| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values 10:02 - Mar 15 with 6075 views | itfcpaul |
Can someone with some knowledge about these things explain to me what value, if any, the shares would be worth if the takeover happens?
I always presumed they were actually worthless and would continue to be, when I bought my Debenture, but wondered if they would have any actual value after takeover?
Not expecting Bitcoin increases obviously........................ |  |
| |  |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:08 - Mar 15 with 633 views | noggin |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:02 - Mar 15 by PJH |
I thought it was a minimum spend of £200 but noggin has just said that they spent £100 so I will re-read what it says/said in the 'Own A Bit Of IT' brochure.
edit-it says offer price £20 per share with a minimum subscription for individuals of £200. [Post edited 15 Mar 2021 17:06]
|
Strange. I definitely paid 100. |  |
| |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:08 - Mar 15 with 631 views | WeWereZombies |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:02 - Mar 15 by PJH |
I thought it was a minimum spend of £200 but noggin has just said that they spent £100 so I will re-read what it says/said in the 'Own A Bit Of IT' brochure.
edit-it says offer price £20 per share with a minimum subscription for individuals of £200. [Post edited 15 Mar 2021 17:06]
|
Good to have that confirmed, exactly as I remember it. |  |
| |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:09 - Mar 15 with 627 views | PJH |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:06 - Mar 15 by PhilTWTD |
Having said what I said, I thought I ought to make a few calls and discovered things are not progressing after all. |
So that nice man with an American accent that phoned me to offer me £1000 a share for my 75 shares was not genuine? |  | | |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:15 - Mar 15 with 614 views | PJH |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:08 - Mar 15 by noggin |
Strange. I definitely paid 100. |
Well it certainly says in the brochure minimum subscription for individuals £200.
There were two share issues but I think the second one was only for existing shareholders-I got 50 shares first time and another 25 second time. | | | |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:36 - Mar 15 with 593 views | Durovigutum |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:08 - Mar 15 by noggin |
Strange. I definitely paid 100. |
From memory there was a collective offer of some sort that bundled up people who couldn't afford the £200 and allowed a larger share to be bought and split into £100 segments. I was stone broke at the time, so recall taking this route. |  | | |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:38 - Mar 15 with 589 views | noggin |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:36 - Mar 15 by Durovigutum |
From memory there was a collective offer of some sort that bundled up people who couldn't afford the £200 and allowed a larger share to be bought and split into £100 segments. I was stone broke at the time, so recall taking this route. |
That would explain it. Looks like mine were purchased from Ipswich First, rather than the club itself. | |
| |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:44 - Mar 15 with 581 views | PhilTWTD |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:04 - Mar 15 by WeWereZombies |
The plc accounts may not have been looked at if they do not form part of the takeover target but any transactions with the plc that are in the Club accounts or in other companies within the Marcus Evans Group should definitely have come under scrutiny during due diligence. So questions that have been asked as part of this process are, I suspect, behind the declaration in the letter to shareholders.
The other possibility I can think of is that it is some late in the day precautionary disclosure by Ensors and/or the Mark Andrews to prevent the general meeting in August getting bogged down in historical accounting events. |
You may well be right, that there may have been investigations from the other end. I'm certain the PLC board will have known nothing about the takeover deal, with the exception of Mark Andrews, who I'm guessing may well have known something from his Town role.
The issue raised in the accounts is well above my head, but seems to essentially date from 2008, so seems odd for it to have been raised now. |  | | |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 18:09 - Mar 15 with 550 views | Ryorry |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:06 - Mar 15 by PhilTWTD |
Having said what I said, I thought I ought to make a few calls and discovered things are not progressing after all. |
Oh dear. I wonder if we'll ever know the full facts. I'd like to think it was ME doing due diligence, but ... |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 20:34 - Mar 15 with 507 views | Ryorry |
IF the takeover fell through because ME wanted to protect the 12.5% shareholders (ie some of us fans) as he hinted at in his letter a few days ago, I really don't get that.
The shares are worthless both in financial terms, we're told, nor do they give us any practical clout either - it's not as though we had any say or a vote re the takeover. So what would the point be in 'protecting our interest'? I think most of us shareholders, if we'd been asked, would have preferred the takeover to have gone ahead, and relinquished our holding, which was only nominal anyway.
Thoughts? | |
| |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 21:11 - Mar 15 with 484 views | Radlett_blue |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 20:34 - Mar 15 by Ryorry |
IF the takeover fell through because ME wanted to protect the 12.5% shareholders (ie some of us fans) as he hinted at in his letter a few days ago, I really don't get that.
The shares are worthless both in financial terms, we're told, nor do they give us any practical clout either - it's not as though we had any say or a vote re the takeover. So what would the point be in 'protecting our interest'? I think most of us shareholders, if we'd been asked, would have preferred the takeover to have gone ahead, and relinquished our holding, which was only nominal anyway.
