| EGM + statement on 09:37 - Feb 22 with 3575 views | Sandyman |
| EGM + statement on 08:33 - Feb 22 by RAFCBLUE |
https://open.spotify.com/show/7c7ltYVwnicbVz0uYTXAW5
From 02.00 minutes onwards. A must listen and about 13 minutes of Maguire asking questions.
Reveals the ground is worth £4m to £6m and a valuation is being done by the Board.
Explains that there is an identified investor and lots of other interested parties, some with online presence and some not so, but nothing is certain.
On that basis, the club should have a future. |
Agreed, well worth a listen. |  | |  |
| EGM + statement on 09:45 - Feb 22 with 3524 views | James1980 |
Regarding the MH court case didn't the board decide not to appeal the decision because they didn't want to incur the costs and go through another one? |  |
| |
| EGM + statement on 09:48 - Feb 22 with 3523 views | turnthescrew |
| EGM + statement on 09:03 - Feb 22 by dawlishdale |
What an absolute mess.
It's like turkeys being asked to vote for Christmas whilst they are on the butchers block in February. Death now...or in a few months.
Such a crying shame that it has come to this. The Board came into the club on the back of the removal of Bottomley and Rawlinson, and had the support of 99% of fans. There was an absolute wave of goodwill from the wider football community.
Sadly, they have managed, through a wide variety of awful business decisions, to completely destroy that goodwill, and have now become the target of fan angst themselves. It was almost impossible for them to have done this so quickly, but; they've done it.
A series of catastrophic business decisions have brought us to this point, and sadly, the fingers are pointed firmly and squarely at those who have been in the Boardroom recently. Have these people got any business sense? It really appears not from outside looking in.
What happened to change the Boards mindset from challenging the MH share transfers as being illegal to going cap in hand to them to buy up their shares at an inflated price? Was our legal advice flawed? If it changed, did we consider legal action against our advisory team?
What happened about a former Director who I believe still posts on here telling me personally that we were taking Bottomley to Court and " guaranteed a six figure pay out "?
In fact... what happened at the court case? We haven't had an update and it will have happened by now?
Why did the Board deem it good business sense to turn down offers of assistance from many people with vast knowledge and experience in the football world? That advice and help was offered unconditionally, but it appears that it was declined outright.
Giving Stockdale the transfer budget to waste and then sacking him so quickly into the season was hopeless governance. Followed by the desperate attempts to appoint his successor only to land an out of work journeyman and then give him a 2 year deal when he would have worked almost on a week to week deal.
Why did they repay a substantial (and low interest rate) loan which took up valuable cashflow? Baffling business sense. Cashflow is king in any small business.
Who oversaw the Ethan Brierly sh*tshow transfer episode? Sending him on loan to a club under a transfer embargo, and only bringing him back when it was too late to sell him elsewhere. Genius.
I bought my few thousand pounds worth of shares not in the expectation of getting a return on it...or even ever getting anything back, but to help my football club. The same principal should apply to those who are now desperate to find a buyer. Don't put money into a football club if you might need it back in the future.
The Trust has once again been shafted here, and all of us who gave money, shook buckets and undertook all manner of fundraising projects can feel likewise hard done to. If this motion is passed, the Trust will have no voice, no power and no authority whatsoever. The Trust Director must feel like an absolute fool, and should be withdrawn from the Board today. |
"What happened about a former Director who I believe still posts on here telling me personally that we were taking Bottomley to Court and " guaranteed a six figure pay out "?
In fact... what happened at the court case? We haven't had an update and it will have happened by now?"
*****************
The story goes that the proceedings against him were withdrawn by the club. Whether that was on legal advice or otherwise, has not been disclosed as far as I know. It was certainly never officially explained.
