Quote: The Clan "You seem he'll bent on painting the share offer as negative!
There's been enough assurances and explanation for anyone to see that their £1K will either help the club survive or they can have it refunded in full if that's what they want.
Some people asked if there could be a tangible benefit to th offer and the club responded with a package of benefits.
As for a Trust being formed, who knows? I'm sure every avenue available is being investigated.
One thing for definite is that if the share issue is successful the current BoD will have ZERO, NILL, ZIP, NADA, NO INFLUENCE NONE!'"
I'm probably intruding on private grief here so apologies but my background and job is credit/financial analysis.
Firstly have looked at the admittedly old (31/12/2009) and abbreviated accounts for WAKEFIELD TRINITY RUGBY LEAGUE FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED they are a lot better than those of my club the Saints in terms of solvency and much lower liabilities which makes me wonder why there is a crisis as the club is only marginally insolvent. The club has no assets but the Saints are propped up by directors loan without which we would undoubtedly fold - the hope is the new stadium will give us something like a 50% boost in income as per Warrington dire did.
It would seem to me after examining the director's and current shareholders' other interests that that could easily if they had the will raise the money required by way of a new issue of shares or by shareholders loans. I know Sir Rod bailed the club out of the last crisis but what about the other shareholders? I apologise if I am wrong and unless something has happened since the last set of accounts they don't seem to have contributed financially.
You are obviously very well read on these events and a passionate supporter of a club with a very proud history; can I ask you - are the existing shareholders subscribing to the new share issue? If not, why not?
Assuming they are not subscribing the £500K if raised would only give the fans 49.6% control (assuming the new shares rank par with the existing shares). This seems a convenient percentage?
On a slightly separate point. I believe that if the RFL treated you any differently to Wrexham i.e. allowing new a change of directors and owners followed by administration followed by the purchase of the clubs "assets" and name etc by these same "new" investors who could blame "previously inherited debts", then you would have an excellent case for judicial review against the RFL. They cannot be selective in their treatment (at least publically).
