| Interesting Trust Email 20:09 - Jun 29 with 121290 views | Neath_Jack |
Regarding the options open to us.
It's going to cause some massive debate on here i reckon  |  |
| |  |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:13 - Jul 6 with 1710 views | Nirvana |
| Interesting Trust Email on 19:50 - Jul 6 by Nookiejack |
You reported the first option as taking the Trust's funds to £6m pre tax.
Yet circa £1m is already in the bank.
So if £5m was taxed the Trust would only receive £4m. Trusts funds in total would only be £4m in total.
You then compared the above pre tax figure to the post tax litigation option of £16m to £17m - although not sure if we then need to add to that the £1m already in the bank.
If the Trust receives £23m and is taxed at 20% then Trust would receive £18.4m plus circa £1m on Bank = £19.4m in comparison to the £5m - both on a post tax basis. |
Holy sshitt, man.
This whole thread has been rather bookish, but I didn't know there was a trigonometry exam at the end.
I hope you, or others, are accountants because this is some dreadfully boring stuff.
Fair play to you and Lisa, and others, who can stay awake while talking about this.
Wake me up when there's a court case on the horizon. |  | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:13 - Jul 6 with 1710 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 19:59 - Jul 6 by Uxbridge |
23m, pre tax, is probably too high an estimate. You're also assuming the Trust would get its legal fees back, which is far from guaranteed.
My 6m is correct, pre tax. 5+1=6. 5 after tax.
Spinning figures like this does nobody any favours.
Anyway, to answer another post, I completely agree that accurate figures need to be reflected in the documentation when it is sent to members, or a best guess when it comes to legal action (which, like it or not, remains unknown). Although I suspect accusations of bias will still apply regardless ... There'll always be holes to pick in the analysis and the wording. For what it's worth, things are being done in good faith.. Nobody here has anything personally to gain. |
So the Yanks are offering £6m pre tax (£4.8m post tax) plus £1m in bank = total Trust Funds of £5.8m post tax?
Or are the Yanks offering £5m pre tax (£4m post tax) plus £1m in bank = total Trust Funds £5m? |  | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:16 - Jul 6 with 1701 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:10 - Jul 6 by Uxbridge |
I suspect is it wrong to be honest. It's all before my time and I don't know the ins and outs, but it has been looked into.
Saying that, I completely agree that appropriate advice needs to be taken with regards to any financial windfall, and that has already been raised many times internally. |
As I say, it may well be, but either the Trust pays tax or it doesn't.
If it does, it is odd that there's never been any tax in the accounts.
If it doesn't, it won't now.
It may be due to anticipated use, but in which case, that's always applied. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:17 - Jul 6 with 1695 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:13 - Jul 6 by Nirvana |
Holy sshitt, man.
This whole thread has been rather bookish, but I didn't know there was a trigonometry exam at the end.
I hope you, or others, are accountants because this is some dreadfully boring stuff.
Fair play to you and Lisa, and others, who can stay awake while talking about this.
Wake me up when there's a court case on the horizon. |
Sorry but if CGT does need to apply - the decision should be based on a post tax position.
The £1m already in the Bank should also not be included. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:18 - Jul 6 with 1690 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:17 - Jul 6 by Nookiejack |
Sorry but if CGT does need to apply - the decision should be based on a post tax position.
The £1m already in the Bank should also not be included. |
Sorry to bore you.... | | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 20:22 - Jul 6 with 1675 views | cymrojack |
[Post edited 10 Jun 2021 11:53]
|  |
| Gwynedd & Swansea - Veteran of Morriston Boys Club |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:28 - Jul 6 with 1653 views | Nirvana |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:18 - Jul 6 by Nookiejack |
Sorry to bore you.... |
It's okay, Nookie.
We can't all have the same interests. Glad there are people out there who can and want to do this stuff for the club. I'll help where I can, but this thread really isn't it.
I have no idea what the truth is about this stuff you guys are talking about, and I am absolutely not spending my free time trying to.
Kudos to you and Lisa, Uxbridge, even Shaky, for maintaining a civil dialogue while discussing a pretty arcane subject. I mean that, truly. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:30 - Jul 6 with 1651 views | Uxbridge |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:13 - Jul 6 by londonlisa2001 |
£23m is the deal that the others received which is why it's being used surely? Remember #110 ?