Baffling for sure, unless he had an 'ace up his sleeve' which would have been to the detriment of the club or it's employees/remaining Directors. Who knows? but it disgusts me that he has walked away unscathed after the damage he caused. | | | |
| EGM + statement on 10:15 - Feb 22 with 3365 views | Duckegg |
| EGM + statement on 08:14 - Feb 22 by NorthernDale |
The council could provide a loan and it would be an community asset to the council. |
I'm sure that SG said around October/November that they approached the council for financial help and the response was something like they dont have the monies to help..... |  | | |
| EGM + statement on 10:19 - Feb 22 with 3340 views | TomRAFC |
Motions at an EGM can be withdrawn, and the same could happen here. There's no good version of this situation, but there's certainly the chance for a less awful one.
If the club have found a suitable investor and have identified agreeable terms that require changes to the articles, that's something that shareholders can vote on in an informed way. Present them to the shareholders, and then call an EGM for whatever motions may be required to complete the sale.
Unless the club are trying to sell to someone dodgy, there's a good chance it'll go through. Definitely a better chance than this current set of motions.
Signing over completely unmoderated power to sell the club to anyone, with safety nets for some and not others, is an issue for me. I don't think our current board have the skillset to manage this successfully.
Oddly enough, these are some of the same criticisms of the motions presented by Bottomley and co. Those motions were withdrawn too.
There's been some excellent sensible contributions to this thread, but I'm happy to create another username and have a conversation with myself in an embarrassing Matt Southall style. It's clearly catching on. [Post edited 22 Feb 10:26]
| |
| |
| EGM + statement on 10:21 - Feb 22 with 3294 views | YouTubeDale |
| EGM + statement on 17:33 - Feb 21 by Mundell |
When Simon Gauge became Chairman he was hopelessly naive, firm in his belief that running a 'fan owned' club would be relatively straightforward, but without having given any serious thought to what it might actually mean. He was, of course, egged on by the Trust and many of the club's fans who were equally delusional. Apologies for being so direct, but it needs saying.
When it became clear to him that the club was inherently loss making (having relied on windfall transfer income and income from cup runs to cover operating losses in the 'golden years'), that there was no easy way to increase revenues or cut costs and that Tracey Crouch wasn't going to ride to the rescue with immediate solutions, he sobered up and smelt the coffee.
Unfortunately, finding himself completely out of his depth and with no clear idea what to do, he chased the fantasy that an "investor" could be found who'd be willing to pay good money for a minority stake, and no control, in a business going nowhere without significant ongoing cash injections .... from the investor.
Once he'd understood that the only way forward was to cede control to a lead investor who would only want to 'invest' cash directly into the club (i.e. nobody sensible and without nefarious intent (eyes on the real estate) was ever going to pay a penny simply to buy out somebody's else's ownership stake) the reality dawned on him that almost everyone who invests in a club below Championship level loses every penny they've staked. Our shares have never been worth anything. This created a huge dilemma for him. How to keep the club afloat while also getting back some of the money he'd invested? He's not been able to solve that dilemma because there isn't a solution. The risk is that as result he's become ever more desperate.
I have every sympathy for the position Gauge has found himself in, "between a rock and a hard place" doesn't even come close. Nevertheless, sympathy doesn't translate to trust. Gauge has now lost all objectivity and even if he once had good judgement (and that's debatable) his latest proposal cannot be taken at face value. Shareholders (of which I am but one) should not even consider approving it without a lot more information. The proposal before the EGM could potentially be the worst of all possible worlds - the ceding of control to a completely unknown third party who, via liquidation of the Football Club, would have access to the real estate assets.
Unfortunately, there are now only bad options available but there is perhaps one that might be worth considering. In this option the club's existing shareholders retain ownership of the real estate assets (securing the future of the club) while selling the Football Club (the operating company) to an investor/operator for a nominal price.
This arrangement would include an arms length lease between the two legal entities and, ideally, an arrangement which would enable the Trust, acting on behalf of the shareholders, to have the ability to limit the freedoms of the new owner in a way similar to the deal Brentford's Trust agreed when Matthew Benham took majority ownership. This could prevent a move of stadium, change of club colours, name etc.
