| No court action? on 16:24 - Feb 15 with 1719 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 16:22 - Feb 15 by felixstowe_jack |
The Americans have not offered a £ have they.
They trust are keeping all their shares.
The trust shareholdings are being diluted because of NEW investment by the Americans. Something our supporters have been calling for over tye last few years since they took over. |
So the trust aren't keeping their shares then are they? |  |
|  |
| No court action? on 16:24 - Feb 15 with 1719 views | felixstowe_jack |
| No court action? on 16:19 - Feb 15 by pencoedjack |
I didn't even know the trust still existed.
Haven't received any correspondence from them for months. |
As a trust members I have received regular emails from them and of course can look at the Website to read the monthly minutes which are published there. |  |
| |
| No court action? on 16:27 - Feb 15 with 1692 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| No court action? on 16:18 - Feb 15 by Chief |
So by that logic the Americans could have offered a quid and that automatically means the trust dropping the case? |
Classic Chief.! Chief keep your powder dry and comment on the final deal.
It was my opinion that the costs for legal action were always unacceptable and the case itself not as strong as promoted. The Convertible note was a game changer. |  |
| |
| No court action? on 16:28 - Feb 15 with 1679 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 16:27 - Feb 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Classic Chief.! Chief keep your powder dry and comment on the final deal.
It was my opinion that the costs for legal action were always unacceptable and the case itself not as strong as promoted. The Convertible note was a game changer. |
We know the final deal. It's poor.
As I said 500k to walk away. | |
| |
| No court action? on 16:29 - Feb 15 with 1670 views | felixstowe_jack |
| No court action? on 16:24 - Feb 15 by Chief |
So the trust aren't keeping their shares then are they? |
The trust are keeping all their shares . You clearly do not know how business are run or how shares are issued.
As an example
The trust owns 20 shares other own 80 shares
If 20 new share are issued to raise cash the trust still owns 20 shares and other own 120 shares but the trust percentage of shares will fall to 16.66% | |
| |
| No court action? on 16:32 - Feb 15 with 1657 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 16:29 - Feb 15 by felixstowe_jack |
The trust are keeping all their shares . You clearly do not know how business are run or how shares are issued.
As an example
The trust owns 20 shares other own 80 shares
If 20 new share are issued to raise cash the trust still owns 20 shares and other own 120 shares but the trust percentage of shares will fall to 16.66% |
They aren't though, they are bring diluted down, yet the club wouldn't in reality be able to be sold for anymore than it was previously.
Their share percentage is falling, you've said it there yourself. | |
| |
| No court action? on 16:37 - Feb 15 with 1625 views | shandyjack |
Can sense there will be a lot of anger over this and the trust numbers will diminish greatly. |  |
| |
| No court action? on 16:37 - Feb 15 with 1624 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 16:32 - Feb 15 by Chief |
They aren't though, they are bring diluted down, yet the club wouldn't in reality be able to be sold for anymore than it was previously.
Their share percentage is falling, you've said it there yourself. |
And if the trust are not going to be adversely affected by dilution, why would either side bother with this 5% protection consession?
It's a token meek gesture that the trust board have grabbed. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| No court action? on 16:39 - Feb 15 with 1608 views | BillyChong |
£500k for what would have been worth £15m. A total stitch up by the yanks and sellouts. The old Trust board must be seething. | | | |
| No court action? on 16:41 - Feb 15 with 1600 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 16:39 - Feb 15 by BillyChong |
£500k for what would have been worth £15m. A total stitch up by the yanks and sellouts. The old Trust board must be seething. |
Phil S has written a fairly lengthy post on his site. | |
| |
| No court action? on 16:41 - Feb 15 with 1599 views | felixstowe_jack |
| No court action? on 16:32 - Feb 15 by Chief |
They aren't though, they are bring diluted down, yet the club wouldn't in reality be able to be sold for anymore than it was previously.
Their share percentage is falling, you've said it there yourself. |
Their share percentage is falling not their number of shares. Are you being deliberately obtuse?
If the trust came up with money to invest in the club they could keep their percentage at the same amount. But they do not have the funds
As least the Americans are putting new funds into the club. [Post edited 15 Feb 2022 16:41]
| |
| |
| No court action? on 16:43 - Feb 15 with 1587 views | felixstowe_jack |
| No court action? on 16:39 - Feb 15 by BillyChong |
£500k for what would have been worth £15m. A total stitch up by the yanks and sellouts. The old Trust board must be seething. |
The club is only currently worth £30 million so how can 20% of £30 million be worth £15 million? | |
| |
| No court action? on 16:46 - Feb 15 with 1573 views | Dr_Winston |
| No court action? on 16:32 - Feb 15 by Chief |
They aren't though, they are bring diluted down, yet the club wouldn't in reality be able to be sold for anymore than it was previously.
Their share percentage is falling, you've said it there yourself. |
Well yeah. The amount of shares owned isn't changing. The amount of shares as a proportion of those available is, hence the percentage. He covered that.
If people want money put into the club then this is how it works. Nobody is going to spend £10m when a fifth of shareholders don't without expecting something in return, like a greater percentage. |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| No court action? on 16:51 - Feb 15 with 1556 views | KeithHaynes |
| No court action? on 16:43 - Feb 15 by felixstowe_jack |
The club is only currently worth £30 million so how can 20% of £30 million be worth £15 million? |
It’s like dragons den mate 😂 |  |
| |
| No court action? on 17:00 - Feb 15 with 1491 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| No court action? on 16:15 - Feb 15 by Chief |
This is no offer that adequately compensates the trust in anyway.
Essentially sold 10% for 500k. Laughable. |
From what I have read briefly this is not true.
After dilution The SCST will hold 15% of the club down from 21%. 5% 'golden share?' and 10% unprotected. They will also receive £500k.
