(Yet another) OAKWELL 1575AM UPDATE

<div class="layout"><div class="article"><div class="articleText"><div class="articleHeadlineAndBody" id="articleHeadlineAndBody"><h3 class="headline">OAKWELL 1575AM UPDATE</h3><h3 class="headline">From the official site</h3><div class="lastEditDate" id="lastEditDate"><font size="4">Posted on:Fri 05 Sep 2008</font></div><div class="articleBody" id="articleBody">

<font style="font: 13px Times New Roman; letter-spacing: 0px; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none" size="4">Following communication with Ofcom, Barnsley Football Club is now in a position to make a further statement relating to the suspension of broadcasting of match commentaries on Oakwell AM. </font></p>

<font style="font: 13px Times New Roman; letter-spacing: 0px; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none" size="4">Oakwell AM is a third party organisation and business that holds the broadcasting licence for the station. BFC for many years has paid a fee to Oakwell FM for each commentary made. On 20 August 2008, BFC met with a representative of the Supporters Trust and some of the commentary team of Oakwell AM to hear concerns relating to the operation of the third party station. At the meeting, it appeared that there may be long outstanding payments due to members of the commentary team and concerns were expressed relating to the operational state of the third party owned broadcasting equipment. </font></p>

<font style="font: 13px Times New Roman; letter-spacing: 0px; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none" size="4">As a consequence of the discussion it was agreed by all parties present at the meeting that the best course of action was to suspend broadcasts. In the interim, BFC has contacted Ofcom and understands that Oakwell AM's licence to broadcast expired at the end of April 2008 and has not been subsequently renewed. Ofcom's advice is that the grant of a licence to broadcast is subject to registration, application and proper regulatory scrutiny for a new licencee. </font></p>

<font style="font: 13px Times New Roman; letter-spacing: 0px; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none" size="4">It is not BFC's intention to become a broadcaster in its own right and, in any case, it is unlikely that fans would welcome subjective commentaries from the Club's own staff. As a result, it has always commissioned commentaries services whether via Oakwell AM or for Barnsley World from third parties. We have received some tentative enquiries from organisations wishing to restore AM match broadcasting and will make a further announcement in due course. However it is unlikely that there will be an early resumption of the service.</font></p></div></div></div></div></div>

 

TOTALLY contradicts the original statement

Why did the club announce a statement that was seeminglyinaccurate?</p>

Also, why did the supporters trust claim that the trust were NOT part of discussions when the club again claims that they were?</p>

 

So, the broadcasts made by Oakwell 1575AM after April were illegal? nt

 

The first line of the last paragraph is the most ironic thing I've ever read nt

...

 

That's what it claims

I wonder who would legally be responsible? The station owner or the club for allowing its property to be used for illegal broadcasting (if indeed the article is correct and the statement is true)