By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
EGM - which way are you voting? on 21:34 - Mar 3 by TalkingSutty
and you're happy to accept that on the say so of the Chairman? You wouldn't like to see if we can get help to buy a bit more time to see if we can find a better option?
[Post edited 3 Mar 21:36]
As I mentioned yesterday, we've been buying time with directors loans since the EGM of August 9th 2023. Time has run out. Of an opinion, backed with no evidence, we can apparently buy more time. From whom? How? Who pays the bills? A fine idea or actual investor proactivity that is proven. I can't see any evidence of that. You can't second guess that potential investors MAY, theoretically, prop the club up while we see if we like them, when if they don't (or we don't like them) we're gone. Where is the evidence (not opinion) that liquidation won't follow a failed EGM? I've seen none.
We are where we are. I hope beyond hope that TS's wish comes true and a far better investor is lined up to fulfil his requirements. Nobody else can see one beyond imagination.
4
EGM - which way are you voting? on 22:01 - Mar 3 with 3338 views
EGM - which way are you voting? on 22:01 - Mar 3 by D_Alien
Like you, i felt a bit less certain about this after the Trust email, hence my post last night about "muddied waters"
And also like you, the outcome of the meeting tomorrow is something to be anticipated
Edit: could be wrong, but i think George will be involved
[Post edited 3 Mar 22:02]
I’m catching up a little bit here, but these questions and answers from the fans meeting seem to be most pertinent re investor due diligence…
4. What is the procedure for approving a buyer?
The first stage is for the potential buyer to issue a Letter of Intent. At that stage we would ask them to publicly declare themselves and would undertake a level of due diligence and request proof of funds. We would then work on a Share Purchase Agreement that the board approved to then authorise the sale of the shares to that party.
5. Now that the Chairman has provided the Trust with details of the potential investor is it possible to speak to them first hand prior to the EGM in order to ascertain how far down the line the negotiations are and at what level they would like involvement from the Trust. If it isn’t possible to speak, maybe via a live link then why not?
This didn’t happen just now but has been done with all previous parties that reached an advanced stage of talks. As previously stated, the standard of investor we are now talking to would as part of their due diligence certainly want to speak to representatives of the Dale Trust before completing the share purchase.
0
EGM - which way are you voting? on 22:36 - Mar 3 with 3212 views
EGM - which way are you voting? on 22:00 - Mar 3 by Sandyman
As I mentioned yesterday, we've been buying time with directors loans since the EGM of August 9th 2023. Time has run out. Of an opinion, backed with no evidence, we can apparently buy more time. From whom? How? Who pays the bills? A fine idea or actual investor proactivity that is proven. I can't see any evidence of that. You can't second guess that potential investors MAY, theoretically, prop the club up while we see if we like them, when if they don't (or we don't like them) we're gone. Where is the evidence (not opinion) that liquidation won't follow a failed EGM? I've seen none.
We are where we are. I hope beyond hope that TS's wish comes true and a far better investor is lined up to fulfil his requirements. Nobody else can see one beyond imagination.
It's not a personal agenda and its not my requirement. I'm not just accepting what the chairman says at face value, unlike you. We had further interested investors come forward last week, have all those expressions of interest been explored? I can second guess that if there are alternative options available that would secure the long term future of the club then money could be lent the club to buy it some time to complete a transaction, or maybe the interested party would be willing to subsidise the shortfall once the Chairman stops funding, its not beyond the realms of possibility.To suggest that it's impossible that other scenarios might not present themselves over the next couple of weeks is your perogative but please don't start getting angry with those who refuse to accept that the Chairman's way is the only way. I can second guess all I want and the proof of the pudding will present itself in the near future, there is a safety net and the Chairman suggests we already have one suitable investor lined up, that's great, i really hope he is right. It would be even better though if another credible one appeared in the meantime who wasnt as insistent on the 90%, that's also not a impossibility. I'm pretty sure the vote at the EGM will go through but that doesn't guarantee anything. Nothing is guaranteed with this club despite what anybody says. A club that is asset rich being allowed to just go into liquidation, in a election year i don't believe that would be allowed to happen. A club on the doorstep of the now defunct Bury FC at that.
