rea

I would assume not the way it would be structured. SMISA would have an obligation to purchase from GS for £x per share, if less money comes in then it just takes longer to buy the shares. This budgeting process is entirely separate from the Club budgeting, which is based on not spending more then you receive in income. The Club over the last few year (with the exception of the dome which WAS paid for by fans, so probably prove the opposite of your point) has never taking in any cash as a long term investment, only as cash flow cover (something which will still need to happen IMHO). So less money being available has nothing to do with SMiSA direct debits etc, less money will be available if the new owners and directors make a mess of the business, a risk no matter who owns it under any model. Now you could argue that the lack of "investment" (e.g more than 1 year debt) has led the Club to its current league position, but i personally believe that in the long term it is better to be relegated and remain solvent than to go into debt and risk insolvency. No Structural debt means you are in control of your own destiny, maybe i am just a control freak but that would be my preference

I dont Speak from SmiSA and i dont Speak for SD on this matter, all of the above is in the public domain

There will be thousands of pounds of legal and accounting costs. There was at Hearts in just writing the contract between Bidco and Fanco. Does each party pay there own costs or do they all go into a big repayment pot. There will also be stamp duty and lots of sundry stuff. A takeover even of thus scale will cost thousands if not tens of thousands. SMISA have already spent thousands on the finance report via SD

Ann Sold for around £30m Gordon was reported to have sold for enough to make him a millionaire, having been at both there Gaffs, neither are short for cash, though GLS football shirt collection is significantly bigger

Why...is because 75% control of the shares allow you to pass a special resolution, which could be nessesary under certain circumstances and a lawyer will always recommend you can control 75% of the shares when you come to try and take over a company. It is obviously upto the buyer if they decide that simple 51% majority is enough, but the lawyers will always want to if 75% can be counted upon.

I would suggest that if their Chairman has time to make a statement to the media then they should have time to email their members

Issue is you need all the share bought last year etc that would enable a new consortium to be in control of 75% of the shares, which is a key issue, 51% is just not enough for this kind of structure of deal. I looked at doing the deal privately after 10000hours fell through and then selling it back over time, but only 51% was able to be controlled at that time and so the legal advice was not to. FoH needed the 75% collectively also. Unless one grouping can in total start off with 75% then it is going to be difficult to make this sort of deal work

I think it is clear the shares will not sell for less than what was paid for them, if you want this ownership saga ended you will at least need to pay close to what it cost them IMHO

Perhaps now SMiSA might have a better understanding now of why 10000hours could not and would not let them share all the info we had with their members now. A bid team simply has to get on with it and be trusted to do the job, and then bring a deal forward for both voting (though it is not the voting for it that counts) and of course outwith SMiSA fan support, so long as they dont solely go down a community share issue route then the rest will come out when it is ready

I think the average paid for them was around the £8 mark IIRC so £800K for approx 97,000 shares would see everyone get their money back.....ish

Other way around i suspect. GLS buys the consortiums shares (maybe with a wee bit of saved or quickly raised cash from SMISA) that with KMG gives the New Consortium 75% of the shares which is what is needed, then SMISA over time buy 51% back off the New consortium...hey presto Majority Fan Ownership

Just like the 10000hours bid i am sure that this will not be possible. It would basically be illegal to do that sort of thing and in theory the only route open would be to pay a dividend on the shares that SMISA own say 51% but that would also mean paying the same dividend to the 49% as there class of shares are effectively the same.....time to find my share certificate!

Disagree, the fan base is large enough to support at least a bid of £800K. what is needed to support it is a lump sum cash input which is presumably what Gordon is bringing to the party.

Good luck to those involved, i hope someone within SMISA is going to be able to basically work full time on the bid and funding, in order to give the process the time it deserves, from experience it will need it. Who is the front man for SMiSA....who do i get to ask "what's in it for them"

.. a wee bit more than that...TBF thought i would suggest that any bid will be made up of a cash sum X say £500K followed by more over a couple of years say to take it to Y + £800K with an extra £200K possible depending on performance and transfers, which would then take it to £1m or so. Cannot see £1m being a straight up cash offer in one lump for a number of reasons

So the amount invested in shares has been what so far? On the basis that a loan is not an investment as it was interest free and returned in full

For what or is worth they are allowed to sell shares on but obviously it is not the company purpose.

£140,000 invested? Is that what has been spent on shares?

Merry Christmas... ☺

Not an enforceable right.The right to buy would only apply to groups such as CICs and CBS's

If the full extent of the proposals become law then an independent assessment would be made of the value of any majority shareholding put up for sale

Not fiction but if you have not read it you should, one of the best football bios i have ever read http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Fabulous-Baker-Boys-Greatest/dp/1780271743

i think it would be fair to say neither would have signed when they did if it was not for Brian, Teale in particular.

They certainly dont all have full time jobs away from the Club. All the best to BC, interesting times indeed

I did not receive an email either. However email [email protected] and he will send you info and check you are on the system for future emails