| New shares 19:46 - Mar 7 with 27030 views | TTNYear |
Apparently new/more shares are being issued from the club... this needs discussing. |  |
| Anti-cliquism is the last refuge of the messageboard scoundrel - Copyright Dorset Dale productions |
| |  |
| New shares on 19:50 - Mar 7 with 7707 views | Brierls |
Available to purchase? Because that would be a strengthening or diluting of a shareholding, surely? |  | | |
| New shares on 19:58 - Mar 7 with 7662 views | kiwidale |
Admit I don't understand the reasons for a new share issue, It will bring in extra revenue but has the value of the club increased to warrant it and will it dilute the value of the already existing shares? is this an attempt to strengthen the control of the club by certain richer shareholders, again I don't understand so asking the questions Im sure their are some on here that will understand it better. |  |
| This is not the time for bickering.
|
| |
| New shares on 20:20 - Mar 7 with 7570 views | James1980 |
Doesn't the message say not to mention it? | |
| |
| New shares on 20:32 - Mar 7 with 7514 views | SuddenLad |
This was supposed to be confidential and people were asked to keep it so. |  |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| New shares on 20:37 - Mar 7 with 7480 views | rochdaleriddler |
| New shares on 20:32 - Mar 7 by SuddenLad |
This was supposed to be confidential and people were asked to keep it so. |
Shush |  |
| |
| New shares on 20:58 - Mar 7 with 7405 views | boromat |
Delete the thread? | |
| |
| New shares on 21:03 - Mar 7 with 7384 views | judd |
| New shares on 20:58 - Mar 7 by boromat |
Delete the thread? |
Why? |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| New shares on 21:15 - Mar 7 with 7342 views | 442Dale |
| New shares on 21:03 - Mar 7 by judd |
Why? |
And that is the question. It applies in so many areas.
It is the question that everyone should want answering. |  |
| |
| New shares on 21:24 - Mar 7 with 7301 views | judd |
| New shares on 21:15 - Mar 7 by 442Dale |
And that is the question. It applies in so many areas.
It is the question that everyone should want answering. |
Had the microphone not been removed so swiftly from fans at the recent forum, my next question was why was there an advisor on the top table and on what was he advising?
Where do concerned shareholders go for advice before being potentially railroaded into voting some of their rights away for 5 years at the EGM, thus opening the door to a massive change in the ownership model? Granted this latter point was hinted at by Tony Pockney at the forum, but the full extent of the proposal was not disclosed. | |
| |
| New shares on 21:50 - Mar 7 with 7230 views | RAFCBLUE |
| New shares on 21:24 - Mar 7 by judd |
Had the microphone not been removed so swiftly from fans at the recent forum, my next question was why was there an advisor on the top table and on what was he advising?
Where do concerned shareholders go for advice before being potentially railroaded into voting some of their rights away for 5 years at the EGM, thus opening the door to a massive change in the ownership model? Granted this latter point was hinted at by Tony Pockney at the forum, but the full extent of the proposal was not disclosed. |
Surely in such an open an transparent environment, perhaps the Chairman, CEO and Finance Director of the club may want to publicly set out their reasons for wanting to hold an EGM with the view to altering the share capital base of the club?
Such an EGM only being necessary if changing the fundamentals of the share capital is actually on the cards.
The first warning sign was some referring to the confidential nature of the information in documents and the Board thanking people for not sharing them publicly.
The second warning sign was the Trust writing to all its members, alerting them to this, circulated before this thread.
I have a very simple observation that if the reasoning for changing is not explained to a shareholder, they should simply vote against the motion presented.
And it should be debated. |  |
| |
| New shares on 21:55 - Mar 7 with 7198 views | Dorislove |
| New shares on 21:50 - Mar 7 by RAFCBLUE |
Surely in such an open an transparent environment, perhaps the Chairman, CEO and Finance Director of the club may want to publicly set out their reasons for wanting to hold an EGM with the view to altering the share capital base of the club?
Such an EGM only being necessary if changing the fundamentals of the share capital is actually on the cards.
The first warning sign was some referring to the confidential nature of the information in documents and the Board thanking people for not sharing them publicly.
The second warning sign was the Trust writing to all its members, alerting them to this, circulated before this thread.
I have a very simple observation that if the reasoning for changing is not explained to a shareholder, they should simply vote against the motion presented.
And it should be debated. |
The top few people of value of shares dwarf all the others combined and most of these are current board members so maybe its legal procedure to send out notices ? Interesting times ahead. |  | | |
| New shares on 21:57 - Mar 7 with 7191 views | BigDaveMyCock |
Project fear. | |
| |
| New shares on 22:00 - Mar 7 with 7178 views | 442Dale |
https://www.daletrust.co.uk/2019/07/trust-week-what-is-the-trust-2/
<<“The Trust is owned by an ever increasing number of members and retains over 12,000 shares within the Football Club making it one of the leading shareholders.”>>
There is a link at the bottom of the article to join the Trust and therefore become a member with a say in an organisation which holds over 12,000 shares. Once you have become a member you would be able to ask questions on any subject about our football club and the Trust would be required to answer as best they can using whatever information and routes to obtain that information they have available. | |
| |
| New shares on 22:02 - Mar 7 with 7169 views | judd |
| New shares on 21:55 - Mar 7 by Dorislove |
The top few people of value of shares dwarf all the others combined and most of these are current board members so maybe its legal procedure to send out notices ? Interesting times ahead. |
I'm sure the board has abided by stringent rules in advising shareholders of this proposal. I'm sure the board fully back the proposals. I hope that non board members with a significant shareholding are able to debate the proposals and influence a democratic outcome.
