Dons Set To Secure Multi Million Investment

[Reliablesource]

I don't really understand enough about company types so someone can correct me if I am wrong. My understanding of this is that the investors who we have lined up don't want to have to then make an offer for the whole equity of AFC, which they would be obliged to do with a plc, so turning AFC into a private company negates that and makes us a much more agreeable company to invest in?

You could indeed look at it like that. You could instead form a view based on what the Twitter zombies say.

[Ten Caat]

Daft question but how do you buy shares in AFC?

 

Club shop. Hang fire till after Easter and they will be significantly reduced in price

[boboisared]

Club shop. Hang fire till after Easter and they will be significantly reduced in price

Not bad.

[fine-n-dandy]

I heard the next plan is to turn AberDNA into a private limited company as well

[sooth_stander]

So, what will happen to the shares of all those who bought £250 worth back in 1995? If it’s a PLC, will the owners of those shares have to sell them, or phit?

[Tord31]

its going to mean very little change. its very difficult to trade the shares at the moment and something will likely be put in place similar

[strachanmcgheegoal]

No they’re just worth less. That’s the purpose of the takeover protection laws.

 

Say you own 250 and there’s 1000 in total. So you own 1/4 of the cake. If they create another 1000 shares which the owner of the other 750 buys he now own 7/8ths and by doing nothing your slice has gone down to an 8th.

 

As someone said above it’s an apparently positive use of the same rule that Dave King is using negatively to dilute out any huns who doesn’t tow the line (ie give him their money to fund his pipe dream). Including the club Tropicana mugs.

[Don Shula]

No they’re just worth less. That’s the purpose of the takeover protection laws.

 

Say you own 250 and there’s 1000 in total. So you own 1/4 of the cake. If they create another 1000 shares which the owner of the other 750 buys he now own 7/8ths and by doing nothing your slice has gone down to an 8th.

 

As someone said above it’s an apparently positive use of the same rule that Dave King is using negatively to dilute out any huns who doesn’t tow the line (ie give him their money to fund his pipe dream). Including the club Tropicana mugs.

 

Your example is very misleading min. They don't just create shares, they sell them so as long as it's for the right price your own shareholding value doesn't change.

 

Using your numbers. If the business was worth £1Million then your 25% is worth £250K (£1000 per share). They then issue another 1,000 shares for £1Million (at the same £1,000 per share) so your shareholding has gone down to 12.5% but the business is now worth £2 Million (the original value of £1M plus the new cash paid into the business of £1M) so your 12.5% is worth the same £250K.

[aberdeen1970]

Whereas with the Huns their shares are worthless anyway so extra share issues don't affect the value of their shareholding!

[minijc]

Yeh, what you took from it.

 

But like most things you say, everyone else can safely assume you're wrong.

I'll take a comment like that off of most on here but nae you, so stick to reporting on womens football after you failed at covering the mens game you piece of garbage.

[strachanmcgheegoal]

Your example is very misleading min. They don't just create shares, they sell them so as long as it's for the right price your own shareholding value doesn't change.

 

Using your numbers. If the business was worth £1Million then your 25% is worth £250K (£1000 per share). They then issue another 1,000 shares for £1Million (at the same £1,000 per share) so your shareholding has gone down to 12.5% but the business is now worth £2 Million (the original value of £1M plus the new cash paid into the business of £1M) so your 12.5% is worth the same £250K.

Aye but you’re assuming your investment of £1m pits another £1m of equity onto the bottom line (not a given) and you’re assuming your own share value is right ie. that’s what the new ones will be worth. That’s not usually the case.

[V for Vendetta]

So, what will happen to the shares of all those who bought £250 worth back in 1995? If it’s a PLC, will the owners of those shares have to sell them, or phit?

They still own them but can't trade them as easily.

 

And if more shares are issued then the existing shares are reduced in value (simplest way of looking at it)

[Don Shula]

Aye but you’re assuming your investment of £1m pits another £1m of equity onto the bottom line (not a given) and you’re assuming your own share value is right ie. that’s what the new ones will be worth. That’s not usually the case.

 

On day one of the new investment the £1M does go to straight to equity, what it is worth thereafter of course depends on what it is used for. I agree with you the key point is what share price is used to issue the new shares and it is that alone that determines whether the original shareholders are diluted or not. I believe they have been using £1 per share when issuing shares for the recent investments from Cormack and Crotty.

[Panda]

I'll take a comment like that off of most on here but nae you, so stick to reporting on womens football after you failed at covering the mens game you piece of garbage.

I cover both, along with a whole range of stuff. So you'll need a new insult.

 

I'll give you a few days to think one up.

[NEM]

HOW DO YOU BUY SHARES IN AFC

You gonna buy 5?

[Panda]

HOW DO YOU BUY SHARES IN AFC

Surely you don't need someone to answer this question?

[BWG]

I've got 300 or so shares. I'll sell you them Millerman if you make me a reasonable offer.

[Ten Caat]

I do

 

What number do you phone

 

BWG's moby…

 

In view of the recent news, you may not be short of offers by other shareholders very willing to sell you theirs ana

[Tord31]

egm tomorrow for the vote?

 

understand the document says next to nothing about there being an investment

 

bit of a non event when Milne and Cormack can vote this through themselves