| Trust meetings 12:47 - Apr 3 with 28579 views | D_Alien |
The newsletter has dropped, and the plan is for three open meetings in late April / early May, but no date(s) fixed yet |  |
| |  |
| Trust meetings on 21:18 - Apr 16 with 2406 views | Rodingdale |
| Trust meetings on 12:24 - Apr 16 by TalkingSutty |
I managed to meet Simon Gauge in the Dale Bar yesterday and had a one on one chat with him which gave me some clarification. He was under the impression that the fans were aware that if the second batch of shares weren't sold they would have to move from a fan owned and fan run club and look for a outside investor. That was why the shareholders and Tust members, supporters, weren't informed prior to him issuing the statement regarding the search for investors. I disagreed with his explanation and suggested there was no clarity around that message at the time, certainly not at the AGM or the Trust AGM. We begged to differ on that matter.
What did become clear was the need to reimburse the Directors for their financial outlay regarding the MH shares and i think that is now their main focus. That's perfectly understandable i think and to be honest if i was in their shoes i would probably feel the same way. None of us know the personal circumstances of anybody in the Boardroom and let's be honest they've parted with a awful lot of money to save the club
So at the end of our chat i was left with a feeling that there is no ambition, energy or drive in the Boardroom to push the club forward, not as a collective anyway and somebody stepping up and taking on the challenge would come as a relief. The club is skint basically. I think the Chairman probably thinks he should have never got involved in the first place 😀
Do I have faith that they will seek out the best manager for the job and have a real good go to improve the product on the pitch next season, no i don't unfortunately. The main aim is to recoup their outlay and because of that i think we need to start looking for a new Chairman and Board of Directors. Either wait for the current incumbents to choose a new Boardroom or the fans to do it themselves. I don't think there is a appetite for the latter though to be honest.
I also think that as supporters we need to take control of the club and see if there is some way of buying back the MH shares from the Chairman and the Directors. I'd like to see Simon Gauge issue a statement putting all the cards on the table so we know what we are all working with. We are all fans together and I include those in the Boardroom in that.
This is my interpretation of our discussion and Simons might differ but I give him credit for being available in the Dale Bar. I urge any other supporters to also take the opportunity when you next see him. It also needs to be remembered that the overwhelming majority of people balloted in the Trust survey were not opposed to outside investors being sought, so I am very much in the minority on this. [Post edited 16 Apr 2023 12:33]
|
For what’s worth - and thanks for having the minerals to have that conversation. I post as another who voted against new investment- I think the report back from this conversation is the most concerning - but not, to me, surprising thing I’ve read on this message board. We are off the rails here - on and off the pitch. Yes we got rid of MH but the threat to the club has not gone away. The trust’s efforts- well meaning as they are - feel like rearranging deck chairs. We need an emergency EGM not workshops and flip charts!! |  | | |
| Trust meetings on 21:57 - Apr 16 with 2320 views | TalkingSutty |
| Trust meetings on 21:18 - Apr 16 by Rodingdale |
For what’s worth - and thanks for having the minerals to have that conversation. I post as another who voted against new investment- I think the report back from this conversation is the most concerning - but not, to me, surprising thing I’ve read on this message board. We are off the rails here - on and off the pitch. Yes we got rid of MH but the threat to the club has not gone away. The trust’s efforts- well meaning as they are - feel like rearranging deck chairs. We need an emergency EGM not workshops and flip charts!! |
I would agree about a EGM, i thought that would have happened at the time of the statement from SG. I said the same thing to Simon Gauge but he disagreed and said that one wasn't needed for the reasons i explained in my previous post. Having said that, the Trust Ballot indicated that 9 out of 10 who responded didn't have a issue with going down the investor route, so that needs to be respected by the minority. I don't know how the shareholders or supporters think, similar i would have thought.
It's easy to point the finger at the Trust but i think we expect too much of them sometimes, i admit i'm guilty of that at times. They don't want to burn bridges with those running the club and they also want to represent their members, it's a difficult balancing act but ultimately if they feel as though the future of the club is in jeopardy then they do what is best for the club and raise the alarm. If they are being ignored then they need to inform the members of that.
Your point about the upcoming meetings are good ones because i think there are more important issues at play which need urgent attention. We need to hear from the Chairman about the plans for the close season, the season tickets, the playing budget and the financial outlook for the club over the next twelve months. There are a multitude of other questions also. Without knowing the answers to some of those questions most of what is up for discussion at these meetings could well be redundant in a few months time. You can't buy into any ideas or plans with so much uncertainty surrounding the club and questioning the Trust is all well and good, to a large extent they are at the mercy of those running the club. [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 8:17]
|  | | |
| Trust meetings on 22:19 - Apr 16 with 2287 views | D_Alien |
| Trust meetings on 21:57 - Apr 16 by TalkingSutty |
I would agree about a EGM, i thought that would have happened at the time of the statement from SG. I said the same thing to Simon Gauge but he disagreed and said that one wasn't needed for the reasons i explained in my previous post. Having said that, the Trust Ballot indicated that 9 out of 10 who responded didn't have a issue with going down the investor route, so that needs to be respected by the minority. I don't know how the shareholders or supporters think, similar i would have thought.
