Jump to content

Crowd Funding For St Mirren


basher1981
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't know why the board wouldn't look at this by way of raising the funds needed to sell their share in the club?

They have 52%. They could easily create a crowd funding platform to sell their shares. It would mean real ownership of the club would be transferred to the fans / punters who chip in for some shares and their over valued share price would be achievable.

Look at Brewdog for example. Their first batch of crowd funding saw them offer 2% of their shares at £95 a share. I think it valued the company at around 10 million or something. ( might have been more)

The beauty is if they ( the board) don't achieve their target price in the set time scale then they don't sell one share. In fact the guys at the helm could still maintain some shareholding and be the initial board to run the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I don't know why the board wouldn't look at this by way of raising the funds needed to sell their share in the club?

They have 52%. They could easily create a crowd funding platform to sell their shares. It would mean real ownership of the club would be transferred to the fans / punters who chip in for some shares and their over valued share price would be achievable.

Look at Brewdog for example. Their first batch of crowd funding saw them offer 2% of their shares at £95 a share. I think it valued the company at around 10 million or something. ( might have been more)

The beauty is if they ( the board) don't achieve their target price in the set time scale then they don't sell one share. In fact the guys at the helm could still maintain some shareholding and be the initial board to run the club.

While I'm all for fan ownership we had the chance unfortunately it was well under funded. Before that Stuart Gilmour put out a share issue again well underfunded.

Going by these two factors it would seem a large section of our fans are not interested.

Anyway what about the rumour Man City are buying us up this week apparently before the end of ( pre ) season. Looking at my watch there is a few hours left

Edited by Isle Of Bute Saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With crowd funding you would be selling the shares to individuals rather than a group so the 52% majority shareholding would be lost and one of the other current shareholders would then become the majority shareholder. You have little knowledge of who would actually be buying the shares by crowd funding and could find that someone unsuitable pays for a large share and also starts buying the share from other shareholders in order to get the majority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With crowd funding you would be selling the shares to individuals rather than a group so the 52% majority shareholding would be lost and one of the other current shareholders would then become the majority shareholder. You have little knowledge of who would actually be buying the shares by crowd funding and could find that someone unsuitable pays for a large share and also starts buying the share from other shareholders in order to get the majority.

The only way it could be done is through SMISA - Again they were formed to raise money for the club then come up with the idea to purchase shares which the club said NO to. It could still be possible to have a fan buy out through SMISA but going by my post above not enough fans care about a fan buy out with 500 hours being the prefect example.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the last thing we need is a rag-tag approach to buying the club. Fan ownership imo only works as a partnership with a controlling interest person/body leading.

The german 50+1% model could serve us well... IF..! there is a group of suitably qualified/dedicated people prepared to front it for no more than a free seat and pie in the directors box.

What won't work patently is trying to get the fans to buy the club from the consortium and then being left with a debt and no working capital.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the last thing we need is a rag-tag approach to buying the club. Fan ownership imo only works as a partnership with a controlling interest person/body leading.

The german 50+1% model could serve us well... IF..! there is a group of suitably qualified/dedicated people prepared to front it for no more than a free seat and pie in the directors box.

What won't work patently is trying to get the fans to buy the club from the consortium and then being left with a debt and no working capital.

Raising the cash is a much harder prospect than finding someone to sit on the board which could easily done by vote. As I wrote above SMISA is the way forward with this. Unfortunately tried tested to failure every time cash has been tried to be raised.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raising the cash is a much harder prospect than finding someone to sit on the board which could easily done by vote. As I wrote above SMISA is the way forward with this. Unfortunately tried tested to failure every time cash has been tried to be raised.

IMO its the other way round.

The cash could be raised but getting not just anyone that wants a crack at it, but people with the skill set, time and inclination to be questioned about every tiny decision, and what their motivation is....

Those people are the hardest to attract, really who wants the grief?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO its the other way round.

The cash could be raised but getting not just anyone that wants a crack at it, but people with the skill set, time and inclination to be questioned about every tiny decision, and what their motivation is....

Those people are the hardest to attract, really who wants the grief?

So you don't believe SMISA is the way forward to 1/ organize the raising of funds , 2/ to find the appropriate people to be voted to board level.

I'm curious how you think the funding can be found when two previous attempts , one to raise cash through shares and the other 500hours fell well short of the target.

I'm all for fan ownership of the club and would contribute just feel it's pie in the sky with what I wrote above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you don't believe SMISA is the way forward to 1/ organize the raising of funds , 2/ to find the appropriate people to be voted to board level.

