community and fan ownership of Accrington Stanley

[expatriate]

jeff, how many could that hold comfortably with seating ? thanks

[JEFF]

Originally Posted by expatriate

jeff, how many could that hold comfortably with seating ? thanks

Probably about 100 seated and room for another 30-40 standing

[Long time red]

All very commendable but before we own the club the person who currently owns it needs to be willing to sell. Who at this moment in time owns ASFC, by own I mean in who's name are the majority of the shares registered.

[Exile on Spencer St]

Originally Posted by JEFF

The upstairs room at Bold Street Club is always available

Haven't been in there since I saw The Strawbs in about 1969.
I don't suppose, purely in the interests of historical consistency, there's a room in Stanley Street available?

[DAV007]

as soon as a premiership club is taken over by fans, the whole league will be attracted to the idea and it will blossom.

[maccawozzagod]

Originally Posted by Long time red

All very commendable but before we own the club the person who currently owns it needs to be willing to sell. Who at this moment in time owns ASFC, by own I mean in who's name are the majority of the shares registered.

i've got to say that i agree with Long Time Red, the idea of US owning the club is very appealing, but the person who owns ASFC (or 51% + whatever is 'left over' from the share issue shambles) was unwilling to lend ears to the proposals made by ASSF when the club was practically dead in the water. Why would that change now that the club is in far calmer waters?

[shakermaker]

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod

i've got to say that i agree with Long Time Red, the idea of US owning the club is very appealing, but the person who owns ASFC (or 51% + whatever is 'left over' from the share issue shambles) was unwilling to lend ears to the proposals made by ASSF when the club was practically dead in the water. Why would that change now that the club is in far calmer waters?

Don't 'they' own 51% of a club indebted to Ilyas? Until they grace his palm with a lllllllot of cash, they have to listen, right?

[maccawozzagod]

< shrugs shoulders in wild abandonment >


on the positive side though, it is blatantly obvious that until the spectre of EW is banished from such conversations surrounding 'ownership' then the wider public of Accrington appear not to give a rats' about the club. The same could be said (to a lesser extent) about O'Neil.

The club had been measured up for its coffin this time last year, the townsfolk coughed up next to nothing towards its saving.

[expatriate]

hello Long time red and macca. sorry for the odd and delayed times for replying. i am still out in Hong Kong, and whilst you are snug as bugs in your slumberland duvets its bright mid morning here. I will be back next week, so there will continue to be odd times for replies till then - and its certainly not that i am ignoring you.

On the question of ownership you may have missed or not grasped the import of earlier bulletin board conversations on this precise topic.

However there is absolutely no impediment to the fans and community owning the vast majority of the shares. As a company that has many shareholders and many shares outstanding ASFC has no actual owner at present. In the past, whoever owned 5!% of the club tended to end up calling himself the "owner", which is both factually and legally incorrect. However, that is by the by, and i think that unless the "owner" has the capacity to both fund and bank roll the place as well as be qualified to manage on a professional basis, the end result is always disasterous. combining those two qualities is almost never possible. If you look at somewhere such as Chelsea, where only 1 person owns the club and all the shares, that person (abrahamovich), he also delegates the day to day running of the club to professionals (very highly paid professionals). There are more direct comparables in the lower divisions as well, but my view is still that its very rare for someone to have both the financial wherewithal as well as the requisite professional skills to run a club and make all the decisions.

Turning now to ASFC. There is no legal or other impediment to the club issuing as many shares as necessary to whoever it deems fit. for example if there are 100,000 shares currently outstanding, then it is a matter of record that either Mr Whalley or Mr O'Neil owns 51% of them. Certainly Mr O'Neil has claimed to own these shares for a long time, but no transfer has taken place to my knowledge. I have taken Mr O Neil at face value and I Have not been too bothered by the underlying facts since ownership of approx 51,000 shares is utterly and absolutely meaningless at ASFC right now. As someone pointed out, the documented creditors are the ones who control the club, and for a while last year that was HMRC !

Going forward I hope top achieve a wide ranging discussion about the structure and parameters that are important for ASFC with respect to community and fan based ownership. I certainly dont have all the answers, but I do have a determination to try and create a long term solution. The benefit of a public discussion that allows all of us to participate is that we have a chance to listen and learn from all differnent opinions. If we then build on that, and a community owned club can be created, then there is absolutely no impediment, and sufficient shares will be created to give that group the majority ownership.

There were many bulletin board regulars present at the last official shareholder meeting where a resolution to approve an increase in authorised share capital was passed unanimously, and i cant recall the figures, but that resolution (which is a matter of public record and therefore tansparent) is one of the route markers that allows us to have this discussion.

i hope this clarifies. as always shout loudly if you disagree or dont understand. i will try again. Its important we have this discussion in as open a manner as possible and i will do my bit.

Ilyas


Turning to your question

[VALAIRIAN]

Originally Posted by expatriate

There were many bulletin board regulars present at the last official shareholder meeting where a resolution to approve an increase in authorised share capital was passed unanimously, and i cant recall the figures, but that resolution (which is a matter of public record and therefore tansparent) is one of the route markers that allows us to have this discussion.

£200,000 Spings to mind Ilyas!!!

[expatriate]

valarian are you in Hong Kong ?

[Mr T]

Ilyas I'm fairly sure Valarian is in the UK!!

I also recall that the additional share capital voted on was an additional £200K to be used at the discression of the Directors.

[JEFF]

Originally Posted by Exile on Spencer St

Haven't been in there since I saw The Strawbs in about 1969.
I don't suppose, purely in the interests of historical consistency, there's a room in Stanley Street available?

What historical consistency do you mean ?

If you check the Club's history you will find that the present club was formed 'after a meeting at Bold Street Working Mens Club' and as far as I know the original Club was formed at the Stanley Arms, which has been closed for a long time now.

[VALAIRIAN]

Originally Posted by expatriate

valarian are you in Hong Kong ?

No, just got up early!!!!

[theresonlyoneaccy]

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod

i've got to say that i agree with Long Time Red, the idea of US owning the club is very appealing, but the person who owns ASFC (or 51% + whatever is 'left over' from the share issue shambles) was unwilling to lend ears to the proposals made by ASSF when the club was practically dead in the water. Why would that change now that the club is in far calmer waters?

Because we don't have a winding up order from HMRC, which values the club much more highly and he could possibly get a return.