Dick Knight Share Dispute - Unnamed Director offer £0.01 per share

[Thunder Bolt]

Yes. You said DK didn't offer shares to fans because the risk was too high, as if it was fact

If you say so.

 

[Simster]

If you say so.

I do. And clearly, I'm not the only one who thinks as much. Buzzer did too.

It's funny how you can be so defensive over how I interpreted your words, but it's ok for you to outright accuse Ben's Grandad of being Greg Stanleys MATE.

 

[cjd]

You know him personally or just a keyboard warrior?

I did meet him on a very few occasions...I personally found him very unlikeable and arrogant. However, that is not my issue with him.

He flew on Tony Blooms financial coat-tails for so long and yet seemed taken aback when Tony had had enough of him and his amateur "me, me me" attitude. If Dick Knight had his way we would still be run amateurishly by him,his loose tongue and equally loose tongues of the FFA team.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I do. And clearly, I'm not the only one who thinks as much. Buzzer did too.

It's funny how you can be so defensive over how I interpreted your words, but it's ok for you to outright accuse Ben's Grandad of being Greg Stanleys MATE.

Have you read his previous posts about it? The way he defended him was more than just a business colleague.

 

[Beach Hut]

If Dick Knight had his way we would still be run amateurishly by him,his loose tongue and equally loose tongues of the FFA team.

Harsh but fair

 

[Ernest]

I couldn't believe the arrogance of Tight wanting to hand over the keys to AMEX to Bloom, the bloke who paid for every last brick

 

[Beach Hut]

I couldn't believe the arrogance of Tight wanting to hand over the keys to AMEX to Bloom, the bloke who paid for every last brick

In the light of recent events I could

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

As to whether DK could have offered shares whilst he was chairman only applies to speculation over his motives for selling them now. Why is DK's motive for selling any concern ler alone the 'core' one.

As far as I am concerned motive is irrelevant - the simple fact is that he now wants to sell a few of his shares to fans who also want to buy them - also fact is that someone is trying to block that sale.

Any sale will have little if any impact on the club or current shareholders, as EP has pointed out, and will have zero effect for fans not interested in buying them.

No, all I'm saying is that it is a core concern when assessing whether DK is doing this because he really wants a share offering to fans, or for other perhaps less noble reasons.

Actually, the argument I would accept is that DK always intended a fan share issue once we'd got to the new ground. It was just that his ousting by Tony happened quickly and before that point. But no one has claimed that that was the case.

 

[Creaky]

No, all I'm saying is that it is a core concern when assessing whether DK is doing this because he really wants a share offering to fans, or for other perhaps less noble reasons.

Actually, the argument I would accept is that DK always intended a fan share issue once we'd got to the new ground. It was just that his ousting by Tony happened quickly and before that point. But no one has claimed that that was the case.

But what has DK's motive for offering shares for sale got to do with the current situation other than giving some the opportunity to argue over them?

Motives don't change the simple fact that he has done so and some fans would like to take up the opportunity of buying them. Whatever DK's motives someone is trying to prevent ordinary fans from owning a miniscule part of the club they support.

Is there anybody on here that really feels it is justifiable to deprive fellow fans this simple pleasure if they are willing to pay for it?

 

[Beach Hut]

But what has DK's motive for offering shares for sale got to do with the current situation other than giving some the opportunity to argue over them?

Motives don't change the simple fact that he has done so and some fans would like to take up the opportunity of buying them. Whatever DK's motives someone is trying to prevent ordinary fans from owning a miniscule part of the club they support.

Is there anybody on here that really feels it is justifiable to deprive fellow fans this simple pleasure if they are willing to pay for it?

Yes I do, I would sooner the ownership remains with those with money to do things as opposed to a few hangers on that would just whinge about catering etc

 

[Creaky]

Yes I do, I would sooner the ownership remains with those with money to do things as opposed to a few hangers on that would just whinge about catering etc

Oh well

I haven't noticed lack of share ownership stopping many from complaining about the catering -

 

[Beach Hut]

Oh well

I haven't noticed lack of share ownership stopping many from complaining about the catering -

That is very true

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

But what has DK's motive for offering shares for sale got to do with the current situation other than giving some the opportunity to argue over them?

Motives don't change the simple fact that he has done so and some fans would like to take up the opportunity of buying them. Whatever DK's motives someone is trying to prevent ordinary fans from owning a miniscule part of the club they support.

Is there anybody on here that really feels it is justifiable to deprive fellow fans this simple pleasure if they are willing to pay for it?

Well I feel that his motive is intrinsic to this and the key point of this sorry episode.

I agree that rank and file fans should have an opportunity to buy shares in the club.


But WHY has Dick changed his mind ?

NO share issues when he was chairman.

Yet he grizzles now that there are none when he no longer is

Is this textbook hypocracy

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Well I feel that his motive is intrinsic to this and the key point of this sorry episode.

