| Share sale 11:34 - Jun 3 with 58545 views | fitzochris |
I understand the shares owned by Chris Dunphy, Bill Goodwin and Paul Hazelhurst have been sold to a US-based concern.
Keep an eye on Companies House over the coming weeks. |  |
| |  |
| Share sale on 13:36 - Jun 6 with 2210 views | 442Dale |
On people joining the Trust to “have a voice”, it’s a very good point and one which promotes that it’s your voice they are representing. This is a line in the sand moment and can totally understand the thoughts around what may have happened before; but we can’t change the past, only influence the future (That’s going on merchandise soon).
One thing the Trust could clarify, which I’ll try and establish when sending in any questions, is how people can join now as they had, understandably suspended applications for membership due to current circumstances. Maybe a commitment can be made to accept any enquiries and communication from all supporters for the moment. |  |
| |
| Share sale on 13:39 - Jun 6 with 2201 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Share sale on 11:14 - Jun 6 by judd |
It would appear that the club turned down the offer of direct investment via the purchase of unissued shares and are making an issue of the share transfer not benefiting the club financially.
A real issue.
Let's see if there have been any other share transfers and where those funds went.
Fitzo has already said he's stepping away from this now that his diligent work has been picked up by the Trust.
I cannot see why Chris Dunphy should be asked to make a public statement on a private transaction. |
I'm amazed by the spin of the negative presentation of new investors by the club's statement, judd.
The only way funds will come into the club from shares is if they are new shares and failing a resurrection of the AGM/EGM that will not happen any time soon.
Was it not this Board that valued next shares in the club at £6 a share?
If Dan Altman and Emre Marcelli have bought at less than £6 a share (possible) then they would be well within their rights to ask the current Board to keep that £6 level, knowing that they are already sitting on a paper profit. |  |
| |
| Share sale on 13:43 - Jun 6 with 2182 views | Zac_B |
| Share sale on 13:20 - Jun 6 by nordenblue |
I'm not sure why everyone is so certain that CD would only do business if its deemed good for the club, this is the very same club/board that previously shafted him royal and went behind his back to bring him down if rumours are to be believed, he just may have played this card as a direct repercussion to his previous treatment by certain members of our current boardroom, while at the same time cashing in,its a win win for him? |
Although this is a fair shout, CD will have been very careful when considering selling his shares to another party. He will have the club's best intentions at heart with this decision. |  | | |
| Share sale on 13:43 - Jun 6 with 2179 views | judd |
| Share sale on 13:39 - Jun 6 by RAFCBLUE |
I'm amazed by the spin of the negative presentation of new investors by the club's statement, judd.
The only way funds will come into the club from shares is if they are new shares and failing a resurrection of the AGM/EGM that will not happen any time soon.
Was it not this Board that valued next shares in the club at £6 a share?
If Dan Altman and Emre Marcelli have bought at less than £6 a share (possible) then they would be well within their rights to ask the current Board to keep that £6 level, knowing that they are already sitting on a paper profit. |
Good point.
Technically are they investors, having transferred existing shares to their ownership?
Or are they carpetbaggers, possibly buying low and knowing a £6 valuation is now in the offing? Although given the date of the transaction I could be wide of the mark in this instance. Apologies if so... |  |
| |
| Share sale on 13:59 - Jun 6 with 2130 views | tony_roch975 |
| Share sale on 13:39 - Jun 6 by RAFCBLUE |
I'm amazed by the spin of the negative presentation of new investors by the club's statement, judd.
The only way funds will come into the club from shares is if they are new shares and failing a resurrection of the AGM/EGM that will not happen any time soon.
Was it not this Board that valued next shares in the club at £6 a share?