It's easy to point the finger at the Trust but i think we expect too much of them sometimes, i admit i'm guilty of that at times. They don't want to burn bridges with those running the club and they also want to represent their members, it's a difficult balancing act but ultimately if they feel as though the future of the club is in jeopardy then they do what is best for the club and raise the alarm. If they are being ignored then they need to inform the members of that.
Your point about the upcoming meetings are good ones because i think there are more important issues at play which need urgent attention. We need to hear from the Chairman about the plans for the close season, the season tickets, the playing budget and the financial outlook for the club over the next twelve months. There are a multitude of other questions also. Without knowing the answers to some of those questions most of what is up for discussion at these meetings could well be redundant in a few months time. You can't buy into any ideas or plans with so much uncertainty surrounding the club and questioning the Trust is all well and good, to a large extent they are at the mercy of those running the club. [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 8:17]
|
Understand what you're saying about the Trust, and why you're saying it
What i want from being a Trust member is for it to represent the fanbase with a strong, independent voice
Like the BoD, i think there might be a touch of weariness due to the effects of the past two years, which would take its toll upon anyone at the forefront of the events we've witnessed
I still think it's vital that we have a Trust that functions the way its members would wish, so that's why these meetings are required, irrespective - or maybe especially because of - what's happening in the boardroom at Dale
[Post edited 16 Apr 2023 22:20]
| |
| |
| Trust meetings on 22:54 - Apr 16 with 2239 views | Hopwoodblue |
| Trust meetings on 21:57 - Apr 16 by TalkingSutty |
I would agree about a EGM, i thought that would have happened at the time of the statement from SG. I said the same thing to Simon Gauge but he disagreed and said that one wasn't needed for the reasons i explained in my previous post. Having said that, the Trust Ballot indicated that 9 out of 10 who responded didn't have a issue with going down the investor route, so that needs to be respected by the minority. I don't know how the shareholders or supporters think, similar i would have thought.
It's easy to point the finger at the Trust but i think we expect too much of them sometimes, i admit i'm guilty of that at times. They don't want to burn bridges with those running the club and they also want to represent their members, it's a difficult balancing act but ultimately if they feel as though the future of the club is in jeopardy then they do what is best for the club and raise the alarm. If they are being ignored then they need to inform the members of that.
Your point about the upcoming meetings are good ones because i think there are more important issues at play which need urgent attention. We need to hear from the Chairman about the plans for the close season, the season tickets, the playing budget and the financial outlook for the club over the next twelve months. There are a multitude of other questions also. Without knowing the answers to some of those questions most of what is up for discussion at these meetings could well be redundant in a few months time. You can't buy into any ideas or plans with so much uncertainty surrounding the club and questioning the Trust is all well and good, to a large extent they are at the mercy of those running the club. [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 8:17]
|
Reading between the lines it seems the BoD are hoping not to be around next season so season ticket sales and a strategy for next season in the Vanarama League may not be forth coming anytime soon until someone buys the club.
It’s a very precautious position to be in, the land is worth millions and could attract all sorts of dodgy characters. Very worrying times I think. |  |
| |
| Trust meetings on 22:54 - Apr 16 with 2239 views | James1980 |
| Trust meetings on 20:58 - Apr 16 by pioneer |
I am probably missing something here but if the consortium of board members purchased the shares out of their own funds then this purchase had no implications for the ‘stable financial platform and cash reserves’.
We certainly need some answers on how that positive financial picture was turned around, and so quickly. |
Perhaps they factored in an amount they were prepared to spend out of their own finances. | |
| |
| Trust meetings on 06:44 - Apr 17 with 2166 views | TalkingSutty |
| Trust meetings on 22:19 - Apr 16 by D_Alien |
Understand what you're saying about the Trust, and why you're saying it
What i want from being a Trust member is for it to represent the fanbase with a strong, independent voice
Like the BoD, i think there might be a touch of weariness due to the effects of the past two years, which would take its toll upon anyone at the forefront of the events we've witnessed
I still think it's vital that we have a Trust that functions the way its members would wish, so that's why these meetings are required, irrespective - or maybe especially because of - what's happening in the boardroom at Dale
[Post edited 16 Apr 2023 22:20]
|
Agree completely with that but when you look at the agenda over the three meetings a lot of the topics involve things that will need input and direction from those in the Boardroom. They will be long term projects but nobody knows how the club will look in the short term currently and who will be pulling the strings at the top table. I think it would have been more appropriate to have a full and frank discussion with the Trust to see how things can be improved from their side and focus on that.Leave the other stuff for the time being. There has to be an acceptance that having a fan in the Boardroom appears to have been more a hinderence than a positive when it comes to communication, things are worse now than when Bottomley was running the show on the communications front. I don't for one minute think Murray is to blame for that by the way and it must be even more restrictive now that they are looking for outside investors, theoretically handing the club over to somebody else.
