Norwich City Supporters Trust

[Personal Trainer]

Hi lappinitup.

Re having enough shares to make an impact on our own, I doubt it, but as was shown in the Portsmouth scenario where there is a Trust that is an Industrial and Provident Society and a reasonable sized shareholder there is an organisation for other shareholders to coalesce around,

As was stated earlier in this thread, nobody knows what plans the majority shareholders have made for the future or if they might be pressured for some reason or another to find a buyer.

Don, t think I can add much more. I believe what we are doing is worthwhile , others think differently.

 

[TILLY]

As  Lappinitup has said answers from Mike seem to throw up yet more questions. The aim back in 2002 up until fairly recently was to place a fan on the board but a reply in this thread now suggests that the new direction as that seems not achievable is to purchase as many shares as possible in the hope of having a significant input in the event of board upheaval or financial problems. Well that is the impression I get but now Mike states that he doubts they will get enough shares to make an impact.

Confused.com.

 

[Lone Star Canary]

As was stated earlier in this thread, nobody knows what plans the majority shareholders have made for the future or if they might be pressured for some reason or another to find a buyer.

There should always be a succession plan.  ALWAYS.  My baseball team (KC Royals) has been wandering in the desert for 29 years in large part because the original owner died and his kids had little interest in the assuming the club.

 

[Canaryboy]

The link above takes you straight to a page on your website where a private individual is offering four shares for sale at £45 each. It begs the question: why hasn't the Trust bought them rather than advertise them when they are being offered at less than half price? Seems like a bargain to me.

Part of the negotiations with NCFC regarding continuing release of shares to the Trust was that the Trust would act as intermediaries for the Club to handle the number of requests they get for NCFC to buy back individuals shares (usually in parcels of 4) or for individuals to buy small amounts of NCFC shares. The Trust has to post them on the site for an agreed period of time to see if there are any potential purchasers before making an offer. NCFC Legal Dept. does however handle all share transfers as their part of this deal. 

This has confused me a little. You do a good job of explaining why those shares are listed for sale on your website, but Lappinitup's question (albeit probably a rhetorical question) remains unanswered. 

So, is the trust purchasing shares at £100 a piece from the club? 

This seems like a bit of a backwards relationship. You have to do the club a favour by agreeing to advertise cut price shares, in order to have the privilege of paying over the odds for new shares? 

If your aim is to continue to accrue as many shares as possible, then wouldn't it make more sense for you to purchase shares from existing shareholders at lower prices (such as £45 per share). 

When you made a substantial acquisition of new shares recently, after Tilly's organisation gifted you their remaining cash, wouldn't you have got more bang for your buck if you'd actively sought out shareholders willing to dispose of their shareholdings and made them an offer for them? E.g. £50 per share, half price? 

Does the trust need to purchase any new shares at all, with there being so many shareholders out there from the two big share issues in recent history? 

 

[GazzaTCC]

My understanding is, and I'm sure the TrustSec will confirm otherwise if I'm wrong, when the Trust was set up, it's objective was to inject (albeit limited) capital into the Club through the purchase of new shares direct from the Club.

Given that there was, and still is, no active market as such, for existing shareholders to trade their shares, should they so wish, this was the only real option available to the Trust.

The Trust was initially able to acquire shares at £25, and then £30 each. However, with promotion to the Premier League, the Club decided that it would only make new shares available at £100 each.

Given, as i mentioned before, that there is no active market for the shares, this really means that the existing shares can only be traded by agreement between parties, they're worth whatever price the two parties are prepared to strike a bargin at.

It is, in my humble opinion, highly questionable whether the shares are worth anywhere near £100 each.

Notwithstanding the above, the Trust has recently decided, after discussions with the Club, to offer the service to existing shareholders to be able to buy / sell shares, through its website.

The Trust has also taken the decision to be able to acquire shares from existing shareholders, subject to funds.

Whilst some of the observations above are perfectly valid, it remains the fact that very few shares are actually traded each year. Most transfers actually arise through bequests arising from death of recently departed shareholders.

 

[Personal Trainer]

Do you ever wish you hadn't got involved? 

For John:

I have tried to be honest in my replies but this means some parts of the history of the Trust have, unintentionally, been left out (or at my age, forgotten). 

For CanaryBoy:

One of the original aims of the Trust was to inject small amounts of capital into the Club at a time when the Club were launching a share issue in 2002 and later in 2004?, and to allow fans who could not afford the minimum share purchase of 4 shares to at least be represented as a shareholder via the Trust.

The Trust promised that £9 of every £10 subscription would go to the Club in return for shares along with any additional funds raised. This in fact barred the Trust from purchasing shares from individuals as such purchases did not provide "new money" for the Club.

As soon as the Club had got back to the Premier League and was in receipt of all the Broadcasting money and external debt was cleared it was time for the Trust to reconsider it's position. After much debate, with some Board members unhappy at the thought of subscriptions going to pay for individuals wishing to sell their shares for more than they paid for them, it was initially agreed that subscription income would continue to be used to purchase shares from the Club whilst money raised by other means e.g Royal Norfolk Show, Canary Challenge etc. would be used for share purchase from the general public. As always democracy means compromise and the agreement with the Club seemed to the Board to be the best alternative.

As a final personal view, I suspect the resetting of the the share value to £100 had more to do with the majority shareholders receiving a return for the years of not taking interest on their loans to the Club if there was a potential purchaser in the wings.. 

 

[Canaryboy]

Many thanks for the explanation, all makes sense.

Although the argument that you use to justify the clubs new £100 share price could quite easily also be used to justify a return on investment for individuals.

