| EGM on 20:14 - Jul 27 with 3021 views | nordenblue |
| EGM on 18:34 - Jul 27 by judd |
Complete the proxy form sent with your EGM pack and return to George Delves, and copy to info@daletrust.co.uk |
Is every existing shareholder supposed to have been already contacted directly by the club, do we know? |  | |  |
| EGM on 20:42 - Jul 27 with 2935 views | judd |
| EGM on 20:14 - Jul 27 by nordenblue |
Is every existing shareholder supposed to have been already contacted directly by the club, do we know? |
If you've registered your email, within 24 hours, otherwise notices will be posted by mail.
Several fans have had issues with not receiving yet. |  |
| |
| EGM on 22:10 - Jul 27 with 2756 views | pioneer |
Please would somebody post the outcome of the trust consultation with members on here once the result is known . I would like to know what position the trust will be taking before submitting my proxy and have to get proxy nominations in by 7pm on Monday 7th. | | | |
| EGM on 23:00 - Jul 27 with 2661 views | Brierls |
| EGM on 13:17 - Jul 26 by samueloneils |
The EGM statement seems very clear to me.
They are saying:
The club is running out of monies to continue normal operations.
This should not surprise us in view of previous financial accounts and the forecast statements, and particularly after the relegation and the loss of so much support monies from the Prem and the EFL.
The Directors are determined to press on with finding the right investor to provide substantial and potentially ongoing funding. Anybody who still doubts the necessity of this is still in cloud-cookoo land. They have made it clear that they are still finding the usual rogues and vagabonds who are probably holding on for the complete collapse before stepping in with a cheap offer. We know all about them.Equally there may well be some genuine offers which make the Directors doubt the ability to raise funds. Into this category would fall Chris Dunphy who was honest enough to withdraw when he realised how much was required.
Because the Board are trying to fulfill their promise, and it was a promise, to find the right investor, two of them are prepared to step in and offer a lifeline by way of a loan to tide the Club over until an investor comes in. Only two of them have the money and determination to put a substantial sum up. This is no reflection on the other directors who have also put in large amounts which has enabled the Club to get through so far but
cannot afford to risk more..The security of the Club assets is a reasonable commercial proposal. These are not Fred Ratcliffe times.
Sure we don`t know details of the loan proposal, but remember if the Directors are in negotiation with serious potential investors, some information may be better kept private at this stage. However this cuts across the necessity to keep shareholders informed if they are to react positively to the EGM vote,.and I expect this info will be soon received.
There will always be the doubters and a few ostriches, particularly after the Morton House experience, but surely fans can recognise a lifeline when they see it. Are we prepared to risk losing the club ? It seems to me we are not going to get a better solution in the short term..
What I do read into the statements from the Directors is that this is an urgent matter. Laying off half the staff and the resulting redundancy issues, for instance, could take weeks and months and increase costs in the short term. Time is now the enemy.
IMO |
Fantastic post. |  | | |
| EGM on 23:40 - Jul 27 with 2614 views | Brierls |
| EGM on 09:21 - Jul 27 by samueloneils |
Many people are turning this vote into a vote of no confidence in the Board.
This is not what it is.
It is a vote to enable the Club we love to draw down essential funds to enable it to continue in day to day operations. We need to concentrate on that.
The alternative is clear.
The time for settling grievances should be later. |
This sums up my thoughts perfectly.
Please can we separate grievances from the matter in hand?
This isn't an attempt by SG & RK to get their hands on the ground. Securing the (new) loans against the ground is simply an insurance policy for them, to make sure they get the (new) loans money back in the event of everything going pop. They don't get the ground, they get the money they loaned after the ground is sold (by administrators). They've reached a limit of what they can afford to lose, yet they are still offering to put money in.
The alternative is accepting investment from somebody who has previously been deemed unsuitable. Simply because they have some funds right here, right now. More of an opportunist than an investor. That'll really teach that nasty Simon, won't it?
I understand we all have different opinions, and certainly different tolerance levels, but surely it's clear this is a genuine offer to put the club in a position to make the correct decision on investors and our future?
Some may be making their feelings known, while knowing deep down that they'll vote in favour. That's a dangerous game to play, there could be 10, 20, 50, 100 others who make their mind up from one visit to the forum, one bit of word of mouth annoyance, without any further thought to what the alternative brings. I don't often say the P word on here and now it's appearing twice...please can we separate grievances from the matter in hand? [Post edited 27 Jul 2023 23:47]
| | | |
| EGM on 00:00 - Jul 28 with 2588 views | D_Alien |
| EGM on 23:40 - Jul 27 by Brierls |
This sums up my thoughts perfectly.