[Post edited 3 Mar 22:55]
0
EGM - which way are you voting? on 22:54 - Mar 3 with 3152 views
EGM - which way are you voting? on 22:36 - Mar 3 by TalkingSutty
It's not a personal agenda and its not my requirement. I'm not just accepting what the chairman says at face value, unlike you. We had further interested investors come forward last week, have all those expressions of interest been explored? I can second guess that if there are alternative options available that would secure the long term future of the club then money could be lent the club to buy it some time to complete a transaction, or maybe the interested party would be willing to subsidise the shortfall once the Chairman stops funding, its not beyond the realms of possibility.To suggest that it's impossible that other scenarios might not present themselves over the next couple of weeks is your perogative but please don't start getting angry with those who refuse to accept that the Chairman's way is the only way. I can second guess all I want and the proof of the pudding will present itself in the near future, there is a safety net and the Chairman suggests we already have one suitable investor lined up, that's great, i really hope he is right. It would be even better though if another credible one appeared in the meantime who wasnt as insistent on the 90%, that's also not a impossibility. I'm pretty sure the vote at the EGM will go through but that doesn't guarantee anything. Nothing is guaranteed with this club despite what anybody says. A club that is asset rich being allowed to just go into liquidation, in a election year i don't believe that would be allowed to happen. A club on the doorstep of the now defunct Bury FC at that.
[Post edited 3 Mar 22:55]
But are we willing to vote down the resolution and with the only current confirmed interest we have on at this stage , the hope that should the decision not to move forward with the resolution and the deal with WHS breaks down.
Again I ask where is the plan to move forward and pay the wages of the staff in March, to fund the rest of the season and also negotiate with the BoD to allow this to happen?
I’m sorry but at this moment in time I don’t think we can second guess. Who’s to say the interest received last week is any better than WSH? If someone came forward and put a plan then yes. But to date there isn’t.
In the absence of any other credible plan and with an offer from an investor who has track record in football, given the urgency I feel we would be risking too much to reject this proposal. The trust are in contact with the board and are also assessing the investors.
That’s my opinion, I dont like how we have got here at all. But unless someone can step forward with a clear plan how voting no is going to save the club then I can’t not vote to pass the resolution. Admittedly with some regrets and acceptance of risk, but also some optimism for the future.
[Post edited 3 Mar 23:28]
2
EGM - which way are you voting? on 23:00 - Mar 3 with 3103 views
EGM - which way are you voting? on 22:36 - Mar 3 by TalkingSutty
It's not a personal agenda and its not my requirement. I'm not just accepting what the chairman says at face value, unlike you. We had further interested investors come forward last week, have all those expressions of interest been explored? I can second guess that if there are alternative options available that would secure the long term future of the club then money could be lent the club to buy it some time to complete a transaction, or maybe the interested party would be willing to subsidise the shortfall once the Chairman stops funding, its not beyond the realms of possibility.To suggest that it's impossible that other scenarios might not present themselves over the next couple of weeks is your perogative but please don't start getting angry with those who refuse to accept that the Chairman's way is the only way. I can second guess all I want and the proof of the pudding will present itself in the near future, there is a safety net and the Chairman suggests we already have one suitable investor lined up, that's great, i really hope he is right. It would be even better though if another credible one appeared in the meantime who wasnt as insistent on the 90%, that's also not a impossibility. I'm pretty sure the vote at the EGM will go through but that doesn't guarantee anything. Nothing is guaranteed with this club despite what anybody says. A club that is asset rich being allowed to just go into liquidation, in a election year i don't believe that would be allowed to happen. A club on the doorstep of the now defunct Bury FC at that.
[Post edited 3 Mar 22:55]
I don't accept anything at face value as you assert. I'm making a judgement on what evidence is available. It is you that admits to second guessing.
"To suggest that it's impossible that other scenarios might not present themselves over the next couple of weeks is your perogative".
Where did I say such a thing? I said "I hope beyond hope that TS's wish comes true and a far better investor is lined up to fulfil his requirements. Nobody else can see one beyond imagination."
Also, I'm not getting angry. Just making a point on a message board. You know me well enough to know I'm not the angry type.
I think the jist of it is, you have a very worthy ideal of how RAFC should be which is laudible, and caused by care and passion for the club.
I have an equal care and passion for the club, but see the future in a different way.
We'll no doubt have numerous conversations and ales before March 2025, but it will be interesting to see where we are in 12 months time and reconvene this debate, light-heartedly!
If you're at the club Tuesday night (or Saturday) your first pint is on me.
UP THE DALE
2
EGM - which way are you voting? on 23:01 - Mar 3 with 3091 views
EGM - which way are you voting? on 22:55 - Mar 3 by wozzrafc
But are we willing to vote down the resolution and with the only current confirmed interest we have on at this stage , the hope that should the decision not to move forward with the resolution and the deal with WHS breaks down.