This might now be hard to organise, but I can't see how an arrangement of this kind could be worse than what is being proposed by Gauge, though it might reduce his own chances of ever getting any money back.
As noted, I have some sympathy with Gauge, but the fact that he's seriously conflicted means he shouldn't be making this decision. What happens next needs to be in the interests of the majority of shareholders and of the club and its fans, not of Simon Gauge and his family.
Once again, apologies for being so direct but desperate times demand honest communication and I wanted to share this perspective. Fair enough if people don't agree.
PS I am aware that shares in Rochdale FC have changed hands for significant sums in recent years, but these transactions are very much outliers in the football industry. Others will know much more than I do about the background to those sales/purchases, but they should be seen very much as exceptions and not likely to be repeated. |
Wise words providing us with a clear vision for the way forward. You are spot on saying Simon is seriously conflicted and shouldn't be making big decisions on our future.
When Gary Lineker came to the Newcastle FA Cup game, he mentioned that his favourite subuteo team was Rochdale. Perhaps he could take over his team again...but leaving the fixed assets of the club well alone! |  |
| |
| EGM + statement on 10:22 - Feb 22 with 3281 views | EllDale |
| EGM + statement on 10:15 - Feb 22 by Duckegg |
I'm sure that SG said around October/November that they approached the council for financial help and the response was something like they dont have the monies to help..... |
Am I right in saying that at last night’s Council meeting to approve next year’s budget it was said that the Council wasn’t in too bad a place financially and that each Council Tax payer is to receive a 2% discount?
Or did I dream it? | | | |
| EGM + statement on 10:32 - Feb 22 with 3211 views | Duckegg |
| EGM + statement on 10:22 - Feb 22 by EllDale |
Am I right in saying that at last night’s Council meeting to approve next year’s budget it was said that the Council wasn’t in too bad a place financially and that each Council Tax payer is to receive a 2% discount?
Or did I dream it? |
But is there enough in the kitty to help the Dale...
Are they willing to help is the question...
Back to the current SG ultimatum as that what it is, is there enough in the shareholders to oust the chair and the board!
Also is it known just exactly how much is needed to financially to see out this season!
Could the counci help with that..
I would like to see SGand the board removed andask Dunphy to help until the summer.. [Post edited 22 Feb 10:52]
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| EGM + statement on 10:38 - Feb 22 with 3171 views | kel |
| EGM + statement on 09:13 - Feb 22 by D_Alien |
So, after plenty of warnings and shareholders re-submitting their email address to the club, they're still putting themselves at risk of having any vote which gets railroaded being invalidated due to non-compliance with statutory obligations?
Hmm...
It's time the gloves came off [Post edited 22 Feb 9:30]
|
No doubt there’ll be an OS article today at some point to ask people to email them if they haven’t received it. I got emails about the AGM but have had nothing since. They’re absolutely useless at virtually everything this lot. |  | | |
| EGM + statement on 10:39 - Feb 22 with 3167 views | 100notout |
| EGM + statement on 10:22 - Feb 22 by EllDale |
Am I right in saying that at last night’s Council meeting to approve next year’s budget it was said that the Council wasn’t in too bad a place financially and that each Council Tax payer is to receive a 2% discount?
Or did I dream it? |
I think you dreamt the bit about the council being in not too bad a place financially. The bit about the 2% discount was after you had smoked the marijuana | |
| |
| EGM + statement on 10:53 - Feb 22 with 3101 views | EllDale |
I was sure I saw a Council tweet quoting Neil Emmett last night. Ah well, never mind. | | | |
| EGM + statement on 11:16 - Feb 22 with 2973 views | 49thseason |
| EGM + statement on 10:53 - Feb 22 by EllDale |
I was sure I saw a Council tweet quoting Neil Emmett last night. Ah well, never mind. |
You did see it last night, the Council meeting was covered blow by blow on "x".
