| CLUB STATEMENT on 19:49 - Dec 30 with 2393 views | judd |
Thanks for the clarification.
I am unaware of the numbers of staff that have departed., nor the reasons or whose decision.
I am astonished that Ikon Sports have had issues booking boxes. I have done hospitality 4 times and the communication has been first class, friendly and no hard sell. I have been asked if I would like to book for certain matches and have politely turned down.
Undoubtedly a new management team has come in and began to run the club differently to the previous sycophancy regime. Don't forget, Morton House announced we were going to run out of money in the summer of 2021, so whoever provided them with that information must have been responsible for an operation that plunged us into peril, and change was absolutely necessary. [Post edited 30 Dec 2022 19:50]
| |
|  |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 19:59 - Dec 30 with 2350 views | SalwaDale |
Cheers
IKON sports were the rugby based suppliers who had an office at Spotland. Can't help but think the new investor needs to be someone with more knowledge of running a football club. Fingers crossed there is a happy ending to this story. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 20:07 - Dec 30 with 2313 views | judd |
Ikon moved to bigger premises on Mellor Street, I believe. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 20:12 - Dec 30 with 2290 views | judd |
Ikon moved to bigger premises on Mellor Street, I believe.
I also don't get this "knows how to run a football club" mantra being rolled out on social media.
This board worked with Andrew Kelly for a.good while and Tony Pockney has several years on board. George Delves has operational experience and we have a good number of retained staff with many years experience. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 20:26 - Dec 30 with 2250 views | fitzochris |
Andrew Kelly has stepped down now and he himself cited the lack of football club experience within the new make up. I’ve said on social media that the board deserves a lot of credit for what they’ve done so far, more in fact, but I have also advocated for someone with football club experience to join the board. It’s missing and it’s obvious.
I can’t believe we’re in the domain where Tony Pockney is being mentioned in this vein.
Someone of Chris Dunphy’s experience, if in nothing but an advisory role, would be very welcome. It would be even better if he considered reinvesting in the football club.
I’ve heard so many anecdotal complaints bout the commercial department too - so that clearly needs an expert eye cast over it. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 20:35 - Dec 30 with 2205 views | 442Dale |
Putting aside the outside investment story, we’ve seen over the last couple of weeks plenty of concern, constructive criticism and ideas from fans, illustrating where we aren’t doing enough off the pitch and where improvements can be made.
Whatever the make-up is when it comes to running the club, we have to be consistent in terms of a desire to acknowledging where we can be better. That, over a long, long period of time, has not existed. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 20:35 - Dec 30 with 2206 views | judd |
Where did Andrew Kelly cite that?
Tony Pockney has been on the board for almost 4 years and his first presentation at a fans forum was warmly welcomed. He could not possibly flourish with Bottomley on board.
It would be great to see Chris Dunphy invited back into the fold, but I fear certain large shareholders may veto that. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 20:38 - Dec 30 with 2180 views | fitzochris |
As they did last time, which I feel would be a shame if that happened again.
Andrew Kelly said that to me and others I know. It wasn’t a public comment and it wasn’t said with malice, it was just an observation. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 20:40 - Dec 30 with 2167 views | 442Dale |
On the last point, if a good majority of supporters made it clear they’d welcome that, why would individuals prevent it?
Also, do shareholders get a vote on who joins the board? The current board wasn’t voted on when people joined, so if Dunphy/AN Other bought enough shares (is it 25k still?) does that and asks to join, the board themselves would decide.
I genuinely could be wrong of course! | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 20:45 - Dec 30 with 2137 views | judd |
The articles allow for the board to appoint directors who offer themselves for election on a rotational basis. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 20:51 - Dec 30 with 2112 views | 442Dale |
So even in the short term, getting some additional help on board can be a possible aim. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 20:55 - Dec 30 with 2086 views | judd |
Yes. Minimum 7 maximum 15 directors | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 20:59 - Dec 30 with 2061 views | RAFCBLUE |
Covered at the time of the hostile takeover:
Article 91 - "no such appointment shall be effective unless two-thirds of the Directors in the United Kingdom concur therein but any Director so appointed shall hold office only until the next following general meeting of the Company and shall be eligible for re-election."
So 5 of the 7 Directors would have to approve it and then it would still go to shareholders at the next AGM that followed. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 21:03 - Dec 30 with 2031 views | fourfourtwo |
Can directors only be appointed at an AGM? What about an EGM? | | | |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 21:06 - Dec 30 with 2012 views | 442Dale |
Thank you!
Also, there’s the ‘non-executive director’ option which the club have utilised well in the last year. Getting someone involved who may have ideas and knowledge to make a real difference on and off the pitch has always got to be welcomed. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 21:08 - Dec 30 with 1998 views | 442Dale |
Think it means they can be appointed whenever and then shareholders vote at the next AGM. If someone joined the board now, shareholders would then get their say next year (probably around November if it’s like this year). [Post edited 30 Dec 2022 21:10]
| |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 21:18 - Dec 30 with 1943 views | HullDale |
After taking a few hours to digest the statement, the best way to describe my feeling about it is 'conflicted'.
2 years ago, we were losing ~£1.2m annually. We needed outside investment.
Today, we are losing ~£1.2m annually. We need outside investment.
