| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity 17:53 - Mar 12 with 35894 views | ChaffRAFC |
https://www.thefootballclubllc.com/
TFC Statement and LOI Release
12 March 2024
We were disappointed to hear today that the chairman has elected to enter a period of exclusivity without an open, full, and fair process. We believe it's crucial for both supporters and shareholders to be fully informed about the future of their club.
Given the numerous questions surrounding this issue, we want to provide as much clarity as possible based on the information available to us.
Attached is our Letter of Intent (LOI) as submitted to the Chairman. We have not yet received any feedback on the LOI from the Chairman, nor have we been given an opportunity to respond to the opposing bid. We believe that both LOIs as submitted should be made transparent to shareholders so they can assess what each bid offers.
We've been engaged in discussions with the club for over two months while working on a long-term business plan that could provide financial stability and additional revenues.
We had a meeting scheduled with Simon for this coming Wednesday to further discuss our plans and thoughts regarding the club's future. However, Simon unexpectedly canceled this meeting on Saturday.
We advocate for a fair evaluation process for all bids. If another bid ultimately proves to be more beneficial for the club, we will fully support the decision to choose that bid.
CONFIDENTIAL
Date: 3 March 2024
Simon Gauge, Chairman
Rochdale AFC
Crown Oil Arena
Dear Mr. Gauge,
We are writing to provide a letter of intent from The Football Club LLC (TFC) in respect of a transaction with Rochdale AFC (RAFC).
The upcoming vote is politically and emotionally charged. We do not want to add any confusion to that vote, and feel the club’s stakeholders should decide the future of the club without us impacting the vote. Therefore, we ask that our submission be kept confidential until after the vote is made by the shareholders and fans at the EGM on 7 March 2024. However, there is one exception to this request: you are permitted to forward this Letter of Intent (LOI) to George Brigham prior to that date. We also request that George Brigham keep this LOI confidential.
We appreciate your hospitality in our February 2024 visit as well as the time, effort, and energy that you and other local community leaders have afforded us. Working with you over the past 3 months to develop our plan has been exciting and deeply fulfilling for us on both a personal and professional level.
Our plan is to provide a capital infusion into the club to cover the next four years of projected deficits while establishing a revenue stream through the commercial development of the club’s grounds. This would be done in such a way as to protect the pitch, stands, and football/rugby spaces. The commercial center would provide the club with long-term stability.
This plan is contingent upon a positive opinion from the Borough Council Planning and Development Department. Our intent is to receive that opinion in March 2024. We note this to be completely transparent. The other bid appears to rely on a commercial real estate development plan as well; we anticipate that the other plan would also need such an opinion in order to move forward.
Our ownership group includes professionals with expertise in property development, tech entrepreneurship, data science, business development, law, finance, marketing, logistics, and more. It is led by two passionate footballers, one of whom grew up in and lives in Lancashire. Most of us are eager to contribute our skills free of charge.
We will strive to ensure that the history and traditions of RAFC are maintained for future generations of fans. We are fully committed to the success of Rochdale AFC.
We do not have a multi-club strategy. We have a Rochdale AFC strategy.
Transaction Overview and Structure
Based on our preliminary review of your football club, TFC is pleased to submit this non-binding letter of intent for a transaction with RAFC. We have shown proof of funds to demonstrate our ability to complete this transaction.
This proposal is based on the pending restructuring of the club’s share structure at the March 7th EGM which would issue 9,000,000 new shares of the club, increasing the total club shares to 10,000,000. We propose purchasing 80% of the equity of RAFC, including all assets and liabilities.
We believe that in order for this transaction to be successful our interests must be aligned. With that in mind, we are proposing a structure that allows all parties to benefit from our future success in an equitable way.
Subject to alignment on definitive documents and completion of customary diligence, we are offering the following:
£1,600,000 at closing, with the use of proceeds to be put towards the operation of the football club.
TFC receives 80% of all RAFC shares on a fully diluted basis, issued upon closing and not subject to any vesting period.
As a gesture of goodwill to the Rochdale community, TFC will transfer 5% of all shares on a fully diluted basis to The Dale Trust to help restore their ownership stake in RAFC (this would leave TFC’s share total at 75% of all shares).
£220,000 of Simon Gauge’s debt will be converted to equity representing 10% of the fully diluted shares of RAFC. We would like to discuss how to handle the remainder of Simon’s debt.
