| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 14:22 - Apr 16 with 7229 views | Sandyman |
Good article. **If** the "large shareholders" don't want to CD back as Chairman, whatever their reasons may be, who do they want? As Richard implied, the situation at RAFC cannot continue as it is. There won't be an RAFC worthy of the name. Fans are drifting away and finding the club as it is unsupportable. The Trust and smaller shareholders are doing their best to bring pressure to bear for change. The fingers will now be pointing at the "large shareholders", some of whom have done tremendous things for the club in the past. What will they do? Or will they allow the club to just wither away? Perhaps some people need to rethink their positions because this is getting very serious. |  | |  |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 14:46 - Apr 16 with 7163 views | electricblue |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 14:22 - Apr 16 by Sandyman |
Good article. **If** the "large shareholders" don't want to CD back as Chairman, whatever their reasons may be, who do they want? As Richard implied, the situation at RAFC cannot continue as it is. There won't be an RAFC worthy of the name. Fans are drifting away and finding the club as it is unsupportable. The Trust and smaller shareholders are doing their best to bring pressure to bear for change. The fingers will now be pointing at the "large shareholders", some of whom have done tremendous things for the club in the past. What will they do? Or will they allow the club to just wither away? Perhaps some people need to rethink their positions because this is getting very serious. |
Unless Dunphy gets a big shareholder supporting him then hs as no chance..
Will Andrew Kelly and the Yanks support Dunphy along with the 25%!
I really do now fear for the club how many time have we heard about investors from within and nothing to show for it..
What asset do Dale have besides the ground!
Mondays outcome will be interesting.. [Post edited 16 Apr 2021 16:16]
|  |
| My all time favourite Dale player Mr Lyndon Symmonds |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 14:47 - Apr 16 with 7152 views | ThreeLions |
We as supporters and customers have to try and ensure the club has a future. The current board along with Charlatans off daytime and trash telly aren't it. We have this summer to save our club and somehow have a steady hand at the wheel or we will be in the shit. [Post edited 16 Apr 2021 14:47]
|  | | |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 15:25 - Apr 16 with 7014 views | judd |
"We've always been reliant and generated our own income whether it's via large income from the lottery..."
Oooh, you bitch. |  |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 16:56 - Apr 16 with 6770 views | SuddenLad |
Not the news we wanted to hear, but I am not surprised. The problem now is what follows. Without some credible additions to the Boardroom, some financial input and a Chairman who actually performs the role properly and shows interest in being Chairman, we are in peril.
Wouldn't it be the ultimate irony if the 'Overcoat Men' sat on their hands when a vote was needed to offer some hope for the future and then watched from the sidelines as we slipped inexorably towards greater problems.
Unless of course, there's an option we know nothing about as yet. The immediate objective must be to press for a change of personnel in key positions, to at least rid the club of weak and inadequate leadership. It simply can't be allowed to continue. |  |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 18:40 - Apr 16 with 6522 views | TomRAFC |
Hopefully, almost fancifully, this public declaration will encourage a major shareholder to be the one to back Dunphy over Bottomley. Ultimately, that's the choice they have. For those who have both shares and a tense relationship with Bottomley/Dunphy, it's an either/or decision. Should they enable Bottomley then they too come into the firing line of the majority of fans.
Those who boycott off the back of such an outcome need to be vocal about it, otherwise the tone of encouragement to protest we saw earlier in the week could set the tone for future challenges to the current board. Whatever stance "the chosen few" might claim to take now, they didn't come across well years ago and they didn't come across well this week. |  |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 18:45 - Apr 16 with 6497 views | 442Dale |
Whatever happens in the next few weeks and months, you would hope all involved take heed of Richard Wild in that podcast and realise that at no stage is it about individuals and what they may want or think, but always about doing the right thing for the football club. |  |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 19:05 - Apr 16 with 6415 views | SuddenLad |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 18:45 - Apr 16 by 442Dale |
Whatever happens in the next few weeks and months, you would hope all involved take heed of Richard Wild in that podcast and realise that at no stage is it about individuals and what they may want or think, but always about doing the right thing for the football club. |
Correct. And that means doing everything possible to ensure that the club is in the hands of custodians who are intent on taking the best care of all aspects of the club.
Everyone should be doing their absolute best, especially the salaried employees, to make sure the club always moves forward and strives to improve on and off the field. | |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 19:39 - Apr 16 with 6317 views | blackdogblue |
Hmmm.. read the article...
In terms of what happens next, Richard did tell the podcast that the interim chairman Andrew Kelly was looking to rectify the problems at the club.
Yep... knock it down & build flats in it? 😢 |  |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 19:49 - Apr 16 with 6296 views | judd |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 19:39 - Apr 16 by blackdogblue |
Hmmm.. read the article...
