Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Sporting director 15:44 - Feb 17 with 31519 viewsfitzochris


Blog: Rochdale 2018/19 part three: Getting points on the board

2



Sporting director on 12:05 - Feb 18 with 3368 viewsJimmyRustler

This will presumably be a pretty lucrative role. Where is this money coming from?
0

Sporting director on 12:16 - Feb 18 with 3299 viewsJames1980

We are just moving with the times, other clubs in lower leagues have them.

Our current CEO has seen our former CEO has employed one at Port Vale and doesn't want to be out done

BBM has discusssed this with the board and all parties agree it is an important appointment to be made.

The board have advertised this with out discussing with BBM to undermine him and hope he quits out of a sense of pride thus saving them paying him off

The board is hoping Mr Altman and co might re consider and make another more attractive offer to gain a controlling share of the club.
[Post edited 18 Feb 2021 12:19]

'Only happy when you've got it often makes you miss the journey'
Poll: When Hendo goes should the number 40 shirt be retired?

-1

Sporting director on 12:18 - Feb 18 with 3292 viewsdawlishdale

I'm no expert on the legalities of running a football club, but there are some very serious questions to be asked of the Board, and the CEO especially, who does not have the best track record in business decision making. I wonder if the club employees and other Board members are even aware of this? I suspect not.

Appointing a Director of Football, on top of all the other off field appointments, would suggest that we have plenty of money available. So why have we not got a left back?

All these changes suggest that

a) The CEO can't do his job and needs help
b) BBM can't do his job and needs help.


The Trust has been ever so quiet recently. Wonder if they have been silenced by the club?


All I know is that we are not the friendly, approachable, family orientated club that we all know and love (d). We are turning into a faceless heartless unapproachable corporate entity, and all on a vastly reduced income that does not need or require such measures.

This all seems to coincide with the date a certain "businessman" was appointed as a Director.
3

Sporting director on 12:25 - Feb 18 with 3275 viewstony_roch975

thanks Judd, that's it; there's also Shareholding 321: 453 shares held by Rochdale AFC Secretary - could also be seen as ''Board' support?

Poll: What sort of Club do we want - if we can't have the status quo

1

Sporting director on 13:49 - Feb 18 with 3124 viewsJPSDale

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 )
0

Sporting director on 14:33 - Feb 18 with 3018 viewsDalenet

Something doesn't add up. The windfalls the club has received from player sales and cup runs in the recent past has cushioned us from the real threats of the pandemic - for now. During the first lock downs we furloughed most of the staff and players. We knew we were in a better position that many clubs. But the CEO and Chair were keen to suggest that this was a tightrope. As Accrington Chairman said recently - clubs need to assume that fans won't be allowed in for the 2021/22 season in the way we all hope and must prepare for that possibility. That would point to cutting costs and managing risk. Indeed a bunker mentality to prepare for survival.

Our actions off the pitch seem to suggest we are building a bigger capability for the future. The CEO reminds us regularly that the fans provide just 15% of the clubs income and I understand that their focus is on trying to harness and build the other 85%. But it isn't clear whether investment in the back office does that or whether we are following another ideology. If we are serious about building a stronger sporting capability that would result in progress on the field we would get it. But the club needs to look at both its purpose and its values and remind itself what we are about. Professionalising the club to create sustainability is one thing. Focussing on that and forgetting about why we exist (and the damage that would be caused by relegation) would be a horrible legacy for the Board and Executive team.

I for one won't feel encouraged to throw another £355 into the pot come summer unless there is greater clarity on where we are going. I don't want the inevitable cost increase to be paying for a bigger and bigger back office as small as my personal contribution will be viewed
0

Sporting director on 14:37 - Feb 18 with 2997 viewsjudd

To be slightly pedantic, the 15% is from gate receipts.

I think far more is generated by fans via other revenue streams.

Poll: What is it to be then?

