|
Post by splitter on Sept 16, 2019 17:12:53 GMT
Well now you come to mention it... In all seriousness, I am anticipating that the Resolution of removal of pre-emption rights and Resolution of allotment of securities passed on 11th June will enable the further dilution of the 8% stakeholding.
Strange. pre-emption rights were removed in May 2009 and also in Nov 2006. As I remember the SC directors voted for this resolution at the time.
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Sept 16, 2019 17:20:41 GMT
Could it be that ownership of the club is joint, run by people with connections to us on behalf of the wider consortium who would have a minority stake in the club itself but a majority stake in the stadium. It would explain the comment about "fans" running the club whilst being unable to move now until all the other parties to the wider development are on board. We are in my mind, just a small part of that. That way the ground would be built as part of the wider development, the club sold for a nominal amount to 'fans', DS keeps the Mem until sold to pay off debts after we move. That's the impression I get as well, Stuart. I don't think the Al-Qadis will be any part of the new ownership (if it happens) apart perhaps from a seat on the board for Wael. The big one for this consortium is buying the land and building the stadium. I don't think who actually owns the football club is particularly important in comparison. I'm not even sure what owning the club actually means, if the club doesn't get matchday or sponsorship revenues. Presumably some of the stadium revenue would have to be diverted to the club to pay wages and transfer fees, but at our level it would be relatively small amounts. Prepare for a whip-round on Gaschat soon.
|
|
|
Post by kruger on Sept 16, 2019 17:21:13 GMT
Didnt someone say on here he that we should know something by the end of September ? Ah, but did they say which year? [br your right no they didn't
|
|
|
Post by peterhooper57 on Sept 16, 2019 17:32:59 GMT
Ah, but did they say which year? [br your right no they didn't You will have to wait until the beginning of August, next year, when Waq will appear once again, as if he has never been away, for his annual pilgrimage away from Kensington, to pontificate and tell us poor BRFC supporters how grateful we must be to have him as the saviour of our club.
|
|
|
Post by CheshireGas on Sept 17, 2019 8:22:23 GMT
So Gassy we won't 'have our club back' as Knowall makes out. It sounds exactly as we have now, Dwane Sports own the ground and Wael (a football fan) is involved with the club. Except we will pay rent on the ground instead of interest on a loan. Sounds to me that we won't 'have our club back' just different investors and different football fans..... Well if Ed Ware was involved then you can hardly even compare him with Wael. We also don’t know if they’d even charge us rent, nor who would own the stadium? If Ed is involved then he must be a bit player as if it was fans buying the club then they would but it now. Therefore if he is involved it will be as a front man without influence.....just as Wael is now! Any investor will want a return, even Higgs got his money back. Of course whoever owns the stadium will want rent especially if it isn't the club.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Sept 17, 2019 8:45:24 GMT
Simple question.... Can someone say what the share value was (or was intended to be). And what it is now? No. An unquoted company doesn't have a day-to-day value like a quoted company does because there isn't a market of people constantly buying and selling those shares and saying what they're prepared to buy/sell them for. If needed (for a sale or for tax purposes for example) an unquoted company can be valued from time to time by a specialist valuer. This is done with reference to financial performance either earnings or profit available for distribution. Where a company is loss making over a period (say 3 or more years) the valuation is usually a basic net assets per share. Meaning you add up the value of all the company's assets (land, buildings, stock etc maybe players contracts too in BRFC's case) and take away the value of all the debts. Then you divide that figure by the number of issued shares.
|
|
|
Post by gregsy on Sept 17, 2019 9:01:17 GMT
Simple question.... Can someone say what the share value was (or was intended to be). And what it is now? No. An unquoted company doesn't have a day-to-day value like a quoted company does because there isn't a market of people constantly buying and selling those shares and saying what they're prepared to buy/sell them for. If needed (for a sale or for tax purposes for example) an unquoted company can be valued from time to time by a specialist valuer. This is done with reference to financial performance either earnings or profit available for distribution. Where a company is loss making over a period (say 3 or more years) the valuation is usually a basic net assets per share. Meaning you add up the value of all the company's assets (land, buildings, stock etc maybe players contracts too in BRFC's case) and take away the value of all the debts. Then you divide that figure by the number of issued shares. OK, I think I'll try to make sense of this at a later date.... But cheers LJG for the response....
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Sept 17, 2019 9:18:52 GMT
No. An unquoted company doesn't have a day-to-day value like a quoted company does because there isn't a market of people constantly buying and selling those shares and saying what they're prepared to buy/sell them for. If needed (for a sale or for tax purposes for example) an unquoted company can be valued from time to time by a specialist valuer. This is done with reference to financial performance either earnings or profit available for distribution. Where a company is loss making over a period (say 3 or more years) the valuation is usually a basic net assets per share. Meaning you add up the value of all the company's assets (land, buildings, stock etc maybe players contracts too in BRFC's case) and take away the value of all the debts. Then you divide that figure by the number of issued shares. OK, I think I'll try to make sense of this at a later date.... But cheers LJG for the response.... I think that comes to less than 1p.