Please can we separate grievances from the matter in hand?
This isn't an attempt by SG & RK to get their hands on the ground. Securing the (new) loans against the ground is simply an insurance policy for them, to make sure they get the (new) loans money back in the event of everything going pop. They don't get the ground, they get the money they loaned after the ground is sold (by administrators). They've reached a limit of what they can afford to lose, yet they are still offering to put money in.
The alternative is accepting investment from somebody who has previously been deemed unsuitable. Simply because they have some funds right here, right now. More of an opportunist than an investor. That'll really teach that nasty Simon, won't it?
I understand we all have different opinions, and certainly different tolerance levels, but surely it's clear this is a genuine offer to put the club in a position to make the correct decision on investors and our future?
Some may be making their feelings known, while knowing deep down that they'll vote in favour. That's a dangerous game to play, there could be 10, 20, 50, 100 others who make their mind up from one visit to the forum, one bit of word of mouth annoyance, without any further thought to what the alternative brings. I don't often say the P word on here and now it's appearing twice...please can we separate grievances from the matter in hand? [Post edited 27 Jul 2023 23:47]
|
Powerful words
What would be even more powerful? The facts and figures regarding their loan and the financial position which makes it necessary. No waiting for an attempt to extract it from them at the Fans Forum - that in itself might result in what's being called "grievances"
If there are specific reasons why those facts/figures can't be divulged, let that be spelled out
Waiting to find out at the EGM simply won't do for many shareholders who'd like nothing better than to think the best of their offer
[Post edited 28 Jul 2023 0:11]
|  |
| |
| EGM on 00:22 - Jul 28 with 2554 views | Sandyman |
| EGM on 23:40 - Jul 27 by Brierls |
This sums up my thoughts perfectly.
Please can we separate grievances from the matter in hand?
This isn't an attempt by SG & RK to get their hands on the ground. Securing the (new) loans against the ground is simply an insurance policy for them, to make sure they get the (new) loans money back in the event of everything going pop. They don't get the ground, they get the money they loaned after the ground is sold (by administrators). They've reached a limit of what they can afford to lose, yet they are still offering to put money in.
The alternative is accepting investment from somebody who has previously been deemed unsuitable. Simply because they have some funds right here, right now. More of an opportunist than an investor. That'll really teach that nasty Simon, won't it?
I understand we all have different opinions, and certainly different tolerance levels, but surely it's clear this is a genuine offer to put the club in a position to make the correct decision on investors and our future?
Some may be making their feelings known, while knowing deep down that they'll vote in favour. That's a dangerous game to play, there could be 10, 20, 50, 100 others who make their mind up from one visit to the forum, one bit of word of mouth annoyance, without any further thought to what the alternative brings. I don't often say the P word on here and now it's appearing twice...please can we separate grievances from the matter in hand? [Post edited 27 Jul 2023 23:47]
|
How long have the club, under various boards, sought a decent and honest investor / set of investors and got nowhere? Decades, at least, notwithstanding the saviours of 2021. Until Sheihk Sugar Daddy turns up, we'll be waiting a while longer. We will also be repelling the carcass feeding vultures like Morton House and their ilk.
I don't doubt the sincerity of SG and RK's offer at all. I do doubt the amendment of article 79(a) and the precedent it will set. I'm concerned as to how we got to this state since 2021 and wether those concerned can be relied upon to execute this proposed option to the benefit of RAFC. This is not a grievance, but an observation.
On limited information, I haven't a clue how I will vote on the 9th August, Brierls, and I'm not the only one. |  | | |
| EGM on 01:38 - Jul 28 with 2518 views | YadHoDale |
I'm no legal expert, but would it be possible to suspend Article 79(a) temporarily, to allow SG and RK some security for the purpose of this particular loan, but then to reinstate it so that the protection it gives to the assets of the club remains. This ought to give some sort of reassurance to SG and RK that they won't lose out if the club folds, but retain the protection of the article to deter future Essex yobbos, Worsley fantasists and the like.
Alternatively, set a date, abolish the clause for however long it takes for SG/RK to sort their loans out formally, then reinstate the clause. With electronic/online communication and money transfers this could be dealt with relatively quickly if the banks are advised in advance what is proposed. I would have thought it possible to have a single issue EGM at e.g. 11am, a short break for the transaction to be done on line then a second EGM the same day (1pm?) to reinstate Article 79(a), and the protection it affords... |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| EGM on 07:12 - Jul 28 with 2402 views | HullDale |
Also as no expert, & it may be a non-starter.
Is there the possibility of the money being loaned, & if needed secured, by the Community Trust?
