| How much? 00:39 - Apr 12 with 6472 views | alibaba |
How much would the trust need to raise to buy enough shares to get to the milestone 25%? |  | | |  |
| How much? on 01:01 - Apr 12 with 5328 views | Joe_bradshaw |
£4 million. |  |
| |
| How much? on 01:16 - Apr 12 with 5300 views | BanosPerth |
Here's a thought. How about trying to persuade the shareholders who had been 'kept in the dark' to either donate or sell cheaply to the Trust sufficient shares to raise the holding to 25.1 % ?
That would be a great way for those shareholders to register their protest and make a huge statement. If I have read things correctly, that $4 mill would not make a great deal of difference to at least one of those shareholders, but of course it would make a massive difference to the real powers of the Trust. | | | |
| How much? on 01:52 - Apr 12 with 5270 views | Davillin |
Sorry to tell you, according to Mr. Sumbler in an interview with BBC, the new shearers want 75.1% of the shares.
Even if all other shareholder sold all their shares, that'd leave 24.9.
So much for wanting the supporters to be involved.
Screwed. If not by this set of owners, then by the next one. |  |
| |
| How much? on 02:14 - Apr 12 with 5245 views | BanosPerth |
| How much? on 01:52 - Apr 12 by Davillin |
Sorry to tell you, according to Mr. Sumbler in an interview with BBC, the new shearers want 75.1% of the shares.
Even if all other shareholder sold all their shares, that'd leave 24.9.
So much for wanting the supporters to be involved.
Screwed. If not by this set of owners, then by the next one. |
I was envisaging doing it before the shearers got their hands on the wool. Would that make a difference ? | | | |
| How much? on 03:00 - Apr 12 with 5227 views | Davillin |
| How much? on 02:14 - Apr 12 by BanosPerth |
I was envisaging doing it before the shearers got their hands on the wool. Would that make a difference ? |
My reply has to be somewhat speculative because we don't know the full intent of the Yanks.
Simple answer: If the buyers insist on 75.1%, there'll be no 25% for the Trust, or no sale. If the club, on behalf of the Trust, insist on 25% of the shares to the Trust, and the new buyers refuse, there'd be no sale. Assuming both sides want the sale to go through, the Trust'll be "odd man out" and up shit creek.
On the one hand, they say they want the supporters to continue to be involved, but on the other hand, if Mr Sumbler is right, they want 75.1% of the shares. Try as I might, I cannot see any other reason for that number except to shut out every other shareholder. And the Trust are the only one who both need it, want it, and are close enough to that figure to make it feasible.
I will repeat myself. If they get that 75.1%, in the absence of any other action with shares, the Trust will be sitting on the edge of a white-hot knife, dreading having their shares dlluted every time a new owner comes along.
And there will be others. These two prospective owners have a track record of usually staying about two years before cashing in. When D.C. United's new stadium is finished, and the club is sold, they'll be off again, hi ho.
Of course, there have been suggestions that there will be some kind of corporate "investment" body involved. Both of them are involved with such groups -- Kaplan with Oaktree Capital Group, which could remain as "cover" for real owners.
Levien and Kaplan are or have been associated with an Indonesian named Erick Thohir at D.C. United, who has been rumoured to want into the Premier League.
It's like that scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark, with hundreds of various serpents writhing around on the floor, waiting for a victim to drop into their middle.
You'll have to think about who those vipers might represent in our dilemma. Hmmmmmm. [Post edited 12 Apr 2016 3:06]
| |
| |
| How much? on 05:11 - Apr 12 with 5175 views | longlostjack |
| How much? on 03:00 - Apr 12 by Davillin |
My reply has to be somewhat speculative because we don't know the full intent of the Yanks.
Simple answer: If the buyers insist on 75.1%, there'll be no 25% for the Trust, or no sale. If the club, on behalf of the Trust, insist on 25% of the shares to the Trust, and the new buyers refuse, there'd be no sale. Assuming both sides want the sale to go through, the Trust'll be "odd man out" and up shit creek.
On the one hand, they say they want the supporters to continue to be involved, but on the other hand, if Mr Sumbler is right, they want 75.1% of the shares. Try as I might, I cannot see any other reason for that number except to shut out every other shareholder. And the Trust are the only one who both need it, want it, and are close enough to that figure to make it feasible.
I will repeat myself. If they get that 75.1%, in the absence of any other action with shares, the Trust will be sitting on the edge of a white-hot knife, dreading having their shares dlluted every time a new owner comes along.
And there will be others. These two prospective owners have a track record of usually staying about two years before cashing in. When D.C. United's new stadium is finished, and the club is sold, they'll be off again, hi ho.
Of course, there have been suggestions that there will be some kind of corporate "investment" body involved. Both of them are involved with such groups -- Kaplan with Oaktree Capital Group, which could remain as "cover" for real owners.
Levien and Kaplan are or have been associated with an Indonesian named Erick Thohir at D.C. United, who has been rumoured to want into the Premier League.
