Daggers Ownership - More obfuscation?

[yozdagger]

It was mentioned to me that in the latest programme the ownership of the club is now clearly listed as being from our vowel muncher friends across the Atlantic.... with FC Sports Investments 2018 Limited (which has just changed it name to Victoria Road Football Ltd).

However, what I cant make any sense of is if the members still have the 26% we were told they do.... let me explain:

When GH "bought" the club a new company was setup: Dagenham and Redbridge FC 2017 Ltd. This company according to latest info in the programme eventually had a shareholding of:

38% GH
27% DB
26% Members
9% ST

So 100% total.... all good so far... (putting aside that apparently some of GH's shares were given to DB and ST for free to achieve this breakdown)

As a result 3 entries were made to companies house of notification of "person with significant control" which lists any person (or entity) that owns shares between 26%>50% (or 51%>74%). GH, DB and Members (via original Dagenham and Redbridge Ltd company).

Once the "sale" to the Americans went through.... TWO notification were sent to companies house:

• Cessation of GH "significant control" (i.e. sold enough to be below 25% or sold all)

• Notification that Americans have 51%<>74%.

But no mention of DB's shareholding of 27% being reduced/sold/diluted - he's still a person with "control" according to companies house.

Now, even assuming the basics.... that Americans own only 51%, DB 27% and Members 26%..... you don't have to be good a maths to see this is >100% - which is not possible.

So either DB's shares are sold/diluted and the club hasn't filed the paperwork yet (yet they filed all the others??) - or the share dealing is all a bit suspect.... have the members been [ahem] over? Also no mention of ST's shares.... basically if the Americans own 51 min and members 26 min then that leaves at most 23% between ST and DB. Yet no filing to say DB has ceased being a "control" shareholder? All very odd.

The club should come forward and explain the true shareholding, not hide behind layers of a company owning >50% of a company where an additional >25% is also owned by another company...

Discuss...

[Auntie Merge]

GH’s original shareholding was 58%. He reduced this to 38% to reduce his liability, ‘giving’ 20% to ST and DB. However, when GH sold his shares he sold the 58 % - the 38% plus he reclaimed the 20% from ST and DB.

What I don't understand is that Dave Ward is meant have completed his part of the initial sale, (when GH came on board) and paid over the cash but didn’t take his 5% shares. Who has these 5% shares? Have they reverted to the members?

[Mike the Dagger]

I understand that Dave Ward pulled out of completing his investment at the point Frank Butcher pulled out last December and the new company was formed, despite the club really needing the money. As a result, Ward's shares were never issued.

All the other investors paid up, despite it looking a hopeless cause at the time to try to see us through to the end of the 2017/18 season.

I don't think there is any secret here, but, I believe the current shareholdings are Members own 26%, Dave Bennett 12%, Steve Thompson 4% and "USA" 58%.

[Mark]

I don't think there's much secret either but would be good if the club were clear. The ownership bit in the programme was not well written!

[Mike the Dagger]

I don't think there's much secret either but would be good if the club were clear. The ownership bit in the programme was not well written!

"Daggers in rubbish at PR shocker."

[yozdagger]

Mike.

If the new share breakdown is right then something a bit dodgy has gone on....

Originally, DB paid 150k for 8.5% yet now has 12%? Did he put in more money?

ST paid 50k for 3% but now has 4%

GH sold 57% but yanks now own 58%

Seems like the 3 of them just divided Dave Wards 5.5% that he didn’t take between themselves for free. What happened to “give the members another 5.5%”?

Guessing that was just board BS then....can fans have their donations back?

[Mike the Dagger]

Mike.

If the new share breakdown is right then something a bit dodgy has gone on....

Originally, DB paid 150k for 8.5% yet now has 12%? Did he put in more money?

ST paid 50k for 3% but now has 4%

GH sold 57% but yanks now own 58%

Seems like the 3 of them just divided Dave Wards 5.5% that he didn’t take between themselves for free. What happened to “give the members another 5.5%”?

Guessing that was just board BS then....can fans have their donations back?

As noted, Dave Ward's shares were never issued so naturally the proportions of the rest would be skewed a bit, however, I don't know the details. It is entirely possible that the existing directors ploughed more in to help though. God knows why they would given the crap they get but hey.

Maybe ask at the next fans forum, or even give them a call to ask about it, Thommo will generally talk to anyone.

Of course then you couldn't hide behind a screen name and anonymity so... ;)

I donated, I certainly didn't expect anything back, I'd be surprised if anyone did TBH. Did you?

It was to keep the club alive. The club got about a third of the stated full target for the season and it kept it running from June to September, 4 months. Money well spent I'd say.

[yozdagger]

Still odd that when the shares “got skewed a bit” it only skewed in favour of DB and ST. Don’t see the members share getting a bump...