It also revealed the Peter Rush died yesterday too.
It would be interesting if one of the accountants on here took a look at the councils accounts, there were rumours thst they had £30m in reserves but I cant see where that money is.
RMBC has been putting up the rates at 4.9% for the last couple of years, staying just under the magic 5% at which they have to justify it the the Government, so there may well be large reserves. I been told they have also been buying houses on Royal Barn Road at the back of Tescos to house asylum seekers but of course its been kept under the radar if true. |  | | |
| EGM + statement on 11:27 - Feb 22 with 2889 views | A_Newby |
| EGM + statement on 08:33 - Feb 22 by RAFCBLUE |
https://open.spotify.com/show/7c7ltYVwnicbVz0uYTXAW5
From 02.00 minutes onwards. A must listen and about 13 minutes of Maguire asking questions.
Reveals the ground is worth £4m to £6m and a valuation is being done by the Board.
Explains that there is an identified investor and lots of other interested parties, some with online presence and some not so, but nothing is certain.
On that basis, the club should have a future. |
Interesting.
The value put on the land that the ground is built on is similar to a rough estimate that James1980 and I came to by comparing the Crown Oil Arena ground footprint to that some old demolished factory housing development land price in Oldham. This was on another thread from December last year but I can't find it on the forum. I did find a thread about my and James1980's discussion. My comment then (half way down page) about an outside investor seems even more relevant to today's circumstances.
What is up with you all!? by RAFC_1990 11 Dec 2023 21:23All I can see on here is talk of how much the ground is worth for housing or resigning from the league and starting off much lower.
All way to defeatist! We havent run up a massive debt like Bury, we just cant continue to spend more than we generate. We need a complete reset, slash all the budgets, run the club on skeleton staff, utilise the voluntary army, put the price of season tickets back up. The 2,000 core fans would still get behind this done correctly. Then its all our jobs to grow the fanbase, run initiatives after initiatives, give loads of free tickets away to kids, get people in the stadium. Rochdale is a big town with a large population, start actually trying to tap into this. We have never done this consistently and properly.
In the meantime we should still have 2,000 fans turning up, more than at least half the clubs in this league, paying more sustainable ST prices, with a cut budget. We should still be able to be competitive in this league. If it results in us being relegated again then so be it, we will certainly be competitive in the league below. Then when we get the club back in shape and have hopefully grown the fan base we can rise again. Who knows in 10 years time we might be back in the EFL with average gates of 4,500/5000 and a more sustainable club.
Either way, Spotland is our home we should not be looking to move away or lose it, we should also not be actively looking to play at a lower lever, just let that natural happen if the budget we can muster makes that the case. I just want to turn up to Spotland on a Saturday and watch a team give it there all to win, if thats in the National League, L2, or NLN or below then so be it.
|  | | |
| EGM + statement on 11:35 - Feb 22 with 2838 views | 442Dale |
| EGM + statement on 11:27 - Feb 22 by A_Newby |
Interesting.
The value put on the land that the ground is built on is similar to a rough estimate that James1980 and I came to by comparing the Crown Oil Arena ground footprint to that some old demolished factory housing development land price in Oldham. This was on another thread from December last year but I can't find it on the forum. I did find a thread about my and James1980's discussion. My comment then (half way down page) about an outside investor seems even more relevant to today's circumstances.
What is up with you all!? by RAFC_1990 11 Dec 2023 21:23All I can see on here is talk of how much the ground is worth for housing or resigning from the league and starting off much lower.
All way to defeatist! We havent run up a massive debt like Bury, we just cant continue to spend more than we generate. We need a complete reset, slash all the budgets, run the club on skeleton staff, utilise the voluntary army, put the price of season tickets back up. The 2,000 core fans would still get behind this done correctly. Then its all our jobs to grow the fanbase, run initiatives after initiatives, give loads of free tickets away to kids, get people in the stadium. Rochdale is a big town with a large population, start actually trying to tap into this. We have never done this consistently and properly.
