| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:18 - Mar 12 with 10303 views | 49thseason |
Sounds like pencils are being sharpened and some further negotiations happening.. Maybe the BOD have looked at the other LOI and seen things they like the look of and want WSH to add them into their bid...? Or they are running into some final contract problems that need further drafting...? |  | |  |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:31 - Mar 12 with 10199 views | DaleiLama |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:18 - Mar 12 by 49thseason |
Sounds like pencils are being sharpened and some further negotiations happening.. Maybe the BOD have looked at the other LOI and seen things they like the look of and want WSH to add them into their bid...? Or they are running into some final contract problems that need further drafting...? |
Or WSH put pressure on RAFC, ahead of the LLC 14/3 "further announcement", to get their bid over the line (hopefully by sweetening the deal substantially for the benefit of the club). |  |
| |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:47 - Mar 12 with 10076 views | Down_the_Ale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:31 - Mar 12 by DaleiLama |
Or WSH put pressure on RAFC, ahead of the LLC 14/3 "further announcement", to get their bid over the line (hopefully by sweetening the deal substantially for the benefit of the club). |
Speaking to RK after the AGM, there was an investor that, if it came to fruition, would "blow WSH's proposal out of the water". It sounds like WSH's offer is not the best one on the table (also confirmed by another former Director on the evening) but the one most suited to SG. Unfortunately, whether or not we like it, SG runs the club, and will continue to do so if he gets his way, which is looking all the more likely with each passing day |  | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:47 - Mar 12 with 10064 views | Chris1803 |
Hope this comes through, as I can't help but feel that an ownership with experience of running and investing in football clubs is hugely preferable in our situation, to the second party that haven't prior experience.
Louisville City FC finished 5th in the USL (2nd tier) last season (the 2024 USL season starts this coming weekend), and MVV Maastricht are currently 13th in the Eerste Divisie, so whilst neither club are title challenging, they're both stable enough on the pitch.
I think right now, I'd settle for being stable on and off the pitch with a vision set out for building in the right direction. [Post edited 12 Mar 11:49]
| | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:50 - Mar 12 with 10027 views | SuddenLad |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:47 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
Speaking to RK after the AGM, there was an investor that, if it came to fruition, would "blow WSH's proposal out of the water". It sounds like WSH's offer is not the best one on the table (also confirmed by another former Director on the evening) but the one most suited to SG. Unfortunately, whether or not we like it, SG runs the club, and will continue to do so if he gets his way, which is looking all the more likely with each passing day |
It isn't for the Chairman to decide. The shareholders have to be consulted. |  |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:57 - Mar 12 with 9944 views | CockneyDale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:47 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
Speaking to RK after the AGM, there was an investor that, if it came to fruition, would "blow WSH's proposal out of the water". It sounds like WSH's offer is not the best one on the table (also confirmed by another former Director on the evening) but the one most suited to SG. Unfortunately, whether or not we like it, SG runs the club, and will continue to do so if he gets his way, which is looking all the more likely with each passing day |
Was RK referring to TFC, do you think, or another? [Post edited 12 Mar 12:10]
|  | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 12:01 - Mar 12 with 9877 views | Duckegg |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:47 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
Speaking to RK after the AGM, there was an investor that, if it came to fruition, would "blow WSH's proposal out of the water". It sounds like WSH's offer is not the best one on the table (also confirmed by another former Director on the evening) but the one most suited to SG. Unfortunately, whether or not we like it, SG runs the club, and will continue to do so if he gets his way, which is looking all the more likely with each passing day |
The club is still fan owned and SG is just the figure head on the BoD and the last time i looked he still did not own the club...
The chair as to contact all shareholders about why he is moving forward with WSH, he cannot make the decision to do the deal becauze he pumpex over £500k into the club......
Some srlf interests going on here..
Or
WSH have backed SG into a corner after seeing what TFC where offering...