I'm curious how you think the funding can be found when two previous attempts , one to raise cash through shares and the other 500hours fell well short of the target.

I'm all for fan ownership of the club and would contribute just feel it's pie in the sky with what I wrote above.

You do realise its 10000hours, or am I being wooshed?

I don't see much difference between crowd funding and the 10000hours attempts anyway. As has been said, the shares need to be sold as a lump 52%, and 10000hours provided the means to do that, whereas crowd funding can't.

The problem I felt for 10000hours was that it wasn't publicised enough. Although I accept that it is difficult if the club can't get involved in publicising it too much due to conflicts of interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you don't believe SMISA is the way forward to 1/ organize the raising of funds , 2/ to find the appropriate people to be voted to board level.I'm curious how you think the funding can be found when two previous attempts , one to raise cash through shares and the other 500hours fell well short of the target.I'm all for fan ownership of the club and would contribute just feel it's pie in the sky with what I wrote above.

I didn't even reference Smisa..?

What Atkinson's folly proved is that the money could be raised from the support, businesses etc.... But leaves the purchasers with no working capital to then run the club on a day to day basis. Bearing in mind there is at least a 400k shortfall to be found every season.

What that debacle also proved is the fan base who were the on,y people to ever commit funds to the proposal! Won't accept a bunch of no marks with Fitzy nailed on for effect, to come in and run the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realise its 10000hours, or am I being wooshed?

I don't see much difference between crowd funding and the 10000hours attempts anyway. As has been said, the shares need to be sold as a lump 52%, and 10000hours provided the means to do that, whereas crowd funding can't.

The problem I felt for 10000hours was that it wasn't publicised enough. Although I accept that it is difficult if the club can't get involved in publicising it too much due to conflicts of interest.

Was making a joke as we ran short of raised funds.

At the end of the day would love to see us the fans control the club. It needs a leader to get is started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Real problem re sale is that any likely buyers will surely want at least 72% shareholding to assume overall control. In any event under Company Law an egm would be required if an acceptable bid is received by the Syndicate.

Who decides whether a bid is "acceptable"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not correct

Don't like to cover old ground but the fans had a great opportunity with you Richard fan ownership is the way ahead unfortunately for us not enough numbers took up the chance.

Have tried to explain above raising funds is not easy. Share Issue - 10,000 HOURS - Even SMISA in the early day's when it was needed only had a few hundred members. You should never say never I have my doubts for reasons given.

Best of luck in your guidance on the new venture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't like to cover old ground but the fans had a great opportunity with you Richard fan ownership is the way ahead unfortunately for us not enough numbers took up the chance.Have tried to explain above raising funds is not easy. Share Issue - 10,000 HOURS - Even SMISA in the early day's when it was needed only had a few hundred members. You should never say never I have my doubts for reasons given.Best of luck in your guidance on the new venture.

Point of order!

It was the fans, and only the fans who took up the chance in more than the minimum number required.

All the other forms of funds proposed never materialised......

The fans were there and ready.

Edited by Lord Pityme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point of order!

It was the fans, and only the fans who took up the chance in more than the minimum number required.

All the other forms of funds proposed never materialised......

The fans were there and ready.

Correct. How many fans do you think it would take to raise two million and within what time scale.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't see anyone else pony up th dough!

Heard lots of promises though, try swaping them for lager over the bar in the Tile.

Remember no money was taken from anyone. The 1000+ fans The Corporate and Community members and the bigger funders.

All were in exactly the same boat. £1.25m offered and turned down.

Nothing more.

We made errors but no one had tried it before. Those fans groups that learned from us have done ok by it so far

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember no money was taken from anyone. The 1000+ fans The Corporate and Community members and the bigger funders.

All were in exactly the same boat. £1.25m offered and turned down.

Nothing more.

We made errors but no one had tried it before. Those fans groups that learned from us have done ok by it so far

So my statement was correct?

The fans put up what was asked of them,

the shortfall on tabling a bid that would have been accepted, and the lack of any assurances as to how the ongoing cash flow deficit of 400 k each year would be managed was why it was turned down.

The club and the fans would have been saddled with an unserviceable debt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why the board wouldn't look at this by way of raising the funds needed to sell their share in the club?

Because Crowdfunding is a fad which is being overhyped.

The overwhelming number of people who try to get funding that way fail to attract any funding at all.

The likes of Brewdog do succeed but they are in a very tiny minority.

Quite apart from anything else, our club doesn't need money, it needs people to run it.

Crowdfunding won't give you that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...