If Dan Altman and Emre Marcelli have bought at less than £6 a share (possible) then they would be well within their rights to ask the current Board to keep that £6 level, knowing that they are already sitting on a paper profit. |
true, sale of un-issued shares would benefit the Club and Altman says he & Marcelli wanted to buy the original un-issued 400,000 but he doesn't say at what price (it was before the £6 figure was mooted); might not that be the problem - that the board either wanted more £ per share than they were willing to pay or wanted them to buy the whole new issue valued at £4.2M? If Altman/Marcelli are looking at a takeover wouldn't they want the new share price to be as low as possible? But as you say, without a rearranged EGM neither the new issue or the price can be agreed. | |
| |
| Share sale on 14:01 - Jun 6 with 2117 views | D_Alien |
Another factor to consider, given the experience that Dan Altman and any associates had at Swansea, is the potential ease with which they might gain a controlling interest in their next venture
Having alighted on Dale, it won't have just been out sporting potential that attracted them, although it'd possibly be true to say that having their analytics business tested at a club like Dale would offer them greater kudos should it succeed, and we're far from a basket case in terms of potential
But given their business experience, and the general level at which Altman operates, it can't have seemed unattractive to have a silent chairman and an apparently self-appointed CEO to contend with, who is after all an employee in terms of that role
It's not unfeasible to think that this description, or something like it, might've been brought to their attention, had they not alighted on it themselves |  |
| |
| Share sale on 14:05 - Jun 6 with 2104 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Share sale on 13:43 - Jun 6 by judd |
Good point.
Technically are they investors, having transferred existing shares to their ownership?
Or are they carpetbaggers, possibly buying low and knowing a £6 valuation is now in the offing? Although given the date of the transaction I could be wide of the mark in this instance. Apologies if so... |
Yes, they are investors. The currently own a % of the club.
The £6 valuation hasn't been achieved yet. If it has all of those small shareholders have achieved 6 times their original investment too.
The current Board could only announce a transfer of shares from one shareholder to another new or existing shareholder.
Increasing the number of shares available is not an option until the AGM/EGM is reconvened. | |
| |
| Share sale on 14:10 - Jun 6 with 2086 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Share sale on 13:59 - Jun 6 by tony_roch975 |
true, sale of un-issued shares would benefit the Club and Altman says he & Marcelli wanted to buy the original un-issued 400,000 but he doesn't say at what price (it was before the £6 figure was mooted); might not that be the problem - that the board either wanted more £ per share than they were willing to pay or wanted them to buy the whole new issue valued at £4.2M? If Altman/Marcelli are looking at a takeover wouldn't they want the new share price to be as low as possible? But as you say, without a rearranged EGM neither the new issue or the price can be agreed. |
And any new shares need to be offered to existing shareholders first on a prorata entitlement to their current shareholding.
The current Board tried to disapply this with one of their EGM resolutions meaning that anyone could come in.
I can't see how Altman and Marcelli would vote for that - having just expended an amount of money to see their % ownership immediately diluted.
For the Board to go back on their £6 a share comment would be a hideous climbdown. That figure will have had some logic in their mind and they had called an EGM to push it through. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Share sale on 14:16 - Jun 6 with 2060 views | Brierls |
| Share sale on 15:58 - Jun 5 by TalkingSutty |
It’s a disgrace isn’t it. Whichever way you look at it it’s a disgrace, i wonder how the Trust feel about this? The Club is rotten to the core and the sooner that Boardroom is dismantled the better. New Chairman, new CEO , new Directors and fan involvement in the boardroom. The lot of them need booting out. There are things gone on at that football Club since the departure of Chris Dunphy that almost defy belief, all on this lots watch, things that will rapidly eradicate those smug looks which we have become accustomed to should they come out in the public domain. Threatening people from the Directors box or offering to fight fans on the car park doesn’t wash with some of us, it sums up the type of people we have running the Club though. [Post edited 5 Jun 2020 16:18]
|
That’s a bit of a sweeping statement on the board. I understand misgivings on the silent chairman, much maligned CEO and UFC Hall of Famer Rawlinson, but Andrew Kelly has apparently worked his rocks off for the club for years and Tony Pockney has been impressive every time I’ve seen him speak.
I don’t know if they’re rotten to the core, but I certainly wouldn’t tar them all with the same brush. Much like I wouldn’t roll over for American investors just because they’ve purchased a shareholding. Let’s see how this all pans out over the next couple of months.