They seem relatively well run, it would mean any protection on the stadium is still owed to a business that also effectively relies on the club surviving, and removes some worries about the security being owed to 2 individuals.
Obviously we don't know how much the intended loan is for / how much liquidity the Community Trust has, but is it worth exploring? |  | | |
| EGM on 07:27 - Jul 28 with 2377 views | TalkingSutty |
| EGM on 00:22 - Jul 28 by Sandyman |
How long have the club, under various boards, sought a decent and honest investor / set of investors and got nowhere? Decades, at least, notwithstanding the saviours of 2021. Until Sheihk Sugar Daddy turns up, we'll be waiting a while longer. We will also be repelling the carcass feeding vultures like Morton House and their ilk.
I don't doubt the sincerity of SG and RK's offer at all. I do doubt the amendment of article 79(a) and the precedent it will set. I'm concerned as to how we got to this state since 2021 and wether those concerned can be relied upon to execute this proposed option to the benefit of RAFC. This is not a grievance, but an observation.
On limited information, I haven't a clue how I will vote on the 9th August, Brierls, and I'm not the only one. |
How much more money are Gauge and Knight thinking of putting into the club, we don't even know that. We have a stadium that is worth roughly £3 million according to Richard Knight, if the Morris amendment is going to be fiddled with in order to provide security for them, then why don't the Trust look at borrowing money against the stadium instead and getting hold of the club,or buying up the remaining shares and taking over the negotiations with the investors. It's not just the football but the rugby club that we are in grave danger of losing here, which also opens up other options. Why not approach RMBC with a proposal and a viable plan to borrow money ( purchase shares) from them against the stadium, or let them come in as partners and make it a community stadium. The Trust have already applied for community status and funding regarding the pitch. Oldham and Bury Council have all recently invested money into their football clubs to help protect them and the Oldham Rugby Club.
I don't believe that the only means of borrowing money is to accept this offer and even then we will still be stuck with a Chairman who isn't fit for purpose, the club is a shambles and the way he treats the shareholders and fans is worse. Use the money in the stadium to make this a proper fan owned club, partner up with RMBC and the community Trust, bring Hornets on board and access levelling up grants/ loans and let the Supporters Trust appoint a new Chairman. It needs proper discussions with the relevant people though and a willingness to do it from the Trust and the fan base. I'm sure there would be plenty of local people with expertise who would offer advice free of charge and help the Trust along the way.
At the moment all we seem to have from some, and i also think the Trust, is an 'acceptance' that what we have now is the best that we can do. I don't believe that all these avenues have been explored properly and with the Morris amendment relaxed it suddenly becomes a more attractive proposition for the likes of RMBC. It's a option that would need a willingness from the Trust to explore but even so i still think the EGM should have been to propose a vote of no confidence in Simon Gauge and the Board and the future should be the Trust running the club until a partnership similar to the one mentioned can be achieved. It doesn't matter how much these two put into the club they have overseen two years of constant decline and took the club to the point of going into liquidation, why would people want them to continue with that decline? That's why i won't vote yes ( I suspect the majority will though).
It's the acceptance from some that this is the best we can do that is worrying, the club hasn't been run properly for years, so what we are seeing is underachievement. Fans/ shareholders are entitled to voice their opinions and vote in which ever way they see fit. I'll be voting no but won't be falling out and getting upset with my fellow fans and friends who vote yes. That's their perogative. My reasoning is that the bigger picture needs looking at and i don't see a future with Simon Gauge as Chairman. I think the Trust/shareholders/fans coming together can look after and run the club more efficiently if there is the will. I would rather try to promote partnership with RMBC and local businesses than bring in unknown outsiders investors. I don't believe that we are close to finalising a deal with suitable investors so that means a continuation of what we have now, a yes vote is therefore a vote of confidence in how the club has been run over the last couple of years because there will be no change at the top.
It's great that we can all discuss our different points of views on the forum without getting upset because somebody thinks the exact opposite of them. Remember those Bury fans who tried to shout down those opposed to Day etc, it provided a vacuum for them to carry on unchallenged and they lost their club. People do funny things when money is involved and its always best to stay vigilant, don't take things at face value. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 7:46]
|  | | |
| EGM on 09:41 - Jul 28 with 2186 views | Trev |
| EGM on 23:40 - Jul 27 by Brierls |
This sums up my thoughts perfectly.
Please can we separate grievances from the matter in hand?
This isn't an attempt by SG & RK to get their hands on the ground. Securing the (new) loans against the ground is simply an insurance policy for them, to make sure they get the (new) loans money back in the event of everything going pop. They don't get the ground, they get the money they loaned after the ground is sold (by administrators). They've reached a limit of what they can afford to lose, yet they are still offering to put money in.