It's like that scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark, with hundreds of various serpents writhing around on the floor, waiting for a victim to drop into their middle.
You'll have to think about who those vipers might represent in our dilemma. Hmmmmmm. [Post edited 12 Apr 2016 3:06]
|
Would I be right in thinking that the monetary value of the Trust's shareholding would drop significantly if the "investors" acquired a 75.1% holding? |  |
| |
| How much? on 06:17 - Apr 12 with 5146 views | somersetsimon |
| How much? on 05:11 - Apr 12 by longlostjack |
Would I be right in thinking that the monetary value of the Trust's shareholding would drop significantly if the "investors" acquired a 75.1% holding? |
Not directly. Here's my understanding - let's say there are exactly 100 shares worth £1M each and the new guys buy 79 from the existing shareholders for £79M. The trust would have 21 shares and the new owners 79. As they are in control, the owners could decide to issue another 100 shares. They could put in another £79M to buy those new shares, but they'd have to offer the trust the chance to buy £21M of those new shares. If they couldn't then the new owners could buy them and halve the trust's percentage shareholding. |  | | |
| How much? on 07:14 - Apr 12 with 5082 views | BanosPerth |
Looks like my original question has been answered already.
From another thread, I read :
"According to what we've been told the Morgans didn't know about the deal yet agreed to transfer voting rights of any residual shares to the buyers to ensure that those buyers had 75.1% of the voting rights".
So it seems there are not enough shareholders left to block the 75.1% ownership (unless someone has a change of heart and mind). | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| How much? on 08:57 - Apr 12 with 4953 views | WarwickHunt |
| How much? on 01:52 - Apr 12 by Davillin |
Sorry to tell you, according to Mr. Sumbler in an interview with BBC, the new shearers want 75.1% of the shares.
Even if all other shareholder sold all their shares, that'd leave 24.9.
So much for wanting the supporters to be involved.
Screwed. If not by this set of owners, then by the next one. |
Shearers? Freudian slip, autocorrect or prescience?
Jason (Levien) and the golden fleece... |  | | |
| How much? on 09:21 - Apr 12 with 4914 views | alibaba |
I read somewhere that the constitution states that all current shareholders have first option on any shares being sold? So if the trust could raise the £4mil then we'd get to the 25% and no dramas. Then we can guarantee that any new investors coming in are left with no choice but to work with the Trust, not against them. | | | |
| How much? on 11:05 - Apr 12 with 4837 views | somersetsimon |
| How much? on 09:21 - Apr 12 by alibaba |
I read somewhere that the constitution states that all current shareholders have first option on any shares being sold? So if the trust could raise the £4mil then we'd get to the 25% and no dramas. Then we can guarantee that any new investors coming in are left with no choice but to work with the Trust, not against them. |
Why would the new investors be so keen to get over 25% unless they were planning something that they knew the trust would block? | | | |
| How much? on 11:10 - Apr 12 with 4810 views | ItchySphincter |
| How much? on 11:05 - Apr 12 by somersetsimon |
Why would the new investors be so keen to get over 25% unless they were planning something that they knew the trust would block? |
The new owners have to get over 75% - then the rules change and they can force new share issues and dilute the trust. That can't happen if the trust have 25.1%. |  |
| |
| How much? on 11:15 - Apr 12 with 4796 views | longlostjack |
| How much? on 11:10 - Apr 12 by ItchySphincter |
The new owners have to get over 75% - then the rules change and they can force new share issues and dilute the trust. That can't happen if the trust have 25.1%. |
That's what I meant earlier. That would be a negative for any prospective buyer of the Trust's shares meaning that they would be worth less than before this deal was announced. | |
| |
| How much? on 11:19 - Apr 12 with 4790 views | Matthew_117 |
| How much? on 09:21 - Apr 12 by alibaba |
I read somewhere that the constitution states that all current shareholders have first option on any shares being sold? So if the trust could raise the £4mil then we'd get to the 25% and no dramas. Then we can guarantee that any new investors coming in are left with no choice but to work with the Trust, not against them. |
If the trust somehow managed to raise the funds to buy those shares, then I have a feeling these "investors" would pull out of the deal.
Also, how does having 25% of the shares protect the trust from having their holding diluted if new shares were issued?
Or does the 25% mean they can block future share issues and therefore not have to worry about that?
-edit just noticed the reply above answers my question [Post edited 12 Apr 2016 11:20]
| | | |
| How much? on 11:21 - Apr 12 with 4785 views | AngelRangelQS |
| How much? on 11:15 - Apr 12 by longlostjack |
That's what I meant earlier. That would be a negative for any prospective buyer of the Trust's shares meaning that they would be worth less than before this deal was announced. |
This is my concern. Apart from the issue of new shares, what else can't they do at 25% and why are they so concerned about having 75%? |  | | |
| How much? on 11:50 - Apr 12 with 4732 views | somersetsimon |
| How much? on 11:10 - Apr 12 by ItchySphincter |
The new owners have to get over 75% - then the rules change and they can force new share issues and dilute the trust. That can't happen if the trust have 25.1%. |
Yes, I know that's what they would be able to do. However, they have made noises about working with the trust and they haven't said anything about diluting shares.