Again I ask where is the plan to move forward and pay the wages of the staff in March, to fund the rest of the season and also negotiate with the BoD to allow this to happen?
I’m sorry but at this moment in time I don’t think we can second guess. Who’s to say the interest received last week is any better than WSH? If someone came forward and put a plan then yes. But to date there isn’t.
In the absence of any other credible plan and with an offer from an investor who has track record in football, given the urgency I feel we would be risking too much to reject this proposal. The trust are in contact with the board and are also assessing the investors.
That’s my opinion, I dont like how we have got here at all. But unless someone can step forward with a clear plan how voting no is going to save the club then I can’t not vote to pass the resolution. Admittedly with some regrets and acceptance of risk, but also some optimism for the future.
[Post edited 3 Mar 23:28]
I honestly don't think it's about whether the (first four) EGM resolutions will get passed, but more about whether all possible investment proposals have been taken into account and given a chance, to enable Dale to get the best deal in the timeframe that's been specified
I would like to clarify one point, if indeed my understanding is correct and it won't set the debate back.
The EGM is to vote and approve the issue of 9m new shares. Not to sell to WSH.
We were told the reason it's being done this way is to facilitate a quick sale, since a share sale does not require lengthy contracts and time/£s to get it over the line. A quick sale is needed because we owe £160k at the end of March - £160k we don't have.
It is up to each and every shareholder to decide if this is true or not. I have 'accepted it' as I believe the balance of probability is it is true and the alternative is unthinkable. I would also add, though, that nowhere have we been told the sale to WSH will go through.
There is still a requirement to do due diligence on WSH, but just because they have signed a LOI, we have not agreed exclusivity with them as I understand it, which should still leave scope to consider other bids. Time is short for due diligence on all parties, but the fact that we might have the share mechanism approved surely means we can choose the best buyer for RAFC and sell quickly?
Of course, it also means the club could be sold to anyone the board approves, including wrong uns. Again, the balance of probability suggests this is not one of the most elaborate confidence tricks in the history of football to me, but each shareholder has to weigh the risks from a Yes and No vote and act accordingly.
Got an early meeting tomorrow so turning in now. Just wanted to share this before doing so
EGM - which way are you voting? on 22:55 - Mar 3 by wozzrafc
But are we willing to vote down the resolution and with the only current confirmed interest we have on at this stage , the hope that should the decision not to move forward with the resolution and the deal with WHS breaks down.
Again I ask where is the plan to move forward and pay the wages of the staff in March, to fund the rest of the season and also negotiate with the BoD to allow this to happen?
I’m sorry but at this moment in time I don’t think we can second guess. Who’s to say the interest received last week is any better than WSH? If someone came forward and put a plan then yes. But to date there isn’t.
In the absence of any other credible plan and with an offer from an investor who has track record in football, given the urgency I feel we would be risking too much to reject this proposal. The trust are in contact with the board and are also assessing the investors.
That’s my opinion, I dont like how we have got here at all. But unless someone can step forward with a clear plan how voting no is going to save the club then I can’t not vote to pass the resolution. Admittedly with some regrets and acceptance of risk, but also some optimism for the future.
[Post edited 3 Mar 23:28]
Good post that. I could be completely wrong but don't think there is any danger of the vote NOT being passed at this moment in time. If this is the only bid on the table and there are no other alternatives then there is no other option. My concern is that I'm not sure the Chairman has considered all the other options properly, it's MY concern and he might well have done. I completely understand that others will just take him at his word and not entertain that other investors could be being by passed. I don't have any faith in him for reasons I have outlined, especially when it comes to his dealings with 'credible investors'. Put it down to me being paranoid if you want but this seems like a manufactured deadline and sudden presentation of a investor which is designed to avoid proper scrutiny and secure a sale which is of benefit to both parties..£2 million is cheap for a football club that owns its stadium. Not only that they get a free hand to do with it as they please. Did they stipulate the 90% or did the Chairman suggest it, we can't even be sure of that. Anyway, let's see how it all pans out now.