The alternative is accepting investment from somebody who has previously been deemed unsuitable. Simply because they have some funds right here, right now. More of an opportunist than an investor. That'll really teach that nasty Simon, won't it?
I understand we all have different opinions, and certainly different tolerance levels, but surely it's clear this is a genuine offer to put the club in a position to make the correct decision on investors and our future?
Some may be making their feelings known, while knowing deep down that they'll vote in favour. That's a dangerous game to play, there could be 10, 20, 50, 100 others who make their mind up from one visit to the forum, one bit of word of mouth annoyance, without any further thought to what the alternative brings. I don't often say the P word on here and now it's appearing twice...please can we separate grievances from the matter in hand? [Post edited 27 Jul 2023 23:47]
|
Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, the two are inextricably linked.
You are asking people, with completely justifiable concerns, to blindly follow a chairman who has failed in most aspects since taking position. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 9:47]
| | | |
| EGM on 09:45 - Jul 28 with 2169 views | electricblue |
What do SG and RK call short term!
6months, 12months, 24months!
The way SG as run the club since he became chairman as not seen any improvement from himself and the board within those two years otherwise he would have reduced the staffing levels somewhat...
If the current finances are so dire and an influx of cash is urgently needed why have they not approached RMBC about this and seek help in some shape or formatt, I would rather they contact RMBC then letting SG and RK do it from their own pockets..
It would be a much safer option approaching RMBC surely..
For me there is something not quite right in all of this..
How do they intend to get their monies back if the clubs finances are so bad, putting their money into the club and then are they taking monthly amounts of that back...
Devil will be in the details........ |  |
| My all time favourite Dale player Mr Lyndon Symmonds |
| |
| EGM on 09:51 - Jul 28 with 2155 views | Plattyswrinklynuts |
| EGM on 07:27 - Jul 28 by TalkingSutty |
How much more money are Gauge and Knight thinking of putting into the club, we don't even know that. We have a stadium that is worth roughly £3 million according to Richard Knight, if the Morris amendment is going to be fiddled with in order to provide security for them, then why don't the Trust look at borrowing money against the stadium instead and getting hold of the club,or buying up the remaining shares and taking over the negotiations with the investors. It's not just the football but the rugby club that we are in grave danger of losing here, which also opens up other options. Why not approach RMBC with a proposal and a viable plan to borrow money ( purchase shares) from them against the stadium, or let them come in as partners and make it a community stadium. The Trust have already applied for community status and funding regarding the pitch. Oldham and Bury Council have all recently invested money into their football clubs to help protect them and the Oldham Rugby Club.
I don't believe that the only means of borrowing money is to accept this offer and even then we will still be stuck with a Chairman who isn't fit for purpose, the club is a shambles and the way he treats the shareholders and fans is worse. Use the money in the stadium to make this a proper fan owned club, partner up with RMBC and the community Trust, bring Hornets on board and access levelling up grants/ loans and let the Supporters Trust appoint a new Chairman. It needs proper discussions with the relevant people though and a willingness to do it from the Trust and the fan base. I'm sure there would be plenty of local people with expertise who would offer advice free of charge and help the Trust along the way.
At the moment all we seem to have from some, and i also think the Trust, is an 'acceptance' that what we have now is the best that we can do. I don't believe that all these avenues have been explored properly and with the Morris amendment relaxed it suddenly becomes a more attractive proposition for the likes of RMBC. It's a option that would need a willingness from the Trust to explore but even so i still think the EGM should have been to propose a vote of no confidence in Simon Gauge and the Board and the future should be the Trust running the club until a partnership similar to the one mentioned can be achieved. It doesn't matter how much these two put into the club they have overseen two years of constant decline and took the club to the point of going into liquidation, why would people want them to continue with that decline? That's why i won't vote yes ( I suspect the majority will though).
It's the acceptance from some that this is the best we can do that is worrying, the club hasn't been run properly for years, so what we are seeing is underachievement. Fans/ shareholders are entitled to voice their opinions and vote in which ever way they see fit. I'll be voting no but won't be falling out and getting upset with my fellow fans and friends who vote yes. That's their perogative. My reasoning is that the bigger picture needs looking at and i don't see a future with Simon Gauge as Chairman. I think the Trust/shareholders/fans coming together can look after and run the club more efficiently if there is the will. I would rather try to promote partnership with RMBC and local businesses than bring in unknown outsiders investors. I don't believe that we are close to finalising a deal with suitable investors so that means a continuation of what we have now, a yes vote is therefore a vote of confidence in how the club has been run over the last couple of years because there will be no change at the top.