During our chat Simon stated that he never reads the fans forum. That also speaks volumes to me, as a club Chairman you should have your finger on the fans pulse and be able to gauge the mood of the fan base. The forum is a great platform for him to be able to do that very easily. So we have a Chairman that doesn't look at the forum and a caretaker manager that doesn't look at the league table..to me those comments sum up the state of the club, and they wear those comments like a badge of honour, they're very proud of it.
It's also not good enough that the Chairman and Directors seem to think they can do as they please with the club and are not properly challenged, either by the Trust or the Shareholders. If they have and are being robustly challenged we've heard nothing about it in the Trust newsletters, only those on the trust committee know the answer to that though.
Being ignored and lines of communication cut for months on end at a time when the club has suddenly been put up for sale is a massive red flag and as a Trust/ shareholders/ fans we deserve a lot more after all we've been through. The Trust should be right at the front when it comes to discussions with investors, we should be demanding that of the Chairman. If those in the Boardroom aren't interested in running the club properly (they obviously aren't) then let's get somebody in who is,or look at doing it ourselves. Once we get private investors in we've lost the club and we'll never get it back.
The Trust meetings are put together with good intentions but there's currently a massive elephant in the room that needs to be sorted out and talking about the club shop and volunteering etc is like moving paper clips around on a desk, we might not even have a club soon never mind a club shop. I imagine those running the Trust are weary of it all, the Chairman in particular has done more than anybody over the last couple of years and deserves a lot of credit for that. Use the meetings to rebrand the Trust, decide what the main priority of the Trust needs to be, set out proper guidelines as to what the Trust expects from those running the club and the actions that will be taken should they fail to adhere to them.I think that they could also do with a few more volunteers to help on the committee and take some of the pressure off those already running it. SImon Gauge is the Chairman but also a fan, if he has true leadership qualities and the welfare of the club at heart he would attend these meetings and help with restructuring the Trust and give some valuable insight into what direction the club is going in. Maybe somebody from the Trust can invite him, that would be a great help. He could bring some Directors along and we could all get around a table and have a full and frank discussion like grown men and woman. We need clarity and that could be achieved easily, forget about fans forums and top tables etc, or taking bloody questions for the Directors to answer, it gets on my nerves that particular one. Unless there's a chance of a reply to a question there's no point. [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 7:49]
| | | |
| Trust meetings on 07:10 - Apr 17 with 2134 views | Rodingdale |
| Trust meetings on 06:44 - Apr 17 by TalkingSutty |
Agree completely with that but when you look at the agenda over the three meetings a lot of the topics involve things that will need input and direction from those in the Boardroom. They will be long term projects but nobody knows how the club will look in the short term currently and who will be pulling the strings at the top table. I think it would have been more appropriate to have a full and frank discussion with the Trust to see how things can be improved from their side and focus on that.Leave the other stuff for the time being. There has to be an acceptance that having a fan in the Boardroom appears to have been more a hinderence than a positive when it comes to communication, things are worse now than when Bottomley was running the show on the communications front. I don't for one minute think Murray is to blame for that by the way and it must be even more restrictive now that they are looking for outside investors, theoretically handing the club over to somebody else.
During our chat Simon stated that he never reads the fans forum. That also speaks volumes to me, as a club Chairman you should have your finger on the fans pulse and be able to gauge the mood of the fan base. The forum is a great platform for him to be able to do that very easily. So we have a Chairman that doesn't look at the forum and a caretaker manager that doesn't look at the league table..to me those comments sum up the state of the club, and they wear those comments like a badge of honour, they're very proud of it.
It's also not good enough that the Chairman and Directors seem to think they can do as they please with the club and are not properly challenged, either by the Trust or the Shareholders. If they have and are being robustly challenged we've heard nothing about it in the Trust newsletters, only those on the trust committee know the answer to that though.
Being ignored and lines of communication cut for months on end at a time when the club has suddenly been put up for sale is a massive red flag and as a Trust/ shareholders/ fans we deserve a lot more after all we've been through. The Trust should be right at the front when it comes to discussions with investors, we should be demanding that of the Chairman. If those in the Boardroom aren't interested in running the club properly (they obviously aren't) then let's get somebody in who is,or look at doing it ourselves. Once we get private investors in we've lost the club and we'll never get it back.