Key differences being:
- 2 years ago we were a league 1 club, so arguably a more attractive proposition
- 2 years ago we had a smaller version of today's share structure, but with less available shares, meaning it was easier to get a majority shareholding, so arguable a more attractive proposition
- 2 years ago we had Bottomley, Kilpatrick, Rawlinson et al on the board
- 2 years ago shares were, I think, valued at £2
- Today we are mortgage free, with a large chunk of shares readily available
- We have a board made up of actual fans, who I'd guess are better (or at least more honest) to deal with
- There are clear and immediate areas of commercial improvement that an investor could make that would instantly add value to their purchase
- We sit 91st in the league, so if a genuine investor can make genuine improvements, we are probably a unique case where they could actually foster an ROI (if they could get us to league 1, those shares would go up in value)
All things considered, we're basically financially where we were 2 years ago. We've had 2 years of heartache, pain, worry and fight just to keep us at that point, not mentioning the mental health toll on potentially hundreds of people. One thing is for certain, though... I'm more comfortable with the people now charged with looking for investment than I was 2 years ago.
That doesn't, & shouldn't, take away from where we need to see immediate improvements. The volunteer 'Dale Army', and support from experts within the fanbase, to improve off the pitch operations needs to be activated immediately. It will only show as a 'value add' for potential investors, but also help with cash flow and performance in the short term. | | | |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 21:33 - Dec 30 with 1865 views | 442Dale |
Good post. “Conflicted” is pretty accurate, mainly because we spent so long with the ‘fan owned, fan led’ club being promoted as the way forward. That said, we’re all realistic enough to acknowledge that we needed to increase revenue and money coming into the club so accept that investment is one way to achieve this.
The concerns are around going from ‘Up the Dale, not for sale’ to hearing that one day somebody may have “a controlling stake in the club”. Even from the outside, it has to be accepted that seems to be a shift - I’ve had non-Dale fans saying exactly that in the last six hours! The months of work by so many was on the back of questioning, we have to keep doing this because we know that’s what makes us unique as a fan base. There’s nothing wrong with being concerned and having those questions and the board and the Trust should welcome and expect them. They will also, I’m sure, be keen to offer reassurances throughout - as seen in the statement today. | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 21:47 - Dec 30 with 1813 views | pioneer |
Shares are way overpriced. When board members paid that price they were buying the avoidance of a potentially long and costly legal dispute.
Increasing supply substantially would normally lead to a reduction in price. What does an existing shareholder gain from buying more shares? A few more votes at agm. For the average fan it is simply a donation. You can only go to this particular well so many times before it runs dry. And the timing (Christmas, recession, cost of living crisis) is all wrong.
We seem to have gone from the virtuous fan own club theme to almost begging for outside investment very quickly. Its fine indicating that any outside investment will need to be in line with protecting the long term sustainability.....but any restrictions or requirements make the value of that investment less appealing. For example the largest asset...the ground...is subject to restrictions. The rationale is admirable but it impacts on the attractiveness to outsiders and so the value of investment.
Without a Fred Ratcliffe/Chris Dunphy type person stepping forward I don't see this call to arms being successful...at least in the short term....which is when the Investment is needed | | | |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 21:51 - Dec 30 with 1789 views | RAFCBLUE |
The other current "undefined", which has matured in discussion over the last two seasons, is to what level fans want to collectively own their football club?
Exeter have shown what is possible and their Trust owns just under 54% of the club with the other 46% of the club being owned by individuals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exeter_City_Supporters%27_Trust
Most clubs have an owner, mainly benefactor owners.
We are currently have our Trust own 14% of the club with the other 84% of the club being owned by individuals.
https://www.rochdaleafc.co.uk/company-details/
There isn't a right answer and two years ago we had a closed Boardroom with no Trust representation and now an elected Trust member serving as one of the club's Board. Is that better or worse? I guess there will be different views on that depending on the topic.
Clearly Exeter's Trust put a lot of money in over the years (as the Wikipedia explains) but there are lots of non-financial elements like volunteering " In 2015, it was estimated that volunteers had done £310,000 worth of work, spread over 28,000 hours, in the last year alone" | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 23:04 - Dec 30 with 1619 views | kel |
That’s great and people have mentioned a ‘volunteer army’ many times on here recently but there doesn’t seem to be any urgency for it from the club. | | | |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 23:20 - Dec 30 with 1589 views | D_Alien |
One way of looking at that: if a potential new majority shareholder were thinking about coming on board, might they be put off if an army of dedicated fans were already in place, doing stuff? That might impinge on plans the shareholder might have, whilst at the same time they'd presumably want to keep the fanbase onside | |
| |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 00:00 - Dec 31 with 1498 views | kel |
Fair point and I have been assured since my post that the wheels are indeed in motion. It’s worth a try before any potential investor I reckon and I’ll be sticking my name down. Good job I don’t post on other forums these days though  | | | |
| CLUB STATEMENT on 01:02 - Dec 31 with 1421 views | bluevein64 |
I think that you've made an excellent point D Alien however, we have a situation were fans are chomping at the bit to get on board and offer any assistance they're able however, in doing so there're involvement might put off potential investors then it's a case of "thanks but no thanks" and the B of D should tackfully relay that explanation to the willing and able Dale fans! | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
