Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Quia Differt Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ruffers Wrote:

> > Proper MOTD style extended highlights here -

> > brilliant -


>

> Great Video. Encapsulates the atmosphere and

> occasion perfectly !


Agreed...it's nicely put together. I've just watched it all the way through. Pleased to see the cup - which I didn't see at the game due to the sun being in my eyes. Thanks ruffers.

Laddy Muck Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> OMG - those penalties....I nearly had a heart

> attack...

>

> Well worth suffering the blistering heat...a

> wonderful afternoon...and evening...

>

> WELL DONE TO DULWICH HAMLET and thanks to Tooting

> and Mitcham for the loan of their lovely ground.


Here here!

Well done to Dulwich Hamlet!!

It was an amazing day and one we will never forget.

Im chuffed that we made it all down there

Interesting developments off the field ? the DHFC football committee chairman has confirmed the following:


? From the start of next season, the club will be run on a day to day basis by a new Executive Committee made up of the club's stakeholders from within the club and from local business and the council.

? We aim to shortly be able to attract new investment to the club through an issue of new shares. This will make sure the club is on a sound financial footing.


So more council involvement and more money to support the club, which will either dilute or nullify the shares owned by Nick McCormack which are currently 'controlled' by Meadow Residential. We're promised more details soon.


This is very good news in that it suggests the club can get itself onto a firmer financial footing and be immune to Meadow's attempts to destroy it. Although, of course, the ultimate goal is to return to Champion Hill.

It's a legally meaningless piece of bog paper.


Whilst it's true that there is no legal significance to such a letter, in such a high profile situation as this it is not unusual to try a ranging shot - Southwark will either respond encouraging a formal (and legal) approach on those lines, or will indicate that this will (still) be unlikely to be approved. This is a cost effective method of seeing if they have yet found any areas where agreement might be possible. Southwark will need to respond if it does not want to appear unnecessarily obstructive (which would be a bad message for it if it came to more legal proceedings).


If Southwark did suggest that another approach would at least have a chance of being considered, of course, if the actual legal approach was very different from what was in the 'pre-planning' letter they could still readily turn it back.


There appear to be two key sticking points, the inappropriate use of protected land and the paucity of low cost social housing in the original proposals. Unless these are satisfactorily addressed I cannot see a way through the impasse. I am not sure increasing the housing density to include more social housing works here, if only because the council also has a view about housing density. But at least some attempts to take this forward are being made. It may be of course that this is just a PR exercise - but the issue now has a national profile - and champions at a national level to support the club's needs.

  • 1 month later...

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Pleased to see that Google Maps now recognises

> that the Lordship Lane / Goose Green roundabout is

> now called the Dulwich Hamlet Promotion

> Roundabout. Some rave reviews too :-)

>


> +Promotion+Roundabout/@51.4543336,-0.0827837,15z/d

> ata=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0xafc23c18ae67235f!8m2!3d51.460

> 7371!4d-0.0752601



:))

  • 3 weeks later...

Response to a question of mine to club chairman Liam Hickey on the club forum about the new share offering and changes in the ownership of the club. Very welcome developments.


"As a Private Limited Company we are not legally allowed to advertise the sale of shares but we can answer questions about them. We would have expected those at the meeting to have brought the contents of it into the public domain by now but as they haven't then this question is the first time we can say anything.


Yes there has been lots of movement as 73% of the current shares will pass into the ownership of a new holding company within the next 7 days. The club's new Directors will be the Directors of that company - namely me, Tom Cullen and Gavin Rose. We have no intention of selling that holding at any time.


However, we wish to be diluted to bring in new investment and so the meeting also agreed that authorised share capital be increased to ?1.5 million.


These new shares are available to purchase in blocks of 500 shares at ?1 each.


We have also brought the Register of Members up to date and taken some shares that were not taken up as part of the call and those of deceased and non contactable shareholders back into Treasury.


It is our I mention to hand these to the Dulwich Hamlet Supporters Trust as soon as they have tidied up one of their own rules.


The rest are available for fans or investors to purchase as part of the recapitalisation of the company.


Should large investors come forward then we shall look very carefully at their motives as part of our due diligence but we are already aware of people friendly to the club who may wish to invest.


The new Board will shortly be formed and offer places on it to representatives of all the current stakeholder groups.


Please forward any requests to purchase or questions to [email protected]."

Not any time soon, alas. But the (temporary) stay at Tooting & Mitcham's ground appears to be working OK, so the club should be able to sit it out, especially with the proposed new injection of cash. The good thing is that the developers can't do anything with the ground at the moment. It seems that any talks they've had with the council have broken down, so it's probably time to put some pressure on the Minister for Sport to appoint a mediator, as she promised in the Commons earlier this year. If that fails, the council will start the process for Compulsory Purchase. This could take a few years.

More cautiously good news ? Meadow Residential have written off the club's 'debts' to them, though these figures were alway rather nebulous and requests for a proper breakdown were ignored. The good thing is, though, that without that potential liability, the club will be far more attractive to new investors.


Details here too about Meadow's ridiculous revised scheme which will go nowhere:


https://www.londonnewsonline.co.uk/landlords-write-off-dulwich-hamlets-debt/

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...