The Trust meetings are put together with good intentions but there's currently a massive elephant in the room that needs to be sorted out and talking about the club shop and volunteering etc is like moving paper clips around on a desk, we might not even have a club soon never mind a club shop. I imagine those running the Trust are weary of it all, the Chairman in particular has done more than anybody over the last couple of years and deserves a lot of credit for that. Use the meetings to rebrand the Trust, decide what the main priority of the Trust needs to be, set out proper guidelines as to what the Trust expects from those running the club and the actions that will be taken should they fail to adhere to them.I think that they could also do with a few more volunteers to help on the committee and take some of the pressure off those already running it. SImon Gauge is the Chairman but also a fan, if he has true leadership qualities and the welfare of the club at heart he would attend these meetings and help with restructuring the Trust and give some valuable insight into what direction the club is going in. Maybe somebody from the Trust can invite him, that would be a great help. He could bring some Directors along and we could all get around a table and have a full and frank discussion like grown men and woman. We need clarity and that could be achieved easily, forget about fans forums and top tables etc, or taking bloody questions for the Directors to answer, it gets on my nerves that particular one. Unless there's a chance of a reply to a question there's no point. [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 7:49]
|
The more I hear about your chat the worse it gets. Doesn’t read the forum? Hmmm, well he’s obviously being a bit selective there, he referenced fans on the forum having “given up” - in his January Chairman’s update. The problem for me is he’s coming across as superior and aloof. Any well run customer facing business has a Monday am comms meeting to review the previous weeks media and social media content to take on board (free) customer feedback and to enable the media plan to be continually updated and proactive comms prepared for the week(s) ahead. Basic stuff for a well run business, oh but we “don’t read the forum” - you should SG, you should - listening to customers is part of your job. | | | |
| Trust meetings on 07:11 - Apr 17 with 2134 views | frenzied |
| Trust meetings on 06:44 - Apr 17 by TalkingSutty |
Agree completely with that but when you look at the agenda over the three meetings a lot of the topics involve things that will need input and direction from those in the Boardroom. They will be long term projects but nobody knows how the club will look in the short term currently and who will be pulling the strings at the top table. I think it would have been more appropriate to have a full and frank discussion with the Trust to see how things can be improved from their side and focus on that.Leave the other stuff for the time being. There has to be an acceptance that having a fan in the Boardroom appears to have been more a hinderence than a positive when it comes to communication, things are worse now than when Bottomley was running the show on the communications front. I don't for one minute think Murray is to blame for that by the way and it must be even more restrictive now that they are looking for outside investors, theoretically handing the club over to somebody else.
During our chat Simon stated that he never reads the fans forum. That also speaks volumes to me, as a club Chairman you should have your finger on the fans pulse and be able to gauge the mood of the fan base. The forum is a great platform for him to be able to do that very easily. So we have a Chairman that doesn't look at the forum and a caretaker manager that doesn't look at the league table..to me those comments sum up the state of the club, and they wear those comments like a badge of honour, they're very proud of it.
It's also not good enough that the Chairman and Directors seem to think they can do as they please with the club and are not properly challenged, either by the Trust or the Shareholders. If they have and are being robustly challenged we've heard nothing about it in the Trust newsletters, only those on the trust committee know the answer to that though.
Being ignored and lines of communication cut for months on end at a time when the club has suddenly been put up for sale is a massive red flag and as a Trust/ shareholders/ fans we deserve a lot more after all we've been through. The Trust should be right at the front when it comes to discussions with investors, we should be demanding that of the Chairman. If those in the Boardroom aren't interested in running the club properly (they obviously aren't) then let's get somebody in who is,or look at doing it ourselves. Once we get private investors in we've lost the club and we'll never get it back.
The Trust meetings are put together with good intentions but there's currently a massive elephant in the room that needs to be sorted out and talking about the club shop and volunteering etc is like moving paper clips around on a desk, we might not even have a club soon never mind a club shop. I imagine those running the Trust are weary of it all, the Chairman in particular has done more than anybody over the last couple of years and deserves a lot of credit for that. Use the meetings to rebrand the Trust, decide what the main priority of the Trust needs to be, set out proper guidelines as to what the Trust expects from those running the club and the actions that will be taken should they fail to adhere to them.I think that they could also do with a few more volunteers to help on the committee and take some of the pressure off those already running it. SImon Gauge is the Chairman but also a fan, if he has true leadership qualities and the welfare of the club at heart he would attend these meetings and help with restructuring the Trust and give some valuable insight into what direction the club is going in. Maybe somebody from the Trust can invite him, that would be a great help. He could bring some Directors along and we could all get around a table and have a full and frank discussion like grown men and woman. We need clarity and that could be achieved easily, forget about fans forums and top tables etc, or taking bloody questions for the Directors to answer, it gets on my nerves that particular one. Unless there's a chance of a reply to a question there's no point. [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 7:49]
|
You make some excellent points.
As for reading the forum ..i think to be fair its representative of less than 3% of the Dale support , a good 30% of the comments are tripe, made up ,speculation, pure lies and antagonistic ..so id ignore it as well!!! | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trust meetings on 07:23 - Apr 17 with 2119 views | Rodingdale |
| Trust meetings on 07:11 - Apr 17 by frenzied |
You make some excellent points.
