Trust Board minutes - 11 September 2017

Here they are http://ecfcst.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Sept-2017-TB-A-mins.pdf

The first and the last minutes of part A are some pretty beefy bookends to the rest of it! (EDIT - sorry I actually meant the first of part A and first of part B summary)

On the rights issue point, just to reiterate the offer I have made before, if the TB would like me to take a look at any detail of regulatory aspects I'd be happy to do so (as a holder of a Chartered Institute of Securities & Investments Diploma in Investment Compliance and as a Chartered Fellow of the Institute)

Before we get into a rights issue, surely the most appropriate way forward would be to offer to buy minority shareholdings? This was considered to be the best way forward in 2011 and £17,000 was allocated in the Trust budget for this purpose. (It didn't happen at that time because the Club wanted the cash for other things). However with such a specific amount earmarked for this purpose there must have been agreement with a number of shareholders to purchase their holding, so why are we not now following this route?

Why would we want to spend £17k when a rights issue will generate cash and / or deliver >75% shareholding with no cash outlay? (loan conversion)

fred binneys head said:

Why would we want to spend £17k when a rights issue will generate cash and / or deliver >75% shareholding with no cash outlay? (loan conversion)

Click to expand...

See my post no.13 on the Freehold of the Park thread.

Why do we need 100% shareholding to prevent a takeover?

What was the outcome on the discussion if bar prices?

What's the point in having a rights issue if all existing shareholders can buy new shares proportionate to their existing shareholding? Surely all that does is preserve the status quo, but with more shares in existence?

Also: who are FGG, and what's the difference between a trustee and an officer?

Antony Moxey said:

What's the point in having a rights issue if all existing shareholders can buy new shares proportionate to their existing shareholding? Surely all that does is preserve the status quo, but with more shares in existence?

Also: who are FGG, and what's the difference between a trustee and an officer?

Click to expand...

FGG stands for Finance and Government Group. An officer is a servant who works for the organization and cannot vote like a Trustee.

I certainly agree with the tenor of your first paragraph. However the argument is that minority shareholders would not exercise their right to buy, particularly if the share price is set high enough. The Trust would then mop up these additional shares. However I simply prefer to buy out the existing shareholders. The Trust should do it asap - the Club was worthless a short time ago but now it has value which can only increase if the academy continues to perform.

As regards buying out the existing shareholders my understanding is that some cannot be traced and some will choose not to sell. Quite a lot of legwork involved with no guarantee of finding willing sellers. The rights issue is a one off exercise that will require reluctant sellers to fork out money and I would expect a lot of rights will not be taken up so the Trust holding will increase. If existing shareholders do take up their rights then more cash will flow into the Club.

This is the classic solution and I would have no hesitation in supporting it.