| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:49 - Mar 12 with 3206 views | judd |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:44 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
Is there any news on a 7th director being appointed? |
Not that I am aware of. I believe it was a question asked of the board a while ago. |  |
|  |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:49 - Mar 12 with 3206 views | Rehsad |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:18 - Mar 12 by judd |
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. |
I took your recommendation to be based on the trading situation and not the bidder - and at the time the only talk was of Liquidation. Did you mean to say 'Administration' or did you mean 'Liquidation'? I suspect the latter, as SG never mentioned Administration until the EGM result had been called. |  | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:49 - Mar 12 with 3194 views | Down_the_Ale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:18 - Mar 12 by judd |
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. |
Thanks Judd and apologies if I got my wires crossed. It was a conversation I was listening to and must have misinterpreted.
Many thanks for the clarity about the interested parties.
Despite my views about the current board, I do think the release of shares was just as necessary for the club, as it was 3 years ago. I'm just not comfortable, along with many others, that the best interests of the club are at the forefront, and even if there wasn't a huge conflict of interest, the current board have shown that they do not have the knowledge or expertise to run the club, let alone find the best buyer for us. | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:55 - Mar 12 with 3153 views | judd |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:49 - Mar 12 by Rehsad |
I took your recommendation to be based on the trading situation and not the bidder - and at the time the only talk was of Liquidation. Did you mean to say 'Administration' or did you mean 'Liquidation'? I suspect the latter, as SG never mentioned Administration until the EGM result had been called. |
Yes, you are correct, apologies. I was thinking of the normal procedure. It was an even bigger threat. | |
| |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:58 - Mar 12 with 3119 views | judd |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:49 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
Thanks Judd and apologies if I got my wires crossed. It was a conversation I was listening to and must have misinterpreted.
Many thanks for the clarity about the interested parties.
Despite my views about the current board, I do think the release of shares was just as necessary for the club, as it was 3 years ago. I'm just not comfortable, along with many others, that the best interests of the club are at the forefront, and even if there wasn't a huge conflict of interest, the current board have shown that they do not have the knowledge or expertise to run the club, let alone find the best buyer for us. |
The creation of these class A shares was to create a vehicle to enable a prospective buyer to acquire up to 90% of the club whilst putting funds into the club and not buying up existing shares from shareholders, who would be the beneficiaries. | |
| |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 15:02 - Mar 12 with 3078 views | Brierls |
| 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? |
I’m not sure of “as opposed to what shareholders want”. Speaking purely for myself, I think the WSH interest looks more credible than the TFC interest. I’m not hung up on it being “Simon’s choice” so long as it’s the best for the club. I also wouldn’t be a fan of Simon staying on as Chairman, the club is divided and that’s something we need to move away from. Ideally any takeover would mean Directors who have loaned money getting that money back, in cash, rather than equity at 22p a class A share.
I can think of one director who will vote the same way as SG, I wouldn’t be so sure on the others. I think with something this big, there will be people outside the boardroom queuing up to bring them up to date even if SG hasn’t (I’m not suggested that is the case).
I don’t know the answer to your question on The Trust, but I suspect it’s because they are the largest shareholder and the closest thing we have to a collective voice of the fans. I know that I have trust in the Trust Chairman to do everything in his power to make sure we get the best deal for the club. |  | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 15:06 - Mar 12 with 3039 views | judd |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 15:02 - Mar 12 by Brierls |
I’m not sure of “as opposed to what shareholders want”. Speaking purely for myself, I think the WSH interest looks more credible than the TFC interest. I’m not hung up on it being “Simon’s choice” so long as it’s the best for the club. I also wouldn’t be a fan of Simon staying on as Chairman, the club is divided and that’s something we need to move away from. Ideally any takeover would mean Directors who have loaned money getting that money back, in cash, rather than equity at 22p a class A share.
I can think of one director who will vote the same way as SG, I wouldn’t be so sure on the others. I think with something this big, there will be people outside the boardroom queuing up to bring them up to date even if SG hasn’t (I’m not suggested that is the case).
I don’t know the answer to your question on The Trust, but I suspect it’s because they are the largest shareholder and the closest thing we have to a collective voice of the fans. I know that I have trust in the Trust Chairman to do everything in his power to make sure we get the best deal for the club. |
Hic!  | |
| |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 15:13 - Mar 12 with 2958 views | Down_the_Ale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 14:58 - Mar 12 by judd |
The creation of these class A shares was to create a vehicle to enable a prospective buyer to acquire up to 90% of the club whilst putting funds into the club and not buying up existing shares from shareholders, who would be the beneficiaries. |
Correct, similar to 3 years ago. There would have been golden shares purchased which would have given the investor around 40-45% of the club (can't remember the exact %'s) for around £2.5m which would have gone directly into the club. Individual shareholders would then have had to be bought out for them to reach 51%.
The position is much worse now of course, hence the threat of liquidation. We are selling 90% of the club for £1.98m (hopefully more), with around £1.2m effectively owed out next day, and the potential for the new investor to withdraw the remaining £800k, whilst owning a ground valued at £4m-£6m! We are certainly much worse off than we were, but what's gone has gone. Just need to make sure we have long term investment as the £800k remaining will last a matter of 2 or 3 months.
