 | Forum
Reply | Club statement - New directors appointed
at 15:35 10 Jun 2021
RAFCBLUE, my comments are not an opinion, they are a fact. Its clear that you have reviewed the accounts documents and seen D Bottomley as the club signature on pages 3 and 5, but then decided not to scroll down further to page 8 where Wyatt Morris Golland sign off the documents in their role as Statutory Auditors, a role for which they are paid to check the details, ensure they are accurate to facilitate the correct and accurate documents on the Companies House Website you have used to access the information.
I understand those that feel that DB should no longer be in employment, but thats a matter for those elected Directors as his line management. But blaming him and others, in this case newly elected Director NG, for the potential errors of a paid service provider is not helping a fractious situation.
I have no opinion on NG other than what I read, life long fan, season ticket holder and an accountant prepared to give his time and experience to the club. The problem is that if people keep up these inappropriate public criticism of someone's professional competency we will have a situation where nobody worth their salt would contemplate going on the Board due to wider impacts on their business / personal life.
I repeat my earlier point, the correct documents would have been agreed and signed off in a meeting between WMG and the Club Officials, the reason to suggest this is that the Statutory Auditors have to make sure things balance, and the cash balance was wrong, so WMG would not have agreed to sign them off due to basic errors, but they did agree. The most likely issue is a simple admin error at WMG or possibly NG where the wrong documents / working papers were uploaded rather than the final and agreed documents that balanced.
Up The Dale - Stronger Together |
| Forum
Reply | Club statement - New directors appointed
at 21:29 9 Jun 2021
Im NOT a Bottomley fan, but its not fair or reasonable to blame these errors on him or Nick Grindrod. As you have been on Companies House and read who has signed what, I am guessing you know a little bit about the documents and the processes which these documents will have followed...
Wyatt Morris Golland also signed the accounts in their role as Auditor ( you did not mention this), for which they are paid a reasonable sum of money. WMG will then have submitted the documents to Companies House. DB, NG and any other official could have seen the correct document only for WMG errors to enable incorrect documents to be submitted, seemingly for the club officials to "carry the can" publicly for the mistake
WMG have been the paid auditors of the accounts for many years, only loosing the business for a couple of years when they lost the job due to a comparable firm quoting better terms. I agree, these are simple errors which need addressing, perhaps this issue will spur on a review of the appointment of paid Auditors with a view to a change as well as other changes being pushed along at the club |
| Forum
Reply | AGM / EGM /AGM / EGM Match update thread - kick off 7pm
at 17:10 3 Jun 2021
The "Morris 4" is a very interesting point.
GM resigned as a Director of the club in 2010, thats 11 years ago, during which time he has not managed to find a future custodian for his shares. Then all of a sudden he has 4 possible Director candidates... seems strange to me that during 11 principally good years these people did not come forward, but now times are tough, GM is able to promote them as possible Directors. The must be true Dale Fans
GM and his era paid £0.50 for their shares, the going rate seems to be between £2 and £6 depending on who you are dealing with. As and when deals go through I hope these custodians are transparent about the selling price and what happens to the "profit", perhaps they could give it back to the club. As Custodians I'm sure they wont want to profit from their passion / hobby.
The same question goes for CD who potentially made a large profit from the sale of his shares to the American Shareholders, but this seems to be forgotten. Transparency Please.
If more shares are not to be issued ( good IMO ) there must be a succession plan on the existing shareholding. If shareholders simply wish to own shares but not participate in the managing of the club, its a long road to a slow death as we have no energy or strategy in the Boardroom with the necessary shareholding to drive things forward, or the ability to "Manage" the employed executives and staff.
This week has demonstrated that the Shareholders run the Club as that's the Company Law that we must abide by, and those same Shareholders who protected the Club also have a responsibility for provide a platform to move forward, which might / probably will involve them moving the share on to Custodians New.
New Money might not be available, but surely New Blood ( preferably Blue !) is. |
| Forum
Reply | AGM / EGM /AGM / EGM Match update thread - kick off 7pm
at 12:27 3 Jun 2021
Perhaps Mark Hodkinson could write a sequel to The Overcoat Men - Tracksuit Man and the Boy Wonder, to provide another perspective on who did what in the past.