In terms of what happens next, Richard did tell the podcast that the interim chairman Andrew Kelly was looking to rectify the problems at the club.
Yep... knock it down & build flats in it? 😢 |
I think the chairman is steeped in sport, despite his occupation. | |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 20:31 - Apr 16 with 6138 views | dalenumber2 |
I think I trust Andrew Kelly to endeavour to achieve the best possible outcome . I know he is very passionate about the club. [Post edited 16 Apr 2021 20:32]
|  | | |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 20:42 - Apr 16 with 6095 views | Brierls |
This is exactly what I was worried about, hence me asking if the ‘bid’ had any substance. FFS. |  | | |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 20:46 - Apr 16 with 6084 views | RAFCBLUE |
https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/rochdale/news/54603/mark-hodkinson-inside
The above analysis by Mark Hodkinson showed that control of the football club rests in the hands of 27 shareholders (or their estates) who control 89.9% of the voting rights.
It is reasonable to suggest that for the Dale Trust (which owned 2.5%) to get to 25% from only 54 unique shareholders they must have captured the vote of a fair number of the smaller shareholdings on this list.
Equally, the current Board (Mr Kelly, Mr Bottomley, Mr Rawlinson and Mr Pockney) you would think are not in the Dale Trust's backers. They hold 19.5%, but the Dale Trust as a block can now outvote them.
The key is going to come down to five people - Dan Altman, Emre Marcelli, Graham Morris, David Kilpatrick and Andrew Kilpatrick. These five people own 47.5% of the club. Add to that the Dale Trust and any minority shareholders and you are past the 50% required to effect change.
Whatever happened in 2018 that led to Dunphy stepping down has clearly left a sour taste on all sides.
I know more read this messageboard than might admit and I would stongly urge those five men and Dunphy, to get their collective thinking caps on, unite and take this club forward.
They are the elder statesmen of Rochdale football club and without David Kilpatrick and Graham Morris the club would have been lost to Tommy Cannon. For those of a younger disposition, the club was thrown into turmoil in the mid 1980s when comedian Tommy Cannon, portrayed as the club’s saviour initially, allegedly caused controversy and uproar in the town when the new look Board of Directors made a series of decisions deemed not in the best interests of the club. Cannon eventually resigned in 1988 after an EGM was called by shareholders but behind him he left a whole host of debts.
Without Andrew Kilpatrick and his late father Brian, both stalwart Rochdale fans over many many years, Rochdale would never have gone for players of the quality to build a team out of League 2 and in modern football, like it or not, there is a role to play for Dan Altman and Emre Marcelli and data analytics.
Whoever is in charge of Rochdale, including the current Board, it is a thankless job but it is only ever about custodianship.
A solution must be found to this current disarray and then a raft of new directors - in their 30s and 40s need recruiting - to partner these old experienced heads so there is transition, planning and a club for everyone to support.
In life, history repeats. This is our 1988.
Up the Dale. |  |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 20:54 - Apr 16 with 6027 views | James1980 |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 20:46 - Apr 16 by RAFCBLUE |
https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/rochdale/news/54603/mark-hodkinson-inside
The above analysis by Mark Hodkinson showed that control of the football club rests in the hands of 27 shareholders (or their estates) who control 89.9% of the voting rights.
It is reasonable to suggest that for the Dale Trust (which owned 2.5%) to get to 25% from only 54 unique shareholders they must have captured the vote of a fair number of the smaller shareholdings on this list.
Equally, the current Board (Mr Kelly, Mr Bottomley, Mr Rawlinson and Mr Pockney) you would think are not in the Dale Trust's backers. They hold 19.5%, but the Dale Trust as a block can now outvote them.
The key is going to come down to five people - Dan Altman, Emre Marcelli, Graham Morris, David Kilpatrick and Andrew Kilpatrick. These five people own 47.5% of the club. Add to that the Dale Trust and any minority shareholders and you are past the 50% required to effect change.
Whatever happened in 2018 that led to Dunphy stepping down has clearly left a sour taste on all sides.
I know more read this messageboard than might admit and I would stongly urge those five men and Dunphy, to get their collective thinking caps on, unite and take this club forward.
They are the elder statesmen of Rochdale football club and without David Kilpatrick and Graham Morris the club would have been lost to Tommy Cannon. For those of a younger disposition, the club was thrown into turmoil in the mid 1980s when comedian Tommy Cannon, portrayed as the club’s saviour initially, allegedly caused controversy and uproar in the town when the new look Board of Directors made a series of decisions deemed not in the best interests of the club. Cannon eventually resigned in 1988 after an EGM was called by shareholders but behind him he left a whole host of debts.
