Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagger Vance
I've mentioned the Wimbledon model a few times over the years, for two reasons. The duality of their share ownership and ability to leverage it to build capital sums when needed (see the £1.2m) and the full time direction offered by the key board members.
I've always felt a dual approach with a separate share class allows freedom to capital raise for larger projects (such as training facilities) but it needs a more pragmatic approach than the political purity of the current system.
Worth noting that on the Bryn thread the discussions re the day the fans raised the bond money. On that day with an hour to go we were short, a fan from London who was on holiday at the time but had been discussing investing as part of a duality scheme via the Friends of Wrexham group and the former Chair of the Trust (who was very pragmatic and pro duality) stepped in to underwrite the difference to ensure we made it. A group of minority shareholders who can be dipped into to capital raise would allow much greater financial fire power.
However its politically less pure and for this reason I see it being a non runner for the foreseeable future despite the fact £500k was identified within a week last time around from just 4 people when we were examining whether the minority group could ensure the ground came as part of the sale. If it wasn't countenanced to keep the ground then I can't see any other scenario where it would be acceptable to the hierarchy.
|
I never knew any nor this, I’m not sure I totally understand, but are you saying we could in theory have bought Colliers!!! Please God let this NOT be the case. I fear I’m about to see my arse big time!!!!