It's great that we can all discuss our different points of views on the forum without getting upset because somebody thinks the exact opposite of them. Remember those Bury fans who tried to shout down those opposed to Day etc, it provided a vacuum for them to carry on unchallenged and they lost their club. People do funny things when money is involved and its always best to stay vigilant, don't take things at face value. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 7:46]
|
The best way forward as I see it is approaching RMBC with a view to purchasing all the unsold shares as well as any that the directors wish to get rid of. That way if any board members want to step down there’s a way out for them that doesn’t jeopardise the future of the club. |  | | |
| EGM on 10:37 - Jul 28 with 2036 views | Thacks_Rabbits |
| EGM on 09:51 - Jul 28 by Plattyswrinklynuts |
The best way forward as I see it is approaching RMBC with a view to purchasing all the unsold shares as well as any that the directors wish to get rid of. That way if any board members want to step down there’s a way out for them that doesn’t jeopardise the future of the club. |
There is of course the other option of actually running the club like a real business. The board got us into this position and now they decide the fans and shareholders are worth talking to because they need something. The message changes every few months and this has not suddenly happened, it’s been on the ways for months / years.
We are losing £30k a week that’s black and white, so how about getting it down to £25k a week to start with, pretty easy to do with any half decent level of financial acumen. Improve the commercial department so it works and sells what is wanted or make it all online with collection available from the ticket office or items posted. Offer a monthly scheme where you can pay x amount per month into an account with the club that’s converted into shares at the end of each year, making admin minimal.
The option of borrowing against the assets is another easy option by those too lazy or incompetent to run a football club properly. We have sold players and had all the season ticket money so where has that all suddenly gone? There are so many unanswered questions and so many things I suspect they don’t want to answer.
I’m not being negative for the sake of it and as I have said I’m 99% sure the motives of SG and RK are good, but it’s those in the future as well, if the club is sold and the charge on the club remains with the potential new owners, which it easily could, we are into bURY territory potentially. Sounds dramatic but it’s very possible. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 10:38]
|  |
| |
| EGM on 10:47 - Jul 28 with 1999 views | wozzrafc |
Someone needs to get a grip on this situation and fast or we are all in danger of doing the club irreparable damage.
The current board have made mistakes, and probably found themselves in a situation, not wholeheartedly of their own doing. They probably regret getting involved and who can blame them. But they they have stuck with , putting in more money than probably any other directors and have reached the limit of their surplus resources . They have faced abuse and yet they still prepared to continue.
But that said the fans have legitimate concerns about how the club has been run and where the club is heading. The lack of updates or tangible engagement has fuelled an air of scepticism and distrust. Just springing an EGM at short notice and with little information has not helped. They need to looks at themselves and how the have gone about this.
We can discuss ideas about approaching the council, bringing back directors or holding a car boot sale every other Sunday until we are blue in the face but that’s not going to address the issue that none of us know the full facts and can make an informed judgement.
We are in danger of each and everyone of us of us striking a death nal into the coffin of our club. Southall, Bottemley and Curran must be laughing their tits off at us.
A line needs to be drawn. The Board need to let the fans know the facts about our current position, why the need for the loan and how they suggest to move forward. We need to know how bad it is and what needs to be done to get us on a Sustainable footing. This needs to be done before the EGM so fans can make a decision whether to back the proposal and also know what the consequences are if we don’t.
But it can’t end there if the shareholders fans and trust so back them at theEGM. then the board have to give something in return and that is a new approach with the fans at the centre of it. This loan will only address the short term issues and whilst getting investment is the long term future all parties need to start working together to ensure we survive in the mean time.
Now there is an opportunity with the forum next week for this to be addressed. If I was the board I would start with a honest appraisal of where we are, what they plan is for the loan and open up to the fans. They need to make the first move BUT we as fans now more than ever have to put behind us what has gone on before and listen.
Then and only then can you make a honest decision. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 10:56]
| | | |
| EGM on 10:56 - Jul 28 with 1974 views | 442Dale |
| EGM on 10:47 - Jul 28 by wozzrafc |
Someone needs to get a grip on this situation and fast or we are all in danger of doing the club irreparable damage.
The current board have made mistakes, and probably found themselves in a situation, not wholeheartedly of their own doing. They probably regret getting involved and who can blame them. But they they have stuck with , putting in more money than probably any other directors and have reached the limit of their surplus resources . They have faced abuse and yet they still prepared to continue.
But that said the fans have legitimate concerns about how the club has been run and where the club is heading. The lack of updates or tangible engagement has fuelled an air of scepticism and distrust. Just springing an EGM at short notice and with little information has not helped. They need to looks at themselves and how the have gone about this.