The official statement was poor. I read it as “they were supposed to buy unissued shares which brought money into the club, but we couldn’t reach an agreement and they purchased privately and we’re not happy”. If anything it shows the board aren’t against the Altman and Marcelli being involved, and with Dunphy selling to them, gives me hope that they’re genuine long term investors albeit with a plan to build and get more exposure to their scouting system off the back of it. |  | | |
| Share sale on 14:20 - Jun 6 with 2038 views | electricblue |
| Share sale on 13:20 - Jun 6 by nordenblue |
I'm not sure why everyone is so certain that CD would only do business if its deemed good for the club, this is the very same club/board that previously shafted him royal and went behind his back to bring him down if rumours are to be believed, he just may have played this card as a direct repercussion to his previous treatment by certain members of our current boardroom, while at the same time cashing in,its a win win for him? |
And CD is entitled to his win win for his outstanding service to the club...... |  |
| My all time favourite Dale player Mr Lyndon Symmonds |
| |
| Share sale on 14:31 - Jun 6 with 2013 views | TalkingSutty |
| Share sale on 14:16 - Jun 6 by Brierls |
That’s a bit of a sweeping statement on the board. I understand misgivings on the silent chairman, much maligned CEO and UFC Hall of Famer Rawlinson, but Andrew Kelly has apparently worked his rocks off for the club for years and Tony Pockney has been impressive every time I’ve seen him speak.
I don’t know if they’re rotten to the core, but I certainly wouldn’t tar them all with the same brush. Much like I wouldn’t roll over for American investors just because they’ve purchased a shareholding. Let’s see how this all pans out over the next couple of months.
The official statement was poor. I read it as “they were supposed to buy unissued shares which brought money into the club, but we couldn’t reach an agreement and they purchased privately and we’re not happy”. If anything it shows the board aren’t against the Altman and Marcelli being involved, and with Dunphy selling to them, gives me hope that they’re genuine long term investors albeit with a plan to build and get more exposure to their scouting system off the back of it. |
Yes, having had time to reflect i will give Mr Pockney the benefit of the doubt. My post was fuelled with anger, i need to lower my expectations of people running the Club and stop comparing them with some of our fantastic supporters, such as David Clough...often seen peddling his bike around Littleborough selling Goldbond, even in the depths of winter the poor bugger. I was thinking about him last week when the lotto agents were binned off, something like that would have devastated David.
I agree with you though lets see how this all pans out and maybe re-visit this thread further down the road.👠[Post edited 6 Jun 2020 15:02]
|  | | |
| Share sale on 14:46 - Jun 6 with 1964 views | Brierls |
Can we all agree, that whatever happens, chants of “USA, USA...” is not be tolerated and punishable by public stoning?
I don’t care if we’re 5 up away at Sunderland after Altman & Marcelli have taken over, with our new Albanian whizz striker, identified by amazing stats and algorithms, bagging 4 and putting it on a plate for the other.
Not acceptable. | | | |
| Share sale on 14:46 - Jun 6 with 1963 views | judd |
| Share sale on 14:16 - Jun 6 by Brierls |
That’s a bit of a sweeping statement on the board. I understand misgivings on the silent chairman, much maligned CEO and UFC Hall of Famer Rawlinson, but Andrew Kelly has apparently worked his rocks off for the club for years and Tony Pockney has been impressive every time I’ve seen him speak.
I don’t know if they’re rotten to the core, but I certainly wouldn’t tar them all with the same brush. Much like I wouldn’t roll over for American investors just because they’ve purchased a shareholding. Let’s see how this all pans out over the next couple of months.
The official statement was poor. I read it as “they were supposed to buy unissued shares which brought money into the club, but we couldn’t reach an agreement and they purchased privately and we’re not happy”. If anything it shows the board aren’t against the Altman and Marcelli being involved, and with Dunphy selling to them, gives me hope that they’re genuine long term investors albeit with a plan to build and get more exposure to their scouting system off the back of it. |
That's an interesting interpretation of the statement, Brierls.
I cannot get the same meaning as you, no matter how much I try.
Talks stalled last year.
There are no plans for further discussions.
The board continues to explore other opportunities for external investment.
(Not direct quotes, but fairly accurate, I think.)
No welcome on board message.
Clear annoyance that investment has not gone to the club in this share transfer. | |
| |
| Share sale on 14:47 - Jun 6 with 1960 views | judd |
| Share sale on 14:46 - Jun 6 by Brierls |
Can we all agree, that whatever happens, chants of “USA, USA...” is not be tolerated and punishable by public stoning?
