

 

Time to get an update?

[Dave_Og]

14 minutes ago, LaticMark said:

 

It's now 3 months to the day that Abdallah Lemsagam said he would sell Latics.

 

Time to get an update?

I think the whole point is that there hasn't been one. 

[wiseowl]

17 hours ago, oafcmetty said:

Plenty of Oldham fans out there with a bit of wedge. Not necessarily millionaires and the like, but if the cause was right, a million is achievable.

Never in a million years will the fans raise a million pounds (in my opinion).

 

[oafc1955]

1 hour ago, wiseowl said:

Never in a million years will the fans raise a million pounds (in my opinion).

 

If the money was to be used by OASF to buy the ground/club as part of a consortium I think they would definitely raise £1m and maybe even more. I mentioned before that there has to be some sort of recognition for your financial input.ie. a share type scheme that could be instigated at a later date. If you donated in £50/£100/£150 and were issued some sort of certificate for increments there of I would put in my ST money no doubt!

[PeteG]

8 minutes ago, oafc1955 said:

If the money was to be used by OASF to buy the ground/club as part of a consortium I think they would definitely raise £1m and maybe even more. I mentioned before that there has to be some sort of recognition for your financial input.ie. a share type scheme that could be instigated at a later date. If you donated in £50/£100/£150 and were issued some sort of certificate for increments there of I would put in my ST money no doubt!

I think and could be wrong but as a charity there is limitations to how they can invest that money, certainly investing the majority of it into any kind of consortium.

[Mercater]

2 minutes ago, PeteG said:

I think and could be wrong but as a charity there is limitations to how they can invest that money, certainly investing the majority of it into any kind of consortium.

Maybe true. Perhaps it could be set up as CIC? Unsure

[kowenicki]

Fans aren’t gifting a combined £1m without a plan/goal. (It is a gift by the way. If you are giving it then don’t expect a return. A retrospective ‘share scheme’ is fanciful within this context (and would be worthless anyway))
 

Blitz isn’t our saviour. Why would he be? Surely the opposite suits him. The club is a headache that either goes away because someone pays his ridiculous price or it goes bust. One of those is far more likely than the other right now. 
 

The point of my original question was to seek an update regarding progress on lobbying/securing interest from prospective buyers. With no new buyer, willing to take a chance and buy the lot, we are ‘rearranging the deckchairs’.

 

Sorry to be such a pessimist… not my usual style at all.