Dave King to Sell Shares to Club 1872

[der Berliner 3,830]

18 minutes ago, Tannochsidebear said:

The whole point of C1872 members giving them money for share purchases is to put the money into the club. Not to send this money away to South Africa never to be seen or benefitted from again. If King wants to sell his shares and can make a profit on them, then he should do so, and we would expect him to have the integrity to not sell to an outsider with no love for the club. That in itself is a big ask but there you are, we are a demanding bunch and he knows that full well.

 

If we think what the club could do with £13M of new money, it could well set us up for the next couple of years, ensure we only have to sell 1 or 2 players instead of more, perhaps allow us to strengthen further, or to invest in our stadium and facilities. I would 100% back any investment where the money goes to the club directly. I will have no part of a legacy where the only legacy is King riding off into the sunset with his "investment" back at the expense of the fans.

 

 

 

Ain't this acquisition of shares not similar to the buying of shares from Ashley & Co. a wee while back? While I see the whole point of putting money into the club, is safeguarding its future by acquiring shares (at a lower price too, as far as I understand it) not on a similar wavelength?

 

[forlanssister 3,114]

For those yearning for a sustainable model going forward this proposal takes us futher from that goal not closer.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Where would we be if we had bought david Murray's shares instead of whyte. 

 

I believe the rst bought new shares not Murray's.

 

Understand why but look what happened 

[Stevie - 4lads Blog 922]

Anyway folks, my original post was not meant to provoke a response. Merely my own tuppence worth 

 

However one thing I agree on is there is a lot of questions that is to be answered and serious questions which need asking

 

That doesn’t mean I think any less of the idea, Never again should the events of 2012 happen, we all have an opportunity to ensure it doesn’t. That for me is the point 

[Bluedell 5,679]

1 hour ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

Again your tone is completely harsh when I made a simple post on the matter 

 

Apologies. It's just frustration, as I highlighted in my post. 

[Bluedell 5,679]

31 minutes ago, the gunslinger said:

Where would we be if we had bought david Murray's shares instead of whyte. 

 

I believe the rst bought new shares not Murray's.

 

Understand why but look what happened 

Murray's shares weren't for sale at that point. The cash the RST invested in the club was just additional finance. The RST were nowhere near raising 7 or 8 figure sums.

[Bluedell 5,679]

1 hour ago, der Berliner said:

 

Ain't this acquisition of shares not similar to the buying of shares from Ashley & Co. a wee while back? While I see the whole point of putting money into the club, is safeguarding its future by acquiring shares (at a lower price too, as far as I understand it) not on a similar wavelength?

 

It is and I argued against the Ashley share purchase too....although at least with that one they were buying out someone who wanted to damage the club. This one makes even less sense.

[stewarty 2,060]

Personally I'm supportive and have amended my subscription accordingly.  There are pros and cons here, and I share some of the concerns from @Bluedell and @rbr.   Whilst perceptions of poor governance remain, it does make it harder to persuade more people to get involved and I think its a risk that could mean that they don't raise enough money, not least given the current economic climate.

 

 

[craig 5,199]

6 hours ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

Certainly going to back the campaign anyway I can. A chance to ensure 2012 never happens again is a good thing and it’s sad to see negativity surrounding it

 

Upped my subscription to legacy this morning and back what they are trying to do 

I think this is a line which very much needs to be used cautiously.  This is only the case in the event that C1872 can maintain their shareholding - what if the club needs to raise a further 20 million and C1872 can't maintain their shareholding ?  They will then have a diluted shareholding and the more diluted they become the greater the possibility that someone they don't wish as a shareholder gets of becoming one.

 

It isn't quite the "Never Again" that both C1872 and Dave King make it appear to be.  There are certainly circumstances in which it might not be the case, no matter how remote they should at least be recognized and appreciated.

 

For those who got the Legacy membership - how much was it ?  I have a lifetime membership with C1872 but haven't had time to take a look at the legacy membership

[craig 5,199]

6 hours ago, Bluedell said:

Arguably raising £13m and paying it into the club, rather than paying it to Dave King, makes a repeat of 2012 less likely.

 

Dave King will be looking for £5.4m from the club in 10 months, and there is all the other funding that's required. Where is that coming from?

 

That £13m is cash that could help the club become more financially secure and help it back on its feet. Why is it sad for people to take that view?

Completely agree BD - exactly the point I was making above.

 

Too many are jumping in on the "Never Again" and taking it for granted - only happens should C1872 (and members) continue to fund as and when needed - will that continue ?  There has been a malaise with C1872 for years now - how and what are they going to do to get 20,000 members ??  There is also a need for greater transparency for my liking