Shares in our club were hardly an attractive proposition in 2002 or 2004, and I suspect most people purchased without having ever realistically been able to expect to ever see the money back, and if you purchase a share for £30 in 2002 (or was it £25?), and sell it for £45 in 2014, are you really 'profiting'? 

I just used an inflation calculator to determine that £30 in 2002 is the equivalent of £43.31 now. So that would make £45 a fair price. 

Perhaps the trust could use such a calculation to determine the maximum that they are prepared to pay for existing shares, with zero real terms profit for the seller http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1633409/Historic-inflation-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html

If they purchased for £30 in 2002, and sold for £30 now, they would in fact be selling at a real terms loss?

 

[Canaryboy]

Just an idea, but would it be feasible if the trust established a scheme where shareholders could elect to automatically donate their dividends to the trust whilst retaining their own shares? 

Perhaps with dividends from all participants being converted into shares in the trusts name by the club? So shareholders effectively waiving their dividends, in return for the trust receiving free shares?

Don't know what the legalities of that would be.

 

[GazzaTCC]

Nice idea, although the Club doesn't currently (and is highly unlikely to ever) pay dividends on Ordinary shares

 

[TILLY]

The shares being talked about do not pay a dividend.

 

[GazzaTCC]

There is no right or wrong way to value shares that aren't actively traded and do not pay a dividend. The price has to be agreed between the parties and can (currently) be anywhere between £0 and £100 if you wish to buy new shares from the club.

 

[Canaryboy]

Nice idea, although the Club doesn't currently (and is highly unlikely to ever) pay dividends on Ordinary shares

The shares being talked about do not pay a dividend.

Forgot that.

All the more reason why it is fair for somebody to ask £45 then, if purchasing for £30 in 2002, adjusting the price for inflation.

Just like Delia's £100 share price potentially rewards her for interest free loans in the event of a takeover, those shares with no dividends are also effectively interest free loans.

Delia and MWJ could sell their majority stake without the buyer being forced to make an offer to all shareholders, that doesn't become obligatory until a single shareholder acquires 75% of the shares?

In the event that they did sell their stake they wouldn't ever be obliged to make the sale price public either would they? So we may never know how much they actually achieve, doubt it will be £100 per share though - even if we were in the Premier League. If we were a London club it would probably be a different story.

 

[TILLY]

Interesting to note that this same subject has opened up a debate on 'another' site with what appears to be a different set of posters.

 

[Beauseant]

"Appears" being the operative word.

It hasn't opended a debate, just been used as an excuse to take any negatives that have appeared in this (highly constructive) thread while conveniently ignoring any positives about the Trust. Ironically, given that this thread was set up to invite feedback about the Trust and how it can develop I note that the anonymous OP on the pink'un thread (although having claimed to have read this thread with an open mind) unilaterrally concludes that we are elitist, aloof and not interested in fans' opinions.

Anyway, thanks to everyone who's taken part in the debate on here and it's certainly provided plenty of food for thought. I'm just off back to my ivory tower now to laugh at the peasants......

 

[Lone Star Canary]

Ironically, given that this thread was set up to invite feedback about the Trust and how it can develop I note that the anonymous OP on the pink'un thread (although having claimed to have read this thread with an open mind) unilaterrally concludes that we are elitist, aloof and not interested in fans' opinions.

With a couple of decades of experience with organizations like this at various minor league levels/sports here in the states, I can tell you that this behavioral dynamic is not unique.  The organization is either perceived as a fiefdom by those who feel inadequate and left out, or it IS a fiefdom run by people for whom the organization is the highest station they will ever attain.  Either way, someone's always grumpy, but if it's the former and you're the person in charge, you just have to let the complaints roll off your back.

 

[Beauseant]

With a couple of decades of experience with organizations like this at various minor league levels/sports here in the states, I can tell you that this behavioral dynamic is not unique.  The organization is either perceived as a fiefdom by those who feel inadequate and left out, or it IS a fiefdom run by people for whom the organization is the highest station they will ever attain.  Either way, someone's always grumpy, but if it's the former and you're the person in charge, you just have to let the complaints roll off your back.

Wise words my friend. If I worried about this sort of stuff I wouldn't do it

 

[gerryinromania]

Thanks for all the info coming out. Must admit that although I had heard of the Trust, I didn't have a clue what it was about. Good reading here and learning, whereas elsewhere :huh: Many thanks to all the posters on this thread

 

[lappinitup]

Good reading here and learning, whereas elsewhere :huh:

You obviously haven't noticed but several posters on this thread also post 'elsewhere'.

This thread was actually started by a Trust board member and the trustsec was prepared to give answers (which is to be applauded).

In my view, if the Trust are going to use football forums to get their message across and guage opinions, then they should use ALL of them, not just the ones they find agreeable. A HUGE number of fans use the Pinkun and the WOTB plus the many smaller sites around, and whilst they have their share of idiots, they have many good posters too.

If the opening post had been placed on ALL the other sites and answered with the same honesty and courtesey to other posters as as been shown here, then i feel a more accurate assessment of fans opinions would be gained. Of course you would get some idiots but, as with every other walk of life, you simply ignore them.

Only by reaching out to Norwich fans EVERYWHERE will the Trust gain the recognition they yearn (and avoid the accusations of being 'elitist').

 

[gerryinromania]

Thanks for that Lappinitup. I can read and I do visit other sites, and I do tend to enjoy a lot of posters from wherever. I am well aware of the many posters here from other places

 

[Personal Trainer]

Hi Lappinitup

I have been posting on the WOTB as "trustsec" regularly for over a decade (usually get trolled!).