Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2021 20:24:06 GMT
I'm just wondering if the majority of fans on here are also shareholders - on an individual basis, and, therefore, have previously voted on matters at the AGM, such as who gets elected to the Board? I'm not referring to the share scheme overseen by the SC, or the election of the Fans Directors. The reason for asking is that I received this response in a thread on the other forum: "If you really are a committed supporter why are you not a shareholder? Then you would have a REAL interest in YOUR CLUB."Maybe I'm in a minority, as I'm obviously not considered to be committed enough. Nope I’m not, does this mean any work I’ve done voluntarily for the club or anything linked to it is now useless? Wish someone had told me
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Nov 18, 2021 20:44:52 GMT
Unfortunately there is a culture of elitism within some splinter groups/organisations associated with the club. It probably occurs in most sporting clubs.
I suppose it gives the perception of entitlement and minor royalty status, but exhibiting it just makes the pompous look like they have a superiority complex and it's best ignored....
I quite like the humble cash paying fan. Far more interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 18, 2021 20:46:35 GMT
How do you actually buy shares in BRFC and how much are they? I anticipate the answers are: 1) you can't unless somebody offers to sell you their's or the club issue more shares, both of which seem unlikely 2) a pure guess, £10 per share? I thought you had to buy a grands worth? Tenner here or there not a big deal but a grand for most is a huge deal. I don't think you can just go out and buy any, you have to find somebody who wants to sell them. Even if you buy them you'd still have no say in how the club is run, which seems to be what Knowall was actually implying, not that you're a better fan etc.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Nov 18, 2021 21:25:55 GMT
Well, the logical conclusion to having shares making a better, more engaged,fan means that the more shares you have, the bigger and better fan you must be.
That makes Wael our biggest and best fan to date.
Probably not what Knowall was intending. 😉
|
|
|
Post by Tilly's Thighs on Nov 18, 2021 21:38:14 GMT
Seems that maybe I'm not a minority no-mark then.
In the pre-Weal days, did non Board member shareholders have enough votes to block somebody from being elected to the Board? That was the impression I was given - it's a whole new world which I don't understand!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2021 21:49:15 GMT
Seems that maybe I'm not a minority no-mark then. In the pre-Weal days, did non Board member shareholders have enough votes to block somebody from being elected to the Board? That was the impression I was given - it's a whole new world which I don't understand! No, the previous board always had enough shares to do what they wanted to within company law.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Nov 18, 2021 21:53:54 GMT
Yes because buying 1 share means the club is YOURS. Vacuous nonsense from the gutter forum as per normal. Move along. For perspective it was Roy of the Presidents Club spouting the bollox So when he isn't being a twat on here..... What an absolute w**ker.
|
|
|
Post by stapletongas on Nov 18, 2021 21:59:36 GMT
I'm just wondering if the majority of fans on here are also shareholders - on an individual basis, and, therefore, have previously voted on matters at the AGM, such as who gets elected to the Board? I'm not referring to the share scheme overseen by the SC, or the election of the Fans Directors. The reason for asking is that I received this response in a thread on the other forum: "If you really are a committed supporter why are you not a shareholder? Then you would have a REAL interest in YOUR CLUB."Maybe I'm in a minority, as I'm obviously not considered to be committed enough. The other forum could meet in a phone box
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 18, 2021 22:08:22 GMT
Seems that maybe I'm not a minority no-mark then. In the pre-Weal days, did non Board member shareholders have enough votes to block somebody from being elected to the Board? That was the impression I was given - it's a whole new world which I don't understand! No, the previous board always had enough shares to do what they wanted to within company law. What was the reason for diluting the SC shareholding by the board led by NH or GD, which was around the time Kevin Spencer and co were trying to push though their Agenda for Change?
|
|
|
Post by Tilly's Thighs on Nov 18, 2021 22:47:57 GMT
No, the previous board always had enough shares to do what they wanted to within company law. What was the reason for diluting the SC shareholding by the board led by NH or GD, which was around the time Kevin Spencer and co were trying to push though their Agenda for Change? I'm not clear on what happened back then, was KS a Fans Director?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2021 23:07:45 GMT
What was the reason for diluting the SC shareholding by the board led by NH or GD, which was around the time Kevin Spencer and co were trying to push though their Agenda for Change? I'm not clear on what happened back then, was KS a Fans Director? KS = Kim Stuckey was.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2021 23:13:44 GMT
No, the previous board always had enough shares to do what they wanted to within company law. What was the reason for diluting the SC shareholding by the board led by NH or GD, which was around the time Kevin Spencer and co were trying to push though their Agenda for Change? The remaining members of the board needed to increase their shareholding as they had lost their control with the resigning directors taking their shares outside of the boardroom, they were also short of cash. They had to launch a rights issue and if the directors who had resigned had taken up their entitlement then the board would have still lost control. However, in reality the directors who resigned weren't going to throw £100k's at a board they had resigned from. The supporters club shareholding was vastly reduced by the rights issue but they voted for this action.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Nov 19, 2021 6:02:13 GMT
I would completely ignore any comments by Roy Cowell/Knowall on there Tilly.
