| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity 17:53 - Mar 12 with 36047 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 15:44 - Mar 14 with 4435 views | Rodingdale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 15:21 - Mar 14 by TalkingSutty |
It is pretty unbelievable how one man has been allowed to just do as he want with the club, how has the situation been allowed to develop bearing in mind its a fan owned club with over 500 shareholders and the Trust holding the most shares? It's not just the Trust who should be asking themselves that question but also the shareholders and fans. As a collective fan base we are all culpable and also too quick to believe what comes out of the boardroom. The fans always want what's best for the club but recent history has revealed that quite a few who sit in the boardroom think entirely differently. |
Oh I agree but the board carried the EGM. They have full endorsement. Maybe the under bidder will challenge the exclusivity decision? |  | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 19:26 - Mar 14 with 4130 views | pioneer |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 15:21 - Mar 14 by TalkingSutty |
It is pretty unbelievable how one man has been allowed to just do as he want with the club, how has the situation been allowed to develop bearing in mind its a fan owned club with over 500 shareholders and the Trust holding the most shares? It's not just the Trust who should be asking themselves that question but also the shareholders and fans. As a collective fan base we are all culpable and also too quick to believe what comes out of the boardroom. The fans always want what's best for the club but recent history has revealed that quite a few who sit in the boardroom think entirely differently. |
15% voted no….well it was probably way more than 15% because those with large shareholdings probably voted yes and the figures are based on shares held. | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:01 - Mar 14 with 4020 views | James1980 |
My ramblings. Have prospective bidders agreed to cover the cost of completing the season with the successful buyer reimbursing the unsuccessful ones?
Are there meetings taking place to arrange funds so the we can finish all 46 games without breaching NL rules? Is there a consortium of shareholders with sufficient shares that are able to call an EGM to topple the current board and put in their people to oversee the takeover or carry on continuing as we were? | |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:08 - Mar 14 with 3985 views | 442Dale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:01 - Mar 14 by James1980 |
My ramblings. Have prospective bidders agreed to cover the cost of completing the season with the successful buyer reimbursing the unsuccessful ones?
Are there meetings taking place to arrange funds so the we can finish all 46 games without breaching NL rules? Is there a consortium of shareholders with sufficient shares that are able to call an EGM to topple the current board and put in their people to oversee the takeover or carry on continuing as we were? |
Some good questions in there.
It’s quite remarkable that people aren’t seeing the obvious.
Should we be playing games if there is ANY doubt we will complete the season? There were some people who posted about Bury in the summer of 2019 who had strong views on this.
They. F’n. Know. |  |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:26 - Mar 14 with 3879 views | James1980 |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:08 - Mar 14 by 442Dale |
Some good questions in there.
It’s quite remarkable that people aren’t seeing the obvious.
Should we be playing games if there is ANY doubt we will complete the season? There were some people who posted about Bury in the summer of 2019 who had strong views on this.
They. F’n. Know. |
Another concern of mine is that someone could say I tried my best to get a deal over the line but the continued criticism put investors off and given there was no alternative plan proposed by those against the takeovers to provide funds to complete the season it is with heavy heart receivers have been instructed to put the club into liquidation.
Sorry for shouting but WHAT NEXT, WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES? | |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:30 - Mar 14 with 3847 views | 442Dale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:26 - Mar 14 by James1980 |
Another concern of mine is that someone could say I tried my best to get a deal over the line but the continued criticism put investors off and given there was no alternative plan proposed by those against the takeovers to provide funds to complete the season it is with heavy heart receivers have been instructed to put the club into liquidation.
Sorry for shouting but WHAT NEXT, WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES? |
Another good question, James.
Here’s another one, why was it allowed to play out like this?
Narratives are often hidden in plain sight. | |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:38 - Mar 14 with 3803 views | Rodingdale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:26 - Mar 14 by James1980 |
Another concern of mine is that someone could say I tried my best to get a deal over the line but the continued criticism put investors off and given there was no alternative plan proposed by those against the takeovers to provide funds to complete the season it is with heavy heart receivers have been instructed to put the club into liquidation.
