Ipswich's Chief Executive Officer (CEO)

[dylanisabaddog 4,871]

@TIll 1010 I'm afraid that is absolute nonsense. The offer made by Watling to Chase and Smith /Jones had by law to be extended to all shareholders including me. I received the statutory letters offering to buy my shares which I refused. That offer valued the shares owned by Chase at around the figure shown in the accounts today.

You are not an accountant. Don't make statements of fact about subjects of which you have little or no knowledge or understanding. 

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

12 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

@TIll 1010 I'm afraid that is absolute nonsense. The offer made by Watling to Chase and Smith /Jones had by law to be extended to all shareholders including me. I received the statutory letters offering to buy my shares which I refused. That offer valued the shares owned by Chase at around the figure shown in the accounts today.

You are not an accountant. Don't make statements of fact about subjects of which you have little or no knowledge or understanding. 

Dylan, I am not saying who is right and wrong here, but I am intrigued by one point in your post. When Chase sold his shares to Watling we were not a PLC, so I am not sure takeover rules applied at all. And ditto when Watling sold to S&J. The accounts show Chase as having 48,000 ordinary shares in 1996.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

Yep. The only two letters I got from Chase were one to find out if I was dead and another to say with a third of the season left we could still make the playoffs. 

I wasn't dead. And we didn't make the playoffs.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,424]

I’m sticking my entire Ncfc share portfolio (4 shares) on an Arsenal win . I’ll have 6 shares by Saturday evening . 

Kerching . 

So long suckers . 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

3 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

Where in earth would you find one of them? I guess Stuart Webber would qualify. He's also expanded and grown our club. 

If you actually meant professional football owners then you'd be hard pressed to find anyone with more experience than Smith & Jones.

I like you Kenny but you'd make a rubbish custodian of a football club. You would be worth a few bob though 

I think I'm about to lose my house on Arsenal this weekend. If the worst happens could you lend me a couple of quid?🙃

I would indeed be rubbish... I'd definitely keep Webber even though he can be an **** at times. If I get rich I'll give you a free box at the home of football. 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Kenny Foggo

[nutty nigel 7,509]

8 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

I would indeed be rubbish... I'd definitely keep Webber even though he can be an **** at times. If I get rich I'll give you a free box at the home of football. 

We'll make it a PUPs box so hurry up and get rich🙃👍

[Duncan Edwards 2,220]

Really enjoying this thread. Interesting stuff and I might finally find out how much Watling Walleted. Tangy knew. Because if you know, you know. But I don’t. How much was it? 

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,424]

7 hours ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Really enjoying this thread. Interesting stuff and I might finally find out how much Watling Walleted. Tangy knew. Because if you know, you know. But I don’t. How much was it? 

Whatever it was , I’d stick it on Arsenal. 

[Jim Smith 2,314]

13 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Err, yes. The money originally paid by Smith and Jones to buy the club went to Chase for the value of his shares. None of it went to Norwich City. They later made loans some of which were converted to shares but Bob walked away with a small fortune in exchange for his original £60k investment. 

No Watling bought out Chase then sold to Delia and MWJ for an undisclosed sum (which is not rumoured to be in the millions).

[Jim Smith 2,314]

8 hours ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Really enjoying this thread. Interesting stuff and I might finally find out how much Watling Walleted. Tangy knew. Because if you know, you know. But I don’t. How much was it? 

I can’t find it right now but there has been one article somewhere with a rumoured figure which I think was either £300k or £700k. Someone posted it on an historic thread on here which you can no longer access. It was not fact though, not sure where the figure came from. 

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

11 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

Yep. The only two letters I got from Chase were one to find out if I was dead and another to say with a third of the season left we could still make the playoffs. 

I wasn't dead. And we didn't make the playoffs.

Yes, nutty. Not long before Chase was ousted he had launched a move to tidy up the share register, and in some cases buy back shares. But Dylan seems to be talking about something rather different.

Just to add, Dylan is wrong to say S&J bought the club by buying what had been Chase's shares from Watling. They acquired what was a minority holding and only became in effect the owners when they later converted loans they had made into more shares, to create a majority stake.

Edited September 8, 2021 by PurpleCanary

[TIL 1010 4,722]

17 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

@TIll 1010 I'm afraid that is absolute nonsense. The offer made by Watling to Chase and Smith /Jones had by law to be extended to all shareholders including me. I received the statutory letters offering to buy my shares which I refused. That offer valued the shares owned by Chase at around the figure shown in the accounts today.