He comes from the Twerton generation which had the ear of the Dunfords and who fully believes we should return to 1986 and run rovers that way.
It’s a funny sense of self entitlement that comes from some of the shareholders believing that a small share investment from many moons ago meant they could throw their weight around and belittle fans who didn’t/don’t/can’t take up any share options.
The whole irony is that the chair of the SC Share scheme then voted away any rights they had to a say a few years later making the whole scheme utterly pointless! Not to mention dilution after dilution which has reduced their total shareholding to 3.5% in current climes. Barking at the moon would have a greater effect for the actual power that gives them.
These are the very fans though that took a pot shot at the owner and his board and lost, quite badly in the end as it turned out. I would actually question whether these ones are actually fans anyway given their behaviour in the past. I mean, they even threat fellow rovers fans with legal action.
Thankfully David Thomas is now in charge and we will see a change to the position of most of the above.
Rest assured Tilly that your support of BRFC is just as valuable to the club than any other supporter who walks through the turnstiles, regardless of the financial input you may or may not be able to give the club.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Nov 19, 2021 6:28:27 GMT
I'm just wondering if the majority of fans on here are also shareholders - on an individual basis, and, therefore, have previously voted on matters at the AGM, such as who gets elected to the Board? I'm not referring to the share scheme overseen by the SC, or the election of the Fans Directors. The reason for asking is that I received this response in a thread on the other forum: "If you really are a committed supporter why are you not a shareholder? Then you would have a REAL interest in YOUR CLUB."Maybe I'm in a minority, as I'm obviously not considered to be committed enough. The other forum could meet in a phone box In fairness, Roy/Knowall/Fanatical is also a member of this forum too, although he tends to post just as much crap he is normally a little more careful in his use of language here. Some might say that a proper fan is someone who has helped and supported Wael Al Qadi. The man who bought us, cleared our loans, wiped out our debt, built a training ground and kept us afloat during the pamdemic. Thank goodness Roy has always been supportive of him..... Ahem.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Nov 19, 2021 7:26:53 GMT
For perspective it was Roy of the Presidents Club spouting the bollox So when he isn't being a twat on here..... What an absolute w**ker. I preferred this reply Hugo…
|
|
|
Post by Tilly's Thighs on Nov 19, 2021 9:42:35 GMT
I'm not clear on what happened back then, was KS a Fans Director? KS = Kim Stuckey was. Thank you - I'd forgotten that there were 2 Directors with the initials KS! Am I correct in remembering that David Brain was the other Fans Director at that time? After having a fairly settled Board during the Twerton years, there appeared to be a turnover of Directors in a fairly short space of time, I did follow what was happening via the old forum, but some of it has got a bit hazy in my brain down the years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2021 9:53:27 GMT
Thank you - I'd forgotten that there were 2 Directors with the initials KS! Am I correct in remembering that David Brain was the other Fans Director at that time? After having a fairly settled Board during the Twerton years, there appeared to be a turnover of Directors in a fairly short space of time, I did follow what was happening via the old forum, but some of it has got a bit hazy in my brain down the years. David Brain was an Associate Director as the SC were only entitled to one full director at that time. He stepped up to the full director role following Kim Stuckey's resignation.
|
|
|
Post by barumgas on Nov 19, 2021 17:49:14 GMT
I'm just wondering if the majority of fans on here are also shareholders - on an individual basis, and, therefore, have previously voted on matters at the AGM, such as who gets elected to the Board? I'm not referring to the share scheme overseen by the SC, or the election of the Fans Directors. The reason for asking is that I received this response in a thread on the other forum: "If you really are a committed supporter why are you not a shareholder? Then you would have a REAL interest in YOUR CLUB."Maybe I'm in a minority, as I'm obviously not considered to be committed enough. The other forum could meet in a phone box Wow,they have have that many.
|
|
|
Post by mftc on Nov 20, 2021 9:59:17 GMT
How many share offers have there been in recent years?
I recall one just around the time we moved to the Mem, but since then I thought it was effectively a closed shop.
The ShareScheme was what it was. A fundraiser to make sure we didn't go into administration, but the sales pater of the SC buying into the FC was a good pitch.
If the club offered ordinary fans the chance to buy shares on the same terms as the ShareScheme (increasing funds compared to the rate that other/new directors can purchase them) then I am sure the uptake would be positive.
I recall approx £3 millions worth was ringfenced for the ShareScheme. I guess that the SS has purchased £1.6 mill (despite criticism, it did it's job and saved the club - think £20k still donated each year), so there must be scope.
Saying that if fans paid £1.4 million this season for shares we would still be on track for a near £3million loss based on Waels covid season figures.
Any shareholders need to ask questions about where the money keeps leaking away from the club.
If we expect 6,500 average crowds, why have a break even of 12,000. It does not appear very business savvy.
I would also ask how much is Wael prepared to gamble, cos at this rate, he wont have much left in his piggy bank.
|
|