Thoughts? |
The plc shareholders would be a tiny factor in an overall takeover of ITFC & hard to believe Evans would turn down a deal on that basis, but a satisfactory sale of Town for him might be more about leaving his reputation intact than money. That having been said, he could cough up the money himself to pay off the minority shareholders. |  |
| |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 21:19 - Mar 15 with 477 views | PhilTWTD |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 17:38 - Mar 15 by noggin |
That would explain it. Looks like mine were purchased from Ipswich First, rather than the club itself. |
Yes, the Trust ran a share save scheme so shares could be bought in smaller numbers. | | | |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 22:02 - Mar 15 with 462 views | Ryorry |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 21:11 - Mar 15 by Radlett_blue |
The plc shareholders would be a tiny factor in an overall takeover of ITFC & hard to believe Evans would turn down a deal on that basis, but a satisfactory sale of Town for him might be more about leaving his reputation intact than money. That having been said, he could cough up the money himself to pay off the minority shareholders. |
Thanks, think you might have put your finger on it there re his rep. | |
| |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 22:49 - Mar 15 with 450 views | WeWereZombies |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 20:34 - Mar 15 by Ryorry |
IF the takeover fell through because ME wanted to protect the 12.5% shareholders (ie some of us fans) as he hinted at in his letter a few days ago, I really don't get that.
The shares are worthless both in financial terms, we're told, nor do they give us any practical clout either - it's not as though we had any say or a vote re the takeover. So what would the point be in 'protecting our interest'? I think most of us shareholders, if we'd been asked, would have preferred the takeover to have gone ahead, and relinquished our holding, which was only nominal anyway.
Thoughts? |
The Evans ownership era has clearly not been the best one in Ipswich Town's history but I am wary of this approach from an American consortium because:
i) I cannot discern who is really behind the takeover. I know Brett Johnson seems to be the mouthpiece but it is possible than one of the other names is the real driving force and has no more transparency than Evans.
ii) The intention is not to push Ipswich all the way to the Premier League but to use the club in a moneyball operation, much like Brentford have been used. OK, we might end up a division higher but we would be always the bridesmaid and never the bride as we watched players and managers develop and make a name for themselves at Portman Road before moving on to bigger things. I know that has always happened but the pace would accelerate and any hopes of a return to the early 1960s, the 1970s and early 1980s, the early 1990s or 2000-2002 would be remote.
iii) I thought Sheepshanks was a very decent chairman for us but one thing I didn't like was his 'fact finding' mission to the States when he came back with ideas to sex up our match day experience and all we got was a layer of falseness trumped out of the tannoy. Not that I have any idea how you can recreate the atmosphere that used to permeate a terraced Portman Road in the seated arena, I just think American owners would take us even further away from it.
Finally, I would prefer any future deal to leave me with my shareholding in Ipswich Town plc intact for sentimental reasons. It makes me feel connected to the history of the club and I don't even mind if it got diluted (I have placed it at a nominal value of £0.01 in my share portfolio for years) just so long as my name was on a list of shareholders in our club. | |
| |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 07:10 - Mar 16 with 418 views | trncbluearmy |
| ITFC Shareholders and Share Values on 22:49 - Mar 15 by WeWereZombies |
The Evans ownership era has clearly not been the best one in Ipswich Town's history but I am wary of this approach from an American consortium because:
i) I cannot discern who is really behind the takeover. I know Brett Johnson seems to be the mouthpiece but it is possible than one of the other names is the real driving force and has no more transparency than Evans.
ii) The intention is not to push Ipswich all the way to the Premier League but to use the club in a moneyball operation, much like Brentford have been used. OK, we might end up a division higher but we would be always the bridesmaid and never the bride as we watched players and managers develop and make a name for themselves at Portman Road before moving on to bigger things. I know that has always happened but the pace would accelerate and any hopes of a return to the early 1960s, the 1970s and early 1980s, the early 1990s or 2000-2002 would be remote.
iii) I thought Sheepshanks was a very decent chairman for us but one thing I didn't like was his 'fact finding' mission to the States when he came back with ideas to sex up our match day experience and all we got was a layer of falseness trumped out of the tannoy. Not that I have any idea how you can recreate the atmosphere that used to permeate a terraced Portman Road in the seated arena, I just think American owners would take us even further away from it.
Finally, I would prefer any future deal to leave me with my shareholding in Ipswich Town plc intact for sentimental reasons. It makes me feel connected to the history of the club and I don't even mind if it got diluted (I have placed it at a nominal value of £0.01 in my share portfolio for years) just so long as my name was on a list of shareholders in our club. |
Can't say I remember any americanisation at FPR after Sheepys visit but I do tend to take my place just before start of game and first at the bar at half-time.
100% agree on shares not worth a penny and do not care,they have other value.
I also have resevations about a takeover, the Evans deal is very good for the club, it's just his managing of it that is useless,perhaps he has learnt some lessons and things may change from now on. [Post edited 16 Mar 2021 7:11]
|  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