The trust should be letting us know more soon I hope. |  | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 12:19 - Mar 12 with 9693 views | D_Alien |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:47 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
Speaking to RK after the AGM, there was an investor that, if it came to fruition, would "blow WSH's proposal out of the water". It sounds like WSH's offer is not the best one on the table (also confirmed by another former Director on the evening) but the one most suited to SG. Unfortunately, whether or not we like it, SG runs the club, and will continue to do so if he gets his way, which is looking all the more likely with each passing day |
Given the board's NDA stance, that disclosure might be regarded as rather indiscreet, unless there was an ulterior motive for putting that out there |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Exclusive period with WSH on 12:35 - Mar 12 with 9573 views | wozzrafc |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:47 - Mar 12 by Chris1803 |
Hope this comes through, as I can't help but feel that an ownership with experience of running and investing in football clubs is hugely preferable in our situation, to the second party that haven't prior experience.
Louisville City FC finished 5th in the USL (2nd tier) last season (the 2024 USL season starts this coming weekend), and MVV Maastricht are currently 13th in the Eerste Divisie, so whilst neither club are title challenging, they're both stable enough on the pitch.
I think right now, I'd settle for being stable on and off the pitch with a vision set out for building in the right direction. [Post edited 12 Mar 11:49]
|
I don't think WSH own louisville (i thought the same at first.) they are owned by Soccer holding which i believe is a different company | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 12:39 - Mar 12 with 9529 views | wozzrafc |
We need to be careful here IMHO, We as fans don't know anything about the bid of WSH or TFC. We cant say one is better than the other.
There could be a scenario where WSH is better for the club as well as suiting Gauge.
Unless details of the bids are released (TFC is being released by them on Thursday) it would be unfair to WSH to say its only being accepted because it suits gauge. | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:03 - Mar 12 with 9338 views | _Windydale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 12:39 - Mar 12 by wozzrafc |
We need to be careful here IMHO, We as fans don't know anything about the bid of WSH or TFC. We cant say one is better than the other.
There could be a scenario where WSH is better for the club as well as suiting Gauge.
Unless details of the bids are released (TFC is being released by them on Thursday) it would be unfair to WSH to say its only being accepted because it suits gauge. |
If it suits Gauge and its a great deal for the club then happy days. | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:18 - Mar 12 with 9241 views | ramsdale |
Information surrounding both bids, and any further bids for that matter, need to be accessible to all shareholders immediately.
As I've mentioned on another thread, there needs to be a lot more people involved in this process than SG, and in my honest opinion, SG should have limited involvement in the decision.
The representative who came into the Sandy on Saturday from the TFC bid was accompanied by a former director who I'm led to believe had some "choice" words to share about our chairman before standing down. If there is any underlying feeling from SG about the former director who appears to be possibly linked with TFC, SG can't, as far as I'm concerned, be impartial to look at which is the best deal for Rochdale AFC.
I have defended SG on numerous occasions due to the financial commitment and personal abuse he has suffered over the past few years, but after comments at the EGM coupled with the actual running of the football club he has very little, if any, stock left with me.
Whichever way we go with the bids, Simon Gauge can't have an operational role in this football club going forward. | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:21 - Mar 12 with 9202 views | 442Dale |
A statement which speaks volumes.
Awaiting the next update with interest. |  |
| |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:27 - Mar 12 with 9155 views | SuddenLad |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:18 - Mar 12 by ramsdale |
Information surrounding both bids, and any further bids for that matter, need to be accessible to all shareholders immediately.
As I've mentioned on another thread, there needs to be a lot more people involved in this process than SG, and in my honest opinion, SG should have limited involvement in the decision.
The representative who came into the Sandy on Saturday from the TFC bid was accompanied by a former director who I'm led to believe had some "choice" words to share about our chairman before standing down. If there is any underlying feeling from SG about the former director who appears to be possibly linked with TFC, SG can't, as far as I'm concerned, be impartial to look at which is the best deal for Rochdale AFC.
I have defended SG on numerous occasions due to the financial commitment and personal abuse he has suffered over the past few years, but after comments at the EGM coupled with the actual running of the football club he has very little, if any, stock left with me.
Whichever way we go with the bids, Simon Gauge can't have an operational role in this football club going forward. |
100% agree. Gauge is now a loose cannon, He has exhausted his credits as far as I'm concerned and that disgraceful statement at the EGM was the last straw.
We are repeatedly told that he will not listen to any of the other directors and simply goes it alone. That cannot be allowed to continue and he needs reigning in.
We are all aware of his previous generosity and have praised him for his actions, but that was then and this is now.