In the meantime we should still have 2,000 fans turning up, more than at least half the clubs in this league, paying more sustainable ST prices, with a cut budget. We should still be able to be competitive in this league. If it results in us being relegated again then so be it, we will certainly be competitive in the league below. Then when we get the club back in shape and have hopefully grown the fan base we can rise again. Who knows in 10 years time we might be back in the EFL with average gates of 4,500/5000 and a more sustainable club.
Either way, Spotland is our home we should not be looking to move away or lose it, we should also not be actively looking to play at a lower lever, just let that natural happen if the budget we can muster makes that the case. I just want to turn up to Spotland on a Saturday and watch a team give it there all to win, if thats in the National League, L2, or NLN or below then so be it.
|
That thread, like many others over the last year and more paints an incredibly sad picture. That it took for the iceberg to be within touching distance to hear actual detail about subjects like debts via the media tells its own story.
As some have commented recently, imagine if any of this had happened under the previous regime. I |  |
| |
| EGM + statement on 11:40 - Feb 22 with 2799 views | samueloneils |
It really is time to concentrate on whether we want a club operating for the rest of this season or not.
The radio statement is clear.
There is an investor waiting in the wings who will invest £2m providing they have 90% of the shares.
SG is dismissive of the rogue and waster type of investor and suggests the potential investor has a clear track record and has a company background of substance. Short of actually naming the investor, which he clearly cannot do at this stage, I don`t see how much more info he could give out.
Now if you are one of those who doesn`t trust him or the board, then I suspect nothing will persuade you. Poring over "what went wrong" is no help at this critical time,
If you consider this is a "shotgun" proposal, I would ask you the same question. Are you prepared to risk everything when there may be an instant solution? We were warned 2 months ago that money to pay the bills/wages was running out.
Personally I would rather trust SG than lose my football club. In administration, the administrator`s sole function is to get the best price for the assets (such as they are) and pay off the creditors, starting with HMRC and other statutory bodies.
I believe we have one chance here, but that involves belief in what SG is saying, In the interview he states clearly the £2m will go into the club, not into shareholders pockets.
I would rather put my faith in someone who has "put his money where his mouth is" than completely lose control of the next sequence of events, which is the only alternative in the timescale we are talking about.
When it comes to a vote, we have to focus on what we are voting for. Remember Brexit! | | | |
| EGM + statement on 11:43 - Feb 22 with 2774 views | 442Dale |
| EGM + statement on 11:40 - Feb 22 by samueloneils |
It really is time to concentrate on whether we want a club operating for the rest of this season or not.
The radio statement is clear.
There is an investor waiting in the wings who will invest £2m providing they have 90% of the shares.
SG is dismissive of the rogue and waster type of investor and suggests the potential investor has a clear track record and has a company background of substance. Short of actually naming the investor, which he clearly cannot do at this stage, I don`t see how much more info he could give out.
Now if you are one of those who doesn`t trust him or the board, then I suspect nothing will persuade you. Poring over "what went wrong" is no help at this critical time,
If you consider this is a "shotgun" proposal, I would ask you the same question. Are you prepared to risk everything when there may be an instant solution? We were warned 2 months ago that money to pay the bills/wages was running out.
Personally I would rather trust SG than lose my football club. In administration, the administrator`s sole function is to get the best price for the assets (such as they are) and pay off the creditors, starting with HMRC and other statutory bodies.
I believe we have one chance here, but that involves belief in what SG is saying, In the interview he states clearly the £2m will go into the club, not into shareholders pockets.
I would rather put my faith in someone who has "put his money where his mouth is" than completely lose control of the next sequence of events, which is the only alternative in the timescale we are talking about.