If the Trust win, chances are it would get its costs back. |
You're assuming the 110 is correct of course.
We don't know the correct figure at the moment, will need that before we can do anything, but the above is slightly overstated from what we understand.
If it was accurate, then the 5% is worth 5.5m pre tax of course. I'm surprised Nookie didn't get that figure right  |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:40 - Jul 6 with 1629 views | LeonWasGod |
Why's everyone talking about the value of the shares? Surely what they represent (our ownership of our club) is far more important, and priceless. Once it's gone, it's gone. |  | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:03 - Jul 6 with 1591 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:40 - Jul 6 by LeonWasGod |
Why's everyone talking about the value of the shares? Surely what they represent (our ownership of our club) is far more important, and priceless. Once it's gone, it's gone. |
What is your understanding of the 'Drag' rights that have been conceded? | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:10 - Jul 6 with 1578 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:30 - Jul 6 by Uxbridge |
You're assuming the 110 is correct of course.
We don't know the correct figure at the moment, will need that before we can do anything, but the above is slightly overstated from what we understand.
If it was accurate, then the 5% is worth 5.5m pre tax of course. I'm surprised Nookie didn't get that figure right |
I was only using it as it was the number the Trust were using when the deal happened.
So yes, I was assuming that the Trust knew. Same as I assumed the Trust knew the offer when it was recommended a week ago.
Not a dig Ux. I'm grateful for the amount of questions you've answered this week. Genuinely.
The questions are a genuine attempt to clarify, not to spin. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:23 - Jul 6 with 1544 views | LeonWasGod |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:03 - Jul 6 by Nookiejack |
What is your understanding of the 'Drag' rights that have been conceded? |
I understand that we should/could have been involved, but we weren't. And now there's an option to sell some shares on the same terms. But surely the decision of whether to sell or not shouldn't be just about how much the share sale would raise, but also about the loss of 50% of our stake in the club.
I'll admit I don't understand the rationale behind accepting the deal. It provides money but we have less of a stake. I'd have thought we want as big a stake as possible and not sell-up like the sellouts? | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:40 - Jul 6 with 1530 views | vetchonian |
| Interesting Trust Email on 19:50 - Jul 6 by Nookiejack |
You reported the first option as taking the Trust's funds to £6m pre tax.
Yet circa £1m is already in the bank.
So if £5m was taxed the Trust would only receive £4m. Trusts funds in total would only be £4m in total.
You then compared the above pre tax figure to the post tax litigation option of £16m to £17m - although not sure if we then need to add to that the £1m already in the bank.
If the Trust receives £23m and is taxed at 20% then Trust would receive £18.4m plus circa £1m on Bank = £19.4m in comparison to the £5m - both on a post tax basis. |
So it's all about the money then we are as bad as the sell outs | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:42 - Jul 6 with 1524 views | longlostjack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:23 - Jul 6 by LeonWasGod |
I understand that we should/could have been involved, but we weren't. And now there's an option to sell some shares on the same terms. But surely the decision of whether to sell or not shouldn't be just about how much the share sale would raise, but also about the loss of 50% of our stake in the club.
I'll admit I don't understand the rationale behind accepting the deal. It provides money but we have less of a stake. I'd have thought we want as big a stake as possible and not sell-up like the sellouts? |
With those drag rights in place we'll be losing our stake in the club anyway down the line. Unless people believe that the "investors" have no intention of selling in the future and have the long term interests of the club at heart it's an absolute deal breaker. [Post edited 6 Jul 2017 21:43]
|  |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:43 - Jul 6 with 1521 views | monmouth |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:23 - Jul 6 by LeonWasGod |
I understand that we should/could have been involved, but we weren't. And now there's an option to sell some shares on the same terms. But surely the decision of whether to sell or not shouldn't be just about how much the share sale would raise, but also about the loss of 50% of our stake in the club.
