| EGM on 13:39 - Jul 26 with 3033 views | 442Dale |
It shouldn’t be about individual opinion what the directors/club are or aren’t saying. It should be laid out with basic facts to all shareholders.
How bad would any of us feel voting one way or the other based on the limited info we have now, only for something else to come out later?
There are some shareholders who have spent thousands who aren’t on the board. They as much as anyone who has spent a few hundred deserve this information before making their decisions. |  |
|  |
| EGM on 14:14 - Jul 26 with 2938 views | SalwaDale |
| EGM on 12:24 - Jul 26 by James1980 |
I have received the email, Is it possible they are being sent out first to those more likely to vote by proxy, due to distance from the town? |
Definitely not, I live thousands of miles away and used the proxy last time. Unless they are wanting those who did that to be the last to get it. [Post edited 26 Jul 2023 14:17]
|  |
| |
| EGM on 14:32 - Jul 26 with 2866 views | TVOS1907 |
| EGM on 14:14 - Jul 26 by SalwaDale |
Definitely not, I live thousands of miles away and used the proxy last time. Unless they are wanting those who did that to be the last to get it. [Post edited 26 Jul 2023 14:17]
|
I used the proxy last time and got my email last night, so it seems rather random. |  |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| EGM on 14:42 - Jul 26 with 2815 views | KnavesmireBob |
| EGM on 10:26 - Jul 26 by Albert_Whitehurst |
Although I don’t necessarily doubt the intentions of the board, I do question their competency as many others have.
So, to give them additional monies secured against the ground to continue managing the business in a similar vein would probably send us beyond the brink. Unless, there is a specific reason for a boost in funding which could see a change in fortunes.
Understanding their ultimate goal at the EGM alongside the Plan B (what happens if the motion is not passed) will be critical for Shareholders, including myself, to make a decision.
Desperate times and difficult to put a positive spin on it. |
This reflects where I'm at too. I think I've pretty much reached the point where I don't see value in continuing with the status quo - I'll attend the EGM if I can get over and will remain open minded until then, but as things stand the proposal just seems to be signing off on perpetuating more of the same communication flaws from within the boardroom, and I'm struggling to see any glimmers of hope that lessons are being learned and things can get better.
I think ATP's tweets earlier about being fully Trust owned/operated are well worth serious debate, if indeed there's enough people amongst us that would take that on. If that means we end up finding a natural level in the pyramid lower than now but we have a club and fan base aligned and happy then I think I'd take that. We'd still try to win every game and always play at the highest level possible, who knows how high that could be with unity and momentum behind us.
I'm feeling positive about the new management team of Jim and Kevin and how they're going about shaping the new squad. George came across as a competent and likeable operator on the podcast the other day. New season just around the corner, hope always springs eternal. So why do we continue to shoot ourselves in the foot. |  | | |
| EGM on 15:32 - Jul 26 with 2660 views | TalkingSutty |
| 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 |
That's a excellent post and makes perfect sense. Communication, or lack of it, has been a ever present since the Chairman and Directors purchased the MH shares, it's been a constant problem. At first I wondered if it was deliberate but i'm now starting to realise it's got to be down to a lack of experience when it comes to communicating with a large number of shareholders and running what is a multi million pound business. What other explanation can there be to explain the announcement of this EGM and the lack of information? |  | | |
| EGM on 15:46 - Jul 26 with 2603 views | 442Dale |
None of that matters. It was made specifically clear via the Trust’s July newsletter that there was an intention to announce news about the club AGM soon:
https://www.daletrust.co.uk/2023/07/trust-newsletter-july/
<<“ Rochdale AFC AGM
No date in place at the moment but hope to announce something ahead of the new season.“>> | |
| |
| EGM on 15:47 - Jul 26 with 2595 views | judd |
Thanks. Dates are playing games with me. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| EGM on 15:49 - Jul 26 with 2583 views | 100notout |
| EGM on 15:47 - Jul 26 by judd |
Thanks. Dates are playing games with me. |
keep you regular though | |
| |
| EGM on 16:18 - Jul 26 with 2493 views | judd |
| EGM on 15:49 - Jul 26 by 100notout |
keep you regular though |
Just as well.