When it comes to a vote, we have to focus on what we are voting for. Remember Brexit! |
Then let these potential investors meet the Trust and then attend the EGM. | |
| |
| EGM + statement on 12:16 - Feb 22 with 2671 views | Mundell |
| EGM + statement on 11:40 - Feb 22 by samueloneils |
It really is time to concentrate on whether we want a club operating for the rest of this season or not.
The radio statement is clear.
There is an investor waiting in the wings who will invest £2m providing they have 90% of the shares.
SG is dismissive of the rogue and waster type of investor and suggests the potential investor has a clear track record and has a company background of substance. Short of actually naming the investor, which he clearly cannot do at this stage, I don`t see how much more info he could give out.
Now if you are one of those who doesn`t trust him or the board, then I suspect nothing will persuade you. Poring over "what went wrong" is no help at this critical time,
If you consider this is a "shotgun" proposal, I would ask you the same question. Are you prepared to risk everything when there may be an instant solution? We were warned 2 months ago that money to pay the bills/wages was running out.
Personally I would rather trust SG than lose my football club. In administration, the administrator`s sole function is to get the best price for the assets (such as they are) and pay off the creditors, starting with HMRC and other statutory bodies.
I believe we have one chance here, but that involves belief in what SG is saying, In the interview he states clearly the £2m will go into the club, not into shareholders pockets.
I would rather put my faith in someone who has "put his money where his mouth is" than completely lose control of the next sequence of events, which is the only alternative in the timescale we are talking about.
When it comes to a vote, we have to focus on what we are voting for. Remember Brexit! |
“There is an investor waiting in the wings who will invest £2m providing they have 90% of the shares”.
I’d be surprised if it’s anywhere near as clear cut as that, but even if it is and even if Gauge is bound by a confidentiality agreement he must be capable of being a lot more transparent than he’s been so far.
In his interview on The Price of Football podcast his comments are a combination of statements of the obvious, cryptic clues and obfuscation. For example, he implies that one option is to build a hotel on the land and use the income from it to subsidise the club so that it becomes sustainable. Really?
Is that a serious suggestion or just idle speculation? Is the idea to find an investor whose primary objective is to develop the football club or one whose primary objective will be to make capital investments which will help to create a sustainable “business” of which a football club is a more or less important part? The distinction is fundamental.
What are shareholders being asked to agree to? It would be madness to vote in favour of the resolutions without a lot more information and there is no excuse for not providing it. | | | |
| EGM + statement on 12:32 - Feb 22 with 2591 views | TalkingSutty |
| EGM + statement on 11:40 - Feb 22 by samueloneils |
It really is time to concentrate on whether we want a club operating for the rest of this season or not.
The radio statement is clear.
There is an investor waiting in the wings who will invest £2m providing they have 90% of the shares.
SG is dismissive of the rogue and waster type of investor and suggests the potential investor has a clear track record and has a company background of substance. Short of actually naming the investor, which he clearly cannot do at this stage, I don`t see how much more info he could give out.
Now if you are one of those who doesn`t trust him or the board, then I suspect nothing will persuade you. Poring over "what went wrong" is no help at this critical time,
If you consider this is a "shotgun" proposal, I would ask you the same question. Are you prepared to risk everything when there may be an instant solution? We were warned 2 months ago that money to pay the bills/wages was running out.
Personally I would rather trust SG than lose my football club. In administration, the administrator`s sole function is to get the best price for the assets (such as they are) and pay off the creditors, starting with HMRC and other statutory bodies.
I believe we have one chance here, but that involves belief in what SG is saying, In the interview he states clearly the £2m will go into the club, not into shareholders pockets.
I would rather put my faith in someone who has "put his money where his mouth is" than completely lose control of the next sequence of events, which is the only alternative in the timescale we are talking about.
