Purchase / Cancellation of Shares.

[andyf5000]

Im not sure what this is but if it’s a share reduction it is the company acquiring existing shares (from current share holders) and cancelling them. The other side of the equation is that those shareholders would receive cash for the shares they’ve sold. Often done as an alternative to paying a dividend. Hopefully this isn’t the case or if it is there’s more to it and linked to an exit for the Americans which currently holding club back.

[thereichstuff]

Originally Posted by andyf5000

Im not sure what this is but if it’s a share reduction it is the company acquiring existing shares (from current share holders) and cancelling them. The other side of the equation is that those shareholders would receive cash for the shares they’ve sold. Often done as an alternative to paying a dividend. Hopefully this isn’t the case or if it is there’s more to it and linked to an exit for the Americans which currently holding club back.

How much would the Americans want though . A lot more than the £22 m we just received I’d imagine .

[andyf5000]

Originally Posted by thereichstuff

How much would the Americans want though . A lot more than the £22 m we just received I’d imagine .

I agree £22m doesn’t sound enough but who know what agreement has been reached. Normally these are pro rata rather than for the benefit of one group but if all shareholders agree it can be done for the benefit of one shareholder only. We won’t know until the full document is visible or an announcement is made but hoping it means a deal is close.

[Since 1968]

Originally Posted by Dorking .Eagle

I'd say buy the whole store, car park and petrol station, then do the whole ground properly and without any comprimises

Have you thought about the flats that sit over Sainsburys.

[dave_who_ru]

Originally Posted by andyf5000

I agree £22m doesn’t sound enough but who know what agreement has been reached. Normally these are pro rata rather than for the benefit of one group but if all shareholders agree it can be done for the benefit of one shareholder only. We won’t know until the full document is visible or an announcement is made but hoping it means a deal is close.

I doubt we will be any the wiser when the document is published.

When 127,750 B shares were allotted in January 2016 there was no indication of who took these up. In the actual accounts for the year ended June 2016 it states that a director exercised share options to acquire the shares at par for a cash consideration. It would appear they paid £100 a share i.e. £12,775,000.

On the basis the nominal value of each share is £0.001 we are talking about 23,800 shares being cancelled. Even at an inflated price of say £200 a share that is less than £5m.

EDIT: Sorry I have edited my numbers. Feel free to disagree.

[aj4england]

Originally Posted by Since 1968

Have you thought about the flats that sit over Sainsburys.

Have to wonder, why teams in London, where space is at a premium, would not look to rebuild the ground with inbuilt accomodation on site (i.e. private houses that can be sold/rented). Such is the geographical footprints of grounds these days, properties bolted on to the end, much as the ones on the Whitehorse Lane end currently are now, could be a fantastic earner for the club long term?

Obviously may be some obvious pitfalls that I am ignoring - any reasons why clubs dont do this?

[chatham_eagle]

Originally Posted by Since 1968

Have you thought about the flats that sit over Sainsburys.

There aren't any are there? Other than Crystals, I can't recall anything above.

[alanlee11]

Perhaps it's money to go towards the Arthur not being a third world death trap.

[dave_who_ru]

Originally Posted by aj4england

Have to wonder, why teams in London, where space is at a premium, would not look to rebuild the ground with inbuilt accomodation on site (i.e. private houses that can be sold/rented). Such is the geographical footprints of grounds these days, properties bolted on to the end, much as the ones on the Whitehorse Lane end currently are now, could be a fantastic earner for the club long term?

Obviously may be some obvious pitfalls that I am ignoring - any reasons why clubs dont do this?

The problem is you are in the same position as we are now when you want to redevelop. You have bits of the ground that are leased to third parties.

[aj4england]

Originally Posted by dave_who_ru

The problem is you are in the same position as we are now when you want to redevelop. You are bits of the ground that are leased to third parties.

No I completely agree - though in an ideal world where we were able to purchas all the land that the current ground, sainsburys, petrol station and flats on Whitehorse lane sit on, would as part of the rebuild include housing?

Out of town grounds like Leicester, Saints etc in recent years havent, but with London housing prices at such a premium, would it be something we would consider in the ideal world?