It is our understanding the Borough Council has been open to deferring their debt for 5-7 years. This is a course of action we intend to explore.
We look forward to working with you to develop the process by which these competing bids will be assessed.
Regards,
Justin Corrado |  |
| If I hadn't seen such riches, I could live with being poor |
| |  |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:08 - Mar 12 with 4157 views | wozzrafc |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 19:48 - Mar 12 by Duckegg |
Is there nothing that can be done legally by the trust about this!
I dont know what though but is it worth looking i to.
WSH may be a good thing but we may never know if TFC could be even better...... |
Authority to Allot New Class of Shares and Class Rights
2. THAT, subject to the passing of resolution 1, in accordance with section 551 of the Companies Act 2006, the directors of the Company (Directors) be generally and unconditionally authorised to allot 9,000,000 ordinary A shares of £0.22p each in the capital of the Company having the rights and restrictions as set out in paragraphs 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 below provided that –
a) this authority shall, unless renewed, varied or revoked by the Company, expire at not less than 5 years from the date this resolution is passed; and
b) all ordinary A shares allotted pursuant to the authorisation hereby conferred shall be so allotted at no less than their nominal value
This resolution gives the board permission to issue the new shares. Can’t see where we get a shareholders vote on who they are sold to.
To me it looks like a board vote who to issue to |  | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:09 - Mar 12 with 4157 views | WhitworthDale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 19:43 - Mar 12 by D_Alien |
I'm not sure that's true
Can SG simply agree a deal on his own? Doesn't it have to be a shareholder decision? We need further clarity on this, and i'll readily admit i don't know enough about how these things work, so anyone who does might wish to describe our true position - and quickly
[Post edited 12 Mar 19:44]
|
Share transfers must always be completed in accordance with the relevant company’s articles of association (and shareholders’ agreement, if there is one).
Share Purchase Agreements are agreed between the buying and selling shareholders, and a signed stock transfer form from the selling shareholder(s) will be presented to the board for approval.
A power for the directors to refuse registration is common. This can be a general veto right or a more limited power, which can only be exercised in certain circumstances. So basically it depends what the AoA say.
However, unless the articles of association contain an express right to refuse the transfer of shares, if the company is presented with a duly completed and stamped stock transfer form and the transfer is in accordance with the company’s articles of association, the directors will not have a right to refuse the transfer.
Worth bearing in mind that all directors are under a legal, fiduciary obligation to act in the best interests of true company, ie not themselves. | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:16 - Mar 12 with 4060 views | D_Alien |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:09 - Mar 12 by WhitworthDale |
Share transfers must always be completed in accordance with the relevant company’s articles of association (and shareholders’ agreement, if there is one).
Share Purchase Agreements are agreed between the buying and selling shareholders, and a signed stock transfer form from the selling shareholder(s) will be presented to the board for approval.
A power for the directors to refuse registration is common. This can be a general veto right or a more limited power, which can only be exercised in certain circumstances. So basically it depends what the AoA say.
However, unless the articles of association contain an express right to refuse the transfer of shares, if the company is presented with a duly completed and stamped stock transfer form and the transfer is in accordance with the company’s articles of association, the directors will not have a right to refuse the transfer.
Worth bearing in mind that all directors are under a legal, fiduciary obligation to act in the best interests of true company, ie not themselves. |
Thanks WD
So clarity re AoA needed, but in any event a decision by the BoD could potentially be challenged by shareholders according to the legal obligation as per your last paragraph. Let's hope it doesn't have to come to that since i'm guessing it'd be very difficult to prove, and time is short
Edit: just read wozzrafc's post too [Post edited 12 Mar 20:17]
|  |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 21:03 - Mar 12 with 3798 views | DorkingDale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 19:42 - Mar 12 by Duckegg |
SG wont care about as he wins whatever happens...
The club could end up going into liquidation now due to SG ignorence of TFC any decent person selling a business would speak to both parties ..
SG is coming across as an unprofessional person and is only think about his own monies which is fair enough but at what expense!
The trust need to step up now and quickly.... |
Please explain exactly how you define SG winning? In what way is he going to win anything out of all this? | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 21:28 - Mar 12 with 3686 views | Mundell |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 21:03 - Mar 12 by DorkingDale |
Please explain exactly how you define SG winning? In what way is he going to win anything out of all this? |
I’m not suggesting that Simon Gauge won’t act in good faith and in the best interests of the Football Club, but he is clearly conflicted.