Sorry for shouting but WHAT NEXT, WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES? |
Easy - Take admin, get rid of Biggleswade Biggles and start again as a community run club down the pyramid. | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:46 - Mar 14 with 3770 views | 49thseason |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:38 - Mar 14 by Rodingdale |
Easy - Take admin, get rid of Biggleswade Biggles and start again as a community run club down the pyramid. |
There is no administration if the club has no funds to continue to trade. its illegal to trade knowing you cant pay the bills be you owner, director or administrator. the only option is a voluntary liquidation before some one forecloses on the business and forces a liquidation .
"If you allow the company to incur additional creditors when you know the company is insolvent, you can be found guilty of wrongful trading under section 214 the Insolvency Act 1986. A court can order you (and any other company directors) to personally pay the debts incurred during this period". |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:49 - Mar 14 with 3747 views | James1980 |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:38 - Mar 14 by Rodingdale |
Easy - Take admin, get rid of Biggleswade Biggles and start again as a community run club down the pyramid. |
But is that selfish? Fans up till now have experienced 100+ years of league football, cup runs, giant killings, promotions and yes relegations. AFC Dale 2024 might not reach the levels Rochdale AFC did is it fair to deny fans of the future from the euphoria fans of the past got to feel. | |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:51 - Mar 14 with 3726 views | Rodingdale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:46 - Mar 14 by 49thseason |
There is no administration if the club has no funds to continue to trade. its illegal to trade knowing you cant pay the bills be you owner, director or administrator. the only option is a voluntary liquidation before some one forecloses on the business and forces a liquidation .
"If you allow the company to incur additional creditors when you know the company is insolvent, you can be found guilty of wrongful trading under section 214 the Insolvency Act 1986. A court can order you (and any other company directors) to personally pay the debts incurred during this period". |
Ok - Liquidation then. Anything to remove the man from Tui.
Out of interest- how many clubs have gone from operating to liquidation? | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:52 - Mar 14 with 3722 views | 442Dale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:46 - Mar 14 by 49thseason |
There is no administration if the club has no funds to continue to trade. its illegal to trade knowing you cant pay the bills be you owner, director or administrator. the only option is a voluntary liquidation before some one forecloses on the business and forces a liquidation .
"If you allow the company to incur additional creditors when you know the company is insolvent, you can be found guilty of wrongful trading under section 214 the Insolvency Act 1986. A court can order you (and any other company directors) to personally pay the debts incurred during this period". |
Answer the National League question. | |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:57 - Mar 14 with 3682 views | diplodocus |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:51 - Mar 14 by Rodingdale |
Ok - Liquidation then. Anything to remove the man from Tui.
Out of interest- how many clubs have gone from operating to liquidation? |
If it is liquidation, who gets the 4-6m the ground is worth. and what is the community doing to help?? | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 21:09 - Mar 14 with 3619 views | TalkingSutty |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:26 - Mar 14 by James1980 |
Another concern of mine is that someone could say I tried my best to get a deal over the line but the continued criticism put investors off and given there was no alternative plan proposed by those against the takeovers to provide funds to complete the season it is with heavy heart receivers have been instructed to put the club into liquidation.
Sorry for shouting but WHAT NEXT, WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES? |
Compared to most clubs at this level and in EFL1 and EFL2 we are in decent financial health. We aren't carrying loads of debt, we own our stadium, a luxury that many clubs don't have. Our home attendances in the National League are better than most, we receive a 50% parachute payment next season which most clubs don't and we can start selling our season tickets next month if we wanted to do. Nearly every club outside the Premiership will be trading knowing full well that they will be trading at a loss, many of them losing multi millions of pounds every season. When you factor all of that in why is it only Rochdale that has to be liquidated? It doesn't make sense does it unless thats another option that gives the Chairman etc a chance of getting their money back ? We could well have a shortfall to find when Gauge stops his funding but there is money on the horizon and there are players to sell, sponsorship money to come in and other revenue streams which will kick in as the new season arrives. Painting the club as some sort of financial basket case that has to be liquidated if Gauge doesn't fund it is a narrative that has been perpetuated on this forum by Gauge's bag man and people are falling for it. We are no worse off than any other club at this level and financially better than most.