As for reading the forum ..i think to be fair its representative of less than 3% of the Dale support , a good 30% of the comments are tripe, made up ,speculation, pure lies and antagonistic ..so id ignore it as well!!! |
So far this thread alone has had over 10,000 views. That’s significant activity from existing and potential future customers- you don’t take on board everything of course but there are nuggets of gold for the board. The media manager should be reviewing and preparing a summary for the board of all media and social media. Media is real - no customer facing business can ignore it, particularly one facing dwindling support because of a poor product offering. We are “looking for an investor” - do you think potential investors don’t review our social media??? | | | |
| Trust meetings on 07:33 - Apr 17 with 2111 views | TalkingSutty |
| Trust meetings on 07:10 - Apr 17 by Rodingdale |
The more I hear about your chat the worse it gets. Doesn’t read the forum? Hmmm, well he’s obviously being a bit selective there, he referenced fans on the forum having “given up” - in his January Chairman’s update. The problem for me is he’s coming across as superior and aloof. Any well run customer facing business has a Monday am comms meeting to review the previous weeks media and social media content to take on board (free) customer feedback and to enable the media plan to be continually updated and proactive comms prepared for the week(s) ahead. Basic stuff for a well run business, oh but we “don’t read the forum” - you should SG, you should - listening to customers is part of your job. |
I'm used to speaking to people and i would say i'm a good judge of character. I think Simon will do what Simon wants and it's either his way or the highway. The fact he can just cut off all communication from the fan base and change the direction of the club without consultation speaks volumes, sometimes actions speak louder than words. I now think the Trust would struggle to be properly heard no matter how hard they tried, if somebody isn't fully engaged in listening then what can they do? Raise the alarm would be my suggestion. Communication needs to be a two way street, involving give and take and I'm willing to bet that isn't happening. Everything is speculation though because we've heard very little from the Trust regarding their relationship with the board and nothing from the Chairman or Directors. All we can do is speculate on the forum, that's all we have. [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 8:09]
| | | |
| Trust meetings on 08:27 - Apr 17 with 2037 views | TalkingSutty |
| Trust meetings on 22:54 - Apr 16 by Hopwoodblue |
Reading between the lines it seems the BoD are hoping not to be around next season so season ticket sales and a strategy for next season in the Vanarama League may not be forth coming anytime soon until someone buys the club.
It’s a very precautious position to be in, the land is worth millions and could attract all sorts of dodgy characters. Very worrying times I think. |
I spoke to Simon about the Stadium and perhaps looking at re-locating and getting the council and the rugby club involved. He dismissed the idea and said councils wouldn't get involved in that. Oldham and Bury have just invested £1.5 million into projects involving the football clubs. He also suggested that nobody would want to buy the stadium land, something that I found very odd and a bit worrying. I had to explain to him that it would be prime land for building houses, just like the ones adjacent that are on the Church Inn land. I find it hard to believe that he wouldn't have known that. I'm sure anybody investing in the club will have that at the forefront of their minds, they wouldn't be much of a investor if they didn't😀
He knows what direction he is going in and clearly doesn't want to listen to any other suggestions. As I said, it's very important that fans do the same as me and engage him in a one on one when they see him around the club but ask the searching questions otherwise there is no point. I forgot to ask him about the company who have been employed to do the due dilligence on the club,or whatever you want to call it. If Simon and the Directors clearly have no intentions of running the club and are selling on their shares then this private company must be looking at the club on behalf of a third party, otherwise it doesn't make sense. On reflection, regarding our chat,we just disagreed on everything but there was no falling out involved. [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 9:11]
| | | |
| Trust meetings on 09:31 - Apr 17 with 1944 views | Hopwoodblue |
| Trust meetings on 08:27 - Apr 17 by TalkingSutty |
I spoke to Simon about the Stadium and perhaps looking at re-locating and getting the council and the rugby club involved. He dismissed the idea and said councils wouldn't get involved in that. Oldham and Bury have just invested £1.5 million into projects involving the football clubs. He also suggested that nobody would want to buy the stadium land, something that I found very odd and a bit worrying. I had to explain to him that it would be prime land for building houses, just like the ones adjacent that are on the Church Inn land. I find it hard to believe that he wouldn't have known that. I'm sure anybody investing in the club will have that at the forefront of their minds, they wouldn't be much of a investor if they didn't😀
He knows what direction he is going in and clearly doesn't want to listen to any other suggestions. As I said, it's very important that fans do the same as me and engage him in a one on one when they see him around the club but ask the searching questions otherwise there is no point. I forgot to ask him about the company who have been employed to do the due dilligence on the club,or whatever you want to call it. If Simon and the Directors clearly have no intentions of running the club and are selling on their shares then this private company must be looking at the club on behalf of a third party, otherwise it doesn't make sense. On reflection, regarding our chat,we just disagreed on everything but there was no falling out involved. [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 9:11]
|
It’s a sad situation we find ourselves in at the moment, even throughout the dark days of the 70’s and 80’s it never felt this bad, there was always something round the corner, but it seems now the club as a whole has given up and no longer has the appetite to carry on.
We are lacking big characters within the boardroom that can grab the club by the scuff of the neck and rally the troops, we’ve had them in the past and that’s what got us through the “never say die” attitude. As supporters we can only do so much to try and help but if the club is to be saved it has to come from within the boardroom.
It’s to much us and them at the moment instead of a collective approach.