Without Andrew Kilpatrick and his late father Brian, both stalwart Rochdale fans over many many years, Rochdale would never have gone for players of the quality to build a team out of League 2 and in modern football, like it or not, there is a role to play for Dan Altman and Emre Marcelli and data analytics.
Whoever is in charge of Rochdale, including the current Board, it is a thankless job but it is only ever about custodianship.
A solution must be found to this current disarray and then a raft of new directors - in their 30s and 40s need recruiting - to partner these old experienced heads so there is transition, planning and a club for everyone to support.
In life, history repeats. This is our 1988.
Up the Dale. |
Did Tommy Cannon claim to be a Dale fan? If so did he have similar supporting record to DB? | |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 21:10 - Apr 16 with 5962 views | SuddenLad |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 20:46 - Apr 16 by RAFCBLUE |
https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/rochdale/news/54603/mark-hodkinson-inside
The above analysis by Mark Hodkinson showed that control of the football club rests in the hands of 27 shareholders (or their estates) who control 89.9% of the voting rights.
It is reasonable to suggest that for the Dale Trust (which owned 2.5%) to get to 25% from only 54 unique shareholders they must have captured the vote of a fair number of the smaller shareholdings on this list.
Equally, the current Board (Mr Kelly, Mr Bottomley, Mr Rawlinson and Mr Pockney) you would think are not in the Dale Trust's backers. They hold 19.5%, but the Dale Trust as a block can now outvote them.
The key is going to come down to five people - Dan Altman, Emre Marcelli, Graham Morris, David Kilpatrick and Andrew Kilpatrick. These five people own 47.5% of the club. Add to that the Dale Trust and any minority shareholders and you are past the 50% required to effect change.
Whatever happened in 2018 that led to Dunphy stepping down has clearly left a sour taste on all sides.
I know more read this messageboard than might admit and I would stongly urge those five men and Dunphy, to get their collective thinking caps on, unite and take this club forward.
They are the elder statesmen of Rochdale football club and without David Kilpatrick and Graham Morris the club would have been lost to Tommy Cannon. For those of a younger disposition, the club was thrown into turmoil in the mid 1980s when comedian Tommy Cannon, portrayed as the club’s saviour initially, allegedly caused controversy and uproar in the town when the new look Board of Directors made a series of decisions deemed not in the best interests of the club. Cannon eventually resigned in 1988 after an EGM was called by shareholders but behind him he left a whole host of debts.
Without Andrew Kilpatrick and his late father Brian, both stalwart Rochdale fans over many many years, Rochdale would never have gone for players of the quality to build a team out of League 2 and in modern football, like it or not, there is a role to play for Dan Altman and Emre Marcelli and data analytics.
Whoever is in charge of Rochdale, including the current Board, it is a thankless job but it is only ever about custodianship.
A solution must be found to this current disarray and then a raft of new directors - in their 30s and 40s need recruiting - to partner these old experienced heads so there is transition, planning and a club for everyone to support.
In life, history repeats. This is our 1988.
Up the Dale. |
I'm not sure we've plumbed the depths of 1988 just yet, but we're on the way to it unless there's a major change of direction. Those days are a stain on the clubs' history. God forbid we arrive there again. | |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 21:13 - Apr 16 with 5954 views | ncfc_chalky |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 20:54 - Apr 16 by James1980 |
Did Tommy Cannon claim to be a Dale fan? If so did he have similar supporting record to DB? |
I think that I've mentioned before that I was once in a bar in Spain and there was a right slanging match going on between people and when my then Mrs came over she said that it was Tommy Cannon and when I asked what it was all over she replied confused "Rochdale"
Any of you lot? |  |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 21:16 - Apr 16 with 5943 views | TVOS1907 |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 20:54 - Apr 16 by James1980 |
Did Tommy Cannon claim to be a Dale fan? If so did he have similar supporting record to DB? |
He didn't when he arrived, but he occasionally pledged 'allegiance' over time.
All bluster though, which fans quickly saw through. |  |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 21:16 - Apr 16 with 5940 views | judd |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 21:13 - Apr 16 by ncfc_chalky |
I think that I've mentioned before that I was once in a bar in Spain and there was a right slanging match going on between people and when my then Mrs came over she said that it was Tommy Cannon and when I asked what it was all over she replied confused "Rochdale"
Any of you lot? |
Tommy Cannon was no laughing matter | |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 21:24 - Apr 16 with 5903 views | TVOS1907 |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 21:16 - Apr 16 by judd |
Tommy Cannon was no laughing matter |
... ever! | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 21:30 - Apr 16 with 5876 views | James1980 |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 21:16 - Apr 16 by TVOS1907 |
He didn't when he arrived, but he occasionally pledged 'allegiance' over time.