TFC’s offer in respect of his debt isn’t particularly generous. It’s a part equity conversion (which, realistically, has little value to him) and a vague offer to discuss the rest of his loans. We don’t know what WSH is offering, but it might be much more attractive to him.
In these circumstances, he ought to recuse himself from the decision making process. He certainly shouldn’t be making any decisions about who to sell to. | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 21:47 - Mar 12 with 3576 views | Mundell |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:16 - Mar 12 by D_Alien |
Thanks WD
So clarity re AoA needed, but in any event a decision by the BoD could potentially be challenged by shareholders according to the legal obligation as per your last paragraph. Let's hope it doesn't have to come to that since i'm guessing it'd be very difficult to prove, and time is short
Edit: just read wozzrafc's post too [Post edited 12 Mar 20:17]
|
Resolution 2 at the EGM might be read to imply that as shareholders we have now given the Board authority to sell nine million shares at 0.22 pence to any buyer of their choosing. However, in general, a Board would not sell a company without shareholder approval and that’s especially true in this case where at least one of the directors (the Chairman) is fundamentally conflicted.
Simon Gauge has already made one expensive legal misjudgment and it is to be hoped that he will now be more cautious. Shareholders could reasonably argue that resolution 2 was approved primarily as a mechanism to enable the club to be sold and in the expectation that there would be only one possible transaction available, given the very tight deadline. The fact that there appear to be two relatively comparable bids has created a very different scenario and shareholders might well be able to argue that they did not envisage the Board making a choice without further consultation.
Given its large shareholding perhaps the Trust can make representations on behalf of all shareholders and request the club explains its decision making process and why the Board does not intend to hold another EGM. [Post edited 12 Mar 21:48]
| | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 22:34 - Mar 12 with 3304 views | Nafelad |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 18:16 - Mar 12 by Sandyman |
Shareholders are seemingly being misled. Do we need to call another EGM as a matter of urgency? |
Yes. |  |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 22:42 - Mar 12 with 3238 views | Rehsad |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 22:34 - Mar 12 by Nafelad |
Yes. |
If shareholders were misled then this is a very serious matter. "Seemingly" allows RAFC to clarify this. I am very concerned that a move towards a further EGM will result in the cash well drying up - and fast. This would finish the club - no ifs or buts - liquidation ends the club. I am also very concerned that there could be doubts that not all available information was on the table last week and this needs closing out. A communication from the club is necessary - and soon. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 22:53 - Mar 12 with 3160 views | D_Alien |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 21:47 - Mar 12 by Mundell |
Resolution 2 at the EGM might be read to imply that as shareholders we have now given the Board authority to sell nine million shares at 0.22 pence to any buyer of their choosing. However, in general, a Board would not sell a company without shareholder approval and that’s especially true in this case where at least one of the directors (the Chairman) is fundamentally conflicted.
Simon Gauge has already made one expensive legal misjudgment and it is to be hoped that he will now be more cautious. Shareholders could reasonably argue that resolution 2 was approved primarily as a mechanism to enable the club to be sold and in the expectation that there would be only one possible transaction available, given the very tight deadline. The fact that there appear to be two relatively comparable bids has created a very different scenario and shareholders might well be able to argue that they did not envisage the Board making a choice without further consultation.
Given its large shareholding perhaps the Trust can make representations on behalf of all shareholders and request the club explains its decision making process and why the Board does not intend to hold another EGM. [Post edited 12 Mar 21:48]
|
Thanks for this. A delicate situation and as Rehsad subsequently alludes to, a move to bring greater clarity might also bring curtains - although that just flags up how utterly ridiculous the situation has become
Is it even possible for SG to take the club into liquidation whilst seemingly valid offers remain on the table? If not, the best solution really would be for him to take a back seat now. Apart from anything else, he's not a businessman | |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 23:08 - Mar 12 with 3050 views | dingdangblue |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 21:28 - Mar 12 by Mundell |
I’m not suggesting that Simon Gauge won’t act in good faith and in the best interests of the Football Club, but he is clearly conflicted.
TFC’s offer in respect of his debt isn’t particularly generous. It’s a part equity conversion (which, realistically, has little value to him) and a vague offer to discuss the rest of his loans. We don’t know what WSH is offering, but it might be much more attractive to him.