The last forum felt like the headmasters office and we were a bunch of naughty children sat before him as we had dared to question the methods of those in charge. | |
| |
| Trust meetings on 09:58 - Apr 17 with 1923 views | TalkingSutty |
| Trust meetings on 09:31 - Apr 17 by Hopwoodblue |
It’s a sad situation we find ourselves in at the moment, even throughout the dark days of the 70’s and 80’s it never felt this bad, there was always something round the corner, but it seems now the club as a whole has given up and no longer has the appetite to carry on.
We are lacking big characters within the boardroom that can grab the club by the scuff of the neck and rally the troops, we’ve had them in the past and that’s what got us through the “never say die” attitude. As supporters we can only do so much to try and help but if the club is to be saved it has to come from within the boardroom.
It’s to much us and them at the moment instead of a collective approach.
The last forum felt like the headmasters office and we were a bunch of naughty children sat before him as we had dared to question the methods of those in charge. |
Agree with that, there's only so much the fans can do. As a fan owned club we could take things into our own hands but i think there would have to be a acceptance that we would be operating further down the pyramid than the National League. A lot of supporters wouldn't have the appetite for that though I don't think.
The other option is a club owned by outside investors with no allegiance to the club. Things would change for me if that happens, it wouldn't feel like our club anymore and i'd be keeping a eye more on those running the club than what's happening on the pitch. I think we've all had enough of doing that over the last few years.
Local businessmen such as Chris Dunphy being involved, the same sort of people as us who have a deep love for the club, is something I would rally around without doubt. A combination of that and a supporters owned club all working together, bouncing ideas off each other and engaging the Town as a whole. Full inclusivity and engagement, not what we currently have.
Can anybody muster a group of trustworthy local businessmen who can raise £500k to purchase the Directors shares? We need them now more than ever before and they'd get free labour from the fans to help [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 10:03]
| | | |
| Trust meetings on 10:40 - Apr 17 with 1864 views | pioneer |
| Trust meetings on 09:58 - Apr 17 by TalkingSutty |
Agree with that, there's only so much the fans can do. As a fan owned club we could take things into our own hands but i think there would have to be a acceptance that we would be operating further down the pyramid than the National League. A lot of supporters wouldn't have the appetite for that though I don't think.
The other option is a club owned by outside investors with no allegiance to the club. Things would change for me if that happens, it wouldn't feel like our club anymore and i'd be keeping a eye more on those running the club than what's happening on the pitch. I think we've all had enough of doing that over the last few years.
Local businessmen such as Chris Dunphy being involved, the same sort of people as us who have a deep love for the club, is something I would rally around without doubt. A combination of that and a supporters owned club all working together, bouncing ideas off each other and engaging the Town as a whole. Full inclusivity and engagement, not what we currently have.
Can anybody muster a group of trustworthy local businessmen who can raise £500k to purchase the Directors shares? We need them now more than ever before and they'd get free labour from the fans to help [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 10:03]
|
There is no way the directors will get their money back on the MH shares (Plan A). As I have said before they paid a premium price in order to avoid costly legal actions. With that threat now off the table the shares are only worth what somebody is willing to pay for them and as we know from the public (or ‘fan’) offering (Plan B) the market does not support that higher price. I doubt they could sell them at the lower price attached to the first share sale…its simply supply and demand …continually increasing supply is not a solution to our financial challenges.
So having drained the fans dry on shares, and having been left holding on to overpriced shares when ‘the music stopped’. it would be interesting to know what strategies they might consider adopting as plan C. | | | |
| Trust meetings on 10:45 - Apr 17 with 1859 views | TomRAFC |
It's easy to forget that The Trust is actually The Supporters Trust. The answer to why the trust isn't doing *insert personal preference here* is because it represents the membership. The trust doesn't pick and choose it's battles, the membership does. Want the trust to represent your view? It takes a split second to copy and paste the posts you put on here and email it to info@daletrust.co.uk. | |
| |
| Trust meetings on 11:18 - Apr 17 with 1823 views | TalkingSutty |
| Trust meetings on 10:45 - Apr 17 by TomRAFC |
It's easy to forget that The Trust is actually The Supporters Trust. The answer to why the trust isn't doing *insert personal preference here* is because it represents the membership. The trust doesn't pick and choose it's battles, the membership does. Want the trust to represent your view? It takes a split second to copy and paste the posts you put on here and email it to info@daletrust.co.uk. |
That depends on how open those in the Boardroom are in fully engaging the Trust. From a outsider looking in i've seen quite a few promises and deadlines but nowt much forthcoming...hence me having to approach the Chairman myself. I'm erring on the side of the Trust, the Chairman and Directors should be ensuring that they are accommodated, not the other way around. [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 11:38]
| | | |
| Trust meetings on 11:39 - Apr 17 with 1805 views | A_Newby |
I have read this thread with interest particularly the contributions from TS and 442.
442 raises good questions about the big differences in financial statements between the end of April and end of October 2022 and what happened in between to cause the major change.
One event not mentioned in the timeline on this thread though was the repaying the mortgage on the ground in June 2022.
I understand from reading Chris Dunphy’s autobiography how the mortgage on the ground arose in 2016.