We can discuss ideas about approaching the council, bringing back directors or holding a car boot sale every other Sunday until we are blue in the face but that’s not going to address the issue that none of us know the full facts and can make an informed judgement.
We are in danger of each and everyone of us of us striking a death nal into the coffin of our club. Southall, Bottemley and Curran must be laughing their tits off at us.
A line needs to be drawn. The Board need to let the fans know the facts about our current position, why the need for the loan and how they suggest to move forward. We need to know how bad it is and what needs to be done to get us on a Sustainable footing. This needs to be done before the EGM so fans can make a decision whether to back the proposal and also know what the consequences are if we don’t.
But it can’t end there if the shareholders fans and trust so back them at theEGM. then the board have to give something in return and that is a new approach with the fans at the centre of it. This loan will only address the short term issues and whilst getting investment is the long term future all parties need to start working together to ensure we survive in the mean time.
Now there is an opportunity with the forum next week for this to be addressed. If I was the board I would start with a honest appraisal of where we are, what they plan is for the loan and open up to the fans. They need to make the first move BUT we as fans now more than ever have to put behind us what has gone on before and listen.
Then and only then can you make a honest decision. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 10:56]
|
Have we assurances of the format of the forum? How long it will last? Whether it will be broadcast for all shareholders/supporters to watch?
All of these could easily and should have been confirmed by now.
As could more information sent to shareholders which detailed the proposals.
None of this is on supporters as long as they are being respectful and avoid abuse when trying to establish facts. |  |
| |
| EGM on 11:01 - Jul 28 with 1965 views | pioneer |
| EGM on 07:27 - Jul 28 by TalkingSutty |
How much more money are Gauge and Knight thinking of putting into the club, we don't even know that. We have a stadium that is worth roughly £3 million according to Richard Knight, if the Morris amendment is going to be fiddled with in order to provide security for them, then why don't the Trust look at borrowing money against the stadium instead and getting hold of the club,or buying up the remaining shares and taking over the negotiations with the investors. It's not just the football but the rugby club that we are in grave danger of losing here, which also opens up other options. Why not approach RMBC with a proposal and a viable plan to borrow money ( purchase shares) from them against the stadium, or let them come in as partners and make it a community stadium. The Trust have already applied for community status and funding regarding the pitch. Oldham and Bury Council have all recently invested money into their football clubs to help protect them and the Oldham Rugby Club.
I don't believe that the only means of borrowing money is to accept this offer and even then we will still be stuck with a Chairman who isn't fit for purpose, the club is a shambles and the way he treats the shareholders and fans is worse. Use the money in the stadium to make this a proper fan owned club, partner up with RMBC and the community Trust, bring Hornets on board and access levelling up grants/ loans and let the Supporters Trust appoint a new Chairman. It needs proper discussions with the relevant people though and a willingness to do it from the Trust and the fan base. I'm sure there would be plenty of local people with expertise who would offer advice free of charge and help the Trust along the way.
At the moment all we seem to have from some, and i also think the Trust, is an 'acceptance' that what we have now is the best that we can do. I don't believe that all these avenues have been explored properly and with the Morris amendment relaxed it suddenly becomes a more attractive proposition for the likes of RMBC. It's a option that would need a willingness from the Trust to explore but even so i still think the EGM should have been to propose a vote of no confidence in Simon Gauge and the Board and the future should be the Trust running the club until a partnership similar to the one mentioned can be achieved. It doesn't matter how much these two put into the club they have overseen two years of constant decline and took the club to the point of going into liquidation, why would people want them to continue with that decline? That's why i won't vote yes ( I suspect the majority will though).
It's the acceptance from some that this is the best we can do that is worrying, the club hasn't been run properly for years, so what we are seeing is underachievement. Fans/ shareholders are entitled to voice their opinions and vote in which ever way they see fit. I'll be voting no but won't be falling out and getting upset with my fellow fans and friends who vote yes. That's their perogative. My reasoning is that the bigger picture needs looking at and i don't see a future with Simon Gauge as Chairman. I think the Trust/shareholders/fans coming together can look after and run the club more efficiently if there is the will. I would rather try to promote partnership with RMBC and local businesses than bring in unknown outsiders investors. I don't believe that we are close to finalising a deal with suitable investors so that means a continuation of what we have now, a yes vote is therefore a vote of confidence in how the club has been run over the last couple of years because there will be no change at the top.