In these circumstances, he ought to recuse himself from the decision making process. He certainly shouldn’t be making any decisions about who to sell to. |
You dont know whats happened regarding Gauge basically loaning money since December to keep the club going. Maybe he's got it in writing that he only loaned the money if he got it all back when we get a buyer. He certainly doesn't want £220 grands worth of shares. |  |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 23:12 - Mar 12 with 3021 views | D_Alien |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 23:08 - Mar 12 by dingdangblue |
You dont know whats happened regarding Gauge basically loaning money since December to keep the club going. Maybe he's got it in writing that he only loaned the money if he got it all back when we get a buyer. He certainly doesn't want £220 grands worth of shares. |
I think the minutes of the EGM will show that he said he wasn't looking to get all his money back from a buyer, and if that's the case he will indeed have misled the meeting, which would have consequences | |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 23:37 - Mar 12 with 2899 views | mikehunt |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 23:12 - Mar 12 by D_Alien |
I think the minutes of the EGM will show that he said he wasn't looking to get all his money back from a buyer, and if that's the case he will indeed have misled the meeting, which would have consequences |
He and his colleague definitely said that. |  |
| The worm of time turns not for the cuckoo of circumstance. |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 00:09 - Mar 13 with 2833 views | dingdangblue |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 23:12 - Mar 12 by D_Alien |
I think the minutes of the EGM will show that he said he wasn't looking to get all his money back from a buyer, and if that's the case he will indeed have misled the meeting, which would have consequences |
That is quite ambiguous though. He may have given the club more than the £500k loan previously but just wants the £500k back (so him saying he doesn't want all his money back would still stand).
Certainly any involving £220k in shares is a non starter. | |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 00:11 - Mar 13 with 2833 views | Sandyman |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 23:37 - Mar 12 by mikehunt |
He and his colleague definitely said that. |
Agreed. |  | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 00:18 - Mar 13 with 2825 views | WhitworthDale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 21:28 - Mar 12 by Mundell |
I’m not suggesting that Simon Gauge won’t act in good faith and in the best interests of the Football Club, but he is clearly conflicted.
TFC’s offer in respect of his debt isn’t particularly generous. It’s a part equity conversion (which, realistically, has little value to him) and a vague offer to discuss the rest of his loans. We don’t know what WSH is offering, but it might be much more attractive to him.
In these circumstances, he ought to recuse himself from the decision making process. He certainly shouldn’t be making any decisions about who to sell to. |
That is absolutely correct, Mundell.
The Companies Act 2006 obliges directors to avoid conflicts of interest, by recusing themselves from the decision making processes ant the board level (such as, assuming the articles require it, board approval of a sale of shares). The other directors can vote to waive conflicts of interest of other directors, but this is all subject to the overriding duty on each of them to act in the best interests of the company (ie the shareholders) as a whole. I don’t know the exact nuts and bolts of the Chairman’s interests and the offers from investors, but it does seem on its face to present a potential conflict and SG and other Directors will need to treat very carefully.
As a separate point, it depends on the articles and any shareholders agmt but approval of other shareholders may be required there under for a transfer of shares (pre-emption rights / consent rights etc). | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 01:47 - Mar 13 with 2738 views | Chris1803 |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 18:09 - Mar 12 by TalkingSutty |
So the shareholders were taken for a ride last week at the EGM. The Chairman didn't want the motions to be passed in order to attract other investors, they wanted the motion passed in order to get THEIR deal over the line. The shareholders have been misled by the Chairman. It's a disgrace. There is currently a Dutch reporter on Radio Manchester who isn't speaking very highly of WSH at all. |
"There is currently a Dutch reporter on Radio Manchester who isn't speaking very highly of WSH at all."
Can't see how you draw that conclusion at all.
I've paraphrased from the BBC Radio Manchester interview, that's available to listen back to via BBC Sounds. (Any notes added by myself are in brackets.)
The interview is with Danique Eijkenboom - @EijkenboomD on X/Twitter.
Manchester Total Sport, 12/03/2023.
He talks about how World Soccer Holdings (Dutch Soccer Holdings in the case of MVV - same people, different entity name) are working on a long term goal at MVV, professionalising and developing the club.
He makes reference to WSH holding a meeting with MVV Maastricht supporters in Dec 2023 (one presumes like our style fans forum), and that WSH have a good level of communication with MVV supporters.
He talks about how WSH have invested in "organisational stuff" as the journalist puts it, as well as into their youth academy, ahead of transfers.
