simplythebest 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Sorry, I meant I don't think he's said what % of the club the £20m is for, hence he's not stated what they value the club at. Well all of it is for the club by the sounds of it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 As I said on another thread, he said on Friday that there are two fund managers wanting to invest £25M each. That sounds like a big fat version of a salesman lying about having other people interested in what he's selling in an attempt to trick the potential buyer into parting ways with their better judgment and hard earned cash. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigy 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Well all of it is for the club by the sounds of it. But how much is retained by the current shareholders/owners? If you bought the whole £20m in shares you wouldn't own 100% of the company. Those £20m shares are only for a proportion of the company, and those who have already invested will retain the rest. What we don't know is how much has been retained by the current investors, and how much did they have to pay to get that amount of stake in the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Not necessarily. A simplistic example to explain is that imagine a company breaks even every year and has net assets of £5m then it would be worth £5m. If it then had a share issue and raised £20m, it would then have net assets of £25m, and could be worth £25m. The amount raised by the share issue does not have a impact on the pre-issue valuation of the company. Be interesting to see what value the market puts on it when the dust settles. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Aye if my Granny hid baws and all that. Another misuse of this oft overused ditty. What exactly does that mean in relation to the post you are replying to? Are you saying that if you granny acquires some balls in the next few years that all your family will be happy? Sorry, but I fail to connect with your chosen metaphor in this context. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Another misuse of this oft overused ditty. What exactly does that mean in relation to the post you are replying to? Are you saying that if you granny acquires some balls in the next few years that all your family will be happy? Sorry, but I fail to connect with your chosen metaphor in this context. It pertains to "if" being the operative word in the post I quoted. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) It pertains to "if" being the operative word in the post I quoted. But "if" is a pretty valid word used for the conditional and used in this sense to give a conditional response in the future. Your phrase is not analogous as it is conditional on the past, with the original author giving humorous reference to the fact of it already having happened and therefore the condition being redundant. It doesn't work for the future as there is no redundancy and so your post doesn't make much sense. Edited October 11, 2012 by calscot 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 The main point was FS said he couldn't see how the interests of Green and the investors could be shared with the club's, i just put forward a senario where that is the case. Of course it may well not happen that way, then again the doomsday senarios I assume he predicts may not happen either. Point is it's not impossible for everyone to be happy. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 But "if" is a pretty valid word used for the conditional and used in this sense to give a conditional response in the future. Your phrase is not analogous as it is conditional on the past, with the original author giving humorous reference to the fact of it already having happened and therefore the condition being redundant. It doesn't work for the future as there is no redundancy and so your post doesn't make much sense. I'm not questioning the validity of the use of "if", quite the contrary. Whether it's analogous or not will depend if STB's statement proves to be prophetic or not (which incidentally I hope it does). 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little General 80 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 One can only hope that the launch will be more professional that a website that doesn't work... . Up and running now 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.