This period of exclusivity has clearly come as a surprise to everyone, so yet again he 'goes it alone'. It has to stop.
OUR club and its' future is far more important than a Chairman hell-bent on doing things his way for his own benefit. | |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:28 - Mar 12 with 9147 views | James1980 |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:18 - Mar 12 by ramsdale |
Information surrounding both bids, and any further bids for that matter, need to be accessible to all shareholders immediately.
As I've mentioned on another thread, there needs to be a lot more people involved in this process than SG, and in my honest opinion, SG should have limited involvement in the decision.
The representative who came into the Sandy on Saturday from the TFC bid was accompanied by a former director who I'm led to believe had some "choice" words to share about our chairman before standing down. If there is any underlying feeling from SG about the former director who appears to be possibly linked with TFC, SG can't, as far as I'm concerned, be impartial to look at which is the best deal for Rochdale AFC.
I have defended SG on numerous occasions due to the financial commitment and personal abuse he has suffered over the past few years, but after comments at the EGM coupled with the actual running of the football club he has very little, if any, stock left with me.
Whichever way we go with the bids, Simon Gauge can't have an operational role in this football club going forward. |
I'm not saying you are saying this ramsdale but a good deal for Rochdale AFC and a good deal for Simon Gauge are not mutually exclusive. | |
| |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:30 - Mar 12 with 9132 views | Down_the_Ale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 11:57 - Mar 12 by CockneyDale |
Was RK referring to TFC, do you think, or another? [Post edited 12 Mar 12:10]
|
I thought TFC at the time but it could have been another. He didn't go as far as disclosing any further info.
What was apparent is that when he was quizzed as to why George (a non-shareholder and no longer Trust chairman at the time) was given information about WSH (which ultimately led to the Trust voting through the proposals made at the EGM), yet this same information had not been shared with actual shareholders, he didn't have an answer!
We, as shareholders, do not have a say! The Directors run the club and make the decisions. SG has two votes as Chairman and so effectively he runs the club. If he doesn't like the answer, he forces them out and threatens legal action. As shareholders, we can change who runs the club on our behalf but must call another EGM to do so before the club is sold and the majority of shares are owned by someone else | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:44 - Mar 12 with 8998 views | Brierls |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:30 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
I thought TFC at the time but it could have been another. He didn't go as far as disclosing any further info.
What was apparent is that when he was quizzed as to why George (a non-shareholder and no longer Trust chairman at the time) was given information about WSH (which ultimately led to the Trust voting through the proposals made at the EGM), yet this same information had not been shared with actual shareholders, he didn't have an answer!
We, as shareholders, do not have a say! The Directors run the club and make the decisions. SG has two votes as Chairman and so effectively he runs the club. If he doesn't like the answer, he forces them out and threatens legal action. As shareholders, we can change who runs the club on our behalf but must call another EGM to do so before the club is sold and the majority of shares are owned by someone else |
As I understand, SG has the deciding vote as Chairman if the BoD vote is tied. I think there are six members of the BoD. If there is a better deal out there for the club, the other members of the BoD do have the power to ensure that goes through.
The exclusivity announcement has come as a surprise. It may be a condition of WSH opening up their books and providing proof of funds. It may not. It would be good to know how long this exclusivity period is and if there has to be a final decision at the end of it.
All options should be explored fully and that includes TFC or any other. [Post edited 12 Mar 13:47]
|  | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:01 - Mar 12 with 8811 views | ramsdale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:28 - Mar 12 by James1980 |
I'm not saying you are saying this ramsdale but a good deal for Rochdale AFC and a good deal for Simon Gauge are not mutually exclusive. |
100% agree bud, however there are 1000's relying on a good deal for Rochdale AFC and only 1 person relying on a good deal for Simon Gauge.
The football club MUST come first, and we can't currently trust SG with that. | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:09 - Mar 12 with 8736 views | Down_the_Ale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:44 - Mar 12 by Brierls |
As I understand, SG has the deciding vote as Chairman if the BoD vote is tied. I think there are six members of the BoD. If there is a better deal out there for the club, the other members of the BoD do have the power to ensure that goes through.
The exclusivity announcement has come as a surprise. It may be a condition of WSH opening up their books and providing proof of funds. It may not. It would be good to know how long this exclusivity period is and if there has to be a final decision at the end of it.