[Post edited 3 Mar 23:18]
0
EGM - which way are you voting? on 23:25 - Mar 3 with 3012 views
EGM - which way are you voting? on 23:10 - Mar 3 by TalkingSutty
Good post that. I could be completely wrong but don't think there is any danger of the vote NOT being passed at this moment in time. If this is the only bid on the table and there are no other alternatives then there is no other option. My concern is that I'm not sure the Chairman has considered all the other options properly, it's MY concern and he might well have done. I completely understand that others will just take him at his word and not entertain that other investors could be being by passed. I don't have any faith in him for reasons I have outlined, especially when it comes to his dealings with 'credible investors'. Put it down to me being paranoid if you want but this seems like a manufactured deadline and sudden presentation of a investor which is designed to avoid proper scrutiny and secure a sale which is of benefit to both parties..£2 million is cheap for a football club that owns its stadium. Not only that they get a free hand to do with it as they please. Did they stipulate the 90% or did the Chairman suggest it, we can't even be sure of that. Anyway, let's see how it all pans out now.
[Post edited 3 Mar 23:18]
Just cos you're paranoid TS, don't mean they're not out to get you !!
1
EGM - which way are you voting? on 23:31 - Mar 3 with 2998 views
EGM - which way are you voting? on 10:51 - Mar 4 by Duckegg
A few days ago I did a google search on their business address.
WSH is registered at an house not an office in some nice office block.
I maybe barking up the wrong tree but as a company of their so called stature it does not come across to well.
Unless I'm barking up the wrong tree here....
Would you rather work with someone who is happy for people to know where he lives or a company that hides behind the address of the incorporation company with 1000s of other businesses or someone who created a company with a similar name and claimed to be based at the COA? Proof of funds is what sorts the men from the idiots in the first instance and evidence of participation in the industry is clearly a good pointer... Buying RAFC, is a fantastic opportunity for people with some money and a plan to develop the club and its hardly surprising that over 150 expressions of interest have been received...and as far as we know, 149, or maybe more by now, have not made a better or more credible case than WSH......
0
EGM - which way are you voting? on 13:35 - Mar 4 with 2412 views
At the moment I feel like we should vote yes to this but I can't help but feel this is a much worse choice than the EGM in 2021 which was thrown out. We could have had serious investment in the club & a training ground whilst we were a league 1 club. At least we weren't threatened with liquidation if we didn't vote it through back then.
Forza Nerazzurri
-1
EGM - which way are you voting? on 13:42 - Mar 4 with 2382 views
EGM - which way are you voting? on 21:47 - Mar 3 by Brierls
I wasn’t aware of that, I don’t think I got that email! And you’re right, it’s not a small point.
I don’t suppose I’ve also missed an email saying “however we have done due diligence now, and these lot look OK too”? Or otherwise.
l’ll be interested to see what comes of the meeting tomorrow, though I really wish the likes of Col or George were involved!
[Post edited 3 Mar 21:53]
Like you Brierls I didn’t see the trust email until now. What a time for an email to go to Junk.
I think there needs to be some clarification from the board to the trust IF the names they gave to the trust for due diligence are linked to the WSH in anyway, I recall from the forum it was mentioned there were other parties involved if the bid.
If the two names are not attached to the WSH bid are they still involved in any other bid being considered.
Who apart from Scott Dyer is involved with the WSH bid and can those names be released to the trust.
A lot of credibility was put on the fact that the trust hadn’t seen any ‘red flags’ indeed Murray said as much at the forum. We need clarification if this was indeed WSH bid or others being referred too.
The resolutions do not refer to a specific bid, they provide the situation where a deal can be done. This needs to be seen to be as transparent as possible as it needs the shareholders to vote on significant trust. The trust statements go along way to provide this.
I hope the meetings with directors today allow the trust to provide clarity on the suitability of individuals who are in the running to buy the club. I understand details can’t be divulged by the trust but they should be able to say they have been made aware of the parties involved, and whether any concerns have been raised or indeed they are comfortable with the credibility of the individuals involved.
1
EGM - which way are you voting? on 14:04 - Mar 4 with 2310 views
What happens when the debt of £1m is paid and we have spent the £1m left, we are back to square one. Surely we need to know what further investment will come from these Americans. There’s mention of building, but I thought no building was allowed due to neighbours.
What about other potential investors? I’ve heard there’s another group of Americans interested who have been visiting the club for 12 month, have a lot more money that the current bunch that they are willing to inject.
I think we need to know how these Americans have been brought to us/introduced. What the fee is for that as well. We should be told about other interested parties also. We also should be told what future plans and investment look like from these current Americans or we could be selling 90% of the club for a pittance just to be in the same situation again in 12 month.
I’m happy to have my shares valued at 22p but only if I know there’s more investment and a proper plan in place.
EGM - which way are you voting? on 13:42 - Mar 4 by wozzrafc
Like you Brierls I didn’t see the trust email until now. What a time for an email to go to Junk.
