Dave King to Sell Shares to Club 1872

[Uilleam 5,963]

3 minutes ago, Bill said:

Another day passes and the parties involved still can't bring themselves to provide an open and honest picture of what's going on with this share sale. It might be a small point but when you're holding your hand out and/or spending other people's money a little transparency might reflect well on you.

From the outside, it looks hurried, and, I hate to say it, a little less than than kosher.

 

 

 

[Uilleam 5,963]

5 hours ago, 26th of foot said:

D'Artagnan used to regularly post on Gersnet. It must be over a year since his last? Agreed, informed and sound poster.

 

Of course, one proviso! I understand he is a former Bootneck, thus a complete and utter cnut. In the grand scheme of things, one of the better complete and utter cnuts. What has happened to him?

He couldn't hold back the tide?

[Stevie - 4lads Blog 922]

3 hours ago, Bill said:

Another day passes and the parties involved still can't bring themselves to provide an open and honest picture of what's going on with this share sale. It might be a small point but when you're holding your hand out and/or spending other people's money a little transparency might reflect well on you.

If only the seller and purchaser had done an extensive interview answering many fans questions on this very Platform 

 

A real Shame actually 

 

Oh hold on, they did...... 

[Bill 13,717]

1 minute ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

If only the seller and purchaser had done an extensive interview answering many fans questions on this very Platform 

 

A real Shame actually 

 

Oh hold on, they did...... 

It was fairly interesting too but hardly the platform where the big truths were ever going to be revealed. I don't believe you actually think it answered all the questions either? 

[Stevie - 4lads Blog 922]

9 minutes ago, Bill said:

It was fairly interesting too but hardly the platform where the big truths were ever going to be revealed. I don't believe you actually think it answered all the questions either? 

I think it’s a good platform for a first interview and there is plenty of follow up or additional ones to ask 

 

But if talking to the fans isn’t the platform then what would be? 
 

Surely we can’t say they aren’t giving answers or being truthful when they have had extensive media interviews for the last week?

 

However it is what it is, natural people are suspicious 

 

Hopefully follow up interviews bring even more clarity on this platform 

[buster. 5,257]

5 hours ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

I think it’s a good platform for a first interview and there is plenty of follow up or additional ones to ask 

 

But if talking to the fans isn’t the platform then what would be? 
 

Surely we can’t say they aren’t giving answers or being truthful when they have had extensive media interviews for the last week?

 

However it is what it is, natural people are suspicious 

 

Hopefully follow up interviews bring even more clarity on this platform 

Thanks for doing the interview Stevie and IMO it did help clear up (for good and bad) some things.

 

However, on this type of subject where the hard earned cash of so many fans is wanted, absolute transparency and full disclosure from the word go is needed. If it has to be almost dragged out then it's not a good sign.

[Stevie - 4lads Blog 922]

4 hours ago, buster. said:

Thanks for doing the interview Stevie and IMO it did help clear up (for good and bad) some things.

 

However, on this type of subject where the hard earned cash of so many fans is wanted, absolute transparency and full disclosure from the word go is needed. If it has to be almost dragged out then it's not a good sign.

What has had to be dragged out? 

[Bluedell 5,679]

10 hours ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

If only the seller and purchaser had done an extensive interview answering many fans questions on this very Platform 

Are you giving up the podcast, Stevie?

[buster. 5,257]

5 minutes ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

What has had to be dragged out? 

You talked about needing additional interviews / follow-ups so as to get what I imagine to be a clearer picture.

I'm just saying, that on the important issues, you'd hope/expect for absolute transparency/disclosure in Interview No.1.

 

This is no slight against you or the podcast. Doing a Jeremy Paxman is very difficult and when it's the guy who was a very important part of regime change that is being interviewed, even more difficult. But you did repeat some of the questions, so kudos & fair play to you for making a decent fist of it.

 

Specifically, for me it comes down to transparency (or lack of) regarding the relationships/links between C1872, Dave King, RIFC and Chris Graham. I know that the sources for the doubts raised are good, so it'd be better to have all the facts out in the open, rather than the subject of online conjecture.

 

 

I'll be honest.

I don't really fully trust DK, never have.... but was always fully behind him and the broader effort for regime change back in the day because I strongly thought it to be in the clubs best interests. Like so many businessmen out there, he might occasionally sail close to the wind but in those dark days, his vision, expertise and hard cash were all needed and given due to his genuine love for the club and concerns for the future. For that I will always be grateful.

[Bluedell 5,679]

I've just listened to the podcast. Thanks to Stevie for carrying it out, but, for me, it raises more questions than it answers.

 

1.       How will C1872 having 25% prevent the events of 2012 as was claimed by Laura?

I don’t see how it would prevent any such events. It wouldn’t have prevented Murray selling to Whyte and I don’t see how it would have prevented any of Whyte’s actions.

 

2.       How would Dave King have prevented Murray giving “the clubs’ shares” as security if he’d known about it?

       

Murray didn’t give the shares as security, but that’s not overly relevant, but the club needed funding and there was a floating charge, so I’m not sure what King would have done.

 

3.       Given the above 2 questions, is the phrase “never again” meaningless?

 

4.       When Laura says that directors of C1872 have no more power than the ordinary members, is that true? 

3 directors have proposed this scheme. 3 members could not propose it or propose an alternative scheme. We are not getting a vote on it so the claim that the organisation is “member led” is also not true.

 

5.       C1872 had the option of taking part in the clubs’ share issues as confirmed by Laura so why didn’t they want to take part in them and attempt to raise funds for them? Why has Dave King taken the priority?

 

6.      Did C1872 deliberately wait until they understood that the club was not going to have any more share issues before deciding to go ahead with this fund raising exercise, given that they had offers to take part in the previous share issues?

 

7.       Is Dave King breaking confidences and potentially affecting the price of shares by stating that any future share issues will be above 20p?

 

8.       Is Dave King privy to the minutes of any board meetings since the last one he chaired in March? Given the Covid 19 crisis, the new funding issues and the lack of player sales not drastically changed the landscape and the funding of the club?

 

9.       Is it C1872 policy that they would prefer the club to sell players to provide funding rather than C1872 buy new shares, as Laura suggests? Is it disingenuous to suggest that the club does no need funding, when it clearly does, especially when King says that he expects his £5m plus interest to be repaid in 10 months’ time.

 

10.   When Laura says that the fans need to step up and take responsibility, why have C1872 not been encouraging participation in the share issues? Is there not a contradiction?

 

11.   If Laura claims that buying shares is not a key decision then is refusing to buy shares in the club not a key decision? 

 

12.   Both King and Laura claim that the accounts are healthy when they show that the club continues to need investor support to meet its liabilities. Would they not accept that they are misleading fans in overstating the strength of the balance sheet?

 

13.   Why are C1872 ignoring their own constitution by not bring a potential £13m investment to the members to vote on? Is a £13m outflow not a “decision relating to a matter which would have a material effect on the assets of the Company” What level of outflow does Laura feel is material?

 

14.   Has there ever been an AGM of C1872?