Jump to content

 

 

Fund Objectives and Questions for River & Mercantile


Recommended Posts

Meaningless pap.

 

Given the opportunity to answer specific questions, even in the broadest of terms, that goes down as a slap in the face. Might as well have typed, 'You don't need to know, so fuck off'.

 

Which immediately gets him & his investment a big question mark from me.

 

Fund managers will very, very rarely tell you specific details on specific stocks. For a number of reasons.

 

This hardly means they should be question marked, when they are basically giving you the same standard response any fund manager is likely to give you.

 

However, I have a director in our company who, even after his own CFO explained to him how Hedge funds actually work in a diversified portfolio, STILL refused to trust hedge funds. All this whilst acknowledging his boss as being one of the smartest financial minds he had ever met.

 

Some people will NEVER trust the financial services sector, and to be fair, with some justification.

 

The response Brahim got was not only standard, but also probably more, and far quicker, than most fund managers would provide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I exchanged two further emails with my connection yesterday evening. I think he was quite taken aback at some of the comments and feels that they "won't win either way" However I have put it to him that they should consider being a little more forthcoming especially as Q (11) is dear to supporters hearts and (14) is fundamental because most supporters would see the needs of a football club as being somewhat different from a normal company and whilst football clubs re supposed to be businesses these days not many are run that way.

 

He came back to say that:

 

"That's the difference as a fan it is emotion! As an investor we take away the emotion.

 

I will discuss with Hugh on Monday and get back to you then."

Edited by BrahimHemdani
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fund managers will very, very rarely tell you specific details on specific stocks. For a number of reasons.

 

This hardly means they should be question marked, when they are basically giving you the same standard response any fund manager is likely to give you.

 

However, I have a director in our company who, even after his own CFO explained to him how Hedge funds actually work in a diversified portfolio, STILL refused to trust hedge funds. All this whilst acknowledging his boss as being one of the smartest financial minds he had ever met.

 

Some people will NEVER trust the financial services sector, and to be fair, with some justification.

 

The response Brahim got was not only standard, but also probably more, and far quicker, than most fund managers would provide.

 

 

no wonder have you seen the wolf of wall st.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fund managers will very, very rarely tell you specific details on specific stocks. For a number of reasons.

 

This hardly means they should be question marked, when they are basically giving you the same standard response any fund manager is likely to give you.

 

However, I have a director in our company who, even after his own CFO explained to him how Hedge funds actually work in a diversified portfolio, STILL refused to trust hedge funds. All this whilst acknowledging his boss as being one of the smartest financial minds he had ever met.

 

Some people will NEVER trust the financial services sector, and to be fair, with some justification.

 

The response Brahim got was not only standard, but also probably more, and far quicker, than most fund managers would provide.

 

I'm happy to acknowledge that, but such a stance still seems to me to be a touch illogical: when fund manager x decides to invest in a football club, surely s/he is aware that the level of scrutiny will ratchet up about 1000% on an everyday investment? And that in our specific case there are swivel eyed loons like me patrolling the ether, ever alert for another shyster?

 

Be it more than usual, it still seems a little 'head stuck in sand' to me.

 

In exchanged two further emails with my connection yesterday evening. I think he was quite taken aback at some of the comments and feels that they "won't win either way" However I have put it to him that they should consider being a little more forthcoming especially as Q (11) is dear to supporters hearts and (14) is fundamental because most supporters would see the needs of a football club as being somewhat different from a normal company and whilst football clubs re supposed to be businesses these days not many are run that way.

 

He came back to say that:

 

"That's the difference as a fan it is emotion! As an investor we take away the emotion.

 

Bit of an easy way out, that, 'we can't win'. He certainly can, he can engage with fans a bit and let them know where he, they and the club all stand in relation to one another.

 

I'm well aware that this fellow is investing to make a return and earn money. We're undervalued, he sees an opportunity. There's nothing wrong with that, that's absolutely expected.

 

The fundamental point, which we are very interested in as it directly affects how our club will recruit, sell, deal with infrastructure and so on, is how he expects to go about accruing that return. Will he leave it to the present board entirely? Will he seek to influence such areas as I mentioned, like buying or selling of players? Will he, too, do a 120 day review, or did he do that prior to investing (which seems more sensible)? Or is it more of a 'hands-off' approach, wait until the price moves us (say) 20% and then sell?

 

Managers may not like (or be willing to) divulge such information, and I would understand why, a bit. But given that fans are not about to stop asking these questions, and that it is down to the fans whether any return is substantial or non-existent, I would query why then make the investment in the first place.