It took a young boy to stop Tommy Cannon and Tracksuit Man Butterworth certainly got my vote over the Overcoats in this weeks proceedings
As "Custodians" all the major shareholders of the club who dont wish to sit on the Board and play a formal active role should be looking to move their shares on to new owners. Its this that has played a large part in creating a vacuum of leadership that has presented opportunities to the vultures that are rumoured to be circling our Club |
| Forum
Reply | AGM / EGM /AGM / EGM Match update thread - kick off 7pm
at 14:41 2 Jun 2021
Match Report on Last Nights EGM
The majority of Shareholders lined up against a limp looking Board side. The ever hard working Trust set the tone early on, 4 motions dismissed within the opening minutes. This knocked the Board further onto the back foot, with Bottomley and Rawlinson in particular looking past their sell by date.
As the game progressed it was clear that class and integrity are indeed permanent, form ( and position) are temporary. Step forward JOHN SMALLWOOD, who with his action of resigning over various contracts / employment issues showed his integrity, then with a few deft comments showed his class by asking question of the Boards FD regarding numbers, Pockney was left floundering in his attempt not to let his Captain Bottomley down, but it was too late, Smallwood landed a critical blow for integrity and transparency - a lesson Pockney will need to learn very quickly if he is to survive at this level.
As the Shareholders retook control of the Club ( and the game) it was left to a long time Dale fan from a previous era to show the new boys and a few of the old boys how it should be done. The Overcoat men pondered, and sighed, but TRACKSUITMAN TREVOR BUTTERWORTH drove Shareholders forward with passion and intelligence. A man few have heard speak before as he keeps his words for behind closed doors, but bye heck, did the folk of Rochdale AFC see how things used to be run when BANGER BUTTERWORTH was around. The hairs on the back on my neck are still standing on end hearing him say " its not Man Utd, its Bloody Rochdale", " you should all be ashamed". A great performance from a classy man.
Butterworth was clearly riled by the Board and was more than up for the challenge, perhaps he was also showing the Overcoat Men that they were not the only players in Dales survival over many years
TRACKSUIT MAN, I salute you and your efforts, and I doff my Baseball cap to you
SMALLWOOD, with such levels of integrity you should be the new Chairman ! |
| Forum
Reply | Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders"
at 09:51 19 Apr 2021
The Overcoat men bought their shares at 50 pence each, so to generate income to the club, they can sell them at the current market rate and give the "profit" to the club. The current directors paid £2 / share, Americans quoted £6 by the club, so somewhere in the middle would seem reasonable. I'm sure none of these men would want to profit from selling their shares, so it seems a reasonable suggestion.
Having listened to the latest podcast with Richard Wilde and seeing other comments about The Overcoat mens lack of support for Dunphy, perhaps now people will accept that Bottomley did not remove Dunphy, but that the major shareholders did.
David Kilpatrick and Graham Morris have an alliance going back over 40 years, Graham Morris was the regular contact of Brian Kilpatrick ( RIP & now his Son ) and these 3 men control the club.
GM was kicked out of the Boardroom whilst CD was Chairman, taking a seat in the main stand. CD removed, GM returned to the Directors Box, its not a coincidence.
The club is in a difficult position because the majority of the shares are held by people who no longer wish to be a director, this is a problem which has been developing for over 10 years. DK resigned as a director in 2006 and GM in 2008, neither seem to have a succession plan for their shares - and they have had plenty of time to look for credible candidates to become the next custodians. This has created a void which people will look to exploit.
On another note - the podcast with Francis giving us a warts and all history, particularly around the Tommy Cannon era, he stated that it was a 16 year old boy that got Cannon removed from the EGM as he was not a shareholder, this did not get much of a mention in the Book |
| Forum
Reply | Chris Dunphy Return?
at 16:31 29 Mar 2021
Please dont misunderstand what I am about to say, I am a CD fan, respect the hours and achievement and would be happy to see him back on The Board, BUT .. its a big big But, we do need to know why he left and have some understanding of the situation, In selling in the way he did, to the the people he sold to, does suggest that his loyalty might have wavered ( he also tried to buy Gateshead) Dont get me wrong Dale have driven us all to the edge at times, but would I give my season ticket to an arsonist ? No
In selling his shares to the American businessmen he has potentially created a serious threat to our clubs existence. There has been no comment on the intension of these men, but we do know that the LOAN agreements and repayments were not acceptable ( AK statement) They are not looking to put money in and not get it and more back... how many supporters would be happy to see the club paying a dividend to the shareholders next time we undercover a Luke Matheson ?
