[azul]

So these Directors convert their debentures into shares, then own the club (and Saltergate) and still get a 6% return no matter what loss we make

Ground share at Field Mill here we come

No wonder Tooley buggered off, can't really blame the man

Or have I got it wrong

[TOTONRABBIT]

not sure surry, full of bods, had a good night out then came back to this, with a blurry view seems like you WILL or .will have another read when sobered up, but it seems we have a very short time to decide, especially as its this time of year when you haven't got time to do ****** all.

ash

[dalekpete]

azul, on Dec 27 2006, 01:20 AM, said:

So these Directors convert their debentures into shares, then own the club (and Saltergate) and still get a 6% return no matter what loss we make

Ground share at Field Mill here we come

No wonder Tooley buggered off, can't really blame the man

Or have I got it wrong

Converting the entire stock of debentures would leave the collective CFC Board with just under 50%. At this point CFSS would still be the largest shareholder. There is nothing to suggest that the eight individuals on the CFC Board are trying to aquire some type of collective "ownership". If they opt for preference shares then they cannot be redeemed for any more than face value.

[fishini]

dalekpete, on Dec 27 2006, 02:57 AM, said:

Converting the entire stock of debentures would leave the collective CFC Board with just under 50%. At this point CFSS would still be the largest shareholder. There is nothing to suggest that the eight individuals on the CFC Board are trying to aquire some type of collective "ownership". If they opt for preference shares then they cannot be redeemed for any more than face value.

And what good will that do?
Will we ever be rid of you?

[dalekpete]

fishini, on Dec 27 2006, 09:25 PM, said:

And what good will that do?

It gives the supporters a seat on the Board with the governance controls that go with that involvement.

It also underpins the community project that brings added value to the Club in terms of involvement, inclusion and secondary income streams.

Other than that our 250k shares mean little more than your 3k.

[fishini]

dalekpete, on Dec 27 2006, 10:06 PM, said:

It gives the supporters a seat on the Board with the governance controls that go with that involvement.

It also underpins the community project that brings added value to the Club in terms of involvement, inclusion and secondary income streams.

Other than that our 250k shares mean little more than your 3k.

True but if £3k seems so little to you can I have it back please? how many of the £250k shares would you have if the many supporters had not thrown thier money away into the CFSS pots to buy all these wothless shares? The supporters created you don't forget it, and how many share do you have?

But that aside you seem to have no more influence on the club than I do and just like me you can't run the club, you can't finace it, you are holding the club back, and I ask if Ma Hubbard withdraws his money what is your alternative

This post has been edited by fishini: 27 December 2006 - 10:14 PM

[dalekpete]

fishini, on Dec 27 2006, 10:13 PM, said:

True but if £3k seems so little to you can I have it back please? how many of the £250k shares would you have if the many supporters had not thrown thier money away into the CFSS pots to buy all these wothless shares? The supporters created you don't forget it, and how many share do you have?

But that aside you seem to have no more influence on the club than I do and just like me you can't run the club, you can't finace it, you are holding the club back, and I ask if Ma Hubbard withdraws his money what is your alternative

Les

You can have your money at the same time as someone gives the CFSS £250k and pays me for my 233.

If you haven't noticed we have a proposal to give up ownership of the Club. Why would a 15% shareholding (bound to fall as preference shares are issued) and a Community Director on the Board hold the Club back?

[dalekpete]

MP-Spire, on Dec 27 2006, 10:50 PM, said:

Pete,

As things appear to be out in the open, I'll ask the obvious question, why the need for preference shares?

Mike

Preference shares seem to be a convienient means of raising investment capital. They allow medium term investment with interest and a long lock-in. They are also redeemed before many other creditors meaning they are secure. None of the Directors will "own" the Club and so would be unwilling to just buy shares with no return.

This locks the existing loans in for five or ten years rather than six months but also shows that CFC(2001) has a significant share capital and Directors who have a medium term involvement. This means other investors and commercial lenders are more likely to look on a business plan favourably.

[dalekpete]

MP-Spire, on Dec 27 2006, 11:18 PM, said:

Pete,

1) They allow medium term investment with interest and a long lock-in. Disagree, preference shares are as liquid as ordinary shares, in the case of the FC, not very liquid!

2) None of the Directors will "own" the Club and so would be unwilling to just buy shares with no return. Their return with ordinary shares will be a dividend based on their investment value and financial performance of the Club.

3) This locks the existing loans in for five or ten years rather than six months. How do preference shares achieve this over ordinary shares?

The preference shares are redeemable at the end of five or ten years. Thus opening up investment opportunities for fans or friendly commercial organisations.

BTW I don't know the last time a non-listed football club paid a dividend!

[Town_Fan]

dalekpete, on Dec 27 2006, 11:45 PM, said:

The preference shares are redeemable at the end of five or ten years. Thus opening up investment opportunities for fans or friendly commercial organisations.

BTW I don't know the last time a non-listed football club paid a dividend!

As I understand it Pete preference shares are converted to ordinary shares if the "dividend" cant be paid. Arent preference shares just a way of getting paid despite how the company performs?

[Wooden Spoon]

Town_Fan, on Dec 27 2006, 11:53 PM, said:

As I understand it Pete preference shares are converted to ordinary shares if the "dividend" cant be paid. Arent preference shares just a way of getting paid despite how the company performs?

from my limited understanding yes.

but, and i think this is it, if "someone" was willing to put in say oh i dont know, about £3million to fiance the ground say, then they get a secure return for said investment?

[dtp]

If we had a "Bank Overdraft", instead of "Preference Shares", on which we were paying 4% to 5% above base rate the financial wizards on this site would not have as much to say - I'm sure.

Such is their bitterness.

[Wooden Spoon]

dtp, on Dec 28 2006, 08:54 AM, said:

Such is their bitterness.

???????????????????

[azul]

dtp, on Dec 28 2006, 08:54 AM, said:

If we had a "Bank Overdraft", instead of "Preference Shares", on which we were paying 4% to 5% above base rate the financial wizards on this site would not have as much to say - I'm sure.

Such is their bitterness.

Well when I become a multi millionaire I will not be expecting any financial return on my investment in CFC, thats because I'm a supporter, not an investor.

This post has been edited by azul: 28 December 2006 - 09:58 AM

[SALTERGATE]

azul, on Dec 28 2006, 09:57 AM, said:

Well when I become a multi millionaire I will not be expecting any financial return on my investment in CFC, thats because I'm a supporter, not an investor.

How much is Phil Taylor investing to remain on the CFC Board?

[Balearic Mac]

SALTERGATE, on Dec 28 2006, 10:12 AM, said:

How much is Phil Taylor investing to remain on the CFC Board?

Probably not as much now that Raymond van Barneveld's bloodied his nose....