I don’t care if we’re 5 up away at Sunderland after Altman & Marcelli have taken over, with our new Albanian whizz striker, identified by amazing stats and algorithms, bagging 4 and putting it on a plate for the other.
Not acceptable. |
Hell yeah | |
| |
| Share sale on 14:53 - Jun 6 with 1935 views | Brierls |
| Share sale on 14:46 - Jun 6 by judd |
That's an interesting interpretation of the statement, Brierls.
I cannot get the same meaning as you, no matter how much I try.
Talks stalled last year.
There are no plans for further discussions.
The board continues to explore other opportunities for external investment.
(Not direct quotes, but fairly accurate, I think.)
No welcome on board message.
Clear annoyance that investment has not gone to the club in this share transfer. |
Well there’s another reason why the statement is poor, it’s been left open to interpretation.
I must admit, I’m filling in the many blanks myself, but the statement suggests the talks stalled over the cost of acquiring shares rather than the credentials of Altman and Marcelli. That’s what I was getting at. | | | |
| Share sale on 15:01 - Jun 6 with 1907 views | Nigeriamark |
| Share sale on 13:39 - Jun 6 by RAFCBLUE |
I'm amazed by the spin of the negative presentation of new investors by the club's statement, judd.
The only way funds will come into the club from shares is if they are new shares and failing a resurrection of the AGM/EGM that will not happen any time soon.
Was it not this Board that valued next shares in the club at £6 a share?
If Dan Altman and Emre Marcelli have bought at less than £6 a share (possible) then they would be well within their rights to ask the current Board to keep that £6 level, knowing that they are already sitting on a paper profit. |
They are not in their rights to ask the board for anything as this was a private sale between them and the 3 previous owners. New shares are completely separate and they have no right to be part of the share selling process either. As I can see it they have no more rights than a Dale fan who may have 10 shares |  | | |
| Share sale on 15:12 - Jun 6 with 1877 views | Sandyman |
| Share sale on 15:01 - Jun 6 by Nigeriamark |
They are not in their rights to ask the board for anything as this was a private sale between them and the 3 previous owners. New shares are completely separate and they have no right to be part of the share selling process either. As I can see it they have no more rights than a Dale fan who may have 10 shares |
This point about "rights" of shareholders could be interesting. The cancelled EGM was asking shareholders to waive the right of pre-emption for any new shares issued should approval be given to the motions on the night.
Hypothetical scenario: Should the EGM be resurrected, and the board's proposal accepted ( nearly said motions passed there!) , all shareholders would give away the right to buy the currently unissued shares in RAFC for five years. This I assume would mean current board members, new shareholders, all shareholders, meaning Messrs Altman & Marcelli wouldn't be able to buy any of the new issue. [Post edited 6 Jun 2020 15:13]
|  | | |
| Share sale on 15:29 - Jun 6 with 1837 views | tony_roch975 |
| Share sale on 15:12 - Jun 6 by Sandyman |
This point about "rights" of shareholders could be interesting. The cancelled EGM was asking shareholders to waive the right of pre-emption for any new shares issued should approval be given to the motions on the night.
Hypothetical scenario: Should the EGM be resurrected, and the board's proposal accepted ( nearly said motions passed there!) , all shareholders would give away the right to buy the currently unissued shares in RAFC for five years. This I assume would mean current board members, new shareholders, all shareholders, meaning Messrs Altman & Marcelli wouldn't be able to buy any of the new issue. [Post edited 6 Jun 2020 15:13]
|
the waiver of pre-emption rights makes sense if you're trying to attract a big investor but even if it happened it wouldn't stop existing shareholders buying the new issue, it just means they don't get first pick. | |
| |
| Share sale on 16:11 - Jun 6 with 1765 views | boromat |
This maybe a 1+1=5 moment but do we think this may be the source of Dunphy leaving the club? Maybe Chris was keen for this investment to go forward but wasn't getting the backing from the rest of the board?
Does feel like there's been a lot of things going on behind the scenes that we've not been made aware of. Obviously it's all been tied up in NDAs etc. | |
| |
| Share sale on 17:44 - Jun 6 with 1614 views | finberty |
| Share sale on 14:46 - Jun 6 by Brierls |
Can we all agree, that whatever happens, chants of “USA, USA...” is not be tolerated and punishable by public stoning?