They are looking for an Investment not and Interest, Hobby or Community project. They see Rochdale AFC as a way to make money for themselves, which ultimately means less for the club if as Directors they are drawing some out
Best solution for all - CD & BG buys the Americans back out, local status quo returned, reduced threat at terrible time. Other shareholders step up ( Kilpatrick Morris etc) or move shares along to local interested parties
Communication required on many fronts, not just the ones that suit CD, and ignore the rest - thats whats upset everyone about DB ! |
| Forum
Reply | Chris Dunphy Return?
at 10:26 29 Mar 2021
I can understand the sentiment towards CD as he is our most successful Chairman to date ( and I can get caught up in that ) - but if he wants to come back on an improved communication charter, he should provide some communication about how and why he left. CD and BG would also need to purchase some shares in their own right, not merely represent Cloughies estate ( Francis or the Trust can d that). Where will these shares come from ??
The Boardroom is in a mess with too many shareholders not playing active roles ( Kilpatrick *2, Morris, Marsh Family etc ) shares need to be moved on to the next "custodians" who can help direct the Club in difficult times by being active Directors, not merely present in the Boardroom at games. Mr Bottomley runs the club how he wants as there are no Directors to hold him accountable - CD could do this, which would be a good step, but the communication theme runs both ways - if CD wants to come back, he will have to start with why he finished, then he would get my support |
| Forum
Reply | The Road to Nowhere
at 14:23 8 Mar 2021
Completely agree with this piece - and the questioning of the model.
I would add another question, how much less will we get for the players we "develop" if we provide L2 experience rather than L1 ? League One experience is more valuable than L2, its a higher standard that they will have operated at, hence higher value.
If we go to League Two, then our financial plight will be even worse, and we will "accept" even lower offers for our talent because we will be hit with even lower ball offers
Action Required Immediately to at least TRY to stop the drop into League 2, BBM needs to make a change to tactics, or he needs to be changed ( sorry - but its a results that count)
PS I seem to remember that when BBM took over he re-instated Wilbraham ( who had fallen out with Hill ) We hit longer passes into him, held it up, passed to our players and moved up the pitch, it worked last time we were in a mess, maybe Humphrys will need to play this role for the team, show, hold, pass and we just might stop the slide |
| Forum
Reply | I wonder what plan the board has in mind
at 10:49 8 Mar 2021
AK1 left the club in name only, he never really joined IMO. He was not a Dale fan, lived 200 miles away, and only became involved via inheritance. His leaving does not create a vacuum as his involvement was minimal, but his shareholding does represent a risk.
AK2 recognises the need for new blood on the Board, but that Board members requires shareholdings and interest or passion for the club. The Americans see it as a business opportunity, nothing else
Other shareholders are creating the vacuum with their shareholdings - David Kilpatrick 22397, Jim Marsh / Family 35000, Graham Morris 32072 = Total 89,469 none of which are involved in "direct leadership" of the club, yet represent a significant weight of the issued shares. With AK1 holding you can add another 110,000 - so roughly 200,000 shares are held by people not interested in leading the club, or it seems, finding appropriate people to replace them ( family, friends, associates etc )
Every business or organisation needs a succession plan - Dale is no different, so the sooner we understand what is happening to these shareholdings the better.
If Andy Kelly decides not to be so proactive and generous with his time ( for free ...) then this will mean that our Board Members will have 39850 shares between them( Bottomley 13100, pockney 12500, rawlinson 14250 ), significantly less that the US based Businessmen looking to make a business transaction ( Make Money from the Club)
The existing shareholders have paid between 50p and £2 for their shares, but the Board asked the US Businessmen for £6 for unissued shares, it seems the US Businessmen did not see the value at £6, but they were able to buy from CD / WG / PH at a more agreeable price.
Andy Kelly, as per his statement, said he checked the register to see where else might represent a "risk" ie the US Businessmen buying shares below the club valuation of £6, but a nice profit for the selling shareholder. He bought more shares and gave more time to protect the Clubs position.
Will any other shareholders choose to make a profit by selling to the US Businessmen above the price they paid for the shares ??
The existing shareholders are all bright people, they can see the vacuum their position is creating - so now its time to step up, make a decision, plan their exits, straighten the club out, and enjoy being Vice Presidents
No decision on BBM will be made whilst there is nobody to make the decision, a lack of a decision that will ultimately leave us in Div2 or worse |
| Forum
Reply | I wonder what plan the board has in mind
at 08:43 8 Mar 2021
I'm sure Mr Bottom(of the table) will have a sales pitch telling us to put our money where his faith is regarding next seasons prices. His memory will be a short one regarding those, like me and many others, who have not requested refunds on this year... loyalty is rarely repaid in life and this will be another example
From the Accounts, Yes Graham Morris did and still does some of the accountancy work, for which his firm gets paid..... |
| Forum
Reply | Club Statement
at 12:10 24 Feb 2021
From A Kelly Statement June 20
The loan agreements and their repayment conditions, along with potential exit agreement were not acceptable.
