|
|
Post by Minormorris64 on Oct 2, 2024 9:55:02 GMT 1
"Shrewsbury Town have revealed £2.1 million of loans invested into the club by Roland Wycherley will not have to be repaid."
From the Shropshire Star
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2024 10:04:25 GMT 1
Converted to shares, shareholding rises from 77% to 87%.
|
|
|
|
Post by pughywasfree on Oct 2, 2024 11:14:25 GMT 1
I can't say I'm that clued up on shares etc but I do know he would have been within his right to loan the money with interest.
The man is a legend. I doubt we will replace him with anyone that has such passion for the club.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 2, 2024 12:00:35 GMT 1
bit like every penny of the £2 million from the sale of land to Lidl went into the club
Legend
|
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Oct 2, 2024 12:15:56 GMT 1
Hopefully the new investment is not too far off, but if not you have to wonder how deep the chairman’s pockets are to keep putting finance in the club. Rather like the topic discussing the closure of restaurants in town the owners have at some point to take a step back and realise that while putting private finance into a business is quite a noble idea, in the long term it’s really a futile exercise that has to stop if the business model simply doesn’t work.
A drop down to league 2 would no doubt help to ease the playing budget and reduce costs but likely see other income streams hit as well, so there remains the reasonable chance losses remain - all be it hopefully a lot less than the £3 million last posted
I realise the money is going in as shares so in theory can be recouped if a sale takes place, but if no sale takes place the money is never recovered.
It’s good the board are willing to put their own money in but do fear it’s brushing aside the more stark reality that the overall business structure just isn’t viable - something new investors will no doubt be aware of too
|
|
|
|
Post by sheltonsalopian on Oct 2, 2024 12:16:42 GMT 1
It's only fair with the number of threads bashing RW that we get a thread saying thanks to him.
He obviously loves the club, he's just taken his eye of the ball in recent years.
|
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 2, 2024 12:30:14 GMT 1
bit like every penny of the £2 million from the sale of land to Lidl went into the club Legend Unless Wycherley owned that land personally, where else would it have gone? If the club/company owned the land then of course the money from its sale belonged to the club/company. |
|
|
|
Post by talkingoftheshrews on Oct 2, 2024 12:39:09 GMT 1
bit like every penny of the £2 million from the sale of land to Lidl went into the club Legend Unless Wycherley owned that land personally, where else would it have gone? If the club/company owned the land then of course the money from its sale belonged to the club/company. I suppose he could've taken money via a dividend from the club. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2024 12:55:47 GMT 1
Unless Wycherley owned that land personally, where else would it have gone? If the club/company owned the land then of course the money from its sale belonged to the club/company. I suppose he could've taken money via a dividend from the club. You're having a laugh 😁😁🤬🤬 The club hasn't paid a dividend to the shareholders in any year of Wycherleys time as Chairman. What we now have confirmed is that the 800,000+new shares issued a few weeks back have gone to the Chairman Ie 800,000 x £2,50 = £2 million Typical Sloppy Star,half a story,RW has converted his loan into shares,which probably will be worth more than £2.50p each when he sells the club. When he sells up he will go from "the man who has never taken a penny out of the club" to "the man who has taken the most out of the club" with one flourish of his signature on a document. He may be a Salop supporter but at the end of the day he is still a businessman first and foremost.Good luck to him and thanks for what he has done but some of you need to stop being so bloody naive |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 2, 2024 12:57:39 GMT 1
oops the Roland haters have spotted the thread and decided to trash it
|
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 2, 2024 13:02:14 GMT 1
Unless Wycherley owned that land personally, where else would it have gone? If the club/company owned the land then of course the money from its sale belonged to the club/company. I suppose he could've taken money via a dividend from the club. He could, but that would have given him a big income tax bill and all the minority shareholders would have been entitled to their share of the dividend as well. |
|
|
|
Post by hectord0g137 on Oct 2, 2024 13:04:41 GMT 1
What am I missing? Isn't it the team that's failing
|