 

Investing, disappearing and taking returns just isn't going to happen at many football clubs, and certainly not at RIFC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy to acknowledge that, but such a stance still seems to me to be a touch illogical: when fund manager x decides to invest in a football club, surely s/he is aware that the level of scrutiny will ratchet up about 1000% on an everyday investment? And that in our specific case there are swivel eyed loons like me patrolling the ether, ever alert for another shyster?

 

Be it more than usual, it still seems a little 'head stuck in sand' to me.

 

 

 

Bit of an easy way out, that, 'we can't win'. He certainly can, he can engage with fans a bit and let them know where he, they and the club all stand in relation to one another.

 

I'm well aware that this fellow is investing to make a return and earn money. We're undervalued, he sees an opportunity. There's nothing wrong with that, that's absolutely expected.

 

The fundamental point, which we are very interested in as it directly affects how our club will recruit, sell, deal with infrastructure and so on, is how he expects to go about accruing that return. Will he leave it to the present board entirely? Will he seek to influence such areas as I mentioned, like buying or selling of players? Will he, too, do a 120 day review, or did he do that prior to investing (which seems more sensible)? Or is it more of a 'hands-off' approach, wait until the price moves us (say) 20% and then sell?

 

Managers may not like (or be willing to) divulge such information, and I would understand why, a bit. But given that fans are not about to stop asking these questions, and that it is down to the fans whether any return is substantial or non-existent, I would query why then make the investment in the first place.

 

Investing, disappearing and taking returns just isn't going to happen at many football clubs, and certainly not at RIFC.

 

Andy, I am happy to pass those last three paras along and see if it influences them when they discuss it again tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh well. Thanks for trying, anyway.

 

This is symptomatic of the whole ownership problem as I see it (which is very confused, I freely admit!). Lacking that single majority owner, we are left with many small groups who come and go, building up a stake then selling when targets are reached - I do remember doing some vague financials training with Safeway years ago, about how not to panic if the share price fluctuated since it was more often a sign of fund management activity rather than a reflection on the company as a whole, never thought it would come in handy for the football, right enough - unless and until we get the share price to a level where such funds cannot see a sizeable enough return to bother investing in the first place.

 

But how?

 

When there's groups right left and centre trying to buy shares but not to get an out right controlling bloc, in order to prevent one single owner and potential mismanagement? Laudible enough but, potentially, a guarantee of the present difficulty in gaining stability. It just seems like we can't win no matter what until - dream scenario - someone trustworthy buys enough to prevent leeches etc fattening the calf only to slaughter it.

 

The people pushing the fan ownership (well, one of them really) has been banging on about how people have a problem with breaking away from the 'slavery' of single . Hopefully he doesn't read any other threads because I'm not keen on another debate with a brick wall; but there seems to be little appreciation that the fan ownership route can create issues, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh well. Thanks for trying, anyway.

 

This is symptomatic of the whole ownership problem as I see it (which is very confused, I freely admit!). Lacking that single majority owner, we are left with many small groups who come and go, building up a stake then selling when targets are reached - I do remember doing some vague financials training with Safeway years ago, about how not to panic if the share price fluctuated since it was more often a sign of fund management activity rather than a reflection on the company as a whole, never thought it would come in handy for the football, right enough - unless and until we get the share price to a level where such funds cannot see a sizeable enough return to bother investing in the first place.

 

But how?

 

When there's groups right left and centre trying to buy shares but not to get an out right controlling bloc, in order to prevent one single owner and potential mismanagement? Laudible enough but, potentially, a guarantee of the present difficulty in gaining stability. It just seems like we can't win no matter what until - dream scenario - someone trustworthy buys enough to prevent leeches etc fattening the calf only to slaughter it.

 

The people pushing the fan ownership (well, one of them really) has been banging on about how people have a problem with breaking away from the 'slavery' of single . Hopefully he doesn't read any other threads because I'm not keen on another debate with a brick wall; but there seems to be little appreciation that the fan ownership route can create issues, too.

 

My personal opinion is that fan ownership or at least fans having sufficient ownership or membership to influence decisions is the best way to go but I have serious doubts as to whether it is achievable.

 

I have been very surprised that given the antipathy towards SDM so many fans seem to see DK as some kind of messiah; but there you go, it's all about opinions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal opinion is that fan ownership or at least fans having sufficient ownership or membership to influence decisions is the best way to go but I have serious doubts as to whether it is achievable.

 

I have been very surprised that given the antipathy towards SDM so many fans seem to see DK as some kind of messiah; but there you go, it's all about opinions.

 

Methinks the point why many people like Dave King is that he is actually a Bluenose and has the money ready to steady the still lurching course of the club. People want stability and safety first and foremost, and King has the ability to offer this. I would assume, shrewd business-man that he is, he'd not follow SDM's course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.