[Celestial Empire]

Originally Posted by andyf5000

I agree £22m doesn’t sound enough but who know what agreement has been reached. Normally these are pro rata rather than for the benefit of one group but if all shareholders agree it can be done for the benefit of one shareholder only. We won’t know until the full document is visible or an announcement is made but hoping it means a deal is close.

Aren't the rumours saying that Blitzer wants out, but that Harris is more neutral ?
Perhaps a new partner (found by Harris), to replace Blitzer ?
Could the Israeli business guy already be a minor shareholder ?

[Simple&Stupid]

Originally Posted by Billy Rhino

For £22m I'd expect to get the whole lot. Would be fantastic if it happened though.

There'd also be space to build the Wooderson Close replacement houses next to the existing properties that front Whitehorse Lane using the current Sainsbury's delivery yard.

[Dorking .Eagle]

Originally Posted by Since 1968

Have you thought about the flats that sit over Sainsburys.

The flats which front Whitehorse Lane? They won't be going anytime soon - The Mayor's office has a policy whereby any home demolished for a development has to be replaced like for like. Hence to get rid of the six 4-bed houses in Wooderson Close, Palace have to find a site within the Borough of Croydon which doesn't have permission, and put down at least six new (equivalent size) 4-bed houses

However what it looks like is paying off and/or a reduction in shares of one of the Yanks

[Stockport_Eagle]

Originally Posted by Dorking .Eagle

I'd say buy the whole store, car park and petrol station, then do the whole ground properly and without any comprimises

That's probably what SP wants, but unfortunately as well as a will the buy, there has to be a will to sell, which is probably the issue.

[ugly and fat]

Originally Posted by Dorking .Eagle

The flats which front Whitehorse Lane? They won't be going anytime soon - The Mayor's office has a policy whereby any home demolished for a development has to be replaced like for like. Hence to get rid of the six 4-bed houses in Wooderson Close, Palace have to find a site within the Borough of Croydon which doesn't have permission, and put down at least six new (equivalent size) 4-bed houses

However what it looks like is paying off and/or a reduction in shares of one of the Yanks

if Councilor Scott on the planning committee can build what he wants where he wants inc on green belt , why cant we??!!!!

[Chris Finch]

Idan Ofer is about to buy some of the club apparently?

[Billy Rhino]

Originally Posted by aj4england

No I completely agree - though in an ideal world where we were able to purchas all the land that the current ground, sainsburys, petrol station and flats on Whitehorse lane sit on, would as part of the rebuild include housing?

Out of town grounds like Leicester, Saints etc in recent years havent, but with London housing prices at such a premium, would it be something we would consider in the ideal world?

There are a few issues with that, probably the key one being the property would take space away from the infrastructure of the stadium e.g. concourses/bars etc. Then there's the practicalities of having a private property in the stadium e.g. access on a match day, noise, parking.

Although property is at a premium in London where do you draw the line with regards to cramming people in? Reduce the amount of parks? Knock down houses to build apartment buildings?

With the advent of online shopping why not just scrap the Westfield plans for Croydon completely and turn the whole of Central Croydon into a residential area? (I'm not advocating this but it will probably happen anyway).

The key to making new stadiums financially viable is to make them multi-purpose venues. Obviously things like conference rooms, wedding facilities are fairly standard but there are potentially many more dual-purpose ideas like external restaurants/bars/cafes, crèche/child care facilities, other sports in the stadium, cinema, online collection service, key cutting/shoe repairs

[aj4england]

I completely agree - however I didn't say cram them in, this would be part of a rebuild. Also, people purchasing/leasing the properties would be aware of the practicalities of living next too/joined on to a stadium.

[Norwich_Eagle]

Originally Posted by aj4england

I completely agree - however I didn't say cram them in, this would be part of a rebuild. Also, people purchasing/leasing the properties would be aware of the practicalities of living next too/joined on to a stadium.

It will not stop complaints.

[Nth Kent Eagle]

Originally Posted by Chris Finch

Idan Ofer is about to buy some of the club apparently?

He owns 30% of Athletico Madrid (according to Wiki). They can lend us some strikers.