Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2016 14:49:00 GMT
It astounds me that any share holder of our club should decide to make public these figures before our AGM, whether they be good or bad . There is no financial context for this figure but it has been put in the public domain . This is why these figures should be retained for the AGM to have an open and minuted discussion.about the finances of the club I have one simple question why has this been done ? It merely gives the club bad press at a time when we have crucial games which are so important for our season Yet this wlll deflect from the great season we are having and errode the much needed confidence that will be esesntial for us to move forward . At times I have to question the motivations behind such disclosures ??
|
|
|
Post by tommysermanni on Mar 23, 2016 15:18:28 GMT
I cant speak on behalf of anyone but perhaps it was done in the name of an old fashioned virtue called transparency ?
The fans have the right to know what is going on at Rovers.The fans ARE ARFC.
I would imagine a small proportion of Rovers die hards actually own physical shares in the club but that has not been for the want of trying to obtain some.
For years now fans have been asking to buy up redundant shares or to have a new shares issue to no avail.
Are you saying that these fans should be kept in the dark until our BOD's deems it an opportune moment for these figures to be released ?
If you are implying that someone has released these figures to derail Rovers season then that is just plain nonsense.
It will have no affect whatsoever as to how the team plays.I have met a number of professional players over the years and what goes on in the boardroom of their clubs is just about the furthest things from their mind.
The sooner the fans know the financial predicament of the club the better.Ignoring it or keeping it under wraps helps no one.
|
|
|
Post by Rovergrant on Mar 23, 2016 16:36:35 GMT
I do not believe the club is in a `predicament` - but I also believe no figures should be bandied about in the public domain until all shareholders have received the accounts and had an oportunity to read and digest. I also don`t believe for a minute that anyone has set out to derail the season. The share situation is a complex, legal and potential costly issue which could cost more to impliment that it would raise in capital - believe me I know when I say that as it was looked at many years ago by myself and the late Robin Marwick, Lawrie Cameron and others. Hopefully the present BOD may have a better perspective on this than we had then.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2016 17:14:49 GMT
Grant agree totally the discussion of a share issue is something that would allow supporters to have real power in the club. But I am aware that this is not a simple matter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2016 17:53:38 GMT
It appears that as of yet the accounts have not been accepted and agreed by the Shareholders, so there is nothing that needs to be transparent until that point. At that point the shares are sent to Companies House, bearing in mind they have already went through an independent audit by aditors approved by the shareholders, not the BOD, after all this legal process the Clubs accounts are open to everyone as a matter of public record.....what we have now is a figure without any substantve narrative and that could cause confusion, not clarity and transparency. The BOD do not decide when figures will be released, the shareholders and companies house do this, as a small business owner I too have to follow all these procedures. I had a minimal involvement with another Club and also thought the BOD was where the buck stopped, but it is actually the shareholders who have to ratify and agree to all the club accounts. As for the share issue, I hope it is possible as the more shareholders the better and that makes discussions like this mute, as shareholders we will all know and see what is happening first hand. Informed discussion is the best thing, at the moment we do not have enough information.
|
|
|
Post by Rovergrant on Mar 23, 2016 18:43:50 GMT
Agree, Charlie, I was a company director up until the end of last year. The problem the present BOD (or previous for that matter) have a shareholding dating back to 1919 and many of those are now untraceable. They cannot just write them off, that would not be legal. It has ben difficult enough to find enough `free` or transferable shares to give present and recent past directors even a nominal holding in the company. Until this issue is overcome, they cannot just `create` shares, even although I believe the BOD want to open up the club to investmnt via an expanded shareholding base.
|
|
|
Post by bucky on Mar 31, 2016 19:08:28 GMT
I cant speak on behalf of anyone but perhaps it was done in the name of an old fashioned virtue called transparency ? The fans have the right to know what is going on at Rovers.The fans ARE ARFC. Couldn't put it better myself. Question: who has a greater interest in the club's financial status and the general direction they are heading? The shareholder who doesn't contribute anything to the club but hangs onto the shares because one day they might get a return if the club goes bust and the ground sold OR the loyal fans who attends home games sometimes away games as well - who this season have been asked to pay increased costs in season tickets and gate admission and for the first time in yonks asked to pay kids through the gate. Shareholder confidentiality/ high morals/ false outrage/ adverse publicity - all these things are red herrings. Only thing worse is how any debate on this message board is stifled by the thought police. How pleasing it is that the Board of ARFC appear to agree that Albion Rovers fans are their greatest assist by opening the debate on the issue of new shares. It won't be straight forward but they should be commended on this.
|
|
|
Post by bucky on Mar 31, 2016 19:25:40 GMT
It appears that as of yet the accounts have not been accepted and agreed by the Shareholders, so there is nothing that needs to be transparent until that point. At that point the shares are sent to Companies House, bearing in mind they have already went through an independent audit by aditors approved by the shareholders, not the BOD, after all this legal process the Clubs accounts are open to everyone as a matter of public record.....what we have now is a figure without any substantve narrative and that could cause confusion, not clarity and transparency. The BOD do not decide when figures will be released, the shareholders and companies house do this, as a small business owner I too have to follow all these procedures. I had a minimal involvement with another Club and also thought the BOD was where the buck stopped, but it is actually the shareholders who have to ratify and agree to all the club accounts. As for the share issue, I hope it is possible as the more shareholders the better and that makes discussions like this mute, as shareholders we will all know and see what is happening first hand. Informed discussion is the best thing, at the moment we do not have enough information. sigh......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
ARFC AGM
Mar 31, 2016 23:24:39 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2016 23:24:39 GMT
May I ask where and when the agm will happen and can trust members like myself attend despite having no shares within the club?
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Roy of the Rovers on Apr 1, 2016 6:56:30 GMT
As mentioned at the start of the thread the AGM was on Tuesday and was only for shareholders or their appointed proxies. Trust members will of course be welcome at the Trust AGM which will (IIRC) be held by the end of May.
|
|
|
ARFC AGM
Oct 29, 2016 7:55:11 GMT
via mobile
Post by bucky on Oct 29, 2016 7:55:11 GMT
I wonder what has happened to all the Gilooly/Kirk/Savage cheerleaders now. Gone- absolutely nowhere
|
|
|
Post by rab on Oct 31, 2016 14:38:07 GMT
The share situation is a complex, legal and potential costly issue which could cost more to impliment that it would raise in capital - believe me I know when I say that as it was looked at many years ago by myself and the late Robin Marwick, Lawrie Cameron and others This is no longer true, Grant. Company law was changed a few years ago to make issuing of new shares easier and less bureaucratic. It boils down to whether the club and existing shareholders want to do this or not - in the recent past they have simply not wanted to do so. I hope this attitude is now changing and that new shares will be made available for those who have for many years wanted to purchase them.
|
|
|
Post by Rovergrant on Oct 31, 2016 17:16:03 GMT
Rab, please check your pm`s
|
|
|
ARFC AGM
Oct 31, 2016 20:46:47 GMT
via mobile
Post by bucky on Oct 31, 2016 20:46:47 GMT
New shares is one of a few things the club has got on the go in an effort to bring money- my major concern is these schemes demand a certain amount of money up front to get off the ground. That is money the club definitely doesn't have this now
|
|