BPAS Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 In this episode, we are joined by Paul Whitehead & Dom Lowe of OASF who explain what they've been doing in conjunction with the FSA, The Co-Operative UK and the Mayor of Greater Manchester's office in preparation to convert OASF to a CBS - Community Benefit Society - and why that will be of benefit to all Oldham Athletic supporters. We have then edited and included the relevant discussion from The Co-Operative Congress, held last weekend in Birmingham, where Paul and Dom represented us, alongside Andy Burnham Mayor of Greater Manchester, Author and Broadcaster John Robb, Andy Walsh of the FSA, a representative from Derby County's Supporters Trust & Rose Marley of The Co-Operative UK. You can now support the pod by paying a monthly subscription of just £2.99 via this link https://anchor.fm/bp-alert/subscribe. All the regular episodes will remain free to everyone. You can also support us by visiting https://www.oafcpodcast.co.uk, subscribing to our mailing list and purchasing from our online shop. Follow the show on Twitter, Instagram & Facebook @oafcpodcast. Download and listen to the podcast via the FanHub app, where content creators and fans alike are rewarded for getting involved #ctg. You can find out more about Push The Boundary by visiting them at www.pushtheboundary.co.uk and following on Twitter @PTB_OAFC. Find out more about OASF at www.oldhamathleticsupportersfoundation.com where you can also donate to the 1895 Fund. Title music is by Manchester DJ and producer Starion find out more at www.redlaserrecords.bandcamp.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basilrobbie Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 I haven't listened to the section from the Birmingham event as yet, am saving that for later. I find all the recent events very encouraging ; I talked on Twitter about momentum, but a lot of disparate activity feels like it is coming together now. I think the point about the democratic legitimacy of OASF was well made. Football club ownership is a risky and complex business these days, and having decent networks, professional credibility and a mandate of your own for action are all so important if you are to get to where you want to be. If the fan-led review leads to even half of the change that I am hoping for, then the Foundation/Trust is going to have responsibilities that it holds on behalf of all of you around making the football club more responsive and accountable to the fanbase, so all this is grist to that particular mill. It's important that many people come forward and play a part though. You may feel that what you can do doesn't count for much, but put together it can make a big difference and free up the capacity of the people who are grappling with issues such as this. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzlatic Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 Another great listen, thank you for putting this together with all the pertinent points from the event. It really gives hope for the future to hear these initiatives being discussed and pursued and just shows what might be achieved by looking at how things could be better rather than a blinkered view of football club ownership. Imagine Boundary Park and the surrounding area being owned by the community and being for the community, rather than taking a simplistic view along the lines of sell land, buy striker. Or 50 grand wouldn't last 3 days. Or "my owner". A stark warning sign from the lady discussing Derby and how they thought things would improve when they got a wealthy local owner in only to see it all turn to shit. Well done and good luck to everyone involved in trying to make this happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
League one forever Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 50 minutes ago, nzlatic said: Another great listen, thank you for putting this together with all the pertinent points from the event. It really gives hope for the future to here these initiatives being discussed and pursued and just shows what might be achieved by looking at how things could be better rather than a blinkered view of football club ownership. Imagine Boundary Park and the surrounding area being owned by the community and being for the community, rather than taking a simplistic view along the lines of sell land, buy striker. Or 50 grand wouldn't last 3 days. Or "my owner". A stark warning sign from the lady discussing Derby and how they thought things would improve when they got a wealthy local owner in only to see it all turn to shit. Well done and good luck to everyone involved in trying to make this happen. Yeah, I’ve said before - a proper community club has become more and more appealing. Even off that means there is a ceiling, but to be honest they’re would be with a rich owner as well. Unless it was Jim Radcliffe- which is never going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzlatic Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 Just realised I used the word "pertinent". Which I think is a Barry favourite. Urgh, I feel sick. I apologise unreservedly. If I ever use "purported", or even worse, "fiduciary", please ban me from the forum indefinitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 27 minutes ago, nzlatic said: Just realised I used the word "pertinent". Which I think is a Barry favourite. Urgh, I feel sick. I apologise unreservedly. If I ever use "purported", or even worse, "fiduciary", please ban me from the forum indefinitely. 'what you've got to understand is...' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basilrobbie Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 I've listened to it all now, interesting stuff. I don't think the "German model" (50% + 1) is regarded as being suitable for England now, if it ever was. Interestingly, the Germans moved to that approach from a previous desire to see 100% fan ownership, and are now contemplating moving back the other way again. But the cost implications of moving to such a model in England run into tens of billions and would be hugely resisted if anyone seriously tried to make it happen. It was however a convenient point from which to start a debate. The question of how you legislate to bar leveraged buyouts, and preclude the kind of complex management structures that have hindered the resolution of the Derby case is very interesting too. However well we design the regulatory powers for the new body, I suspect that dealing with these problems may end up being a two or three stage process : 1) identify the problem 2) make recommendations for football-related rule changes that mitigate it 3) seek legislative