It's great that we can all discuss our different points of views on the forum without getting upset because somebody thinks the exact opposite of them. Remember those Bury fans who tried to shout down those opposed to Day etc, it provided a vacuum for them to carry on unchallenged and they lost their club. People do funny things when money is involved and its always best to stay vigilant, don't take things at face value. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 7:46]
|
I think SG has burnt any bridges that existed with Hornets…and his approach was heavily endorsed by many posters on this board. .I wouldnt expect them to be rushing in to help. On the contrary they are probably having a quiet chuckle. A case of reap what you sow. | | | |
| EGM on 11:04 - Jul 28 with 1950 views | wozzrafc |
| EGM on 10:56 - Jul 28 by 442Dale |
Have we assurances of the format of the forum? How long it will last? Whether it will be broadcast for all shareholders/supporters to watch?
All of these could easily and should have been confirmed by now.
As could more information sent to shareholders which detailed the proposals.
None of this is on supporters as long as they are being respectful and avoid abuse when trying to establish facts. |
I’m not saying it is. The board need to lay the cards on the table. If they don’t we can’t blame the fans for making their own conclusions.
But fans need also to listen also. We can’t base our decisions on say so or speculation. We need to give this proper consideration and have a plan if we decide not to back it.
It has to be addressed by the board and the fans have to give due consideration. We can’t just speculate. If the fans have to ask the questions at the forum then we have already failed.
I hope SG and RK acknowledges this. But also the fans need to acknowledge that these individuals are doing their best to move forward and are willing to continue at great personal expense. We all want the same thing. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 11:06]
| | | |
| EGM on 11:05 - Jul 28 with 1948 views | TalkingSutty |
| EGM on 10:56 - Jul 28 by 442Dale |
Have we assurances of the format of the forum? How long it will last? Whether it will be broadcast for all shareholders/supporters to watch?
All of these could easily and should have been confirmed by now.
As could more information sent to shareholders which detailed the proposals.
None of this is on supporters as long as they are being respectful and avoid abuse when trying to establish facts. |
Information sent to shareholders? I must have missed that one. Still not received a email or any correspondence. | | | |
| EGM on 11:08 - Jul 28 with 1930 views | TalkingSutty |
| EGM on 11:01 - Jul 28 by pioneer |
I think SG has burnt any bridges that existed with Hornets…and his approach was heavily endorsed by many posters on this board. .I wouldnt expect them to be rushing in to help. On the contrary they are probably having a quiet chuckle. A case of reap what you sow. |
They won't be chuckling when they are homeless. I wasn't proposing SG as the appropriate person to be doing any negotiating. Maybe somebody else in the Boardroom could replace him as Chairman, that might be another option. | | | |
| EGM on 11:09 - Jul 28 with 1923 views | electricblue |
| EGM on 10:47 - Jul 28 by wozzrafc |
Someone needs to get a grip on this situation and fast or we are all in danger of doing the club irreparable damage.
The current board have made mistakes, and probably found themselves in a situation, not wholeheartedly of their own doing. They probably regret getting involved and who can blame them. But they they have stuck with , putting in more money than probably any other directors and have reached the limit of their surplus resources . They have faced abuse and yet they still prepared to continue.
But that said the fans have legitimate concerns about how the club has been run and where the club is heading. The lack of updates or tangible engagement has fuelled an air of scepticism and distrust. Just springing an EGM at short notice and with little information has not helped. They need to looks at themselves and how the have gone about this.
We can discuss ideas about approaching the council, bringing back directors or holding a car boot sale every other Sunday until we are blue in the face but that’s not going to address the issue that none of us know the full facts and can make an informed judgement.
We are in danger of each and everyone of us of us striking a death nal into the coffin of our club. Southall, Bottemley and Curran must be laughing their tits off at us.
A line needs to be drawn. The Board need to let the fans know the facts about our current position, why the need for the loan and how they suggest to move forward. We need to know how bad it is and what needs to be done to get us on a Sustainable footing. This needs to be done before the EGM so fans can make a decision whether to back the proposal and also know what the consequences are if we don’t.
But it can’t end there if the shareholders fans and trust so back them at theEGM. then the board have to give something in return and that is a new approach with the fans at the centre of it. This loan will only address the short term issues and whilst getting investment is the long term future all parties need to start working together to ensure we survive in the mean time.
Now there is an opportunity with the forum next week for this to be addressed. If I was the board I would start with a honest appraisal of where we are, what they plan is for the loan and open up to the fans. They need to make the first move BUT we as fans now more than ever have to put behind us what has gone on before and listen.
Then and only then can you make a honest decision. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 10:56]
|
I dont like the idea of a loan from the board members above all else.
Have they actually contacted RMBC and have they said no!
As mentioned selling the remaining shares and the shares of the BoD to RMBC needs serious looking into and the BoD not thought of that why not!
Somebody mentioned removing the board and turning the club into a fan owned and run club via the trust....
Can that be achieved!