When it comes to a vote, we have to focus on what we are voting for. Remember Brexit! |
If what you say is true about a potential investor then why hasn't Gauge liased with shareholders and theTrust prior to speaking to the media? Why has he not fully informed the Trust Chairman, who posted yesterday he hasn't heard anything about potential investors? This should have been his priority, it's not rocket science. [Post edited 22 Feb 12:34]
|  | | |
| EGM + statement on 13:11 - Feb 22 with 2377 views | D_Alien |
| EGM + statement on 11:40 - Feb 22 by samueloneils |
It really is time to concentrate on whether we want a club operating for the rest of this season or not.
The radio statement is clear.
There is an investor waiting in the wings who will invest £2m providing they have 90% of the shares.
SG is dismissive of the rogue and waster type of investor and suggests the potential investor has a clear track record and has a company background of substance. Short of actually naming the investor, which he clearly cannot do at this stage, I don`t see how much more info he could give out.
Now if you are one of those who doesn`t trust him or the board, then I suspect nothing will persuade you. Poring over "what went wrong" is no help at this critical time,
If you consider this is a "shotgun" proposal, I would ask you the same question. Are you prepared to risk everything when there may be an instant solution? We were warned 2 months ago that money to pay the bills/wages was running out.
Personally I would rather trust SG than lose my football club. In administration, the administrator`s sole function is to get the best price for the assets (such as they are) and pay off the creditors, starting with HMRC and other statutory bodies.
I believe we have one chance here, but that involves belief in what SG is saying, In the interview he states clearly the £2m will go into the club, not into shareholders pockets.
I would rather put my faith in someone who has "put his money where his mouth is" than completely lose control of the next sequence of events, which is the only alternative in the timescale we are talking about.
When it comes to a vote, we have to focus on what we are voting for. Remember Brexit! |
I'm afraid your last sentence just ruined any credibility in your case, but please... let's not go there |  |
| |
| EGM + statement on 13:29 - Feb 22 with 2269 views | 442Dale |
| EGM + statement on 12:32 - Feb 22 by TalkingSutty |
If what you say is true about a potential investor then why hasn't Gauge liased with shareholders and theTrust prior to speaking to the media? Why has he not fully informed the Trust Chairman, who posted yesterday he hasn't heard anything about potential investors? This should have been his priority, it's not rocket science. [Post edited 22 Feb 12:34]
|
June 2023
https://www.daletrust.co.uk/2023/06/trust-newsletter-june/
From the Trust representative on the club board:
<<“ In the meantime, work continues to secure outside investment, but, to date, discussions held have not yet developed to the stage of a proposed bid being received. However, should any such proposal/s be received, Trust members, shareholders and the fanbase will be updated.”>>
———
July 2023
https://www.daletrust.co.uk/2023/07/trust-statement-7/
<<“ We remain in constant dialogue with the Club, and we can confirm that there is no deal in place and the Club continues to talk to a number of parties in relation to investment in the Club.
In doing so, we have reiterated to the Club that before any deal is agreed, we will require a formal meeting with any prospective owner. Following that meeting, as the leading shareholder in the Football Club, we will be asking Trust members for their approval. The Club have agreed to inform any prospective investor that this must happen before any sale of shares will take place.”>>
“MUST HAPPEN” | |
| |
| EGM + statement on 14:46 - Feb 22 with 1970 views | NigelWatson |
| EGM + statement on 12:16 - Feb 22 by Mundell |
“There is an investor waiting in the wings who will invest £2m providing they have 90% of the shares”.
I’d be surprised if it’s anywhere near as clear cut as that, but even if it is and even if Gauge is bound by a confidentiality agreement he must be capable of being a lot more transparent than he’s been so far.
In his interview on The Price of Football podcast his comments are a combination of statements of the obvious, cryptic clues and obfuscation. For example, he implies that one option is to build a hotel on the land and use the income from it to subsidise the club so that it becomes sustainable. Really?
Is that a serious suggestion or just idle speculation? Is the idea to find an investor whose primary objective is to develop the football club or one whose primary objective will be to make capital investments which will help to create a sustainable “business” of which a football club is a more or less important part? The distinction is fundamental.
