 | Forum
Reply | Message from the Chairman
at 20:22 4 Aug 2020
Please correct me if i'm wrong but the Dawson monies this September will be less that £400k net of the sell on fee to Ratcliffe Borough, then same again next September?
The £2.5m donation from the premier league would potentially be £2.5m per premier league club, i.e. £50m divided by 46 EFL 1 & 2 clubs. Realistically if it does happen, it will be a long term loan, Premier League clubs are unlikely to 'donate' anything to us, why would they?
The 2018/19 accounts showed a loss of £1.3m after player sales/addons of £1m. Effectively a £2.3m loss without this income. In 2019/20, I expect a decent profit after £2m of player sales/add on income (including the full Dawson monies not yet physically received) and around £1m in extra gate receipts and prize money from the United and Newcastle cup runs. Effectively that's £3m in extra income last year that we're almost certain not to receive this season, therefore huge losses expected! Brutally honest - there does appear to be a massive whole that needs to be filled!
Given that at the fans forum it was suggested that it costs £500k per month to run the club, Houston we have a problem!
I find it difficult to understand on here that each time an open and frank statement from the board is made it gets pulled to shreds. Would we all prefer nothing was said of the genuine situation we are faced with and everyone be kept in the dark? I for one like being kept informed of what's going on |
| Forum
Reply | Ian Henderson on facebook
at 16:43 24 Jun 2020
Yes that's the way I see it too.
It would most certainly help with much of the furloughed non-playing staff wages but still a big chunk of money to pay out to players on top. |
| Forum
Reply | Ian Henderson on facebook
at 14:02 24 Jun 2020
I think it has been mentioned by others on a previous thread, but the furlough grant income from the government doesn't pay for the players wages in full, it will in all probability only cover a small proportion of those wages.
The club will genuinely have a serious amount of outgoings, yes slightly reduced by not playing and receiving furlough grants, but coupled with no income, it would very much surprise me if there was money available to spend and the club were lying to players!
From the 2019 accounts and fans forum presentation, it costs £500k per month to run the club (wages and all). The player wage budget has hopefully come done since then but even so these are not tiny figures that we're talking about in terms of outgoings even if they are reduced significantly whilst no games are being played |
| Forum
Reply | Trust statement
at 13:50 24 Jun 2020
There's a good chance it can be ring fenced but then what value is there in the shares for the investors?
If you're not buying the stadium, the club is worth diddly squat to a businessman/woman, and lets be honest the majority of potential investors will be business people
As fans we all like to think the name, the 'club', etc is worth millions but in reality it isn't so by removing the biggest asset altogether from the equation you're left with no potential investors |
| Forum
Reply | Further Q&As
at 14:32 10 Jun 2020
Agreed
Those are the important things that the current board has to way up. Risk v reward without jeopardising the existence of the club. Same token, if investment is needed to keep the club alive then the price of the shares does need to be realistic.
I suspect £2 per share, £800k or whatever it works out to be at £2 per share would do little to keep the club going, but closer to £3-£4m that isn't repayable would help the club no end.
In reality it will be difficult to find any non-Rochdale fan to invest without any ulterior motive. They need to have a goal/motive otherwise they would just be deciding to take up a new and very expensive hobby! |
| Forum
Reply | Further Q&As
at 13:58 10 Jun 2020
It all seems quite simple in reality. They had £3-4m to invest. The club/board preferred a bigger proportion of the offer to be directly into the club (via the unissued shares) as opposed to loans. Dan Altman and his team wouldn't increase the offer for shares and reduce the loans? Hence no deal!
In my eyes, the board has acted in the best interests of the club in this instance.
Would we as fans rather see us sell all shares at £2 each and then be saddled with repayable debt (whether interest free or not is irrelevant)? I know I wouldn't |
| Forum
Reply | Brissle Rovers -from the Beeb
at 08:58 29 Mar 2020
On the flip side, without the investment (loans), Bristol Rovers might have gone under before now!
The ideal scenario is an investor who eventually writes off their own debt but those will be very few and far between, especially a multi millionaire Dale fan happy to write off a couple of million every year! |
| Forum
Reply | Coronavirus
at 21:10 17 Mar 2020
The worrying stat is that of the 136 confirmed cases in the UK that have an outcome, 71 (52%) have died. The government should most definitely do more testing because even though it will mean numbers are likely to be into the 10’s of thousands, the death toll certainly wouldn’t be quite as scary! |
| Forum
Reply | Match Thread: Burton away
at 15:54 21 Dec 2019
Who’s responsible for playing the players in their best positions? Surely that’s BBM not the Directors?