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 2, 2024 13:05:29 GMT 1
I suppose he could've taken money via a dividend from the club. He could, but that would have given him a big income tax bill and all the minority shareholders would have been entitled to their share of the dividend as well. I wish someone would pay me an amount of money that includes a large income tax bill |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2024 13:24:11 GMT 1
oops the Roland haters have spotted the thread and decided to trash it Laughable 😁😁😁, point out to me which piece is incorrect I'm not a hater,I actually thank him in my post RW is a business man,an entrepreneur,he makes money for himself ( nothing wrong with that ) he isn't a saint. |
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 2, 2024 13:26:22 GMT 1
I suppose he could've taken money via a dividend from the club. You're having a laugh 😁😁🤬🤬 The club hasn't paid a dividend to the shareholders in any year of Wycherleys time as Chairman. What we now have confirmed is that the 800,000+new shares issued a few weeks back have gone to the Chairman Ie 800,000 x £2,50 = £2 million Typical Sloppy Star,half a story,RW has converted his loan into shares,which probably will be worth more than £2.50p each when he sells the club. When he sells up he will go from "the man who has never taken a penny out of the club" to "the man who has taken the most out of the club" with one flourish of his signature on a document. He may be a Salop supporter but at the end of the day he is still a businessman first and foremost.Good luck to him and thanks for what he has done but some of you need to stop being so bloody naive Very well said. Credit to him for making those loans to keep the club going, but what was the alternative? If he hadn't done it the club might have had to take out a commercial loan secured on the stadium at a significant rate of interest. Perhaps it might even have gone into administration if the cashflow was that bad. Either way, the value of Wycherley's investment in the club would have suffered. I appreciate him providing interest free loans but, if he had a sale of the club in mind, it would have been hard not to do something. Converting the loans to shares when sale discussions are taking place could be a shrewd commercial decision. If he hadn't done so, and the club was sold, the best outcome achievable would be that his loans were repaid in full. Converting the loans to shares presents an opportunity for Wycherley not only to recoup all of the £2.1m but also to make a gain on those original loans. If the sale price is more than £2.50 per share then he'll receive more than the £2.1m he loaned the club. Let me make it clear, before Pilch dismisses me as a "Wycherley hater", that I'm not criticising the conversion of loans to shares. The chairman's a shrewd and well advised businessman and, knowing what he does about the sale talks, he'll have an idea what the club might fetch. If it's more than £2.50 per share then he's made a smart and sensible move. If it's less then it's not so straightforward, but he might still minimise the loss he would have made if the loans wouldn't have been repaid in full anyway. It's good that the club no longer carries the burden of that debt and it will now be a buyer of the club who effectively repays it. But in the circumstances of the shares being sold soon, it seems clear that this should also benefit Wycherley. As I said I have no problem with that, but a little more realism and a little less "legend" nonsense is called for. |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 2, 2024 13:32:41 GMT 1
oops the Roland haters have spotted the thread and decided to trash it Laughable 😁😁😁, point out to me which piece is incorrect I'm not a hater,I actually thank him in my post RW is a business man,an entrepreneur,he makes money for himself ( nothing wrong with that ) he isn't a saint. ok, lets just call it 'spiteful' you win, thread trashed |
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 2, 2024 13:33:02 GMT 1
He could, but that would have given him a big income tax bill and all the minority shareholders would have been entitled to their share of the dividend as well. I wish someone would pay me an amount of money that includes a large income tax bill Me too. But my point was that if a £2m dividend had been paid (assuming the club had the reserves to pay it legally), £460k would have gone to minority shareholders. Of the £1.54m left for Wycherley, he might have had to pay around £600k in tax, leaving him with a net £900-950k. Very nice too, but a lot less than £2m. If you don't need the cash, far better to leave it in the company and take it as capital, not income, when you sell the shares later. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2024 13:34:10 GMT 1