My question was more rhetorical. If they knew the trust would be happy with their future plans, there's no need to get over 75% as the trust would vote for the plans. The only reason you need more than 75% is to force through actions that you know the minority shareholders would vote against. | | | |
| How much? on 12:13 - Apr 12 with 4718 views | Landore_Jack |
How much does the Trust have in the bank? |  |
| |
| How much? on 12:20 - Apr 12 with 4701 views | shandyjack |
| How much? on 12:13 - Apr 12 by Landore_Jack |
How much does the Trust have in the bank? |
interesting question! |  |
| |
| How much? on 12:25 - Apr 12 with 4690 views | Flashberryjack |
| How much? on 01:16 - Apr 12 by BanosPerth |
Here's a thought. How about trying to persuade the shareholders who had been 'kept in the dark' to either donate or sell cheaply to the Trust sufficient shares to raise the holding to 25.1 % ?
That would be a great way for those shareholders to register their protest and make a huge statement. If I have read things correctly, that $4 mill would not make a great deal of difference to at least one of those shareholders, but of course it would make a massive difference to the real powers of the Trust. |
Like asking Turkey's to vote for Christmas......it's never gonna happen. |  |
| |
| How much? on 12:46 - Apr 12 with 4639 views | 3swan |
| How much? on 12:13 - Apr 12 by Landore_Jack |
How much does the Trust have in the bank? |
Around £800k was the last I heard | | | |
| How much? on 12:56 - Apr 12 with 4619 views | mattjenkins1990 |
Just giving page ? |  |
| |
| How much? on 12:58 - Apr 12 with 4599 views | EasternJack |
Ok - let's play it through...
1. The trust somehow manage to raise £4M
2. A deal is made that allows the Trust to fragment the offer into 2 groups of shares to allow them raise their share up to 25%
3. Let's ignore the fact that the above would devalue the remainder of the shares (as it will no longer be a controlling stake) (also - paradoxically, reducing the £4M price tag :)
4. Let's assume that both the sellers and buyers are happy with the above.
So - now the Trust has a 25% blocking share of the club.
What next?
This creates an impasse. Any investment from the buyers would be need to be matched by the Trust. I,e, Let's stay the buyers want to inject £30M into the club - the Trust would be expected to bring in £10M. The alternative is for the £30M to be made as a loan (against which asset?) - I can't see the the Trust agreeing to this.
So we stay as we are. Financially balanced but increasingly uncompetitive.
The Trust need to weigh their options carefully over the next few days/weeks. If these buyers are unscrupulous they could effectively water down the real value of the trust shares with incremental investments of fairly small amounts. Very likely scenario if the new owners plan to float. This would leave the Trust with No voice, no shares, no value.
Should the Trust not consider taking the same offer - potentially undercutting to get a sale - and putting the money in the bank for a rainy day? |  |
| |
| How much? on 13:00 - Apr 12 with 4588 views | 3swan |
| How much? on 12:58 - Apr 12 by EasternJack |
Ok - let's play it through...
1. The trust somehow manage to raise £4M
2. A deal is made that allows the Trust to fragment the offer into 2 groups of shares to allow them raise their share up to 25%
3. Let's ignore the fact that the above would devalue the remainder of the shares (as it will no longer be a controlling stake) (also - paradoxically, reducing the £4M price tag :)
4. Let's assume that both the sellers and buyers are happy with the above.
So - now the Trust has a 25% blocking share of the club.
What next?
This creates an impasse. Any investment from the buyers would be need to be matched by the Trust. I,e, Let's stay the buyers want to inject £30M into the club - the Trust would be expected to bring in £10M. The alternative is for the £30M to be made as a loan (against which asset?) - I can't see the the Trust agreeing to this.
So we stay as we are. Financially balanced but increasingly uncompetitive.
The Trust need to weigh their options carefully over the next few days/weeks. If these buyers are unscrupulous they could effectively water down the real value of the trust shares with incremental investments of fairly small amounts. Very likely scenario if the new owners plan to float. This would leave the Trust with No voice, no shares, no value.
Should the Trust not consider taking the same offer - potentially undercutting to get a sale - and putting the money in the bank for a rainy day? |
There has been no offer to buy the Trust's shares, they don't need to pay out more than achieving 75%.
It is good P.R. to say that they are happy with the Trust | | | |
| How much? on 13:12 - Apr 12 with 4556 views | A_Fans_Dad |
Surely if the Trust had £4M the trust's “pre-emption rights” would actually block the sale due to the insistence of the 75.1% | | | |
| How much? on 13:15 - Apr 12 with 4540 views | EasternJack |
| How much? on 13:12 - Apr 12 by A_Fans_Dad |
Surely if the Trust had £4M the trust's “pre-emption rights” would actually block the sale due to the insistence of the 75.1% |
Doubtful as I suspect that the pre-emption rights will be only be applicable for the full share sale - i.e. The Trust would need to match the full offer. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.