The club finished in the playoffs last season, finishing 5th (but lost to NAC Breda in the first round of them) whilst operating on one of the lowest overall budgets in the league. (Looking at the table from 22/23, they finished above some much larger sides than folk would expect them to.)
This season they're currently 13th.
It's also mentioned by the journalist that he feels that WSH are realistic in their ownership, and whilst they have the ambition to get promoted back into the Eredivisie, there is an acknowledgement that they have to take things step by step and that WSH are finding a balance between ambition and realism.
WSH want to increase their stake in MVV to 95%, with the other 5% going to the MVV supporters association, and that the supporters would "always have the golden share".
The process it seems is being worked towards, but needs the Dutch FA to finalise things.
When listening to the interview, it all sounded pretty positive to me! Especially the part regarding WSH being happy to include a Golden Share to the supporters trust.
I'd imagine that's something that could be negotiated into any deal with WSH for us too. [Post edited 13 Mar 1:55]
| | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 02:08 - Mar 13 with 2720 views | scarrow |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 18:28 - Mar 12 by 442Dale |
It’s about following process, communicating properly and being respectful.
Most importantly, it’s about doing the right thing for Rochdale Football Club. |
And the right thing is to go with these and not wannabees who've sniffed around for 12 months. |  |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 06:27 - Mar 13 with 2590 views | TalkingSutty |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 01:47 - Mar 13 by Chris1803 |
"There is currently a Dutch reporter on Radio Manchester who isn't speaking very highly of WSH at all."
Can't see how you draw that conclusion at all.
I've paraphrased from the BBC Radio Manchester interview, that's available to listen back to via BBC Sounds. (Any notes added by myself are in brackets.)
The interview is with Danique Eijkenboom - @EijkenboomD on X/Twitter.
Manchester Total Sport, 12/03/2023.
He talks about how World Soccer Holdings (Dutch Soccer Holdings in the case of MVV - same people, different entity name) are working on a long term goal at MVV, professionalising and developing the club.
He makes reference to WSH holding a meeting with MVV Maastricht supporters in Dec 2023 (one presumes like our style fans forum), and that WSH have a good level of communication with MVV supporters.
He talks about how WSH have invested in "organisational stuff" as the journalist puts it, as well as into their youth academy, ahead of transfers.
The club finished in the playoffs last season, finishing 5th (but lost to NAC Breda in the first round of them) whilst operating on one of the lowest overall budgets in the league. (Looking at the table from 22/23, they finished above some much larger sides than folk would expect them to.)
This season they're currently 13th.
It's also mentioned by the journalist that he feels that WSH are realistic in their ownership, and whilst they have the ambition to get promoted back into the Eredivisie, there is an acknowledgement that they have to take things step by step and that WSH are finding a balance between ambition and realism.
WSH want to increase their stake in MVV to 95%, with the other 5% going to the MVV supporters association, and that the supporters would "always have the golden share".
The process it seems is being worked towards, but needs the Dutch FA to finalise things.
When listening to the interview, it all sounded pretty positive to me! Especially the part regarding WSH being happy to include a Golden Share to the supporters trust.
I'd imagine that's something that could be negotiated into any deal with WSH for us too. [Post edited 13 Mar 1:55]
|
I'm sure the Dutch fella mentioned that MVV lost over 1 million euros last season and they are operating on the lowest budget in the league. I was driving at the time but I seem to remember a sum of about 350 euros was invested into the club last year and it was suggested by the person giving the feedback that Rochdale would require far more on going investment than that to be competitive. Like everybody else we don't know the devil in the detail but to progress this club you can't have Simon Gauge running it, he's not trustworthy and the fans and shareholders dislike him. I didnt speak to one person who had a good word to say about him last night. If it is to be WSH then the first thing they will have to do to get the fans on side is to remove Gauge from the Boardroom. There will never be unity until that happens. The Nicholas Brayne scenario is also still one to watch, a disc jockey from Norwich who nearly landed the club with a bunch of chancers a couple of months ago. The Chairman obviously fell head over heels in love with him and was taken for a ride before the fans intervened. [Post edited 13 Mar 6:59]
|  | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 07:06 - Mar 13 with 2500 views | NigelWatson |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 18:09 - Mar 12 by TalkingSutty |
So the shareholders were taken for a ride last week at the EGM. The Chairman didn't want the motions to be passed in order to attract other investors, they wanted the motion passed in order to get THEIR deal over the line. The shareholders have been misled by the Chairman. It's a disgrace. There is currently a Dutch reporter on Radio Manchester who isn't speaking very highly of WSH at all. |
Totally predictable
Remember, human action is purposeful behaviour
And, time is revealing. | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 07:21 - Mar 13 with 2439 views | kel |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 07:06 - Mar 13 by NigelWatson |
Totally predictable
Remember, human action is purposeful behaviour
And, time is revealing. |
Yes, you’ve said numerous times.