A drop down to league 2 would no doubt help to ease the playing budget and reduce costs but likely see other income streams hit as well, so there remains the reasonable chance losses remain - all be it hopefully a lot less than the £3 million last posted I don’t really see how to be honest, given we’ve already savagely cut the budget we probably already have a mid-level league two budget. If we further cut this following relegation it’ll tell us as fans all we need to know. |
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Oct 2, 2024 13:36:09 GMT 1
You're having a laugh 😁😁🤬🤬 The club hasn't paid a dividend to the shareholders in any year of Wycherleys time as Chairman. What we now have confirmed is that the 800,000+new shares issued a few weeks back have gone to the Chairman Ie 800,000 x £2,50 = £2 million Typical Sloppy Star,half a story,RW has converted his loan into shares,which probably will be worth more than £2.50p each when he sells the club. When he sells up he will go from "the man who has never taken a penny out of the club" to "the man who has taken the most out of the club" with one flourish of his signature on a document. He may be a Salop supporter but at the end of the day he is still a businessman first and foremost.Good luck to him and thanks for what he has done but some of you need to stop being so bloody naive Very well said. Credit to him for making those loans to keep the club going, but what was the alternative? If he hadn't done it the club might have had to take out a commercial loan secured on the stadium at a significant rate of interest. Perhaps it might even have gone into administration if the cashflow was that bad. Either way, the value of Wycherley's investment in the club would have suffered. I appreciate him providing interest free loans but, if he had a sale of the club in mind, it would have been hard not to do something. Converting the loans to shares when sale discussions are taking place could be a shrewd commercial decision. If he hadn't done so, and the club was sold, the best outcome achievable would be that his loans were repaid in full. Converting the loans to shares presents an opportunity for Wycherley not only to recoup all of the £2.1m but also to make a gain on those original loans. If the sale price is more than £2.50 per share then he'll receive more than the £2.1m he loaned the club. Let me make it clear, before Pilch dismisses me as a "Wycherley hater", that I'm not criticising the conversion of loans to shares. The chairman's a shrewd and well advised businessman and, knowing what he does about the sale talks, he'll have an idea what the club might fetch. If it's more than £2.50 per share then he's made a smart and sensible move. If it's less then it's not so straightforward, but he might still minimise the loss he would have made if the loans wouldn't have been repaid in full anyway. It's good that the club no longer carries the burden of that debt and it will now be a buyer of the club who effectively repays it. But in the circumstances of the shares being sold soon, it seems clear that this should also benefit Wycherley. As I said I have no problem with that, but a little more realism and a little less "legend" nonsense is called for. Good post. I think the big risk factor is whether there is realistically an alternative buyer will to meet that £2.50 valuation or more My gut feeling is that value is more than the market is willing to pay - so without a buyer won’t more money need to go in and keep the business running, but at the same time make that £2.50 a share value far less likely to achieve - so you end up in a declining circle of putting more money into a business without making it more attractive to buyers A bit like the government subsidising a failing industry it seems like the right thing to do, but might be building up future problems and actually reducing the chances of future investment from new sources |
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 2, 2024 13:38:05 GMT 1
Laughable 😁😁😁, point out to me which piece is incorrect I'm not a hater,I actually thank him in my post RW is a business man,an entrepreneur,he makes money for himself ( nothing wrong with that ) he isn't a saint. ok, lets just call it 'spiteful' you win, thread trashed "Spiteful - showing or caused by malice" No, it's not that either. This thread is an attempt by some of us to discuss this financial move rationally and with some objectivity. Wycherley hasn't been trashed at all. I said that he appears to have done something shrewd and smart and, based on my partial knowledge of the circumstances, I think I'd have done the same. Good luck to him, no problem at all. Is he a legend for doing that? I don't see why. That's all. |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 2, 2024 13:42:34 GMT 1