All options should be explored fully and that includes TFC or any other. [Post edited 12 Mar 13:47]
|
Apologies Briels, you are correct of course. SG has the casting vote in the event of a tie. In reality SG has two directors in his back pocket though (as long as the hospitality is guaranteed for one of them!!), and so that's 3 of the 6 voting in SG's proposed favour, and with him having the casting vote, it will go in favour of SG as opposed to what the Shareholders actually want.
If a meeting of all Shareholders can't take place, why not say the top 50 at least that can decide on the clubs future/investment. I for one wouldn't be in that top 50 but at least there would be a bit more democracy to who takes over our club.
Unfortunately, I do not trust SG alone to make the best decision for the club based on past and present experience.
You may know the answer to this also please, and I may be going in circles (apologies if I am), if the Trust are to be introduced to the potential investor(s), why not the rest of the clubs shareholders? | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:18 - Mar 12 with 8666 views | judd |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:30 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
I thought TFC at the time but it could have been another. He didn't go as far as disclosing any further info.
What was apparent is that when he was quizzed as to why George (a non-shareholder and no longer Trust chairman at the time) was given information about WSH (which ultimately led to the Trust voting through the proposals made at the EGM), yet this same information had not been shared with actual shareholders, he didn't have an answer!
We, as shareholders, do not have a say! The Directors run the club and make the decisions. SG has two votes as Chairman and so effectively he runs the club. If he doesn't like the answer, he forces them out and threatens legal action. As shareholders, we can change who runs the club on our behalf but must call another EGM to do so before the club is sold and the majority of shares are owned by someone else |
Just to clarify this.
I am a shareholder.
I was Trust chairman at the time you reference.
I was not given information about WSH, but the names of 2 individuals. 1 was Justin Corrado we now know of TFC LLC, the other I am not at liberty to name but is not a name I can connect with WSH. WSH , I believe, were only named on the day of the fans forum, after which point we received a number of changes in vote from members.
My recommendation to vote was based on the threat of administration being very real, in my opinion, unless the vote went ahead in favour. |  |
| |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:19 - Mar 12 with 8656 views | kel |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 13:30 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
I thought TFC at the time but it could have been another. He didn't go as far as disclosing any further info.
What was apparent is that when he was quizzed as to why George (a non-shareholder and no longer Trust chairman at the time) was given information about WSH (which ultimately led to the Trust voting through the proposals made at the EGM), yet this same information had not been shared with actual shareholders, he didn't have an answer!
We, as shareholders, do not have a say! The Directors run the club and make the decisions. SG has two votes as Chairman and so effectively he runs the club. If he doesn't like the answer, he forces them out and threatens legal action. As shareholders, we can change who runs the club on our behalf but must call another EGM to do so before the club is sold and the majority of shares are owned by someone else |
George is a a shareholder. A 2 minute look at companies house would have told you that.
George beat me to it, edit [Post edited 12 Mar 15:03]
|  | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:21 - Mar 12 with 8643 views | judd |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:09 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
Apologies Briels, you are correct of course. SG has the casting vote in the event of a tie. In reality SG has two directors in his back pocket though (as long as the hospitality is guaranteed for one of them!!), and so that's 3 of the 6 voting in SG's proposed favour, and with him having the casting vote, it will go in favour of SG as opposed to what the Shareholders actually want.
If a meeting of all Shareholders can't take place, why not say the top 50 at least that can decide on the clubs future/investment. I for one wouldn't be in that top 50 but at least there would be a bit more democracy to who takes over our club.
Unfortunately, I do not trust SG alone to make the best decision for the club based on past and present experience.
You may know the answer to this also please, and I may be going in circles (apologies if I am), if the Trust are to be introduced to the potential investor(s), why not the rest of the clubs shareholders? |
From my reading of the articles, it is my understanding that the chair has the casting vote in the event of a tied board, but does have an initial vote, too.
It is probably why the minimum number of directors was set at 7. | |
| |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:44 - Mar 12 with 8456 views | Down_the_Ale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:21 - Mar 12 by judd |
From my reading of the articles, it is my understanding that the chair has the casting vote in the event of a tied board, but does have an initial vote, too.
It is probably why the minimum number of directors was set at 7. |
Is there any news on a 7th director being appointed? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