The boards statement about this in June 2022
https://www.rochdaleafc.co.uk/news/2022/june/statement_070622/
From the above statement:
“As our fans are aware, the Spotland Stadium asset benefits from both longstanding Companies Act protections of the 1987 Morris Resolution enshrined within our Articles of Association, as well as being listed as an Asset of Community Value.
In November 1987, the then Board of Directors passed a special resolution under the Companies Act to ensure the club enjoyed permanent protection against Spotland Stadium ever being sold, transferred, or charged via mortgage by any future party.”
From the above with the Morris Resolution in place, I am confused as to if the club could legally even have a mortgage on the ground.
So now the questions.
Having “discovered” the Morris resolution did the board then put itself in the position where it had to clear the mortgage?
How much did the club make in a final payment to completely repay the mortgage?
I am not suggesting that this is the reason for the difference between the two statements, but I would be interested to know if it was a factor. |  | | |
| Trust meetings on 11:49 - Apr 17 with 1793 views | D_Alien |
| Trust meetings on 11:39 - Apr 17 by A_Newby |
I have read this thread with interest particularly the contributions from TS and 442.
442 raises good questions about the big differences in financial statements between the end of April and end of October 2022 and what happened in between to cause the major change.
One event not mentioned in the timeline on this thread though was the repaying the mortgage on the ground in June 2022.
I understand from reading Chris Dunphy’s autobiography how the mortgage on the ground arose in 2016.
The boards statement about this in June 2022
https://www.rochdaleafc.co.uk/news/2022/june/statement_070622/
From the above statement:
“As our fans are aware, the Spotland Stadium asset benefits from both longstanding Companies Act protections of the 1987 Morris Resolution enshrined within our Articles of Association, as well as being listed as an Asset of Community Value.
In November 1987, the then Board of Directors passed a special resolution under the Companies Act to ensure the club enjoyed permanent protection against Spotland Stadium ever being sold, transferred, or charged via mortgage by any future party.”
From the above with the Morris Resolution in place, I am confused as to if the club could legally even have a mortgage on the ground.
So now the questions.
Having “discovered” the Morris resolution did the board then put itself in the position where it had to clear the mortgage?
How much did the club make in a final payment to completely repay the mortgage?
I am not suggesting that this is the reason for the difference between the two statements, but I would be interested to know if it was a factor. |
You may well have a point, but wouldn't it take less than two minutes for the club to have explained that?
There's an issue, as has been pointed out endlessly, with communication.
But just so we know where we are: what percentage of shareholdings is held by the BoD? | |
| |
| Trust meetings on 12:19 - Apr 17 with 1757 views | TalkingSutty |
| Trust meetings on 11:39 - Apr 17 by A_Newby |
I have read this thread with interest particularly the contributions from TS and 442.
442 raises good questions about the big differences in financial statements between the end of April and end of October 2022 and what happened in between to cause the major change.
One event not mentioned in the timeline on this thread though was the repaying the mortgage on the ground in June 2022.
I understand from reading Chris Dunphy’s autobiography how the mortgage on the ground arose in 2016.
The boards statement about this in June 2022
https://www.rochdaleafc.co.uk/news/2022/june/statement_070622/
From the above statement:
“As our fans are aware, the Spotland Stadium asset benefits from both longstanding Companies Act protections of the 1987 Morris Resolution enshrined within our Articles of Association, as well as being listed as an Asset of Community Value.
In November 1987, the then Board of Directors passed a special resolution under the Companies Act to ensure the club enjoyed permanent protection against Spotland Stadium ever being sold, transferred, or charged via mortgage by any future party.”
From the above with the Morris Resolution in place, I am confused as to if the club could legally even have a mortgage on the ground.
So now the questions.
Having “discovered” the Morris resolution did the board then put itself in the position where it had to clear the mortgage?
How much did the club make in a final payment to completely repay the mortgage?
I am not suggesting that this is the reason for the difference between the two statements, but I would be interested to know if it was a factor. |
In the interest of balance it also needs pointing out that the war in the Ukraine has sky rocketed all our bills. I imagine those at the football club will have more than quadrupled over the last 12 months or so. With hardly any walk ups on the day, and invariably small away followings it's no wonder we can't balance the books. This isn't a club firing on all cylinders though and there is loads of scope to increase income. The promise was that the Chairman and Directors had plans in place to do all of these things but they have quickly fizzled out to the point that they now want out and are looking for outside investors. | | | |
| Trust meetings on 12:19 - Apr 17 with 1756 views | A_Newby |
| Trust meetings on 11:49 - Apr 17 by D_Alien |
You may well have a point, but wouldn't it take less than two minutes for the club to have explained that?
There's an issue, as has been pointed out endlessly, with communication.
But just so we know where we are: what percentage of shareholdings is held by the BoD? |
Yes, it would have helped if the club communicated this if contributed to our problem of lack of funds, or just informed the fans even if it was not a problem and stop at least me from speculating.
The shares issued from the August statement were as follows.
