Dick Knights shares

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Master of spin!!

If his intention was to spread ownership why didn't he start the process when he sold the majority to TB? DK's mischief making hits the brakes and as Beach Hut said, it was just to help sell his book.

Same (and predictable) issue I'd have thought provided the Company Articles of Association haven't been changed (shudders). Many, if not all, of the shareholders from 2009 have retained their equity. it's just been progressively diluted by the conversion of debt (largely loans from TB) into new shares. Anyone one of them could instigate this, it certainly doesn't have to be anything to do with the Board.

 

[Goldstone1976]

Which company are these shares in? Thanks (in advance).

The club, ie not the stadium company, or holdings.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Knight did some great things for the Albion, and for that we all owe him.

I did find myself reading that book, however, and feeling that some of his complaints weren't particularly justified. Also thought it was a little "me me me" at times (I know, it's autobiographical, but still...). If I'm honest, there were moments when he came across as a little bitter that Tony Bloom was now the man in the limelight, the one the fans worshipped, and not him.

This current scenario isn't really improving my perception of that. It's all a little disappointing really.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I think that offering 1p for each share to Dick Knight is little short of insulting. We've poked fun at Palace and Pompey offering 2p in the £ when in admin, but surely the mystery member of the board can do better than that.

 

[Creaky]

The club, ie not the stadium company, or holdings.

BHAFC Ltd's shares are 100% owned by Brighton and Hove Albion Holdings Limited.

DK's shares are in the holding company.

 

[TottonSeagull]

Knight did some great things for the Albion, and for that we all owe him.

I did find myself reading that book, however, and feeling that some of his complaints weren't particularly justified. Also thought it was a little "me me me" at times (I know, it's autobiographical, but still...). If I'm honest, there were moments when he came across as a little bitter that Tony Bloom was now the man in the limelight, the one the fans worshipped, and not him.

This current scenario isn't really improving my perception of that. It's all a little disappointing really.

I have to agree with Edna, I found he came over very bitter in the book towards TB especially about TB being chairman! He did great things for the club but, personally, my perception of him went down a little after reading his book. The shares thing was a blatant publicity stunt against the club and to the sell book. All a little sad really.

 

[Goldstone1976]

BHAFC Ltd's shares are 100% owned by Brighton and Hove Albion Holdings Limited.

DK's shares are in the holding company.

You're right. Mea culpa - thanks for correcting my mistake.

 

[Buzzer]

I think that offering 1p for each share to Dick Knight is little short of insulting. We've poked fun at Palace and Pompey offering 2p in the £ when in admin, but surely the mystery member of the board can do better than that.

I bet it's not that far off market rate which if the case is patently NOT insulting. Also, didn't DK do rather nicely out of his sale of shares to TB when TB took over at well above market rate? If those are true then DK and his most ardent fans on here can have nothing to complain about.

And it's all perfectly legal and above board and common practice in business - to give first refusal on sale of shares to existing shareholders at market rate. It's DK trying to be tricksy by offering penny shares at a pound each to gullible or vanity punters and before going through the board as he was required to do.

The 2p Pompey comparison doesn't work. It's completely different.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I bet it's not that far off market rate which if the case is patently NOT insulting. Also, didn't DK do rather nicely out of his sale of shares to TB when TB took over at well above market rate? If those are true then DK and his most ardent fans on here can have nothing to complain about.

And it's all perfectly legal and above board and common practice in business - to give first refusal on sale of shares to existing shareholders at market rate. It's DK trying to be tricksy by offering penny shares at a pound each to gullible or vanity punters and before going through the board as he was required to do.

The 2p Pompey comparison doesn't work. It's completely different.

All spot on.

 

[Simster]

I think that offering 1p for each share to Dick Knight is little short of insulting. We've poked fun at Palace and Pompey offering 2p in the £ when in admin, but surely the mystery member of the board can do better than that.

I've thought long an hard about where I stand on this and have concluded that this is absolute nonsense. For all his past heroics, Dick Knight's behaviour has left a bitter taste in the mouth for many of us I'm afraid.

Isn't it nice of Dick Knight to sell his shares now that he isn't a major player anymore? Funny that he didn't want up to 1,000 randoms popping up at AGMs to ask awkward questions when the club was on *his* watch, instead preferring to surround himself with a handful of nose-tapping beardy-weirdy real ale yes men in an era where the club made little progress beyond plodding along in division three. I can tell you there were dozens of people who'd have love to ask some proper accountable questions at an AGM on his watch. Not least when the bottom fell out of the lending market and he wouldn't tell us where the stadium costs were coming from.

And yet now, according to Mr Knight, it seems it's OK for Bloom and co to field tiresome questions from up to 1,000 random fans, some of whom are bound to be utter bell ends?

[MENTION=38]Beach Hut[/MENTION] is absolutely bang on the money here. Bang on.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

in an era where the club made little progress beyond plodding along in division three.