ok, take you pick
malicious
cruel
vicious
hateful
nasty
bad
malevolent
despiteful
malignant
b***hy
virulent
bitter
venomous
malign
jealous
catty
poisonous
harsh
mean
vindictive
obnoxious
evil
resentful
unkind
hostile
vitriolic
envious
devious
contemptuous
acrimonious
snide
scornful
derogatory
rancorous
snotty
disdainful
disparaging
snakelike
unloving
mean-spirited
unkindly
scurvy
jaundiced
opprobrious
caustic
baneful
deprecating
baleful
scoundrelly
inimical
scathing
acrid
|
|
|
|
Post by DiglisShrew on Oct 2, 2024 13:55:55 GMT 1
Converted to shares, shareholding rises from 77% to 87%. Just a short step from achieving the magic 90% holding figure 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by DiglisShrew on Oct 2, 2024 13:57:46 GMT 1
ok, lets just call it 'spiteful' you win, thread trashed "Spiteful - showing or caused by malice" No, it's not that either. This thread is an attempt by some of us to discuss this financial move rationally and with some objectivity. Wycherley hasn't been trashed at all. I said that he appears to have done something shrewd and smart and, based on my partial knowledge of the circumstances, I think I'd have done the same. Good luck to him, no problem at all. Is he a legend for doing that? I don't see why. That's all. I took it as just correcting a potentially misleading (typically!) headline by the Star 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by Minormorris64 on Oct 2, 2024 13:59:24 GMT 1
ok, take you pick malicious cruel vicious hateful nasty bad malevolent despiteful malignant b***hy virulent bitter venomous malign jealous catty poisonous harsh mean vindictive obnoxious evil resentful unkind hostile vitriolic envious devious contemptuous acrimonious snide scornful derogatory rancorous snotty disdainful disparaging snakelike unloving mean-spirited unkindly scurvy jaundiced opprobrious caustic baneful deprecating baleful scoundrelly inimical scathing acrid Could that list be alphabetic please  |
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 2, 2024 14:04:14 GMT 1
Very well said. Credit to him for making those loans to keep the club going, but what was the alternative? If he hadn't done it the club might have had to take out a commercial loan secured on the stadium at a significant rate of interest. Perhaps it might even have gone into administration if the cashflow was that bad. Either way, the value of Wycherley's investment in the club would have suffered. I appreciate him providing interest free loans but, if he had a sale of the club in mind, it would have been hard not to do something. Converting the loans to shares when sale discussions are taking place could be a shrewd commercial decision. If he hadn't done so, and the club was sold, the best outcome achievable would be that his loans were repaid in full. Converting the loans to shares presents an opportunity for Wycherley not only to recoup all of the £2.1m but also to make a gain on those original loans. If the sale price is more than £2.50 per share then he'll receive more than the £2.1m he loaned the club. Let me make it clear, before Pilch dismisses me as a "Wycherley hater", that I'm not criticising the conversion of loans to shares. The chairman's a shrewd and well advised businessman and, knowing what he does about the sale talks, he'll have an idea what the club might fetch. If it's more than £2.50 per share then he's made a smart and sensible move. If it's less then it's not so straightforward, but he might still minimise the loss he would have made if the loans wouldn't have been repaid in full anyway. It's good that the club no longer carries the burden of that debt and it will now be a buyer of the club who effectively repays it. But in the circumstances of the shares being sold soon, it seems clear that this should also benefit Wycherley. As I said I have no problem with that, but a little more realism and a little less "legend" nonsense is called for. Good post. I think the big risk factor is whether there is realistically an alternative buyer will to meet that £2.50 valuation or more My gut feeling is that value is more than the market is willing to pay - so without a buyer won’t more money need to go in and keep the business running, but at the same time make that £2.50 a share value far less likely to achieve - so you end up in a declining circle of putting more money into a business without making it more attractive to buyers A bit like the government subsidising a failing industry it seems like the right thing to do, but might be building up future problems and actually reducing the chances of future investment from new sources Time will tell, but Dooley sounded optimistic in his interview and the Star talks of there being three interested