I don’t care if we’re 5 up away at Sunderland after Altman & Marcelli have taken over, with our new Albanian whizz striker, identified by amazing stats and algorithms, bagging 4 and putting it on a plate for the other.
Not acceptable. |
Agreed.
The same rule should apply for anyone using the word 'stateside'. |  | | |
| Share sale on 17:52 - Jun 6 with 1601 views | KenBoon |
| Share sale on 17:44 - Jun 6 by finberty |
Agreed.
The same rule should apply for anyone using the word 'stateside'. |
And “from across the pond”. |  | | |
| Share sale on 18:19 - Jun 6 with 1538 views | Sandyman |
| Share sale on 15:29 - Jun 6 by tony_roch975 |
the waiver of pre-emption rights makes sense if you're trying to attract a big investor but even if it happened it wouldn't stop existing shareholders buying the new issue, it just means they don't get first pick. |
Under the boards proposals they wanted shareholders to waive pre-emption rights for five years. | | | |
| Share sale on 18:46 - Jun 6 with 1484 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Share sale on 15:01 - Jun 6 by Nigeriamark |
They are not in their rights to ask the board for anything as this was a private sale between them and the 3 previous owners. New shares are completely separate and they have no right to be part of the share selling process either. As I can see it they have no more rights than a Dale fan who may have 10 shares |
If I was them I would be asking for a seat on the Board.
My logic:
1. I am now the second largest individual shareholding behind Andrew Kilpatrick
2. The previous holders of the shares (Dunphy, Goodwin and Hazlehurst) were all Dale members.
3. I bring something that the Board don't have, namely an in-depth player analytic tool which will benefit the future of the club, bearing it mind Rochdale is a club that balances its books from developing undiscovered players.
The proportion of their shareholding makes them a significant proposition. | |
| |
| Share sale on 18:49 - Jun 6 with 1476 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Share sale on 15:12 - Jun 6 by Sandyman |
This point about "rights" of shareholders could be interesting. The cancelled EGM was asking shareholders to waive the right of pre-emption for any new shares issued should approval be given to the motions on the night.
Hypothetical scenario: Should the EGM be resurrected, and the board's proposal accepted ( nearly said motions passed there!) , all shareholders would give away the right to buy the currently unissued shares in RAFC for five years. This I assume would mean current board members, new shareholders, all shareholders, meaning Messrs Altman & Marcelli wouldn't be able to buy any of the new issue. [Post edited 6 Jun 2020 15:13]
|
The AGM wasn't cancelled; it was started and then paused.
The motions are still on the table for both the AGM and EGM.
The motions on new shares haven't passed so as things stand, all shareholders (including Altman and Marcelli) are caught by existing articles of association which remain unchanged. | |
| |
| Share sale on 19:31 - Jun 6 with 1412 views | 49thseason |
| Share sale on 18:49 - Jun 6 by RAFCBLUE |
The AGM wasn't cancelled; it was started and then paused.
The motions are still on the table for both the AGM and EGM.
The motions on new shares haven't passed so as things stand, all shareholders (including Altman and Marcelli) are caught by existing articles of association which remain unchanged. |
The pre-emption issue seems fairy standard. The companies Act says that if you issue shares you shouldmoffer the new shares to shareholders on a pro rata basis as their current shareholding . However the companies Act also allows share holders to forego their rights. If you read through the details of previous releases of shares, ( on Companies House) the 5 year pre-emption seems fairly standard . Basically it allows the company to release a particular number of shares to a particular person without having others wanting to buy more shares. Whether or not it needs to be for 5 years is a slightly different issue as it seems to me a different time period could be proposed. An example of this was when we bought O'Grady and Andrew Kilpatrick's Dad was given shares in exchange for providing the transfer fee. ( Feb 2010)
Since the aim was to sell a fixed number of shares to Altman and co.and thereby give him a fixed number of shares and a guarantee as to the number of shares that would need to be released.
It seems to me that the major debate surrounds the cost of 400k shares. Unless Altman manages to buy more from existing shareholders at lower cost than the negotiated price and can force his way onto the board as the largest share holder. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