It's difficult to argue against the rest of your post but this bit is factually wrong. Well unless you think returning to Brighton, obtaining planning permission for the Amex, removing Archer from the club once and for all and the odd promotion thrown in can't be classed as progress.

 

[Simster]

It's difficult to argue against the rest of your post but this bit is factually wrong. Well unless you think returning to Brighton, obtaining planning permission for the Amex, removing Archer from the club once and for all and the odd promotion thrown in can't be classed as progress.

Fair point, so I take that back.

We did make progress under Knight, but the fact is that off the pitch it was painfully slow progress. And despite wanting fans to help in all manner of ways, they were very reluctant to share all kinds of information - even stuff that could quite easily have been made public.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

I bet it's not that far off market rate which if the case is patently NOT insulting. Also, didn't DK do rather nicely out of his sale of shares to TB when TB took over at well above market rate? If those are true then DK and his most ardent fans on here can have nothing to complain about.

And it's all perfectly legal and above board and common practice in business - to give first refusal on sale of shares to existing shareholders at market rate. It's DK trying to be tricksy by offering penny shares at a pound each to gullible or vanity punters and before going through the board as he was required to do.

The 2p Pompey comparison doesn't work. It's completely different.

Agree with you completely although I think TB's takeover was facilitated by the issue of new shares - via the conversion of around £18M of debt into new equity. The convertible loan which enabled this (30M shares from memory?) was approved by the Board and appeared on the CH website about 12 months or so beforehand which, in my mind, somewhat undermines the contention that TB's involvement and/or stadium funding was any sort of last minute/panic decision.

 

[Giraffe]

i'm very much on the club's side on this. Dick really is not helping himself now. Just let it go. You sold more books as a result, just leave alone now. It was a pointless and futile publicity stunt by a man that comes across as increasingly bitter.

 

[Buzzer]

Agree with you completely although I think TB's takeover was facilitated by the issue of new shares - via the conversion of around £18M of debt into new equity. The convertible loan which enabled this (30M shares from memory?) was approved by the Board and appeared on the CH website about 12 months or so beforehand which, in my mind, somewhat undermines the contention that TB's involvement and/or stadium funding was any sort of last minute/panic decision.

We're in danger of going off-topic here but I agree with you until your very last point. My reading of the situation was that TB would make good the shortfall (I think that's universally accepted) and was in for £30m. What was never envisaged was that TB would end up paying for all of it and this was what prompted the regicide.

 

[dejavuatbtn]

It's not the people's club anymore. All those who saved the club from Archer and Co are now consigned to its history. Ain't money marvellous.

 

[Creaky]

Will be interesting to see what value the auditors do put on the shares.

They will have to take into consideration two factors - first the asset value of the company now that a lot of TB's cash loans have been converted to equity and that under FFP regulations future losses over £3m have to be covered by further equity purchase rather than straight loans as well as the potential effect of a successful planning application - secondly the 'market value' of the shares with one individual offering 1p a share and 262 offering £1.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I've thought long an hard about where I stand on this and have concluded that this is absolute nonsense. For all his past heroics, Dick Knight's behaviour has left a bitter taste in the mouth for many of us I'm afraid.

Isn't it nice of Dick Knight to sell his shares now that he isn't a major player anymore? Funny that he didn't want up to 1,000 randoms popping up at AGMs to ask awkward questions when the club was on *his* watch, instead preferring to surround himself with a handful of nose-tapping beardy-weirdy real ale yes men in an era where the club made little progress beyond plodding along in division three. I can tell you there were dozens of people who'd have love to ask some proper accountable questions at an AGM on his watch. Not least when the bottom fell out of the lending market and he wouldn't tell us where the stadium costs were coming from.

And yet now, according to Mr Knight, it seems it's OK for Bloom and co to field tiresome questions from up to 1,000 random fans, some of whom are bound to be utter bell ends?

[MENTION=38]Beach Hut[/MENTION] is absolutely bang on the money here. Bang on.

That question was asked at the Hove Town Hall meeting. As I understand it, Tony Bloom was already going to cover the stadium costs if the banks failed to lend, but asked Dick Knight to keep it quiet.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I think the point that is missing is that if Tony Bloom ever sells to a rich, foreign billionaire, then the shares could be worth more than a £1. It's a capital investment

I am pretty confident Albion will be sold on in my lifetime (the next 50 years)

Anyone buying (or trying to buy) Albion shares at £1 a pop as an investment, needs their head read.

If these 100,000 shares represent, as Dick Knight's e-mail suggests, a 0.15% stake in the club, then you would need the sale of the club to be well in excess of £70m to see any tiny profit.

Would you like to buy some magic beans?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

It's not the people's club anymore. All those who saved the club from Archer and Co are now consigned to its history. Ain't money marvellous.

Really?

So Dick Knight, Martin Perry, Norman Cook, etc are NOT still shareholders in the club, then?