WST share percentage: have your say.

[Red_Jackoisback]

Originally Posted by LlayDragon

What would be the point of setting a fictious price on a public forum?

You could say that about any aspect of any debate. How can you say what percentage you would sell if you don't not know what it’s worth. What would be the point in selling any percentage unless it’s a worthwhile sum to be received?

I think people may be thinking we could get millions and not relinquish control.

I’m not getting at you just think some expectations aren’t well founded.

Do give us an idea do you think someone would invest significantly for the than 50% shareholding?

[LlayDragon]

Originally Posted by dragonspark

why is there no option for zero shares

Because it's not about full sale.

Those who voted for full sale on the other pole have made their views clear, black and white.

This is about drilling down for those who voted for some WST ownership, about how large a share ownership (and by extension how much influence and power) they would be comfortable for WST to have?

[Red_Jackoisback]

But how can anyone have a view without know what the sale is worth? If 20% is worth a million why would we sell more? If 60% is worth £1m why bother?

[LlayDragon]

Originally Posted by Red_Jackoisback

You could say that about any aspect of any debate. How can you say what percentage you would sell if you don't not know what it’s worth. What would be the point in selling any percentage unless it’s a worthwhile sum to be received?

I think people may be thinking we could get millions and not relinquish control.

I’m not getting at you just think some expectations aren’t well founded.

Do give us an idea do you think someone would invest significantly for the than 50% shareholding?

As I've already said I doubt anyone would invest any significant sum without gaining a controlling share ownership from it, so 51% or more.

Would you be happy with a group of strangers having control over a lump of your cash, with no legally binding say on how it's spent?

I don't believe there's someone out there who's going to come in and buy the club, then dump millions in. But bad use of big money is rarely successful, it's just wasteful. We don't have big money, but we also don't make good use of the money we have. Teams like Lincoln have shown that the good use of some money makes a big difference.

Clubs like Wrexham have to play the long game well, but at the moment it's short term thinking on an infinite loop. We need thought, care, professional practice, strategy, short, medium and long term vision. Then we need some money to drive it.

The problem is the club doesn't have those things and is just lacking the investment, it needs the lot. I believe anyone who knows their business would see this pretty quick, and would therefore insist on a controlling interest.

[Red_Jackoisback]

Originally Posted by LlayDragon

As I've already said I doubt anyone would invest any significant sum without gaining a controlling share ownership from it, so 51% or more.

Would you be happy with a group of strangers having control over a lump of your cash, with no legally binding say on how it's spent?

I don't believe there's someone out there who's going to come in and buy the club, then dump millions in. But bad use of big money is rarely successful, it's just wasteful. We don't have big money, but we also don't make good use of the money we have. Teams like Lincoln have shown that the good use of some money makes a big difference.

Clubs like Wrexham have to play the long game well, but at the moment it's short term thinking on an infinite loop. We need thought, care, professional practice, strategy, short, medium and long term vision. Then we need some money to drive it.

The problem is the club doesn't have those things and is just lacking the investment, it needs the lot. I believe anyone who knows their business would see this pretty quick, and would therefore insist on a controlling interest.

LD - I completely agree in that anyone putting in a big sum would want control and I believe a small amount won’t make a difference. Therefore all this change of ownership is a load of hot air. If we do want to get a high offer for the club then it’s got to be the sale of a controlling interest.

It’s just my opinion but I don’t think anyone will be interested in pumping in a load of cash to buy.

Organic planned progression is our way forward

[LlayDragon]

Originally Posted by Red_Jackoisback

LD - I completely agree in that anyone putting in a big sum would want control and I believe a small amount won’t make a difference. Therefore all this change of ownership is a load of hot air. If we do want to get a high offer for the club then it’s got to be the sale of a controlling interest.

It’s just my opinion but I don’t think anyone will be interested in pumping in a load of cash to buy.

Organic planned progression is our way forward

Planned progression is what the club does need, whichever label you choose to give that.

The club doesn't just need funding for players, it needs to funding for all those football related aspects which have been systemically neglected. But to that funding to it's full potential the club needs all those skills mentioned in my earlier post.

Those are not being shown by the club in this guise.

[dragonspark]

thanks for that explanation

[Wirral Red]

Originally Posted by Funny_Old_Game

Complete sale. I want someone new to come in and run the show top to bottom. These lot have had nearly 10 years now and we’ve got nowhere.

The people trying to sell Wigan might have a few quid spare.

[LlayDragon]

Originally Posted by Wirral Red

The people trying to sell Wigan might have a few quid spare.

Cheers for the bump.