- 43.3% of shares are owned by the current serving Board of Directors which comprises eight statutory Directors and three Non-Executive directors;
- The Dale Supporters Trust, continues to own 13.9% and is the largest individual shareholder of the club;
- The remaining 42.8% of shares are owned by over 500 different individual shareholding supporters of the club.
Some more shares were sold in the last issue to fans and maybe some more to the board, so the ownership picture is not fully clear.
It will be interesting to see who on the board owns how many shares, we won’t know until the end of June (28th) when they have to submit this to companies’ house. | | | |
| Trust meetings on 12:23 - Apr 17 with 1741 views | DaleiLama |
| Trust meetings on 11:49 - Apr 17 by D_Alien |
You may well have a point, but wouldn't it take less than two minutes for the club to have explained that?
There's an issue, as has been pointed out endlessly, with communication.
But just so we know where we are: what percentage of shareholdings is held by the BoD? |
Don't know exact numbers/%s, but from memory, the Trust has close to 15% (that could have since been diluted a bit, but equally, there is a "top-up scheme" in place for folk making regular monthly donations which would hopefully offset dilutions). Based on that holding, and assuming 10%+ of fans who bought shares at £2 to protect the club would also oppose the sale of the ground and assuming the Morris resolution is robust and would offer the intended protection it was set up to offer, any sale of the club by a group with >50% shareholding, whether opposed by the rest of the (<50%) shareholders or not, could not include converting the footprint of the club to housing, which would be voted down.
On this basis, selling the club on to predators ought to be less easy?
Edit - will be interesting to see if the Board even has 50% share based on A. Newby's post above. And on this basis, the board certainly needs the backing of shareholders in any proposed sale. They really do. [Post edited 17 Apr 2023 12:26]
|  |
| |
| Trust meetings on 12:23 - Apr 17 with 1741 views | judd |
| Trust meetings on 11:39 - Apr 17 by A_Newby |
I have read this thread with interest particularly the contributions from TS and 442.
442 raises good questions about the big differences in financial statements between the end of April and end of October 2022 and what happened in between to cause the major change.
One event not mentioned in the timeline on this thread though was the repaying the mortgage on the ground in June 2022.
I understand from reading Chris Dunphy’s autobiography how the mortgage on the ground arose in 2016.
The boards statement about this in June 2022
https://www.rochdaleafc.co.uk/news/2022/june/statement_070622/
From the above statement:
“As our fans are aware, the Spotland Stadium asset benefits from both longstanding Companies Act protections of the 1987 Morris Resolution enshrined within our Articles of Association, as well as being listed as an Asset of Community Value.
In November 1987, the then Board of Directors passed a special resolution under the Companies Act to ensure the club enjoyed permanent protection against Spotland Stadium ever being sold, transferred, or charged via mortgage by any future party.”
From the above with the Morris Resolution in place, I am confused as to if the club could legally even have a mortgage on the ground.
So now the questions.
Having “discovered” the Morris resolution did the board then put itself in the position where it had to clear the mortgage?
How much did the club make in a final payment to completely repay the mortgage?
I am not suggesting that this is the reason for the difference between the two statements, but I would be interested to know if it was a factor. |
The Morris resolution was known about by the Trust before the AGM/EGM of June 2021. It would appear those selling the club at the time did not know of its' existence.
The mortgage paid off was about £200k.
Not sure about the RMBC loan made in the October of lockdown, which was disclosed as £750k, but not by the club. |  |
| |
| Trust meetings on 13:51 - Apr 17 with 1571 views | D_Alien |
Ten months ago, but seems like ten light-years away | |
| |
| Trust meetings on 13:58 - Apr 17 with 1556 views | 49thseason |
It seems that there is heat but not much light at the moment, perhaps we need to step back a little and consider the position with a little more clarity. The BoD is not looking to sell the club lock stock and barrel, they are looking for an investor who will not have a majority holding, but we should also be aware that situation may change.
The BoD is looking to sell the MH shares they acquired either as part of the deal with an investor or perhaps with some sort of company buy back arrangement if the Articles allow it.
Currently the Board is not very forthcoming about the club's financial or footballing situation, I conclude from the protracted silence that NDA's have been signed and parties are discussing a new investment or alternative means of accessing funds. As someone mentioned previously the anticipated MRTK report may be material to those discussions.
Its not a comfortable situation for any of us, but wild accusations about the BoD's motives won't help. They are in a worse situation than most of us, holding shares they didnt bank on having to buy, and probably would not have bought if their legal advice were not likely to cost more than the shares.
There isn't much we can do individually, so the Trust is effectively the only way for us to try and figure out what is happening, even then, the Trust representative will likely be bound by the NDA's. Our most constructive route at this point is to join in the discussions the Trust is organising and help them to develop an overarching plan to be in a position to question, make suggestions and set out the views of supporters in a number of possible scenarios, and to have the internal systems and expertise ready to meet the inevitable challenges of next season.
We are in limbo to an extent right now , the future is uncertain, but I don't think we can blame individuals, its a process and will be until we hear otherwise. We need to prepare for the worst and hope for the best. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