Wait for the detail. | |
| |
| No court action? on 17:00 - Feb 15 with 1490 views | BillyChong |
| No court action? on 16:43 - Feb 15 by felixstowe_jack |
The club is only currently worth £30 million so how can 20% of £30 million be worth £15 million? |
“What would have been worth…” being the key wording there. Read up on what the original shares went for if you are completely oblivious. | | | |
| No court action? on 17:12 - Feb 15 with 1446 views | STID2017 |
| No court action? on 16:09 - Feb 15 by Chief |
The members voted for court action.
That's no longer happening through the choice of the trust board and yet the members received no consultation of this change of plan.
Imagine Tory's decided not proceed with brexit and didn't bother telling the electorate despite the democratic vote.
It's the very epitome of a betrayal. |
Not the best example, the Tories.
Politicians of all parties in all countries often go back on agreed action, especially to win elections.
Wouldn't have surprised me if they had gone back on Brexit (personally wish they had ). They could have delayed and found some reason.
Anyway back on topic, best solution for all concerned.
Time to move on now |  |
| |
| No court action? on 17:17 - Feb 15 with 1431 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 16:46 - Feb 15 by Dr_Winston |
Well yeah. The amount of shares owned isn't changing. The amount of shares as a proportion of those available is, hence the percentage. He covered that.
If people want money put into the club then this is how it works. Nobody is going to spend £10m when a fifth of shareholders don't without expecting something in return, like a greater percentage. |
Yea that's been accepted by the trust. They knew dilution would be inevitable. The plan was to sell their shares prior to this happening though. | |
| |
| No court action? on 17:21 - Feb 15 with 1420 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 17:12 - Feb 15 by STID2017 |
Not the best example, the Tories.
Politicians of all parties in all countries often go back on agreed action, especially to win elections.
Wouldn't have surprised me if they had gone back on Brexit (personally wish they had ). They could have delayed and found some reason.
Anyway back on topic, best solution for all concerned.
Time to move on now |
The premise is exactly the same. A democratic vote was carried out but the result not taken forward by the trust board. | |
| |
| No court action? on 17:23 - Feb 15 with 1403 views | Flashberryjack |
| No court action? on 16:01 - Feb 15 by vetchonian |
5% shareholding is insignifciant..the Tust will not feature in any future ownership once this mob sell.
Also it will now never ahave sufficient funds to launch a resuce bid should the worst occur.
Intersting though the club managing this given the legal action was against the sellouts and buyers individuals not the club.....
I am saw this coming ...hence why I am no loinger a Trust memebr and wont be rejoining anytime soon |
Yep, I'm no longer a trust member either, I've lost all trust in them (pardon the pun).
They seem more concerned with woke projects these days, shoot me. |  |
| |
| No court action? on 17:28 - Feb 15 with 1381 views | KeithHaynes |
| No court action? on 17:23 - Feb 15 by Flashberryjack |
Yep, I'm no longer a trust member either, I've lost all trust in them (pardon the pun).
They seem more concerned with woke projects these days, shoot me. |
The ethos of the trust should never be lost on anyone, but it’s outdated for me. I actually blame Phil for going out training for marathons. And snickers. | |
| |
| No court action? on 17:34 - Feb 15 with 1368 views | max936 |
| No court action? on 15:50 - Feb 15 by Chief |
Just seen the full statement.
Terrible. The members have been betrayed. |
This in spades. How can they just decide on that without consulting its members. |  |
| |
| No court action? on 17:38 - Feb 15 with 1364 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| No court action? on 16:32 - Feb 15 by Chief |
They aren't though, they are bring diluted down, yet the club wouldn't in reality be able to be sold for anymore than it was previously.
Their share percentage is falling, you've said it there yourself. |
Dilution is a fact of life as I have been explaining to you for months and months and posts after post. The Trust wanted a "free lunch" a big free lunch.
Today they have a very good deal for themselves where they can keep holding and the VIP seats. The others have agreed to give them a "small free lunch" and tag on clause.
I believe they should not get dividends if they are not willing to invest. It appears they can get dividends for their golden 5%, This is generous.
Should the club get promoted with no further investment their value would be £30m or £20m plus the 5% golden share. The US people must believe they can sell the club where the fans own a fixed 5%. Would a Vincent Tan for example accept this? The US cannot sell the club without them with a tag on clause.
It is a good deal for the Trust from what i can see. | |
| |
| No court action? on 17:47 - Feb 15 with 1342 views | STID2017 |
| No court action? on 17:38 - Feb 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Dilution is a fact of life as I have been explaining to you for months and months and posts after post. The Trust wanted a "free lunch" a big free lunch.
Today they have a very good deal for themselves where they can keep holding and the VIP seats. The others have agreed to give them a "small free lunch" and tag on clause.
I believe they should not get dividends if they are not willing to invest. It appears they can get dividends for their golden 5%, This is generous.
Should the club get promoted with no further investment their value would be £30m or £20m plus the 5% golden share. The US people must believe they can sell the club where the fans own a fixed 5%. Would a Vincent Tan for example accept this? The US cannot sell the club without them with a tag on clause.
It is a good deal for the Trust from what i can see. |
I would think that any potential buyer is surely going to be happy with owning 95% of the club ?
5% means diddly squat in terms of any new owners plans for the club.
The trust holding, whilst having a voice at the boardroom, would not be able to block anything,
Surely better than having 21% diluted to a potentially less than 5% in the future ? | |
| |
| No court action? on 17:49 - Feb 15 with 1332 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| No court action? on 17:34 - Feb 15 by max936 |
This in spades. How can they just decide on that without consulting its members. |
It was part of the terms that you voted for for presumably. Go through the terms of the most recent vote and tell us. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
