Viking Supporters Co-operative

Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: bfdoncaster west on November 16, 2014, 04:14:23 pm

Title: shar
Post by: bfdoncaster west on November 16, 2014, 04:14:23 pm
why not vsc buy shar in  club
Title: Re: shar
Post by: Wellred on November 16, 2014, 04:42:44 pm
Would that be Eddie Shar or the Shar of Iran
Title: Re: shar
Post by: bfdoncaster west on November 16, 2014, 04:44:19 pm
why do you take piss
Title: Re: shar
Post by: esdailles left foot on November 16, 2014, 04:49:34 pm
Why can you spell correctly when you need to ???????
Title: Re: shar
Post by: eastender on November 16, 2014, 05:05:24 pm
Why did non of you u go to AGM and u wud no y.  :byebye:
Title: Re: shar
Post by: CJK on November 16, 2014, 05:06:50 pm
Half decent singer she was.
Title: Re: shar
Post by: RobTheRover on November 16, 2014, 06:32:20 pm
Guys,  enough.

BFDoncaster West, the VSC does hold shares in the club,  but buying more, certainly over the past few years, has been impossible. There have been no new share issues for some time (and the last few were only to allow the owners to put more money in without them being loans) so opportunity has been non-existant.

A current shareholder did contact us through their solicitor during the first takeover and offered us a large number of shares  but when we responded they never got back to us.
Title: Re: shar
Post by: Chris Black come back on November 16, 2014, 06:46:39 pm
Does Wetzel still own any shares? There was an agreement in principle I think for him to sell these to Sequentia Capital in 2013, but given the collapsed takeover, not sure this went though?
Title: Re: shar
Post by: RobTheRover on November 16, 2014, 07:00:59 pm
I'm not sure whether it went through or not, CBCB. 
Title: Re: shar
Post by: Boomstick on November 16, 2014, 07:34:42 pm
Guys,  enough.

BFDoncaster West, the VSC does hold shares in the club,  but buying more, certainly over the past few years, has been impossible. There have been no new share issues for some time (and the last few were only to allow the owners to put more money in without them being loans) so opportunity has been non-existant.

A current shareholder did contact us through their solicitor during the first takeover and offered us a large number of shares  but when we responded they never got back to us.
So why wasn't that mentioned during the first take over attempt?
Surely that was a very positive thing?
Title: Re: shar
Post by: silent majority on November 16, 2014, 07:58:15 pm
How is that a positive?
Title: Re: shar
Post by: nice one rovers on November 16, 2014, 08:00:30 pm
Why can you spell correctly when you need to ???????

Why does that worry you? Perhaps he conveys what he wants to say via someone else who types it for him sometimes. Grow up.
Title: Re: shar
Post by: Wiltshire Exile on November 16, 2014, 08:11:02 pm
Why can you spell correctly when you need to ???????

Why does that worry you? Perhaps he conveys what he wants to say via someone else who types it for him sometimes. Grow up.

+1
Title: Re: shar
Post by: Wellred on November 16, 2014, 08:37:14 pm
Why is it always a question but never an answer?
Title: Re: shar
Post by: Bentley Bullet on November 16, 2014, 08:42:22 pm
Trouble is there are more questions than answers, and the more we find out the less we know.
Title: Re: shar
Post by: Glyn_Wigley on November 16, 2014, 09:39:32 pm
Guys,  enough.

BFDoncaster West, the VSC does hold shares in the club,  but buying more, certainly over the past few years, has been impossible. There have been no new share issues for some time (and the last few were only to allow the owners to put more money in without them being loans) so opportunity has been non-existant.

A current shareholder did contact us through their solicitor during the first takeover and offered us a large number of shares  but when we responded they never got back to us.
So why wasn't that mentioned during the first take over attempt?
Surely that was a very positive thing?

For the same reason the current board and JR didn't do their negotiating in public. Business confidentiality.

And as nothing came of it, there was nothing to mention in the end anyway.
Title: Re: shar
Post by: RobTheRover on November 16, 2014, 10:11:26 pm
Correct Glyn.

Look guys, there are lots of things that go on in the background that we would love to report but cant for one reason or another.  We cant win sometimes.  If we let stuff like that out at the time then we wouldnt get taken seriously if it came down to negotiations, keep it quiet and release it when the dust has settled and we get pelters for not divulging every bit of info.