I'll admit I don't understand the rationale behind accepting the deal. It provides money but we have less of a stake. I'd have thought we want as big a stake as possible and not sell-up like the sellouts? |
The drag rights mean that the Trust can be forced to sell all their shares whenever the yanks see fit to sell their own. There is no certain security of ownership it voting for the deal. |  |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:47 - Jul 6 with 1513 views | swancity |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:40 - Jul 6 by vetchonian |
So it's all about the money then we are as bad as the sell outs |
Would you mind explaining that comment please | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:50 - Jul 6 with 1502 views | vetchonian |
| Interesting Trust Email on 14:45 - Jul 5 by Todger |
I think the point is that once they have taken the Trust out totally then virtually any future dividend becomes theirs so they could pay the Trust out and then take a wacking dividend to cover it. They could do exactly the same if they bought part of the Trust shareholding but then they would have to share that dividend with the Trust residual shareholding. |
Can someone with the knowledge ..Lisa , Shaky? Confirm .....whilst the Trust retains a stake, shareholding it makes it harder for the Yamks to take money out of the club?
If this is so isn't it more so that the Trust keeps some stake ......through the deal? Even with drag rights if the yanks flip they would do so at a high so the trust make on the back of that?
Is it possible to reveal what the Trust actually paid for its shareholding initially?
Surely the deal allows the trust to get some thing for its shares keep some control money being taken out of the club by the new much needed investors ?
All of a sudden I feel like a sell out just wanting to trap the £21m.....and then leaving the club open to be milked dry? | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:03 - Jul 6 with 1472 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:23 - Jul 6 by LeonWasGod |
I understand that we should/could have been involved, but we weren't. And now there's an option to sell some shares on the same terms. But surely the decision of whether to sell or not shouldn't be just about how much the share sale would raise, but also about the loss of 50% of our stake in the club.
I'll admit I don't understand the rationale behind accepting the deal. It provides money but we have less of a stake. I'd have thought we want as big a stake as possible and not sell-up like the sellouts? |
With the concession of the Drag rights a new buyer can buy 100% of the shares. The Trust will be dragged along with the Yanks. The Trust will not be left with any shares.
In the litigation scenario it is similarly most likely the whole of the Trust's stake will be bought out.
A stake in the club only has value if you can demonstrate that you have influence. Otherwise you are just holding the stake for the sake of holding it.
For the last circa 14 years up to the sale the club operated as a quasi partnership - no one shareholder had control - no shareholder held more than 25% of the shares. There were a number of shareholders with similar stakes.
At the point of the sale - this all changed - the Trust was left in a Minority position with the Yanks 68% stake and holding the voting rights over residual 11% stake. The Company Articles were changed in favour of the Yanks without the Trust being notified.
The Yanks still have not offered the Trust the same offer for their shares as the seliing shareholders received. This is morally wrong - it shows no respect to the fans at worst contempt. If you hold the stake just for the sake of holding it - you accept this.
It is not the case that by selling now - the Trust gives up its stake in the club forever. By taking litigation - if we win - substantial funds will be banked. There are various ups and downs in football. The Yanks can take us to the next level - hopefully another up.
However as soon as there is another down - the Trust will be in a position to take a controlling stake In the club. Not just influence but control.
Yes it might take time but then the club won't be sold on from one VC to another or Vincent Tan type characters and people we don't even know. ( who owns the Yanks holding company?). | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:05 - Jul 6 with 1463 views | vetchonian |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:47 - Jul 6 by swancity |
Would you mind explaining that comment please |
Yes many on here keep saying we should go to court and get the money that is owed....the purpose of the trust was never to make money it was about and is about ensuring our football club survives and that our city always has a football league club.
All of a sudden the focus is we we were robbed so give us our £21/£23m
Yes we know the sale was a shady deal orchestrated by those so called fans who are the sell outs. As a result potentially the value both financially and of influence of the Trusts stake have been wiped out /reduced. The Trust has been negotiating a deal which perhaps is a compromise but could hamper the new investors taking money out of the club which is why I asked those in the know anout such matters.
Listening to some on here we are becoming as bad as the sell outs as its all money the money
And just for the record recent Slaes of championship clubs Wolves 45m , Charlton reputedly bought for 14m are rumoured to be up for sale circa 40m and that price excludes the Valley so how people think if we take the coin and sellout we could one day own the club outright need to wake up and smell the coffee | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:05 - Jul 6 with 1463 views | E20Jack |
So let me get this right. The yanks dont want to take this to court because ultimately they dont want to release any more of their cash.