If so could it be possible to approach somebody with experience to work with ths trust and dare i say it Chris Dunphy.....
We need a board who can change the direction that the club as been heading towards....
There are many avenues mentioned in other topics on how to generate much needed income ie gold bond for a start.....
Lets get the army of volunteers on board to run with certain aspects......
Lets make it a properly fan/community owned club....
There must be clubs that are run this way and be modelled upon... | |
| My all time favourite Dale player Mr Lyndon Symmonds |
| |
| EGM on 11:09 - Jul 28 with 1923 views | 442Dale |
| EGM on 11:04 - Jul 28 by wozzrafc |
I’m not saying it is. The board need to lay the cards on the table. If they don’t we can’t blame the fans for making their own conclusions.
But fans need also to listen also. We can’t base our decisions on say so or speculation. We need to give this proper consideration and have a plan if we decide not to back it.
It has to be addressed by the board and the fans have to give due consideration. We can’t just speculate. If the fans have to ask the questions at the forum then we have already failed.
I hope SG and RK acknowledges this. But also the fans need to acknowledge that these individuals are doing their best to move forward and are willing to continue at great personal expense. We all want the same thing. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 11:06]
|
The worry is that we are placing too much pressure on the forum establishing answers to the multitude of questions that need answering.
There’s an argument that shareholder information may not be able to be discussed in such a setting. So unless that is not going to be an issue and all answers are documented then good, but let’s get that communicated now. | |
| |
| EGM on 11:16 - Jul 28 with 1887 views | Plattyswrinklynuts |
| EGM on 10:37 - Jul 28 by Thacks_Rabbits |
There is of course the other option of actually running the club like a real business. The board got us into this position and now they decide the fans and shareholders are worth talking to because they need something. The message changes every few months and this has not suddenly happened, it’s been on the ways for months / years.
We are losing £30k a week that’s black and white, so how about getting it down to £25k a week to start with, pretty easy to do with any half decent level of financial acumen. Improve the commercial department so it works and sells what is wanted or make it all online with collection available from the ticket office or items posted. Offer a monthly scheme where you can pay x amount per month into an account with the club that’s converted into shares at the end of each year, making admin minimal.
The option of borrowing against the assets is another easy option by those too lazy or incompetent to run a football club properly. We have sold players and had all the season ticket money so where has that all suddenly gone? There are so many unanswered questions and so many things I suspect they don’t want to answer.
I’m not being negative for the sake of it and as I have said I’m 99% sure the motives of SG and RK are good, but it’s those in the future as well, if the club is sold and the charge on the club remains with the potential new owners, which it easily could, we are into bURY territory potentially. Sounds dramatic but it’s very possible. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 10:38]
|
Agree wholeheartedly Thacks. I said around the time we were relegated that the club needed to make some difficult decisions re staffing & the way it’s commercial department operated. Nothings changed in that regard. | | | |
| EGM on 11:19 - Jul 28 with 1873 views | pioneer |
| EGM on 11:08 - Jul 28 by TalkingSutty |
They won't be chuckling when they are homeless. I wasn't proposing SG as the appropriate person to be doing any negotiating. Maybe somebody else in the Boardroom could replace him as Chairman, that might be another option. |
They already realise they have no long term future at Spotland under the current leadership. They wont be homeless, (just like the trophies and memorabilia they were required to move out of the stadium wasnt left homeless) even if it means a less local home.
The stuff that went on was supported by the Board so I dont think sending another board member to meet with them will make a difference. | | | |
| EGM on 11:35 - Jul 28 with 1808 views | D_Alien |
| EGM on 11:04 - Jul 28 by wozzrafc |
I’m not saying it is. The board need to lay the cards on the table. If they don’t we can’t blame the fans for making their own conclusions.
But fans need also to listen also. We can’t base our decisions on say so or speculation. We need to give this proper consideration and have a plan if we decide not to back it.
It has to be addressed by the board and the fans have to give due consideration. We can’t just speculate. If the fans have to ask the questions at the forum then we have already failed.
I hope SG and RK acknowledges this. But also the fans need to acknowledge that these individuals are doing their best to move forward and are willing to continue at great personal expense. We all want the same thing. [Post edited 28 Jul 2023 11:06]
|
"If the fans have to ask the questions at the forum then we [they?] have already failed."
"...these individuals are doing their best to move forward..."
Those two statements just seem contradictory, and form the crux of the matter. As it stands, should the required financial information be forthcoming before the Forum, it'll already have been dragged out of them, since if they intended to bring it to our attention they'd have indicated they were going to do so
Without it, it's a definite no vote from me
[Post edited 28 Jul 2023 11:39]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