change in related areas of company and insolvency law I wonder whether the long term answer is to designate football clubs as protected in much the same way as heritage sites and AONB are. That might be a step too far for some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 20 minutes ago, basilrobbie said: I've listened to it all now, interesting stuff. I don't think the "German model" (50% + 1) is regarded as being suitable for England now, if it ever was. Interestingly, the Germans moved to that approach from a previous desire to see 100% fan ownership, and are now contemplating moving back the other way again. But the cost implications of moving to such a model in England run into tens of billions and would be hugely resisted if anyone seriously tried to make it happen. It was however a convenient point from which to start a debate. The question of how you legislate to bar leveraged buyouts, and preclude the kind of complex management structures that have hindered the resolution of the Derby case is very interesting too. However well we design the regulatory powers for the new body, I suspect that dealing with these problems may end up being a two or three stage process : 1) identify the problem 2) make recommendations for football-related rule changes that mitigate it 3) seek legislative change in related areas of company and insolvency law I wonder whether the long term answer is to designate football clubs as protected in much the same way as heritage sites and AONB are. That might be a step too far for some. Lots of points in there. Clubs cannot be protected regardless of how they are managed; that's just unfair on clubs that do manage their affairs sensibly. I don't see why one, very small, sector of the economy should have very specific financial rules that don't apply to any other. That lay chaos lies. Regulation, properly enforced, is the answer for me: Owners should be free to put in as much as they want but they should also have to put cash bonds in escrow that mean if they walk away then the contracts they have put in place can be wound down over a period of time rather than immediately. Business plans should be submitted and subject to scrutiny on regular cycles; ideally annually but probably three yearly may be more realistic. Regular financial reporting is an absolute must otherwise reviewing a business plan is entirely pointless. The two things need regular 'reconciliation'. The directors and officers test must include a more detailed business plan. I'd suggest that should be reconciled with reality with more frequency in the early stages. The current one might (or might not) weed put the odd convicted fraudster but it can't predict degrees of post takeover lunacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basilrobbie Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 38 minutes ago, Dave_Og said: Lots of points in there. Clubs cannot be protected regardless of how they are managed; that's just unfair on clubs that do manage their affairs sensibly. (1) I don't see why one, very small, sector of the economy should have very specific financial rules that don't apply to any other. That lay chaos lies. (2) Regulation, properly enforced, is the answer for me: Owners should be free to put in as much as they want but they should also have to put cash bonds in escrow that mean if they walk away then the contracts they have put in place can be wound down over a period of time rather than immediately. (3) Business plans should be submitted and subject to scrutiny on regular cycles; ideally annually but probably three yearly may be more realistic. (4) Regular financial reporting is an absolute must otherwise reviewing a business plan is entirely pointless. The two things need regular 'reconciliation'. (see (4) above) The directors and officers test must include a more detailed business plan. I'd suggest that should be reconciled with reality with more frequency in the early stages. The current one might (or might not) weed put the odd convicted fraudster but it can't predict degrees of post takeover lunacy. (5) Some good stuff in there Dave, I have annotated : (1) This in part a philosophical argument isn't it? Some fans say that there should be no sanctions that affect a club on the field, because only the fans suffer. But in the case of persistent or wilful failure I think these sanctions have to be part of the regulatory arsenal. (2) Agreed. (3) I prefer an overall wage ceiling / salary cap similar to that which applies in the NFL, personally, accompanied by reform of distribution. My thinking is that if you deliver both you could get more or less every club within the EFL at least to a position where TV revenue was at or close to cap, after which it is a meritocracy. I'm not naive enough to believe I'll ever see it. I like your escrow idea. (4) You have made two points that I think are the sides of a coin. Real time information that allows a regulator to take advisory or preventative action before failure becomes entrenched and / or acute has to be the way to go. Your aim should be to minimise intrusive intervention by doing a lot of what might be called more remedial work. (5) I think periodic reassessment against the new O&DT will be a good idea, as will monitoring adherence to business plans. I'd like a regulator that can do diagnostic work with clubs to test their financial and other corporate resilience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPAS Posted June 28, 2022 Author Share Posted June 28, 2022 As we gear up for the new season, we're looking for fan guests again, so if you fancy appearing from the month of August, please contact us either via our socials @oafcpodcast, via email bpalertsystem@gmail.com or via DMs on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 I’ve just messaged you regarding the donation of a unique item that would make a good raffle prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 EFL reform is on the way but was going to be too late for us. The club could have been one of the trailblazers for it. Embedding the MOU with shadow boards and golden share. Working with OASF/PTB/Athleticos and the like to do so. The yearly struggle to get basic shareholder rights/complying with OASF to see full accounts/seek OASF permission to do so. They are due again. It's a David and goliath battle all the time. OASF battled with ex owner. AL made promises of a new start and to work with OASF to leave latics as his legacy. We were promised...."a new hope.." continuing the Star wars theme. All we can do is be ready the best we can. It literally could be in our hands/ have a bigger say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.