You still have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about though. |  | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 11:20 - Mar 13 with 1952 views | wozzrafc |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 00:11 - Mar 13 by Sandyman |
Agreed. |
I seem to recall that he said he and Richard knight had directors loans with the club and he would look to make an arrangement with the new owners regarding that. However he said that he was prepared to turn the into equity if it meant it prevented any deal being done.
Richard Knight said off his own loans he had wrote those off in his own mind and wasn’t looking at getting those back but if he did it he would see it as a bonus. | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 11:26 - Mar 13 with 1913 views | Brierls |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 06:27 - Mar 13 by TalkingSutty |
I'm sure the Dutch fella mentioned that MVV lost over 1 million euros last season and they are operating on the lowest budget in the league. I was driving at the time but I seem to remember a sum of about 350 euros was invested into the club last year and it was suggested by the person giving the feedback that Rochdale would require far more on going investment than that to be competitive. Like everybody else we don't know the devil in the detail but to progress this club you can't have Simon Gauge running it, he's not trustworthy and the fans and shareholders dislike him. I didnt speak to one person who had a good word to say about him last night. If it is to be WSH then the first thing they will have to do to get the fans on side is to remove Gauge from the Boardroom. There will never be unity until that happens. The Nicholas Brayne scenario is also still one to watch, a disc jockey from Norwich who nearly landed the club with a bunch of chancers a couple of months ago. The Chairman obviously fell head over heels in love with him and was taken for a ride before the fans intervened. [Post edited 13 Mar 6:59]
|
The full interview can be heard here - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0hf8wvf
Dutch Journalist: 04:50 - 11:02
Dale fans Luke and Craig: 11:03 - 20:00
(Craig speaks very well)
Your statement: "There is currently a Dutch reporter on Radio Manchester who isn't speaking very highly of WSH at all".
You're banging on about shareholders being misled, yet you're coming out with that nonsense when the guy is saying pretty much the opposite.
Even on your reply you jump into Simon this, Simon that, when it was your comments on the WSH interview that were being challenged.
Please can fans separate WSH from Simon Gauge. Judge them of what they've done, what they're doing, and anything that they're yet to share/do. Do the same for TFC and any other parties. |  | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 11:30 - Mar 13 with 1862 views | Brierls |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 11:20 - Mar 13 by wozzrafc |
I seem to recall that he said he and Richard knight had directors loans with the club and he would look to make an arrangement with the new owners regarding that. However he said that he was prepared to turn the into equity if it meant it prevented any deal being done.
Richard Knight said off his own loans he had wrote those off in his own mind and wasn’t looking at getting those back but if he did it he would see it as a bonus. |
Agreed.
My interpretation from what was said is the money SG isn't going to get back is the money invested in shares (original purchase and then MH). | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 11:30 - Mar 13 with 1861 views | TalkingSutty |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 11:26 - Mar 13 by Brierls |
The full interview can be heard here - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0hf8wvf
Dutch Journalist: 04:50 - 11:02
Dale fans Luke and Craig: 11:03 - 20:00
(Craig speaks very well)
Your statement: "There is currently a Dutch reporter on Radio Manchester who isn't speaking very highly of WSH at all".
You're banging on about shareholders being misled, yet you're coming out with that nonsense when the guy is saying pretty much the opposite.
Even on your reply you jump into Simon this, Simon that, when it was your comments on the WSH interview that were being challenged.
Please can fans separate WSH from Simon Gauge. Judge them of what they've done, what they're doing, and anything that they're yet to share/do. Do the same for TFC and any other parties. |
How can we judge the other parties though? How can I separate Gauge from WSH ? | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 11:39 - Mar 13 with 1803 views | turnthescrew |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 11:30 - Mar 13 by TalkingSutty |
How can we judge the other parties though? How can I separate Gauge from WSH ? |
You can't. Simple as that. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.