I agree that rank and file fans should have an opportunity to buy shares in the club.


But WHY has Dick changed his mind ?

NO share issues when he was chairman.

Yet he grizzles now that there are none when he no longer is

Is this textbook hypocracy

There was obviously a lot of issues (not share, mind you) going back to DK's tenure that are slowly surfacing and one expects this is another. Whether the previous people involved (from his book) are the same as those now, DK does appear to be hellbent on stirring it.

From TB's view it is like an annoying fly that you can't swat, but he really does have bigger issues on his mind at present.

The club has advanced into a medium sized business from almost a cottage based one. TB has surrounded himself with his men, he would hardly want a few hundred shareholders, of various forms, to become unnecessarily embroiled in the fabric of the club. Most small to medium sized companies are owned and operated by a few people, the club is and shouldn't be any different.

The fans had the passion, Dick Knight had the dream, Martin Perry the vision, Tony Bloom the money.

 

[cjd]

Whatever DK's motives someone is trying to prevent ordinary fans from owning a miniscule part of the club they support.

Is there anybody on here that really feels it is justifiable to deprive fellow fans this simple pleasure if they are willing to pay for it?

Quite astonishing...!

One man (DK) owns a few virtually worthless shares.....and is causing quite a stir and bad feeling over them and clearly doing his usual very best to embarrass the club.

Now he would like to create a potential 270 people owning virtually worthless shares.....and you can't see any justifiable reason "to deprive fellow fans this simple pleasure"...hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

 

[Creaky]

Well I feel that his motive is intrinsic to this and the key point of this sorry episode.

I agree that rank and file fans should have an opportunity to buy shares in the club.


But WHY has Dick changed his mind ?

NO share issues when he was chairman.

Yet he grizzles now that there are none when he no longer is

Is this textbook hypocracy

I'm in no position to judge DK's motives nor am I interested in doing so - whatever those motives I'm with you in believing that 'rank and file fans should have an opportunity to buy shares in the club' if a shareholder is willing to sell ones they own.

On that basis I would have thought you'd be more interested in why someone is trying to block the share sale rather than why someone is trying to make it go ahead.

The club is missing an opportunity here - I would think there would be a market for framed share certificates at say £10 a throw on sale in the club shop.

 

[Creaky]

Quite astonishing...!

One man (DK) owns a few virtually worthless shares.....and is causing quite a stir and bad feeling over them and clearly doing his usual very best to embarrass the club.

Now he would like to create a potential 270 people owning virtually worthless shares.....and you can't see any justifiable reason "to deprive fellow fans this simple pleasure"...hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

It is those attempting to block the sale of said shares to fans that are embarrassing the club - if the sale had been allowed to go ahead then it would have been a complete non-story.

Those against the sale and using it as an opportunity to stir up ill feeling about our ex-chairman are the problem.

 

[beorhthelm]

It is those attempting to block the sale of said shares to fans that are embarrassing the club - if the sale had been allowed to go ahead then it would have been a complete non-story.

Those against the sale and using it as an opportunity to stir up ill feeling about our ex-chairman are the problem.

not so. by creating a small legion of minority, vocal shareholders he would create a constant irritating noise from a number of those shareholders who at time to time are unhappy. (cant please all the people etc). it does look like this was the intention, to create a constant irritant for the club. im dont want ill feeling towards Knight who saved the club, but i see no practical reason for the share offer to the public (especially as observed he rejected the suggestion when chairman).

 

[B.W.]

Yes I do, I would sooner the ownership remains with those with money to do things as opposed to a few hangers on that would just whinge about catering etc

Would they really? Seems a rather arrogant and presumptuous stance on your part: less money equals less to offer (assuming the new shareholders don't just want to frame the certificate and hang it on their wall)?

 

[B.W.]

There was obviously a lot of issues (not share, mind you) going back to DK's tenure that are slowly surfacing and one expects this is another. Whether the previous people involved (from his book) are the same as those now, DK does appear to be hellbent on stirring it.

From TB's view it is like an annoying fly that you can't swat, but he really does have bigger issues on his mind at present.

The club has advanced into a medium sized business from almost a cottage based one. TB has surrounded himself with his men, he would hardly want a few hundred shareholders, of various forms, to become unnecessarily embroiled in the fabric of the club. Most small to medium sized companies are owned and operated by a few people, the club is and shouldn't be any different.

The fans had the passion, Dick Knight had the dream, Martin Perry the vision, Tony Bloom the money.

Most companies have shareholders with small holdings, as well as major shareholders. Well, those that are floated. Why should the Albion, now it is being run as a business of reasonable size, be any different? I would say that, given the club's history, there is even more reason than normal for fans to have shareholder status. Dick, AND the fans, saved the club, after all.