There was an EGM last June, that's what threw me. | |
| |
| EGM on 16:32 - Jul 26 with 2437 views | kel |
| EGM on 15:32 - Jul 26 by TalkingSutty |
That's a excellent post and makes perfect sense. Communication, or lack of it, has been a ever present since the Chairman and Directors purchased the MH shares, it's been a constant problem. At first I wondered if it was deliberate but i'm now starting to realise it's got to be down to a lack of experience when it comes to communicating with a large number of shareholders and running what is a multi million pound business. What other explanation can there be to explain the announcement of this EGM and the lack of information? |
#reengagement |  | | |
| EGM on 16:44 - Jul 26 with 2393 views | SalwaDale |
| EGM on 16:32 - Jul 26 by kel |
#reengagement |
You would have thought that, at a time when the board want us to trust them, they would put a little more effort I to earning that trust. There are a lot of promises since they took over that have, unfortunately, been spectacularly missed. I want to trust and support the board but there are levels of incompetence and a lack of communication that make that very, very difficult. | |
| |
| EGM on 18:13 - Jul 26 with 2243 views | Thacks_Rabbits |
I’m afraid I don’t believe a bloody word they say now, they have reacted to the criticism and put a story together, how much if any of it is true lord knows!
If we are that skint then it’s due to their total lack of acumen when it comes to running a football club. You don’t employ a management consultant if you know what you’re doing and it’s desperate measures time. They want their cash back and if we agree to allowing them to borrow on the back of assets they will get it back!
They have realised that they have money in something that is essentially a money pit because they are not up to turning it around, but they won’t take a hit on the share price to get out (which I believe that CD and co were looking to do)
I would urge everyone to vote no to this, if we have to cut staff and be ruthless so be it, but this stinks of smoke and mirrors from the bloody start, as has much of the behaviour of the board. Remember Bottomley, this is exactly the kind of thing he would do thinking he is smarter than these clueless fans!
Incidentally, they could in theory get a loan secured on the assets, then purchase the shares they need to get a controlling majority of the club, then do what the hell they like. It’s a way to get out and make a profit and in my opinion we should be bloody wary. |  |
| |
| EGM on 19:35 - Jul 26 with 2033 views | pioneer |
Any statement that uses the phrase “trust me” is one to be very wary of. | | | |
| EGM on 19:42 - Jul 26 with 2004 views | 442Dale |
<<“ As is and always will be the case, The Trust’s response to this will be directed by its members. As such, we will be conducting a poll of Trust members starting on Friday 4th August. We have chosen this date as it is the day after the Fans Forum. By then, supporters will have had the opportunity to decide which is the appropriate way to vote. The Trust will be voting at the EGM the way that the members dictate them to.”>>
Why will supporters have had the opportunity to decide by the 4th? Will the plethora of other questions be answered by then and available for all supporters/shareholders to view to assist in making an appropriate decision?
Is this confirmation that the forum will be available for all to watch/listen to so they can make an appropriate decision?
Will the Trust be giving further information to their members about the information released by the club about the Community Asset Fund bid (is this the COF?)? eg timescales, amount applied for, proposal for use if successful.
Do the Trust not believe holding their own EGM would be helpful to this ongoing process so that supporters can discuss some of these issues, with answers to questions raised being reported back to members?
Why can the club AGM not take place to discuss our current situation? Another EGM could be called if there were any changes eg new investors. If there are not new investors, when will the AGM take place as it was stated something would be announced before the start of the season?
At what stage did this become “urgent” and if the shareholders vote against the proposal what are the implications? [Post edited 26 Jul 2023 19:54]
| |
| |
| EGM on 19:47 - Jul 26 with 1990 views | electricblue |
The trust members who cannot attend the fans forum will there be some soft of transcript for them to read prior to the trust members vote..... |  |
| My all time favourite Dale player Mr Lyndon Symmonds |
| |
| EGM on 19:59 - Jul 26 with 1955 views | Trev |
I want SG to keep coming out and speaking but everytime he does I get more and more concerned.
Far more questions than answers still.
I can't work out if there is something more afoot or if the bod really are just incompetent. | | | |
| EGM on 20:07 - Jul 26 with 1915 views | D_Alien |
| EGM on 19:42 - Jul 26 by 442Dale |
<<“ As is and always will be the case, The Trust’s response to this will be directed by its members. As such, we will be conducting a poll of Trust members starting on Friday 4th August. We have chosen this date as it is the day after the Fans Forum. By then, supporters will have had the opportunity to decide which is the appropriate way to vote. The Trust will be voting at the EGM the way that the members dictate them to.”>>
Why will supporters have had the opportunity to decide by the 4th? Will the plethora of other questions be answered by then and available for all supporters/shareholders to view to assist in making an appropriate decision?
Is this confirmation that the forum will be available for all to watch/listen to so they can make an appropriate decision?
Will the Trust be giving further information to their members about the information released by the club about the Community Asset Fund bid (is this the COF?)? eg timescales, amount applied for, proposal for use if successful.