Wilbraham on left in recent games, our best attacking threat down the left RND at centre back, Morley too deep, Done not upfront (not good enough in any other position) etc, etc
Yes our squad is threadbare so make the most of what you have got by playing to strengths, not hampering things further by doing a KH (square pegs, round holes) |
| Forum
Reply | SACK THE BOARD
at 22:57 2 Dec 2019
I agree but was thinking you spend say 3 or 4 times £100k (plus wages) of the £3m and surely one of those comes good in the couple of years you can fund them for. Then eat sleep repeat!
We can’t pay what P’boro can pay but I’m sure we could entice one or two of the likes of players found at Boston’s level (number 2 on loan from Huddersfield and no. 10)
With regards the older pros, I agree 100% but sacking the board isn’t going to make the manager play players in their best positions. That’s down to BBM. There were at least 3 players out of position yesterday - how should the board sort that? Sack BBM? |
| Forum
Reply | SACK THE BOARD
at 22:45 2 Dec 2019
Not sure what sacking the board will do to improve things? Do people think a life long Dale fan with previous and successful experience of running a League One club will waltz in with a load of money and sort everything out that is perceived as being wrong with the club?! I think not! |
| Forum
Reply | SACK THE BOARD
at 22:40 2 Dec 2019
By overspent, I mean in terms of the contracts offered (including KHs) that had no hope of being sustained. You would need a Scott Hogan sell on fee every year to continue at the level of outgoings.
I do think you have to speculate to accumulate and the Hogan money and the like could have been put to better use when we had it. I.e. by signing young hungry talent that you could sell on at a premium (a la Peterborough) - unfortunately that didn’t happen, but we gave contracts to the likes Done, Andrew and Wilbraham and then decided to play them out of position. Unfortunately our current gaffer is doing exactly the same and he was appointed by the ‘current board’! |
| Forum
Reply | SACK THE BOARD
at 22:16 2 Dec 2019
Apologies - you are quite right, some of that board is still in place
Unfortunately some mistakes are being make when it comes to cutting costs or trying to raise additional revenues and the knock effect it has on us, the supporters. Hopefully they will learn from these mistakes. The Sunderland mugs spring to mind as being rather embarrassing and a waste of time and effort. From my own personal experience, I do know the CEO is willing to listen to any grievances and try to resolve them for the good of the supporters and the club |
| Forum
Reply | SACK THE BOARD
at 21:22 2 Dec 2019
Excellent post and spot on with regards the financials. In a nutshell, overspending by previous board has had an effect on the current state of play and can’t simply be reversed overnight. The club is working it’s arse off to repair the damage but these things take time. |
| Forum
Reply | It's time we spent some money...
at 12:33 24 Nov 2019
The gate receipts from the United game will go some way to reducing the expected losses I imagine.
I've also heard that the Dawson monies haven't been received and won't be in full for some considerable time
Reducing the overspend by the previous board/manager is an ongoing process to straighten out. As with any business, the club can't just cancel existing contracts that have already been dished out by the previous management and if it does, it results in huge compensation payments - ie. KH & CB! |
| Forum
Reply | Audited Accounts Due Tomorrow!!
at 20:12 8 Mar 2019
Must have been filed by post, in which case as long as they reached Companies House by 28 February then they may have actually been filed on time/at the last minute. Doesn’t necessarily make it clear on Companies House if they were late or not though! |
| Forum
Reply | Audited Accounts Due Tomorrow!!
at 07:25 1 Mar 2019
Quite right, I didn’t realise. In fact it looks like they are very rarely on time at all!
If late two years in a row the penalties are doubled so if over a month late that’s £750 down the pan! They’re looking for cheaper/fan based labour but are throwing money away every year on nothing. Obviously not a massive amount of money in the grand scheme of things but every little helps for a club like ours! |
| Forum
Thread | Audited Accounts Due Tomorrow!!
at 20:27 27 Feb 2019
Not sure if they’ve been late before or if there are penalties from the EFL for late submission but either way it wouldn’t look good if they were late. Here’s hoping the club have it in hand |
| | NDGN82
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 60 | | Comment Votes: | 0 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 60 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.