If we win the court case and the judge orders them to right the wrongs and buy our shares for the initial value - cant we just offer them £5m back for 5%?
They get to essentially keep £5m that they dont want to be paying out and we get a seat on the board and if they genuinelly find the Trust partnership beneficial in a consultancy capacity then everyone is a winner... Right? |  |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:13 - Jul 6 with 1442 views | longlostjack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:05 - Jul 6 by E20Jack |
So let me get this right. The yanks dont want to take this to court because ultimately they dont want to release any more of their cash.
If we win the court case and the judge orders them to right the wrongs and buy our shares for the initial value - cant we just offer them £5m back for 5%?
They get to essentially keep £5m that they dont want to be paying out and we get a seat on the board and if they genuinelly find the Trust partnership beneficial in a consultancy capacity then everyone is a winner... Right? |
 | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:19 - Jul 6 with 1428 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:50 - Jul 6 by vetchonian |
Can someone with the knowledge ..Lisa , Shaky? Confirm .....whilst the Trust retains a stake, shareholding it makes it harder for the Yamks to take money out of the club?
If this is so isn't it more so that the Trust keeps some stake ......through the deal? Even with drag rights if the yanks flip they would do so at a high so the trust make on the back of that?
Is it possible to reveal what the Trust actually paid for its shareholding initially?
Surely the deal allows the trust to get some thing for its shares keep some control money being taken out of the club by the new much needed investors ?
All of a sudden I feel like a sell out just wanting to trap the £21m.....and then leaving the club open to be milked dry? |
Lisa previously posted the club can only pay a dividend out of distributable profits. The club isn't making any distributable profits at the moment. So probably not relevant to the decision.
The Trust could receive more under the Drag rights if the Yanks are successful - however if it all goes pear shaped - a really worst case sceanrio would be that the Yanks sell for a few pence and the Trust is dragged along at that price I.e. Close to Nil.
You therefore have to make your decision on likelihood of Yanks succeeding v likelihood of relegation and downward spiral (as we could always bounce back soon after being relegated). Trouble is in relegation scenario Trust will have circa £5m but probably have then given up of ever achieving long term control. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:27 - Jul 6 with 1407 views | vetchonian |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:19 - Jul 6 by Nookiejack |
Lisa previously posted the club can only pay a dividend out of distributable profits. The club isn't making any distributable profits at the moment. So probably not relevant to the decision.
The Trust could receive more under the Drag rights if the Yanks are successful - however if it all goes pear shaped - a really worst case sceanrio would be that the Yanks sell for a few pence and the Trust is dragged along at that price I.e. Close to Nil.
You therefore have to make your decision on likelihood of Yanks succeeding v likelihood of relegation and downward spiral (as we could always bounce back soon after being relegated). Trouble is in relegation scenario Trust will have circa £5m but probably have then given up of ever achieving long term control. |
Why would the yanks sell at a loss? Or even for a few pence.....they are here to make money
I have earlier asked what stops the yanks selling to a new co once the initial £5m is paid the new co having the yanks at the helm
The yanks will want to get at least a 10% return so unless they end up siphoning monies then they need the club attractive to sell and the trust will benefit then surely | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:30 - Jul 6 with 1402 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:05 - Jul 6 by E20Jack |
So let me get this right. The yanks dont want to take this to court because ultimately they dont want to release any more of their cash.
If we win the court case and the judge orders them to right the wrongs and buy our shares for the initial value - cant we just offer them £5m back for 5%?
They get to essentially keep £5m that they dont want to be paying out and we get a seat on the board and if they genuinelly find the Trust partnership beneficial in a consultancy capacity then everyone is a winner... Right? |
Drag Rights on the 5%? | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:32 - Jul 6 with 1398 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:27 - Jul 6 by vetchonian |
Why would the yanks sell at a loss? Or even for a few pence.....they are here to make money
I have earlier asked what stops the yanks selling to a new co once the initial £5m is paid the new co having the yanks at the helm
The yanks will want to get at least a 10% return so unless they end up siphoning monies then they need the club attractive to sell and the trust will benefit then surely |
Why did Randy Lerner sell at a loss? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