What are shareholders being asked to agree to? It would be madness to vote in favour of the resolutions without a lot more information and there is no excuse for not providing it. |
This is interesting - So, Gauge has already admitted on a podcast that he would be interested in re-purposing Spotland, using the stadium and/or the land around it for a new purpose. Has Gauge always been interested in operating hotels? As I've said countless times before, when somebody's actions do not match their stated objectives it's usually because their real objectives are different from their stated objectives. This is what the majority of Bury supporters overlooked, until it was too late. Time is revealing. I'm not convinced by Gauge's backstory, and I certainly don't trust the bloke. I don't think anybody could describe Gauge as being open and transparent. He has treated the fans with contempt. [Post edited 22 Feb 14:48]
| | | |
| EGM + statement on 14:48 - Feb 22 with 1964 views | samueloneils |
| EGM + statement on 13:11 - Feb 22 by D_Alien |
I'm afraid your last sentence just ruined any credibility in your case, but please... let's not go there |
Sorry if all credibility was lost by a reference to Brexit.
My point is that we need to narrow down to
Do we want to have a Club still trading after the EGM or do we accept that the Club as we know it is no more? Time has run out. Nero and Rome burning.
If we turn this solution down, what follows. No money in the coffers- only one answer.
We have been very clearly warned. | | | |
| EGM + statement on 15:05 - Feb 22 with 1857 views | kel |
| EGM + statement on 14:46 - Feb 22 by NigelWatson |
This is interesting - So, Gauge has already admitted on a podcast that he would be interested in re-purposing Spotland, using the stadium and/or the land around it for a new purpose. Has Gauge always been interested in operating hotels? As I've said countless times before, when somebody's actions do not match their stated objectives it's usually because their real objectives are different from their stated objectives. This is what the majority of Bury supporters overlooked, until it was too late. Time is revealing. I'm not convinced by Gauge's backstory, and I certainly don't trust the bloke. I don't think anybody could describe Gauge as being open and transparent. He has treated the fans with contempt. [Post edited 22 Feb 14:48]
|
The hotel thing wasn’t a Gauge idea but don’t let that stop you and another of your wild conspiracy theories.
Hope that helps. | | | |
| EGM + statement on 15:15 - Feb 22 with 1815 views | D_Alien |
| EGM + statement on 14:48 - Feb 22 by samueloneils |
Sorry if all credibility was lost by a reference to Brexit.
My point is that we need to narrow down to
Do we want to have a Club still trading after the EGM or do we accept that the Club as we know it is no more? Time has run out. Nero and Rome burning.
If we turn this solution down, what follows. No money in the coffers- only one answer.
We have been very clearly warned. |
Thanks, we know | |
| |
| EGM + statement on 15:23 - Feb 22 with 1773 views | James1980 |
| EGM + statement on 14:46 - Feb 22 by NigelWatson |
This is interesting - So, Gauge has already admitted on a podcast that he would be interested in re-purposing Spotland, using the stadium and/or the land around it for a new purpose. Has Gauge always been interested in operating hotels? As I've said countless times before, when somebody's actions do not match their stated objectives it's usually because their real objectives are different from their stated objectives. This is what the majority of Bury supporters overlooked, until it was too late. Time is revealing. I'm not convinced by Gauge's backstory, and I certainly don't trust the bloke. I don't think anybody could describe Gauge as being open and transparent. He has treated the fans with contempt. [Post edited 22 Feb 14:48]
|
Some quotes from that PoF podcast
'For the shareholders, including the directors that spent half a million pounds getting out of the Morton House hostile takeover mess that money is in effect written off'
'The only way to get the club to a long term sustainable level is to develop that asset as well, two sides you can develop' He goes on to mention conferencing facilities, hotel and medical centre. The idea being that developing parts of the ground will provide an additional revenue stream to keep the club going. [Post edited 22 Feb 15:23]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