0

Sporting director on 14:48 - Feb 18 with 2969 viewstony_roch975

I'd estimate circa £400K which is roughly half the gate receipts

Poll: What sort of Club do we want - if we can't have the status quo

0

Sporting director on 14:55 - Feb 18 with 2946 viewsjudd

Yeah, and then depends were fandom and corporate expenditure is split from the £260k sponsorship and donations (2019 accounts)

Poll: What is it to be then?

1

Sporting director on 14:56 - Feb 18 with 2948 viewsDalenet

Oh yes I agree. I certainly put more in than my ticket money. But that isn't the message painted. the "customers" as we are now known have become less relevant in the big picture. They forget that without fans there is no passion, no purpose, no club and no wages.
1

Sporting director on 17:00 - Feb 18 with 2761 viewsSuggers

Who ended up winning after the dust had settled?
1

Sporting director on 17:14 - Feb 18 with 2708 viewsjudd

Perhaps you should investigate who instigated the removal of Life VP privileges when CD was away on business.

The fact that loans (sometimes 6 figures) were repaid in full is testimony to how well run the finances were?

Poll: What is it to be then?

2

Sporting director on 18:06 - Feb 18 with 2565 viewsJPSDale

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...
0

Sporting director on 18:28 - Feb 18 with 2498 viewsjudd

The result of your investigation is presumption and supposition?

That "6 figure debt" was repaid answers your financially well run question. It is not unusual for businesses to owe directors loans.

Not sure what you refer to as "7 figures" - the last year Dunphy was at the club he left half way through a season, so his last full year of chairman responsibility saw a trading loss of £306k with £1,177k cash at bank.

Poll: What is it to be then?

0

Sporting director on 20:35 - Feb 18 with 2242 viewsTVOS1907

What I like about what Accrington do is that their loan signings seem to contribute an awful lot to their success.

They seem to get good loan additions in areas of the pitch that can make a difference - that being in the opponents' penalty area!

Paul Smyth, on loan from QPR, scored their winner last night and this isn't his first spell with Stanley.

They have also recruited very well from non-league.

Will they keep it up season after season? Who knows, but Coleman deserves plenty of praise for what he is doing at the moment.

When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf?

2

Sporting director on 21:08 - Feb 18 with 2156 viewsAtThePeake

What I don't like about the Accrington comparison is that Accrington are a pretty isolated case. They deserve praise for what they are doing and we could learn a few things from them, but for every club like them with smaller resources doing better than us, there are several with larger resources that are one and in some cases even two leagues below us. I do think that is worth remembering.

Tangled up in blue.

0

Sporting director on 21:08 - Feb 18 with 2150 viewsTVOS1907

Absolutely, but Accrington were the only ones mentioned by Sandyman.

When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf?

0

Sporting director on 21:14 - Feb 18 with 2121 viewsAtThePeake

I know and my post is not aimed at you or Sandyman in particular, but it's something I've seen mentioned quite a few times both here and on Twitter.

Tangled up in blue.

1

Sporting director on 21:15 - Feb 18 with 2112 viewsjudd

He should change his user name to Stanleyman, ffs

Poll: What is it to be then?

1

Sporting director on 21:35 - Feb 18 with 2054 viewsSandyman



Throwing your TOYS out the pram again?
1

Sporting director on 21:39 - Feb 18 with 2045 viewsTVOS1907

Thought that was a misspelling of TVOS at first glance, Stanley.

When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf?

0

Sporting director on 21:44 - Feb 18 with 2033 viewsjudd

Not at them prices

Poll: What is it to be then?

1

Sporting director on 21:50 - Feb 18 with 2022 viewsSandyman

https://trainingground.guru/articles/dan-altman-liberating-the-world-of-football
0

Sporting director on 21:54 - Feb 18 with 2008 viewsDaleiLama

Someone's already used the get out of jail free card I believe?

Up the Dale - NOT for sale!
Poll: Is it coming home?

1

Sporting director on 21:56 - Feb 18 with 1999 viewsJPSDale

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.
0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2025