We have 2 new Directors that wanted to agree the terms of their EXIT BEFORE THEY ENTERED. How can this be perceived as a good thing ?
The club are now a marketing tool for their algorithms. We have had no statement from them as to their intensions. These guys might seem nice, but they play to win and that means they want a profit, or cut and run, which could leave the club in ruins if they burden us with players / staff / contracts that are not sustainable for the business they leave behind
Very Worried |
| Forum
Reply | Is it Team Rochdale or is it Team Bottomley.
at 11:32 24 Feb 2021
Thanks for the link - a great listen and very interesting hearing a massive fan and former CEO talking about the history of how we got to where we are today
Keytech / Fagan was allowed in, and then thwarted by fans / staff - checked by Finance Director, nothing amiss. Quick check with a laptop and his seen for what he is in 2 minutes - wow a near miss if ever there was one !
Cannon got in and was thwarted by 15 year old Edward Lord ( ?) Thanks to the young man - a near miss if ever there was two !
Americans just in the door - 3rd time unlucky ??
The shareholders got lucky twice, what will they do this time
Remember - the CEO works for the Board, he will have to do as he is requested or leave the roll. Some might be happy if he were to leave, but underneath he is a Dale Fan, the Americans on the other hand are INVESTORS looking to make a profit, not develop a club
ps Im not a DBfanclub member, but I trust he more than the Americans. I hope Im wrong |
| Forum
Reply | Club Statement
at 11:12 24 Feb 2021
Americans on the Board makes me very nervous. They have previously stated they wanted control, or they would not bother. Now they have been appointed to aging Board as the largest shareholders under 70. Andy Kelly has agreed to be a temporary Chair until one is appointed - he has his work cut out to keep the club out of the control of the Americans.
The question I would like to have answered - what are the existing large shareholders intensions ? A Kilpatrick 110,000, D Kilpatrick 22397, J Marsh / Family 35000, G Morris 32072. These shareholders now sway the balance - the Americans have 37342 + 37343 = 74685 total shares which is more than A Kelly, but not more than the whole of the current Board, but if one of the above were to sell to the Americans, then they will have control without the club receiving a penny of investment. There are more shares on the sidelines than in the game - this is a risk and a threat to the stability & direction of the club.
The previous terms of the American offer of investment were far from acceptable and placed the club at un-necessary risk, hence the rejection. Now on the Board they can make the same proposals and potentially vote it through unless the rest of the Board are united and say no.
We need a clear statement from the Americans as to their intensions.
I hope for the best, but fear the worst ( part of being a Dale fan I guess ) |
| Forum
Reply | Match Thread: Northampton vs Rochdale
at 22:52 23 Feb 2021
"Only a matter of time before we scored "we had one shot on target all game, shocking !
BBM needs to improve the style and excitement of the football before paying crowds are allowed back or he will be arrested for taking money under false pretences !
Hopefully we will still have a chance to stay in L1 when this happens and the crowd can get behind the lads and let them know which way they are shooting
worried that McShane was not on the pitch for this 6 pointer, I hope he is fit for saturday |
| Forum
Reply | Is it Team Rochdale or is it Team Bottomley.
at 13:57 23 Feb 2021
The board seems to turn a blind eye to things when it suits them, the issues detailed by Judd are concerning to say the least ( Russ Green had issues when appointed ... ). The Clubs intension to become a great Community Club surely starts with integrity at the top ??
Perhaps when we get a new Chairman the Trust could ask their opinion on his suitability given the issues
I noted Judds comments about DB telling us of his paying for an investigator to investigate a former director - which podcast ? Listened back to the Dec issues with DB and Dave Sweet and heard nothing - please tell, the suspense is killing me... |
| Forum
Reply | Sporting director
at 11:11 19 Feb 2021
A CEO cant sack a Chairman - its like Chess, CEO does not posses the power to remove a Chairman, only the Majority Shareholders have the power to appoint and remove a Chairman.
The CEO has minimal shares, Kilpatrick *2 and Morris have majority of share between them - they as the majority shareholders decide who the Chairman is - thats why A Kilpatrick became Chairman - the other 2 did not want back into the Board, and he was the only major shareholder left standing when the music stopped
You state Para 2 is wrong, clearly I disagree, but you provide no other comment as to why its wrong. The above explains how and who can remove a chairman and the CEO does not have that power, unless he has the support of the Shareholders.... comes back to the fact that Shareholders got rid of Dunphy and returned to the Boardroom as VP, not as Board Directors
With the breaking news of the Chairman ( hope its not medical) there is now a huge void in the Boardroom as the majority of shares are held by non Board members. The current shareholders need to show their hand, are they going back on the Board and leading the club, or are they selling - but leaving the club with a "proxy board" is a poor legacy whilst still sitting on shares.
I dont think the Americans are the answer, but there has been no serious attempts made to bring in new blood to the shareholding / board for many years. In the current situation the club needs leadership beyond the voice of CEO - you never know, a stronger board might tone CEO down a little ..... |
| Forum
Reply | Sporting director
at 21:56 18 Feb 2021
The Club lost, we lost - Dunphy was brought during DK and GM years as he was younger and a potential successor to them. They ejected him after many years and have yet to replace him, there has been enough time, they are signing off on all the off field expenditure as if they weren't it would stop.
Successful business needs a succession plan, ultimately the shareholders responsibility to appoint the management, they appoint Chairman, They appoint CEO etc...
No local business person has been able to attain a serious stake in the club, introduce some new ideas and drive from the Boardroom since Andy Kelly joined umpteen years ago ( great job - thank you )
With DK, GM and now chairman all inactive our major shareholders are sat on shares which control the club, but they don't wish to have a say on which direction by being Directors.... just sit in the background and muttering what they don't want, please ask the overcoat men to tell us what the do want...
As they like to say, they are custodians of the club, they should be actively looking for those successors, sell them the shares at the same price they paid ie no profit for the right successor, remain a VP and then there is a future for the club. A void in the Boardroom is a very dangerous thing
Looking at the current board, with the exception of Andy Kelly, they own very few shares. The VPs and recently stood down Chair control the club, when will we hear or see their plans for the future...
I dont care for Boardroom politics - I care for the club..... The Board sets the whole tone, its the leadership, we currently have an empty space which needs filling
The American came knocking not just because of the Youth, The Balance Sheet, but because in their experience of the corporate world, a shareholder register with the current age profile represents a massive opportunity. |
| Forum
Reply | Sporting director
at 18:06 18 Feb 2021
The "removal of the VP Privileges" was presumably done by Goodwin or Dunphy, as when they left, DK and GM returned. Goodwin and Dunphy were and still are close ( as has been commented on this board - looking to buy into other clubs together) so one may have said / done it, but the other was fully aware, so CD on business not really the line, and as Chairman he could have overturned it as soon as he found out, but he didn't. The question is why would they do this if they felt these people were supportive and positive ? They would not have had the privilege removed had there not been issues. Chairman removed, VPs return to the comfy seats, influencing & controlling when they wish, but not responsible... nice work if you can get it.
If the club was well run and within budget, then how did it get into a 6 figure debt ? which is more like 7 figures today which CD got heaps of abuse / blame for
The Bywater money - spread over a number of years, was unexpected and got the club out of jail while VPs ran the club, just as the Murray to Matherson etc has done since
Having secured the ground for the club ( good effort, but would even Rochdale Council approve planning on the ground - probably not), the Directors loans were always pretty safe when the clubs accountant is owed the money... |
| Forum
Reply | Sporting director
at 13:49 18 Feb 2021
I'm no supporter of our CEO, and I see how he rubs people up the wrong way - BUT ... Boardroom Revolt was nothing to do with him as he carries so little weight with the shareholders.
A Kilpatrick, D Kilpatrick and G Morris were more likely candidates for CD leaving and the unnecessary acrimony. During the later stages of of CD Chairmanship Mr Morris was sat in the mainstand exec seats - once CD was ejected Mr Morris was back in the comfort of the Boardroom along with D Kilpatrick who watched occasionally. A Kilpatrick not really seen ( nothing new)
Ive never really bought into "the overcoat" men thing - any money introduced was loans which have been paid back, time given- yes, but they got free seat ( best in the house), food and drink. But now if these men really care about the club they either need to dust off the overcoat, or actively find the next custodian of their shares ( bought at £0.50, so to the right buyer, selling at £0.50 so as not to profit i would hope ) |
| | JPSDale
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 65 | | Comment Votes: | 0 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 65 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.