parties. There are now 1,850,513 shares and their nominal (face) value is £4,626,282 (ie £2.50 per share). The June 2023 accounts show a net asset value of £10,878,286 on the balance sheet (which would equate to £5.88 per share). Now, the net asset value isn't what a company's actually worth, but it's often not bad as a first glance rough indicator. That net asset value is also 15 months out of date now. It's also true that almost all the positive value of the company lies in its freehold property, and that's not a readily realisable value. There are plenty of reasons why the sale price might be significantly below what the club appears to be worth from its accounts. The other big factor is the state of the market for football clubs and I have no idea about that. I couldn't see anywhere what Nordic Football Group paid for Burton Albion in June, which might have been a useful guide. Is Shrewsbury Town worth more than £4.6m? I'd have thought so, but we'll see. |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 2, 2024 14:04:20 GMT 1
;-)
acrid
acrimonious
b***hy
bad
baleful
baneful
bitter
catty
caustic
contemptuous
cruel
deprecating
derogatory
despiteful
devious
disdainful
disparaging
envious
evil
harsh
hateful
hostile
inimical
jaundiced
jealous
malevolent
malicious
malign
malignant
mean
mean-spirited
nasty
obnoxious
opprobrious
poisonous
rancorous
resentful
scathing
scornful
scoundrelly
scurvy
snakelike
snide
snotty
unkind
unkindly
unloving
venomous
vicious
vindictive
virulent
vitriolic
|
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 2, 2024 14:04:57 GMT 1
bit like every penny of the £2 million from the sale of land to Lidl went into the club Legend Because it belonged to the club? He's not an asset stripper. |
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 2, 2024 14:06:00 GMT 1
ok, take you pick malicious cruel vicious hateful nasty bad malevolent despiteful malignant b***hy virulent bitter venomous malign jealous catty poisonous harsh mean vindictive obnoxious evil resentful unkind hostile vitriolic envious devious contemptuous acrimonious snide scornful derogatory rancorous snotty disdainful disparaging snakelike unloving mean-spirited unkindly scurvy jaundiced opprobrious caustic baneful deprecating baleful scoundrelly inimical scathing acrid None of the above. You're being ridiculous. What has this board become when its controller seeks to stifle rational discussion with personal insults? |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 2, 2024 14:06:23 GMT 1
Good post. I think the big risk factor is whether there is realistically an alternative buyer will to meet that £2.50 valuation or more My gut feeling is that value is more than the market is willing to pay - so without a buyer won’t more money need to go in and keep the business running, but at the same time make that £2.50 a share value far less likely to achieve - so you end up in a declining circle of putting more money into a business without making it more attractive to buyers A bit like the government subsidising a failing industry it seems like the right thing to do, but might be building up future problems and actually reducing the chances of future investment from new sources Time will tell, but Dooley sounded optimistic in his interview and the Star talks of there being three interested parties. There are now 1,850,513 shares and their nominal (face) value is £4,626,282 (ie £2.50 per share). The June 2023 accounts show a net asset value of £10,878,286 on the balance sheet (which would equate to £5.88 per share). Now, the net asset value isn't what a company's actually worth, but it's often not bad as a first glance rough indicator. That net asset value is also 15 months out of date now. It's also true that almost all the positive value of the company lies in its freehold property, and that's not a readily realisable value. There are plenty of reasons why the sale price might be significantly below what the club appears to be worth from its accounts. The other big factor is the state of the market for football clubs and I have no idea about that. I couldn't see anywhere what Nordic Football Group paid for Burton Albion in June, which might have been a useful guide. Is Shrewsbury Town worth more than £4.6m? I'd have thought so, but we'll see. I tried to buy a shareholders shares last week he played hard to get, didnt give me a price, clearly wanted more than they were worth and in the end he fell out with me ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 2, 2024 14:08:23 GMT 1
bit like every penny of the £2 million from the sale of land to Lidl went into the club Legend Because it belonged to the club? He's not an asset stripper. I know, I just thought it was going to be a bit of an appreciation thread and a nice post to add ;-) |
|
