garcon Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 The rarely-wrong Chron: http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/72844/councillor-pay-differences-under-attack Ha! The rarely wrong strikes again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Villains Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Struggling with the idea that the Koukash link is being put out there to boost revenue streams though. Nah, It's not a good enough story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jburbri Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Well he definitely means business about the rugby club according to Hamilton. So maybe and ill have all the doubters having a go but maybe he's serious about buying latics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Well he definitely means business about the rugby club according to Hamilton. So maybe and ill have all the doubters having a go but maybe he's serious about buying latics. Hope not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpmarko Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 That argument might stack up if it was a grand a click, rather than coppers. Does eBay take grands or coppers for its listings? I think MEN would be more than happy to follow their example. Or closer to home, we are urged ti click into this site or the official site to get revenue for the club, and I'm pretty sure its not a grand a time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpmarko Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Do you think Mcdonalds take that approach? Lets not bother asking the staff to upsell as its only 20p extra for the large meal? No, accross their global empire they encourage all there staff to ask 'do you want a large meal' because it all adds up. In the same way, MEN are owned by the Trinitiy Mirror Group (pre-tax profits of £98m in 2012). Advertising revenue will be based on the numbers of readers, both printed and online, who will get to view the advertisments (and potentially click through for online). The bigger and wider the readership, the more money Trininty Mirror Group make. It all adds up. I like the MEN, but it is a PLC at the end of the day and the shareholders will demand profits to be made. Does eBay take grands or coppers for its listings? I think MEN would be more than happy to follow their example. Or closer to home, we are urged ti click into this site or the official site to get revenue for the club, and I'm pretty sure its not a grand a time! Balls! Sorry, I'd not turned the page and seen your reply before went and pretty much repeated it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpmarko Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Yep, fair points you make, and daresay it's a reason why they have big chunks of City and Utd coverage/filler every edition. Struggling with the idea that the Koukash link is being put out there to boost revenue streams though. These days a vast amount of 'reporting' is done to boost revenue streams. We know it simply as sensationalism...The more sensational it is, the more people will read it ergo the more people pay for the publication. Which is pretty much why the BBC don't go in for that stuff; the 'juiciness' of their headlines does not correlate to their turnover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 These days a vast amount of 'reporting' is done to boost revenue streams. We know it simply as sensationalism...The more sensational it is, the more people will read it ergo the more people pay for the publication. Which is pretty much why the BBC don't go in for that stuff; the 'juiciness' of their headlines does not correlate to their turnover. Has anyone spotted an apology to the volunteer Kitman in the MEN and Chron? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Koukash is in the M. E. N again today saying he is 100% serious about owning three professional clubs. " I know I can do this and fully intend to, I know for a fact I can look after the interests of all three clubs and make them all a major force ." " I am now more of a facilitator opposed to being a doer and have a great team around me who are very successful in business and all share my sporting vision." " They are fully aware of what I'm wanting to do for this region." Corney has recently said a starting date has been fixed for the building of the stand, however he doesn't want to reveal it in case of possible setbacks.......is this Koukash story the real reason, I think we will find out very soon!!! I am intrigued by the sentence " I am now more of a facilitator opposed to being a doer and have a great team around me who are very successful in business and all share my sporting vision." Is this something to do with bringing together people who will finance the proposed North Stand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 These days a vast amount of 'reporting' is done to boost revenue streams. We know it simply as sensationalism...The more sensational it is, the more people will read it ergo the more people pay for the publication. Which is pretty much why the BBC don't go in for that stuff; the 'juiciness' of their headlines does not correlate to their turnover. Of course, doubt anyone is naive enough to think otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 The "successful in business" bit doesn't quite ring alarm bells but does suggest a potential issue. TTA were "successful in business". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 I see Charlie Parker is a longstanding City season ticket holder. Rusnak-gate and Charlie's leaving seem too much of a coincidence to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpmarko Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Of course, doubt anyone is naive enough to think otherwise. Not hinting in your direction at all but my experience is that, unfortunately, there are plenty of people who really are that naive! But anyway that's another story! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 The "successful in business" bit doesn't quite ring alarm bells but does suggest a potential issue. TTA were "successful in business". As was Chris M**re Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) We're agreed then - we only want to be taken over by someone who's been unsuccessful in business? These successful types are not to be trusted. Edited September 19, 2013 by HarryBosch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) Got it in one. Successful types are always suspicious, and only ever in it for the money. They'll never be accepted. They'll always be outsiders. Have your pitchforks at the ready! Ok, not quite. My implication was "successful in business" doesn't necessarily translate to "successful in the football business". Football is a business with many unique, er, features that are there specifically to trap the unwary and leave normal business types bamboozled and frustrated at the sheer lack of logic. Edited September 19, 2013 by garcon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 They claim some serious expenses however. Some do. All councillors have a certain allowance to cover outgoings, which increases with additional responsibilities. However if my Dad and some of his colleagues are anything to go by, you're average ordinary councillor probably comes out of it even at best. And there are even one or two who genuinely don't claim anything (and probably spend a good few grand a year fulfilling their role). Seem to remember while my Dad was there a few individuals had to, ahem, reconsider their approach to expenses having been caught out taking the pish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 As was Chris M**re At the time yes, with hindsight no. I for one will welcome anyone who proves in hindsight to be successful!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 If I had to distill what I want from a new owner to a single requirement, it would be to leave the club in a better state than they found it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Sinnott Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Has anyone spotted an apology to the volunteer Kitman in the MEN and Chron? When I spoke to Keegan (granted, only on twitter), he said he still stands by his article... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 When I spoke to Keegan (granted, only on twitter), he said he still stands by his article... Although even the name of the individual was incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Surely Keegan and MEN are only reporting what the man himself has said. What else are they suppose to write? If you believe that, you'll believe anything. In the words of the great Alonzo Harris: "This is a newspaper. It's 90 per cent bull:censored:..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Some do. All councillors have a certain allowance to cover outgoings, which increases with additional responsibilities. However if my Dad and some of his colleagues are anything to go by, you're average ordinary councillor probably comes out of it even at best. And there are even one or two who genuinely don't claim anything (and probably spend a good few grand a year fulfilling their role). Seem to remember while my Dad was there a few individuals had to, ahem, reconsider their approach to expenses having been caught out taking the pish. The allowance used to be called expenses on the basis they did it for free. Now they claim on top? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCMIKE Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 Although even the name of the individual was incorrect. Do we have to do this again? Name used was the one used by the club on the website, in the programme and on the team pic. And yes - more than happy with what was written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCMIKE Posted September 19, 2013 Share Posted September 19, 2013 (edited) If you believe that, you'll believe anything. In the words of the great Alonzo Harris: "This is a newspaper. It's 90 per cent bull:censored:..." You've rumbled me. I made it all up. Koukash has no interest in Latics or Oldham rugby. I made Chris Hamilton's comments up too. It's all a cunning, devious ploy to make people click on Latics (and rugby) stories and make us millions. Edited September 19, 2013 by OAFCMIKE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts