Standee wrote:Not at all, just how much do you think the FC shares are worth, in comparison to the loans?
Would it depend how many shares they release though?
If the club are 1 million in debt, and they release 2 million shares worh £1 each. The current board share 1 million and they sell off the other million.
The club will be debt free and owned 50/50 between fans and the existing board. Would that not work? £1 per share for a 2 millionth of a business that will be out of debt and is in a prime position for a franchise sounds ok to me.
Joined: Jan 02 2003 Posts: 43413 Location: rlfans flying wing man
Big Dave T wrote:Would it depend how many shares they release though?
If the club are 1 million in debt, and they release 2 million shares worh £1 each. The current board share 1 million and they sell off the other million.
The club will be debt free and owned 50/50 between fans and the existing board. Would that not work? £1 per share for a 2 millionth of a business that will be out of debt and is in a prime position for a franchise sounds ok to me.
you'd have more chance of sticking you quid on the number 7 in todays flying pig race at beverley
Standee wrote:I actually think it's better to have someone who isnt a "passionate fan" running the club, it means minds run the business rather than hearts.
Whats the problem with Plummer/Hetherington? What is it people want them to be doing that they aren't? Again, people are commenting on issues they have no personal experience of.
I assume you think Hudgell is better than any of them, why? Because he unsettled a contracted player to the point where the player decided to breach his contract? Maybe it's because he made the decision to force the FC fans into an area unfirt for cattle (which we have fixed of our own accord), or is it because he has sanctioned the signing of journeymen past it players?
Despite all our arguments I do have some respect for you because you see to have a "business brain". But when you say whats wrong with Plummer I begin to have my doubts!
Lets put this in simple terms so everyone can figure it out.
I buy 10 shares in a company for £100, that company also owes me £30 in loan form.
I sell 5 shares at £6, which generates £30 in income. My loan is paid off, the club now has £0 debt.
I now own 5 shares, that cost me £50, but are now worth £30, so I have lost £20, and 50% of my shareholding, just to clear a debt.
How, in any way, shape, or form, is that attracive to me as a shareholder?
Let me put it in Simple terms too, the current board of directors dont buy the million pound of shares, they are given them. The million pound investment is used to pay off the directors loans. All 2 millions shares are still owned and are worth £1 each with a solvent club valued at £2 million pound. If a director wants to sell their shares they make £1 per share. Lets keep the directors loans seperate as they are now paid off.
Selling your own shares does not relate to recalling a directors loan.
Joined: Feb 17 2007 Posts: 1762 Location: The theatre of dreams...aka the kc stadium
Big Dave T wrote:Let me put it in Simple terms too, the current board of directors dont buy the million pound of shares, they are given them. The million pound investment is used to pay off the directors loans. All 2 millions shares are still owned and are worth £1 each with a solvent club valued at £2 million pound. If a director wants to sell their shares they make £1 per share. Lets keep the directors loans seperate as they are now paid off.
Selling your own shares does not relate to recalling a directors loan.
How does that not work?
surely if they are their own shares whats to stop em selling em?...must admit i havent read the full thread so its just logical to me if you own shares in whatever...and you wanna sell em you can...its just a case of who you sell em to?
Big Dave T wrote:Let me put it in Simple terms too, the current board of directors dont buy the million pound of shares, they are given them. The million pound investment is used to pay off the directors loans. All 2 millions shares are still owned and are worth £1 each with a solvent club valued at £2 million pound. If a director wants to sell their shares they make £1 per share. Lets keep the directors loans seperate as they are now paid off.
Selling your own shares does not relate to recalling a directors loan.
How does that not work?
If you sell your shares to pay the loan then of course it's related. And who was "given" shares?
Vicenzo wrote:Despite all our arguments I do have some respect for you because you see to have a "business brain". But when you say whats wrong with Plummer I begin to have my doubts!
But seriously, what examples do you have of his failings, PROVEN examples that is, likewise Kath?
The only one I have a propblem with is Mr Rule, and thats more to do with the Brian Johnson issue than anything.
Standee wrote:If you sell your shares to pay the loan then of course it's related. And who was "given" shares?
You arent selling your shares.
If im a director i may be given a percentage of the 1million kept for directors.
The other 1 million that are sold have just been created and are owned by the club not the existing shareholders.
The club sell the extra 1million shares which pay the directors their loans back. Everyones happy? The shareholders have a smaller percentage in the club i suppose but financially i dont see how they are worse off.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