I think there needs to be some clarification from the board to the trust IF the names they gave to the trust for due diligence are linked to the WSH in anyway, I recall from the forum it was mentioned there were other parties involved if the bid.
If the two names are not attached to the WSH bid are they still involved in any other bid being considered.
Who apart from Scott Dyer is involved with the WSH bid and can those names be released to the trust.
A lot of credibility was put on the fact that the trust hadn’t seen any ‘red flags’ indeed Murray said as much at the forum. We need clarification if this was indeed WSH bid or others being referred too.
The resolutions do not refer to a specific bid, they provide the situation where a deal can be done. This needs to be seen to be as transparent as possible as it needs the shareholders to vote on significant trust. The trust statements go along way to provide this.
I hope the meetings with directors today allow the trust to provide clarity on the suitability of individuals who are in the running to buy the club. I understand details can’t be divulged by the trust but they should be able to say they have been made aware of the parties involved, and whether any concerns have been raised or indeed they are comfortable with the credibility of the individuals involved.
One thing worth raising (which I think Kieran Maguire has mentioned a few times in discussion on other clubs) is that due diligence on US investors is always going to be very limited due to the lack of statutory disclosure levels that exist in the UK and Europe. Unless you engage with a PI firm such as Kroll or the like (which would cost well into the five figures), there is going to be very little publicly-available information to go off for the average Joe (or Simon). The key information therefore becomes:
(1) Letter of Intent - whilst not legally binding, this is an accepted first step in a transaction, and puts forward at least some reputational risk if nothing else. With regard to the supposed other investors interested and mentioned over the last few weeks, would be interesting to know if any others have reached LOI, or are just sniffing around / kicking the tires.
(2) Proof of funds - doesn't assure our future and in theory can be manipulated, but at the very least shows capital or someone somewhere willing to provide it. Key question is regardless of them putting the cash in as equity on the Dale side, whether it has been provided to WSH themselves as debt or equity. Given Steve Demetriou's reported involvement in WSH, it could be either - his former consulting firm is the size at which a CEO/Chairman/Board Member would have had to have made some pretty bad decisions not to have a substantial rainy day fund tucked away.
(3) Reputation from online sources - plenty on here have done their best in this regard. Whilst there have been questions asked about the minority stake in MVV and why a 90% stake is required here, I'm at least heartened (assuming Demetriou is the money man here, and I must emphasise that's a supposition) by two facts: - their MVV involvement seems genuine and, Scott Dyer at least gives the public impression of being involved in the running. Another poster on here also mentioned their attendances have increased, although would be good to understand if there are other reasons why. - Demetriou seems to be an avid sports fan. He bought the Erie Bayhawks in 2008 before selling them to the Orlando Magic ten years later, upon which they were relocated to Florida. Obviously one could ask why he sold them, but ten years doesn't exactly seem like a "buy and flip" period of someone looking to make a quick buck, and it seems like this was more of an NBA-decision than entirely down to him. He also seems to have made a decent commercial success in Erie: https://www.goerie.com/story/sports/2017/04/16/demetriou-bayhawks-built-one-best
DISCLAIMER - this shouldn't be viewed as attempting to influence opinion either way. Vote however your heart tells you to. But please do VOTE.
7
EGM - which way are you voting? on 10:41 - Mar 5 with 1312 views
EGM - which way are you voting? on 06:18 - Mar 5 by JumeirahDale
One thing worth raising (which I think Kieran Maguire has mentioned a few times in discussion on other clubs) is that due diligence on US investors is always going to be very limited due to the lack of statutory disclosure levels that exist in the UK and Europe. Unless you engage with a PI firm such as Kroll or the like (which would cost well into the five figures), there is going to be very little publicly-available information to go off for the average Joe (or Simon). The key information therefore becomes:
(1) Letter of Intent - whilst not legally binding, this is an accepted first step in a transaction, and puts forward at least some reputational risk if nothing else. With regard to the supposed other investors interested and mentioned over the last few weeks, would be interesting to know if any others have reached LOI, or are just sniffing around / kicking the tires.
(2) Proof of funds - doesn't assure our future and in theory can be manipulated, but at the very least shows capital or someone somewhere willing to provide it. Key question is regardless of them putting the cash in as equity on the Dale side, whether it has been provided to WSH themselves as debt or equity. Given Steve Demetriou's reported involvement in WSH, it could be either - his former consulting firm is the size at which a CEO/Chairman/Board Member would have had to have made some pretty bad decisions not to have a substantial rainy day fund tucked away.