We have lost a lot of money under Gauge's stewardship but I'd suggest that his decisions and others in the boardroom have been responsible for that. Some of their decision making has cost the club a absolute fortune, the Stockdale saga, stupid transfer fees and ludicrous two year contracts are all down to Simon Gauge, he signed it all off. So yes, he's put a lot of money in but he's also cost the club a lot more when you look at his tenure. There's been a deliberate attempt to frighten the fan base I think by banding around the words liquidation and administration and when you stop and think rationally, if it applies to us then it applies to every club outside the Premiership. The scare tactic was one the Chairman used again at the EGM, blackmailing the fans and threatening shareholders at the most important vote in the clubs history. A EGM that wasn't conducted correctly and needs challenging. [Post edited 14 Mar 21:58]
|  | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 21:09 - Mar 14 with 3616 views | EllDale |
Whoever the liquidator chooses to sell the ground to. | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 21:14 - Mar 14 with 3583 views | Rodingdale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:57 - Mar 14 by diplodocus |
If it is liquidation, who gets the 4-6m the ground is worth. and what is the community doing to help?? |
We are being bounced into doing a deal with who only knows simply because of the chairman’s decisions. There are many sources of funding to enable the club to reset and build again. But the shareholders, and fans have acquiesced, bought in while we’ve seen the club run down. Offers of expertise and labour declined.
I’d take my chances with a council pitch and a few local enthusiasts now, just like in 1907. | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 22:20 - Mar 14 with 3318 views | DorkingDale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 14:49 - Mar 14 by BigKindo |
In deal making often they are worked on 24/7 to get past the finishing post. |
Been there, got the T-shirt..... | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 22:28 - Mar 14 with 3274 views | DorkingDale |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:57 - Mar 14 by diplodocus |
If it is liquidation, who gets the 4-6m the ground is worth. and what is the community doing to help?? |
The creditors of the club........ | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 00:45 - Mar 15 with 3116 views | mikehunt |
So, when Bumley was ousted, it was as a result of the Trust arranging an EGM. This resulted in the current board taking over.
Well there is the precedence. The 9 million shares have not yet been issued, let alone bought so, surely, the people who instigated the previous EGM know which procedures (kindly pointed out to us by Roger himself) to follow, to instigate another one, to remove these incumbents. If thats what we want.
Has to be done soon though, as many people have already stated. |  |
| The worm of time turns not for the cuckoo of circumstance. |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 10:21 - Mar 15 with 2748 views | Rehsad |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 00:45 - Mar 15 by mikehunt |
So, when Bumley was ousted, it was as a result of the Trust arranging an EGM. This resulted in the current board taking over.
Well there is the precedence. The 9 million shares have not yet been issued, let alone bought so, surely, the people who instigated the previous EGM know which procedures (kindly pointed out to us by Roger himself) to follow, to instigate another one, to remove these incumbents. If thats what we want.
Has to be done soon though, as many people have already stated. |
The club is not technically insolvent. As far as I'm aware the total assets are still greater than the total debt. One of the big issues here is an issue of the National League's own making. In refusing to allow the main asset to be used to secure finance, NL has placed the club in a position where cash flow has dried up.Liquidation as a term is being used at its most extreme. It is the quick end but it isn't the only path. Although technically not insolvent, the club is facing severe financial stress and likely finding it difficult (or soon impossible) to pay its bills and is almost certainly exploring avenues that any insolvent business would also do. It starts with restructuring debt and the repayment thereof.
There are big things worry me though. I was unaware that significant debt was still owed to RMBC - this is very important as RMBC would be a first port of call for a secured loan. SG is clearly a huge creditor - we have no idea of the terms of his loan. More importantly he would have to accept restructuring in order for the club to continue. Would NL make exception to its rule regarding lending against the major asset? I hope that it would see sense here. All of this only buys time. Any loan that could be secured would have to be for both working capital and debt repayment. It is not a long term answer.A buyer is required.
Administration has immediate consequences regarding football status - a drop down the leagues - but it does allow for a restructuring of debt, an immediate reduction in costs and various other stringent measures. It is not an answer by any means. The way forwards, should an immediate buyer not be found is to recognise that liquidation is staring us in the face, but to act as our own administrators and find a working solution without officially declaring that we are under administration (without calling in an administrator). The board must be aware of this but as usual its approach to communication is palpable.Prior to the EGM The shareholders would have been better informed had they been shown a (maybe limited) set of working accounts to cover July 2023 to February 20234 - but instead we got rhetoric only eight weeks out from an AGM.