All bluster though, which fans quickly saw through. |
Thank you 🙂 | |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 21:31 - Apr 16 with 5872 views | 49thseason |
Something that occurred to me having listened to Richard Wild on the Podcast is whether CD would consider becoming a Director again if not Chairman.
If there is new blood coming in maybe someone will emerge as a Chairman who Dunphy and Kelly can both work with to see the club through these rocky days. Or would they consider some sort of Joint-Chairmen's role if no one else steps forward? A third option would be to appoint a Non-Exec Chairman just to run the meetings and use a casting vote if needed? Potentially these are short-to-medium term scenarios until such time as the ship is steadied and new, younger Directors and potential Chairmen are brought on board. Certainly we cannot continue with so few Directors The Clubs Articles suggest a minimum of 7, I would suggest a suitable target would be 9 with each having an area of responsibility: Finance, Sales and Marketing, Academy, Lottery, Recruitment and HR, Site management, Digital, PR and Fans, Matchday. Etc.
Its understandable that some of the previous Board members are now perhaps unwilling to step up again but unless they have a better idea it seems equally churlish not to support CD if he is prepared to do a job. I don't think they would want the club to fold because they refused to back someone who has the experience to prevent that happening........ "If not this, then what"? And perhaps just as much to the point "when"? |  | | |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 22:06 - Apr 16 with 5761 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 21:31 - Apr 16 by 49thseason |
Something that occurred to me having listened to Richard Wild on the Podcast is whether CD would consider becoming a Director again if not Chairman.
If there is new blood coming in maybe someone will emerge as a Chairman who Dunphy and Kelly can both work with to see the club through these rocky days. Or would they consider some sort of Joint-Chairmen's role if no one else steps forward? A third option would be to appoint a Non-Exec Chairman just to run the meetings and use a casting vote if needed? Potentially these are short-to-medium term scenarios until such time as the ship is steadied and new, younger Directors and potential Chairmen are brought on board. Certainly we cannot continue with so few Directors The Clubs Articles suggest a minimum of 7, I would suggest a suitable target would be 9 with each having an area of responsibility: Finance, Sales and Marketing, Academy, Lottery, Recruitment and HR, Site management, Digital, PR and Fans, Matchday. Etc.
Its understandable that some of the previous Board members are now perhaps unwilling to step up again but unless they have a better idea it seems equally churlish not to support CD if he is prepared to do a job. I don't think they would want the club to fold because they refused to back someone who has the experience to prevent that happening........ "If not this, then what"? And perhaps just as much to the point "when"? |
The very best organisations have continuity.
Rochdale has always been poor at succession planning, its inevitable that managers and players will move on from Dale - particularly if they are any good - so the key is having the next person in place to have the opportunity.
The only time I can remember that being done brilliantly was in 2006 where we sold Grant Holt to Nottingham Forest and the next day signed Chris Dagnall on loan with a view to a permanent transfer. Parkin's research and planning replaced one Dale legend with arguably another.
The same is true in the Boardroom; there needs to be a simple clear succession plan for all role and a steady flow of new directors in at the bottom who over 20 or 30 years amass the experience to get that balance right. Again, Chris Dunphy was recruited onto the Dale Board in 1980 and stepped down in 2018. You cannot buy that sort of knowledge and experience.
Dale probably could do with 9 Directors of a decent age range (early 40's to mid 70's). Food for thought. | |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 22:44 - Apr 16 with 5655 views | dalefan10 |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 19:39 - Apr 16 by blackdogblue |
Hmmm.. read the article...
In terms of what happens next, Richard did tell the podcast that the interim chairman Andrew Kelly was looking to rectify the problems at the club.
Yep... knock it down & build flats in it? 😢 |
bit out of order that comment mr kelly he has done a lot over the years for this club he has rochdale in his heart the bloke isn't well yet he is still trying to sort the mess out that the club is in | | | |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 01:22 - Apr 17 with 5478 views | Hopwoodblue |
One of the big differences for me is, over the years we have always struggled to make ends meet whoever has been sat in the boardroom but I can honestly say I don’t think I have ever heard the directors moan about it more than this lot do. It seems to be their go to excuse, and yes I get Covid has had big impact on football but Christ don’t we know about it. Talk about using it as a get out of jail card !
I’m sure the likes of Accrington are struggling just as much as we are, but seemed to have managed to prioritise the playing side of matters above all else. I’d rather be skint going into next season in Div one than where we are heading, because with the gates we will be getting next season and beyond are going to make us financially, a lot worse off in the long run.
Talk about being short sighted.
This lot take the biscuit ! [Post edited 17 Apr 2021 1:31]
|  |
| |
| Chris Dunphy "doesn't have support of major shareholders" on 07:57 - Apr 17 with 5274 views | seasidedale |
Biggest worry for me is if David Bottomly becomes chairman | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