(3) Reputation from online sources - plenty on here have done their best in this regard. Whilst there have been questions asked about the minority stake in MVV and why a 90% stake is required here, I'm at least heartened (assuming Demetriou is the money man here, and I must emphasise that's a supposition) by two facts: - their MVV involvement seems genuine and, Scott Dyer at least gives the public impression of being involved in the running. Another poster on here also mentioned their attendances have increased, although would be good to understand if there are other reasons why. - Demetriou seems to be an avid sports fan. He bought the Erie Bayhawks in 2008 before selling them to the Orlando Magic ten years later, upon which they were relocated to Florida. Obviously one could ask why he sold them, but ten years doesn't exactly seem like a "buy and flip" period of someone looking to make a quick buck, and it seems like this was more of an NBA-decision than entirely down to him. He also seems to have made a decent commercial success in Erie: https://www.goerie.com/story/sports/2017/04/16/demetriou-bayhawks-built-one-best
DISCLAIMER - this shouldn't be viewed as attempting to influence opinion either way. Vote however your heart tells you to. But please do VOTE.
Thanks. That’s interesting.
Can I ask where the Steve Demetriou link has come from? I’ve seen that name mentioned before, but I can’t find any connection between him and WSH. I’m no sleuth though to be fair.
Demetriou’s experience with Baseball’s D League (now G League) is interesting. There’s a lot to unpick there though it would very much point to a player development model.
A typical concern with any owner like WSL is whether they really understand what it is they’re getting into and the challenges they will face. In that context it’s a big positive they have had experience with their investment in MVV.
0
EGM - which way are you voting? on 10:50 - Mar 5 with 1284 views
EGM - which way are you voting? on 10:41 - Mar 5 by Mundell
Thanks. That’s interesting.
Can I ask where the Steve Demetriou link has come from? I’ve seen that name mentioned before, but I can’t find any connection between him and WSH. I’m no sleuth though to be fair.
Demetriou’s experience with Baseball’s D League (now G League) is interesting. There’s a lot to unpick there though it would very much point to a player development model.
A typical concern with any owner like WSL is whether they really understand what it is they’re getting into and the challenges they will face. In that context it’s a big positive they have had experience with their investment in MVV.
It's also encouraging their people will be at the Oxford game and apparently spending a few more days in town after that. Of course, if they were to have four directors on the board, i guess they'd want to try the boardroom chairs for size, as it were
Do sports teams have the equivalent of this messageboard over in the States? Can anyone speak Dutch and check out MVV?
EGM - which way are you voting? on 10:41 - Mar 5 by Mundell
Thanks. That’s interesting.
Can I ask where the Steve Demetriou link has come from? I’ve seen that name mentioned before, but I can’t find any connection between him and WSH. I’m no sleuth though to be fair.
Demetriou’s experience with Baseball’s D League (now G League) is interesting. There’s a lot to unpick there though it would very much point to a player development model.
A typical concern with any owner like WSL is whether they really understand what it is they’re getting into and the challenges they will face. In that context it’s a big positive they have had experience with their investment in MVV.
SD's name is in plenty of (mostly Dutch) articles about WSH and it seems was disclosed during the ADO Den Haag takeover process prior to WSH falling out of that process and switching to MVV. Bayhawks are basketball rather than baseball but the point stands! The NBA has various feeder leagues, and I think actually purchased the G-league a few years back which led to a lot of those teams being hoovered up as subsidiaries of the major teams - likely involved in SD coming out of the ownership.
And yes absolutely agreed on the last part, but that would presumably be where Bob Heere's expertise would come in, his academic work seems to have mostly focused on sports and community links, and his name also heavily mentioned in all the Dutch takeover articles (believe he is a US/Dutch national), so the link between the three seems to have been there for a few years at least, rather than being cobbled together for the sake of a look at Dale - as looked like was the case with the last round of jokers.
0
EGM - which way are you voting? on 11:32 - Mar 5 with 1182 views
EGM - which way are you voting? on 10:50 - Mar 5 by D_Alien
It's also encouraging their people will be at the Oxford game and apparently spending a few more days in town after that. Of course, if they were to have four directors on the board, i guess they'd want to try the boardroom chairs for size, as it were
Do sports teams have the equivalent of this messageboard over in the States? Can anyone speak Dutch and check out MVV?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
but the point stands! The NBA has various feeder leagues, and I think actually purchased the G-league a few years back which led to a lot of those teams being hoovered up as subsidiaries of the major teams - likely involved in SD coming out of the ownership.