All interested parties should be allowed to have time to have their planned properly vetted. We need a way of funding the clubs financial activities though ought this period. The board's focus should have both of these points in mind and not be rushing one bidder through because of the risk of the money running out. | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 11:23 - Mar 15 with 2619 views | Dale69er |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 22:28 - Mar 14 by DorkingDale |
The creditors of the club........ |
... and if owt is left, shareholders. |  | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 11:55 - Mar 15 with 2482 views | 100notout |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 20:57 - Mar 14 by diplodocus |
If it is liquidation, who gets the 4-6m the ground is worth. and what is the community doing to help?? |
IF we went into liquidation, the ground would be sold. Would we get £6m? Unlikely. Would we get £4? Possibly. Would we get less than £4m? Very probably. In truth though the ground is only worth what a purchaser is prepared to pay for it. In a distressed state it WILL be less than the open market value. Does the "£4m-£6m" figure relate to OMV?
When the net sale proceeds are received, the first one to receive any money is the liquidator for his fees. Then secured creditors are paid (I don't think we have any). Then preferential creditors are paid (e.g. staff wages). Then unsecured creditors (includes SG and RK) and anything left over (which will be nothing IMHO) will be paid to the shareholders on a pro rata basis.
NORMALLY in a liquidation (albeit of course every one is different) the unsecured creditors take a hit and receive so much in the £ for whatever they owe.
SG will no doubt be doing the sums at to what the best option is for him to get his £556k back - i.e. liquidation or selling to an investor on terms to be negotiated by him with the benefit of all the information available to him. He is as has been said, conflicted. Do the Trust have the same information? They should have (on a confidential basis) but I vey much doubt that they will have.
If not, maybe the Trust should call SG's bluff and call an EGM to remove SG? | |
| |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 12:01 - Mar 15 with 2454 views | wozzrafc |
I agree with a lot of the points reshad, unfortunately the time for this approach was months ago, times run out.
Directors wanted to secure their loans against the ground and that is what the NL prevented. The directors lent the money anyway and that’s been used up.
They said at the directors loan EGM and again at the AGM that they had tried to get long term loan against the ground but were unable.
Our issue is cash flow. We have not enough money coming in to cover the outgoings. There’s no money left and where for the last 4 months directors have stepped in to bridge the gap,they tell us that’s no longer possible.
It’s simple we have two immediate issues, we have wages and bills due for March and April which need to be paid to enable to continue trading.
And if by a miracle we can get over this hurdle we have to show sufficient funding and budgets to the NL to allow us to start next season.
The board have constantly said they will be no plan b despite repeated requests by shareholders over the last six to twelve months. They could have suggested the 90% approach to selling the club months ago approached it in a sensible timescale,but instead they have let the bus freewheel to a cliff edge and rush it through.
Like it or not we either need a deal to be done with WSH that meets NL funding rules or miraculous offer of a cash injection from someone to see us through the next few months and cover the shortfall in budget until the end of next season. [Post edited 15 Mar 12:13]
| | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 14:28 - Mar 15 with 2075 views | Rehsad |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 12:01 - Mar 15 by wozzrafc |
I agree with a lot of the points reshad, unfortunately the time for this approach was months ago, times run out.
Directors wanted to secure their loans against the ground and that is what the NL prevented. The directors lent the money anyway and that’s been used up.
They said at the directors loan EGM and again at the AGM that they had tried to get long term loan against the ground but were unable.
Our issue is cash flow. We have not enough money coming in to cover the outgoings. There’s no money left and where for the last 4 months directors have stepped in to bridge the gap,they tell us that’s no longer possible.
It’s simple we have two immediate issues, we have wages and bills due for March and April which need to be paid to enable to continue trading.
And if by a miracle we can get over this hurdle we have to show sufficient funding and budgets to the NL to allow us to start next season.
The board have constantly said they will be no plan b despite repeated requests by shareholders over the last six to twelve months. They could have suggested the 90% approach to selling the club months ago approached it in a sensible timescale,but instead they have let the bus freewheel to a cliff edge and rush it through.
Like it or not we either need a deal to be done with WSH that meets NL funding rules or miraculous offer of a cash injection from someone to see us through the next few months and cover the shortfall in budget until the end of next season. [Post edited 15 Mar 12:13]
|
Sadly we are both on the same page - with minor differences. I am surprised, given the words emanating from the Chairman at the EGM, that the NL hasn't taken the matter into its own hands and because of this I do wonder about how rigid their original ruling is/was. It probably is too late now as it would need a new lender to kick in asap.