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Sept 17, 2019 10:33:17 GMT
Well if Ed Ware was involved then you can hardly even compare him with Wael. We also don’t know if they’d even charge us rent, nor who would own the stadium? If Ed is involved then he must be a bit player as if it was fans buying the club then they would but it now. Therefore if he is involved it will be as a front man without influence.....just as Wael is now! Any investor will want a return, even Higgs got his money back. Of course whoever owns the stadium will want rent especially if it isn't the club. Ed is not involved. Oh, and it's not a consortium.
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Sept 17, 2019 10:37:24 GMT
Just had a word with the flower man in Westbury On trym who has a share in a business down on the fruit market and he said they have had no offers yet, but they are small fry so would be the last to be told
|
|
Marshy
Proper Gas
Posts: 14,119
|
Post by Marshy on Sept 17, 2019 10:39:03 GMT
If Ed is involved then he must be a bit player as if it was fans buying the club then they would but it now. Therefore if he is involved it will be as a front man without influence.....just as Wael is now! Any investor will want a return, even Higgs got his money back. Of course whoever owns the stadium will want rent especially if it isn't the club. Ed is not involved. Oh, and it's not a consortium. FFS! I need a lay down in a dark room and whipping with a wet lettuce.
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Sept 17, 2019 10:47:18 GMT
Just had a word with the flower man in Westbury On trym who has a share in a business down on the fruit market and he said they have had no offers yet, but they are small fry so would be the last to be told Can't remember if it was the post or BBC but I believe they reported that it was agreed, all apart from majority shareholder Total Produce
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Sept 17, 2019 10:50:44 GMT
Just had a word with the flower man in Westbury On trym who has a share in a business down on the fruit market and he said they have had no offers yet, but they are small fry so would be the last to be told Blimey....thought Buster Edwards had gone on long ago. Must be something in the air tonight. 🙄
|
|
|
Post by gregsy on Sept 17, 2019 11:04:42 GMT
Just had a word with the flower man in Westbury On trym who has a share in a business down on the fruit market and he said they have had no offers yet, but they are small fry so would be the last to be told Plant pot.... Not even tin pot.... Edit: he is actually a decent dude who sells decent plants....
|
|
Marshy
Proper Gas
Posts: 14,119
|
Post by Marshy on Sept 17, 2019 11:09:21 GMT
Just had a word with the flower man in Westbury On trym who has a share in a business down on the fruit market and he said they have had no offers yet, but they are small fry so would be the last to be told Plant pot.... Not even tin pot.... Edit: he is actually a decent dude who sells decent plants.... You’re talking out or your arsepedistra again!
|
|
|
Post by CheshireGas on Sept 17, 2019 11:09:46 GMT
If Ed is involved then he must be a bit player as if it was fans buying the club then they would but it now. Therefore if he is involved it will be as a front man without influence.....just as Wael is now! Any investor will want a return, even Higgs got his money back. Of course whoever owns the stadium will want rent especially if it isn't the club. Ed is not involved. Oh, and it's not a consortium. So if Ed is not involved why are people alluding to it and if that is the case who is involved....... So are you saying its not a group of people then, but an individual?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2019 11:11:21 GMT
Ed is not involved. Oh, and it's not a consortium. So if Ed is not involved why are people alluding to it and if that is the case who is involved....... So are you saying its not a group of people then, but an individual? Or a company?
|
|
|
Post by legas on Sept 17, 2019 11:11:59 GMT
Just had a word with the flower man in Westbury On trym who has a share in a business down on the fruit market and he said they have had no offers yet, but they are small fry so would be the last to be told Blimey....thought Buster Edwards had gone on long ago. Must be something in the air tonight. 🙄 Wael shook hands with him on the deal already ... but it was an invisible touch.
|
|
Marshy
Proper Gas
Posts: 14,119
|
Post by Marshy on Sept 17, 2019 11:18:03 GMT
Ed is not involved. Oh, and it's not a consortium. So if Ed is not involved why are people alluding to it and if that is the case who is involved....... So are you saying its not a group of people then, but an individual? That’s the problem though he’s not saying anything is he? I went out with this really fat woman once, I had to use the term fart and give us a clue?
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Sept 17, 2019 11:34:37 GMT
So if Ed is not involved why are people alluding to it and if that is the case who is involved....... So are you saying its not a group of people then, but an individual? Or a company? Or nobody at all?
|
|