In the past few years I cannot say I have seen any of the myriad of changes move the club forward one bit. | |
| |
| New shares on 22:03 - Mar 7 with 7162 views | RAFCBLUE |
| New shares on 21:55 - Mar 7 by Dorislove |
The top few people of value of shares dwarf all the others combined and most of these are current board members so maybe its legal procedure to send out notices ? Interesting times ahead. |
The EGM proposals will come, I suspect, as special resolutions.
A special resolution is a resolution of the company's shareholders which requires at least 75% of the votes cast by shareholders in favour of it in order to pass.
The top few people don’t currently have 75% of the shares as if they did, they wouldn’t need to bother calling this EGM. | |
| |
| New shares on 22:08 - Mar 7 with 7130 views | Dorislove |
| New shares on 22:02 - Mar 7 by judd |
I'm sure the board has abided by stringent rules in advising shareholders of this proposal. I'm sure the board fully back the proposals. I hope that non board members with a significant shareholding are able to debate the proposals and influence a democratic outcome.
In the past few years I cannot say I have seen any of the myriad of changes move the club forward one bit. |
I dont see Chris Dunphy debating anything with this board and he has 46010 shares ,over £92k in value ,do you want to pay 92k to have no say ? like i say interesting times. | | | |
| New shares on 22:13 - Mar 7 with 7104 views | Dorislove |
| New shares on 22:03 - Mar 7 by RAFCBLUE |
The EGM proposals will come, I suspect, as special resolutions.
A special resolution is a resolution of the company's shareholders which requires at least 75% of the votes cast by shareholders in favour of it in order to pass.
The top few people don’t currently have 75% of the shares as if they did, they wouldn’t need to bother calling this EGM. |
The top few people may not have in possesion but may have in proxy,maybe its just a formality. | | | |
| New shares on 22:15 - Mar 7 with 7100 views | judd |
| New shares on 22:08 - Mar 7 by Dorislove |
I dont see Chris Dunphy debating anything with this board and he has 46010 shares ,over £92k in value ,do you want to pay 92k to have no say ? like i say interesting times. |
We'll have to see.
The unsold shares are being offered at £6 each, so with 400,000 approx up for sale you can bag yourself a major shareholding for a measly £2.4m | |
| |
| New shares on 22:18 - Mar 7 with 7074 views | Dorislove |
| New shares on 22:15 - Mar 7 by judd |
We'll have to see.
The unsold shares are being offered at £6 each, so with 400,000 approx up for sale you can bag yourself a major shareholding for a measly £2.4m |
You lost me on that ,unsold ?? is there a presale for preferencial buyers or something . | | | |
| New shares on 22:22 - Mar 7 with 7058 views | RAFCBLUE |
| New shares on 22:08 - Mar 7 by Dorislove |
I dont see Chris Dunphy debating anything with this board and he has 46010 shares ,over £92k in value ,do you want to pay 92k to have no say ? like i say interesting times. |
If the documentation outputted by the Dale Trust is to be trusted, then it is “not less than £6 a share.”
Chris Dunphy’s shareholding is worth £276,060 on the basis of that documentation. | |
| |
| New shares on 22:27 - Mar 7 with 7029 views | judd |
| New shares on 22:18 - Mar 7 by Dorislove |
You lost me on that ,unsold ?? is there a presale for preferencial buyers or something . |
As I understand it there are c. 900,000 authorised shares from which the company can raise funds. Only c. 500,000 have been issued (sold), so the board want to sell the remaining authorised shares of 400,000 at £6 each.
The EGM, as I understand it, has a resolution to allow this sale and remove the upper limit on authorised shares. In addition, existing shareholders have a right to buy these shares at a discounted rate. There is a motion to remove this right for 5 years. | |
| |
| New shares on 22:29 - Mar 7 with 7005 views | Dorislove |
| New shares on 22:22 - Mar 7 by RAFCBLUE |
If the documentation outputted by the Dale Trust is to be trusted, then it is “not less than £6 a share.”
Chris Dunphy’s shareholding is worth £276,060 on the basis of that documentation. |
DB bought 12500 (new) shares at £2 each to become a director if i have read the sharelisting correctly ,the shares now have increased value to £6 each ,who determined this and more importantly WHY. | | | |
| New shares on 22:31 - Mar 7 with 7000 views | kiwidale |
It would seem that I'm not the only one who is hearing alarm bells over this proposal however nobody has been able to explain what is to be gained or lost and by whom. Looking for investment is one thing a share issue is another thing altogether or am I looking for problems?
edit to add... maybe Chris Dunphy still has a role to play. [Post edited 7 Mar 2020 22:33]
| |
| This is not the time for bickering.
|
| |
| New shares on 22:31 - Mar 7 with 6987 views | Dorislove |
| New shares on 22:27 - Mar 7 by judd |
As I understand it there are c. 900,000 authorised shares from which the company can raise funds. Only c. 500,000 have been issued (sold), so the board want to sell the remaining authorised shares of 400,000 at £6 each.
The EGM, as I understand it, has a resolution to allow this sale and remove the upper limit on authorised shares. In addition, existing shareholders have a right to buy these shares at a discounted rate. There is a motion to remove this right for 5 years. |
Right ,looking for the big fish in other words,selling out. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