I'd be very surprised if other would-be investors aren't watching the situation very closely. If the WSH deal falls through on the last day of their exclusivity window then apparently everything ends. This isn't in the interests of would-be investors as it would be better to keep a going concern than start from scratch. In this case I suspect that immediate cash offers from late entrants cannot be ruled out. Slim chance? Yes. Miracle, No - don't believe in them - I leave that to others. We need to get to the end of the season - that is all that we need funds for. Next season would be very different - cut the outgoings to match the income. OK it may mean a bottom 4 finish but I'm pretty sure that with the income that we continue to generate through the gates we could survive in NL/NLN and then attract the right suitor. Unfortunately , like you, I see the chance of cash through to the summer as a slim chance and therefore WSH hold all the cards. They may be great for us - and I think that we have to hope that is the case.
Your point about the timing of the 90% approach is an interesting one. I've been of the opinion that, as it is quite creative, the board has only recently had its eyes opened to it. It could be though, because this approach lends itself to legal challenge, that they have sat on this card until the last possible moment and only played it when it could be offered as a last resort with no other options. | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 14:46 - Mar 15 with 2015 views | wozzrafc |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 14:28 - Mar 15 by Rehsad |
Sadly we are both on the same page - with minor differences. I am surprised, given the words emanating from the Chairman at the EGM, that the NL hasn't taken the matter into its own hands and because of this I do wonder about how rigid their original ruling is/was. It probably is too late now as it would need a new lender to kick in asap.
I'd be very surprised if other would-be investors aren't watching the situation very closely. If the WSH deal falls through on the last day of their exclusivity window then apparently everything ends. This isn't in the interests of would-be investors as it would be better to keep a going concern than start from scratch. In this case I suspect that immediate cash offers from late entrants cannot be ruled out. Slim chance? Yes. Miracle, No - don't believe in them - I leave that to others. We need to get to the end of the season - that is all that we need funds for. Next season would be very different - cut the outgoings to match the income. OK it may mean a bottom 4 finish but I'm pretty sure that with the income that we continue to generate through the gates we could survive in NL/NLN and then attract the right suitor. Unfortunately , like you, I see the chance of cash through to the summer as a slim chance and therefore WSH hold all the cards. They may be great for us - and I think that we have to hope that is the case.
Your point about the timing of the 90% approach is an interesting one. I've been of the opinion that, as it is quite creative, the board has only recently had its eyes opened to it. It could be though, because this approach lends itself to legal challenge, that they have sat on this card until the last possible moment and only played it when it could be offered as a last resort with no other options. |
As I read the rules the NL would only act at the end of the season. I think it’s in their interest to allow the club every possible chance of surviving. Dealing with a club going bust is easier at the end of a season than during.
I think the reason they didn’t go to shareholders with the idea of diluting shares is one of control. Shareholders would have demanded a say on who they were selling to. As it is the urgency has meant a majority has foregone that requirement.
Maybe we could pull together a budget together for next season if we could get through this but that’s a massive if. It feels like we would be stumbling on particularly with the current board.
I’ve unfortunately and reluctantly come to the conclusion that an investor is the only way forward. I just hope (there’s that word again) WSH if they get over the line will give us the chance to move forward. | | | |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 16:47 - Mar 15 with 1682 views | Rehsad |
| TFC respond to WSH exclusivity on 14:46 - Mar 15 by wozzrafc |
As I read the rules the NL would only act at the end of the season. I think it’s in their interest to allow the club every possible chance of surviving. Dealing with a club going bust is easier at the end of a season than during.
I think the reason they didn’t go to shareholders with the idea of diluting shares is one of control. Shareholders would have demanded a say on who they were selling to. As it is the urgency has meant a majority has foregone that requirement.
Maybe we could pull together a budget together for next season if we could get through this but that’s a massive if. It feels like we would be stumbling on particularly with the current board.
I’ve unfortunately and reluctantly come to the conclusion that an investor is the only way forward. I just hope (there’s that word again) WSH if they get over the line will give us the chance to move forward. |
Fully agree with all of this. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