Do the Trust not believe holding their own EGM would be helpful to this ongoing process so that supporters can discuss some of these issues, with answers to questions raised being reported back to members?
Why can the club AGM not take place to discuss our current situation? Another EGM could be called if there were any changes eg new investors. If there are not new investors, when will the AGM take place as it was stated something would be announced before the start of the season?
At what stage did this become “urgent” and if the shareholders vote against the proposal what are the implications? [Post edited 26 Jul 2023 19:54]
|
It's as if all the time and effort put in by the Trust and its members just a very short while ago didn't happen
Given that the Trust community assett fund bid plays a key role in whether the loan by SC & RK is required, were the Trust not consulted before the loan was made public? |  |
| |
| EGM on 20:11 - Jul 26 with 1883 views | wozzrafc |
| EGM on 20:07 - Jul 26 by D_Alien |
It's as if all the time and effort put in by the Trust and its members just a very short while ago didn't happen
Given that the Trust community assett fund bid plays a key role in whether the loan by SC & RK is required, were the Trust not consulted before the loan was made public? |
I don’t think it’s the Trust it’s the comity trust, what use to be football in the community. | | | |
| EGM on 20:12 - Jul 26 with 1872 views | D_Alien |
| EGM on 20:11 - Jul 26 by wozzrafc |
I don’t think it’s the Trust it’s the comity trust, what use to be football in the community. |
Ah, thanks for the clarification
It was needed... | |
| |
| EGM on 20:17 - Jul 26 with 1845 views | 442Dale |
| EGM on 20:07 - Jul 26 by D_Alien |
It's as if all the time and effort put in by the Trust and its members just a very short while ago didn't happen
Given that the Trust community assett fund bid plays a key role in whether the loan by SC & RK is required, were the Trust not consulted before the loan was made public? |
There are plenty of simple questions for the Trust to answer on the Community Asset Fund bid, not withstanding its place in the bigger picture.
Your points about the previous time and effort are valid, if only because the lack of proper structure around communication and raising supporter concerns is still not visibly in place.
If it was, we’d have seen requests for questions leading to more than the three that are included in this article.
I will remain fully supportive of the Trust and appreciate the work put in to produce this today and it’s not without merit. However, they themselves made it clear time and again at the supporters meetings in April/early May that they are accountable to their members and fans, that they are open to constructive criticism and suggestions of how they can improve. For the good of the club and all those people wondering where we stand, that has to be what they remain focused on tonight. [Post edited 26 Jul 2023 20:19]
| |
| |
| EGM on 20:19 - Jul 26 with 1833 views | Rodingdale |
I’d like a range of options put to the trust membership including:
Do you have confidence in the current Chairman in his competence to run RAFC. | | | |
| EGM on 20:29 - Jul 26 with 1792 views | 100notout |
Still no email despite always getting previous email.
Did they mean 24 hours or days? | |
| |
| EGM on 20:29 - Jul 26 with 2687 views | HullDale |
| EGM on 20:11 - Jul 26 by wozzrafc |
I don’t think it’s the Trust it’s the comity trust, what use to be football in the community. |
It sounds like the Dale Trust (not community), as Simon replies to the Trust:
"You have applied to the COF for a grant, which if successful would have negated the need for any loans and secure the ground for the use of football.
He also said yesterday:
"The loan will also allow time for us to find out if the Supporters Trust community asset fund bid is successful, as this will enable a deal to be done between the Supporters Trust and Club to secure the ground in the long-term and provide a significant cash influx to the Club."
He throws the question to the trust "Trust me, both Richard and I would rather not be lending this money but do not see another solution. " .. getting all departments firing on all cylinders would help. Today we've seen a menu without a menu, shareholders not getting their promised / required communication, a wrong email address on the hospitality link, opposition teams spelt incorrectly, and the club shop offering is still abysmal. No water bottles, pens or 'ready for school' merch, and no mention of an away kit, but you can buy a flowery man bag. Who is making and managing commercial decisions?
This isn't criticising for the sake of it - the basic facts are that the various operations in the club are currently operating at a level of incompetence rarely, if ever, seen before.
The post above is bang on for me - does leveraging the stadium to ease up cashflow just give the board even more opportunity to fail? What have we seen in the last 18/24 months to give us faith that the increased cashflow will, in any way, increase performance?
Edit - SG also references a desire now to sell a minority stake to an outside investor... is that another step change? Have we gone from fan owned to majority shareholder to minority investor that allows the current BoD to remain in place? Does this loan against the ground mean that the current BoD retain control even against the backdrop of external investment? [Post edited 26 Jul 2023 20:32]
|  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