As for the donations.... the club said raise X amount over the season and the members get the 5.5%. They got as you say about a 1/3 over a 1/3 of the season.... on target..... then closed the “scheme” due to new owners... kept the money and didn’t event give a single measly 1% over.... at least hand over 1.75% as “a third”.

I don’t care about being anonymous... I’m Paul Hughes... usually to be seen drinking at the club with Imbirski or diggerthedog.

[Mike the Dagger]

Still odd that when the shares “got skewed a bit” it only skewed in favour of DB and ST. Don’t see the members share getting a bump...

As for the donations.... the club said raise X amount over the season and the members get the 5.5%. They got as you say about a 1/3 over a 1/3 of the season.... on target..... then closed the “scheme” due to new owners... kept the money and didn’t event give a single measly 1% over.... at least hand over 1.75% as “a third”.

I don’t care about being anonymous... I’m Paul Hughes... usually to be seen drinking at the club with Imbirski or diggerthedog.

Hi Paul!

Like I said, I don't have the details. Ask the people that do.

[Adrian]

Got to love a bit of pointless stirring.

The member share was set at a deliberate % and was given to them for nothing.
The split between the other original shareholders is essentially meaningless. They all paid for their shares and got what they paid for.
That would have been slightly skewed as a percent if one person didn't go through with their purchase. That won't mean anyone has been shafted in any way.

Hopkins decision to give his shares to others to reduce his control was a choice he had. I believe that the transfer of shares to the new owners was for a nominal amount so no-one has benefitted from how shares moved around.
Ultimately DB and ST have stumped up cash from their own pockets to own a share of a business which has a pretty minimal value.

The offer around the donations was an incentive to meet the full amount required. That wasn't met so no part of the incentive would get "paid".
That's quite right.

People wanting donations back are just a bit pathetic. The club needed the money and used it to keep itself going. Being bought didn't change that.

[yozdagger]

Lol... DB and ST help themselves to 4.5% of the shares already promised to the members... and that’s “pointless stirring”.

3 years ago this club was 100% owned by members.... ok it was a selling club but it was getting by.... cue all sorts of plans / investments ....all spunked up the wall by the people still on the board. Result: members are now minority shareholders and the club is in a far worse position.... yet the board “keep on truckin’” drawing nice salaries and now owning apparently 16%.

But yeah....that’s pointless stirring to bring up uncomfortable truths isn’t it?

[Mike the Dagger]

Lol... DB and ST help themselves to 4.5% of the shares already promised to the members... and that’s “pointless stirring”.

3 years ago this club was 100% owned by members.... ok it was a selling club but it was getting by.... cue all sorts of plans / investments ....all spunked up the wall by the people still on the board. Result: members are now minority shareholders and the club is in a far worse position.... yet the board “keep on truckin’” drawing nice salaries and now owning apparently 16%.

But yeah....that’s pointless stirring to bring up uncomfortable truths isn’t it?

What did Thommo say when you called him?

[Adrian]

Lol... DB and ST help themselves to 4.5% of the shares already promised to the members... and that’s “pointless stirring”.

3 years ago this club was 100% owned by members.... ok it was a selling club but it was getting by.... cue all sorts of plans / investments ....all spunked up the wall by the people still on the board. Result: members are now minority shareholders and the club is in a far worse position.... yet the board “keep on truckin’” drawing nice salaries and now owning apparently 16%.

But yeah....that’s pointless stirring to bring up uncomfortable truths isn’t it?

You haven't said anything that is true.
DB and ST have the same number of shares as they were supposed to have had to start with, but less shares were issued so they have a slightly higher proportion of the total. It's basic maths.

They've put their own money into something that a majority share of was recently sold for a nominal value. They own 16% of something that is worth the square root of not very much.

Any transfer of shares to the members was based on a condition which was not met. So they get nothing. That's how businesses work.

What salary is drawn by DB?

[yozdagger]

Sorry you are wrong.... if the 5.5% was merely diluted into other shareholding’s then the members would have got about 1.5%boost, DB and ST between them maybe 0.6% and the Americans the rest.

So how did DB and ST get 4.5% of the 5.5% available....

Let’s say there were 100 shares... DB bought 8.5 and St 3.

They need to convert to new shares but now only 94.5 are being issued so 8.5/94.5= 9% “new shares” yet he has 12%.... (st should go to 3.1% yet has 4%.....members should go to 27.5% but don’t move at all)

And Mike yes I will ask this at the next Forum direct to boards faces.

[Mike the Dagger]

And Mike yes I will ask this at the next Forum direct to boards faces.

That's great, I am sure the other 150 people there will be fascinated while you argue about the odd 2% of shares. Don't forget to ask about the clubhouse beer and the toilets while you are at it.

Out of interest, are you a Member? Did you donate?

This is interesting... http://www.murrellassociates.co.uk/news ... companies/