Proposed capital investment is all well and good but the benefits will take several years to come to fruition. How will the club be funded in the meantime? Lots to consider/factor in | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Exclusive period with WSH on 15:20 - Mar 12 with 2906 views | judd |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 15:13 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
Correct, similar to 3 years ago. There would have been golden shares purchased which would have given the investor around 40-45% of the club (can't remember the exact %'s) for around £2.5m which would have gone directly into the club. Individual shareholders would then have had to be bought out for them to reach 51%.
The position is much worse now of course, hence the threat of liquidation. We are selling 90% of the club for £1.98m (hopefully more), with around £1.2m effectively owed out next day, and the potential for the new investor to withdraw the remaining £800k, whilst owning a ground valued at £4m-£6m! We are certainly much worse off than we were, but what's gone has gone. Just need to make sure we have long term investment as the £800k remaining will last a matter of 2 or 3 months.
Proposed capital investment is all well and good but the benefits will take several years to come to fruition. How will the club be funded in the meantime? Lots to consider/factor in |
From memory, the funding route for those shares was never established and the favoured buyer pulled out when challenged. I also saw the presentation that showed which existing shareholders would be "looked after", shall we term it?
I have no idea of the detail of money owed immediately, but as part of questions to be asked by the Trust is detail of cash inflow in order to meet the challenge of satisfying financial obligations to suppliers and staff on an on-going basis.
Capital investment absolutely would take a number of years to make a positive impact. | |
| |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 15:46 - Mar 12 with 2733 views | surb_dale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 15:13 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
Correct, similar to 3 years ago. There would have been golden shares purchased which would have given the investor around 40-45% of the club (can't remember the exact %'s) for around £2.5m which would have gone directly into the club. Individual shareholders would then have had to be bought out for them to reach 51%.
The position is much worse now of course, hence the threat of liquidation. We are selling 90% of the club for £1.98m (hopefully more), with around £1.2m effectively owed out next day, and the potential for the new investor to withdraw the remaining £800k, whilst owning a ground valued at £4m-£6m! We are certainly much worse off than we were, but what's gone has gone. Just need to make sure we have long term investment as the £800k remaining will last a matter of 2 or 3 months.
Proposed capital investment is all well and good but the benefits will take several years to come to fruition. How will the club be funded in the meantime? Lots to consider/factor in |
By my reckoning if WSH only bought the 9 million 'A' shares at 22p (total 1.98M) that would only give them a smidge under 87% of the total shares. To get to 90% control they'd need to also buy up the unsold shares that were issued at £2.35. Not sure exact amount of unsold shares there are but it was around 375k. Buying up these would get them to 90% i think and total outlay for them to achieve that would be 881k (2.35 * 375k) + 1.98M = 2.86M
So still a fair bit left after paying off the 'friendly' debt. Gauge has said he'd take equity for his debt so that would leave more cash in the club to invest. | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 16:10 - Mar 12 with 2595 views | DorkingDale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 15:46 - Mar 12 by surb_dale |
By my reckoning if WSH only bought the 9 million 'A' shares at 22p (total 1.98M) that would only give them a smidge under 87% of the total shares. To get to 90% control they'd need to also buy up the unsold shares that were issued at £2.35. Not sure exact amount of unsold shares there are but it was around 375k. Buying up these would get them to 90% i think and total outlay for them to achieve that would be 881k (2.35 * 375k) + 1.98M = 2.86M
So still a fair bit left after paying off the 'friendly' debt. Gauge has said he'd take equity for his debt so that would leave more cash in the club to invest. |
As SG has already stated that he’s prepared to take equity rather than cash for his investment I would think that it’s a fairly safe assumption that he will do the deal that’s best for the future of the club. Can we please just stop all this nonsense on here?! | | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 16:30 - Mar 12 with 2476 views | DorkingDale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 15:46 - Mar 12 by surb_dale |
By my reckoning if WSH only bought the 9 million 'A' shares at 22p (total 1.98M) that would only give them a smidge under 87% of the total shares. To get to 90% control they'd need to also buy up the unsold shares that were issued at £2.35. Not sure exact amount of unsold shares there are but it was around 375k. Buying up these would get them to 90% i think and total outlay for them to achieve that would be 881k (2.35 * 375k) + 1.98M = 2.86M
So still a fair bit left after paying off the 'friendly' debt. Gauge has said he'd take equity for his debt so that would leave more cash in the club to invest. |
| | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 16:46 - Mar 12 with 2364 views | Down_the_Ale |
"it’s a fairly safe assumption that he will do the deal that’s best for the future of the club"
🤣🤣🤣 | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 16:50 - Mar 12 with 2343 views | Down_the_Ale |
Not if the past is anything to go by! | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 17:31 - Mar 12 with 2147 views | Sandyman |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 16:50 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
Not if the past is anything to go by! |
There have indeed been shady board members in the past. |  | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 19:47 - Mar 12 with 1746 views | Down_the_Ale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 17:31 - Mar 12 by Sandyman |
There have indeed been shady board members in the past. |
I believe so, but it's the current ones that have took us to the brink and still don't appear to be doing right by us even at this late stage.
I just hope WSH have their own people, if and when the deal does go through | | | |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 20:53 - Mar 12 with 1578 views | DorkingDale |
| Exclusive period with WSH on 16:46 - Mar 12 by Down_the_Ale |
"it’s a fairly safe assumption that he will do the deal that’s best for the future of the club"
🤣🤣🤣 |
If he is going to keep his money in equity in the club it is in his interest to do the deal which is best for the future of the club - simples...... | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