You are not an accountant. Don't make statements of fact about subjects of which you have little or no knowledge or understanding. 

You are totally wrong as the posts by Nutty and Purple since i last posted contain all the facts surrounding what went on between May 1996 and late 1998.

Watling acquired the shareholding of Chase which was around 34% and there was no requirement by law to extend that offer to all shareholders as you claim and as outilined by Purple. You are muddled with what Nutty posted with regard  to Chase attempting to acquire shares from small shareholders in an attempt to gain more power under the guise of tidying up the shareholder register. He was successful in some cases but those people thought they were being bought back by the club unless tghe cheque dropped through their letterboxes made out by Chase's building company.

By the way any need for the pig ignorant last paragraph in your post ? I may not be an accountant with letters after my name but my knowledge of NCFC history is pretty solid whereas yours is littered with errors.

 

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

26 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

You are totally wrong as the posts by Nutty and Purple since i last posted contain all the facts surrounding what went on between May 1996 and late 1998.

Watling acquired the shareholding of Chase which was around 34% and there was no requirement by law to extend that offer to all shareholders as you claim and as outilined by Purple. You are muddled with what Nutty posted with regard  to Chase attempting to acquire shares from small shareholders in an attempt to gain more power under the guise of tidying up the shareholder register. He was successful in some cases but those people thought they were being bought back by the club unless tghe cheque dropped through their letterboxes made out by Chase's building company.

By the way any need for the pig ignorant last paragraph in your post ? I may not be an accountant with letters after my name but my knowledge of NCFC history is pretty solid whereas yours is littered with errors.

 

To be clear, I was not quite as definitive as that. If the Takeover Code did apply and this share sale was regarded as part of a takeover then a holding of more than 30 per cent would trigger the necessity to offer to buy everyone's shares.

But my suspicion is that the code did not apply and so this was regarded as a purely private transaction. Apart from anything else if the code did apply then all the shareholders would legally have had to have been informed not once but twice - when Chase sold to Watling and when Watling sold to S&J.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

8 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

I can’t find it right now but there has been one article somewhere with a rumoured figure which I think was either £300k or £700k. Someone posted it on an historic thread on here which you can no longer access. It was not fact though, not sure where the figure came from. 

You can just imagine the conversation..

"I've got these shares in the club that I bought from Bob. I've been trying to sell them for 18 months but there's no takers. Things are  getting desperate now. We owe 6.5m, the big stand at the side of the pitch isn't fit for purpose, we've just spunked the best part of a million to Wolves for a striker who couldn't score in a brothel and we're headed towards the third division."

"We'll give you what you paid Bob, we'd hate to see a City fan lose out"

"Brilliant! Thank you both. The cash will come in handy because I have a great investment opportunity for jumbo bog rolls in Six Mile Bottom."

 

 

 

[TIL 1010 4,722]

2 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

To be clear, I was not quite as definitive as that. If the Takeover Code did apply and this share sale was regarded as part of a takeover then a holding of more than 30 per cent would trigger the necessity to offer to buy everyone's shares.

But my suspicion is that the code did not apply and so this was regarded as a purely private transaction. Apart from anything else if the code did apply then all the shareholders would legally have had to have been informed not once but twice - when Chase sold to Watling and when Watling sold to S&J.

Chase owned a minority shareholding of 34% Purple as i stated earlier and still has retained some shares to this day so maybe that is what kept the purchase by Watling at less than 30 per cent  but as sure as night follows day there was not a takeover that involved all shareholders being notified. I hold that what dylan is talking about is when Chase was tidying up the shareholder register and attempted to ascertain who was alive or dead and then his attempt to hoover up small parcels for himself from those who indicated they would sell. Those are the letters that dylan refers to.

Edited September 8, 2021 by TIL 1010

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

17 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

Chase owned a minority shareholding of 34% Purple as i stated earlier and still has retained some shares to this day so maybe that is what kept the purchase by Watling at less than 30 per cent  but as sure as night follows day there was not a takeover that involved all shareholders being notified. I hold that what dylan is talking about is when Chase was tidying up the shareholder register and attempted to ascertain who was alive or dead and then his attempt to hoover up small parcels for himself from those who indicated they would sell. Those are the letters that dylan refers to.

I think that is likely to be the case, but without Dylan coming back with more information one cannot be certain.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

cancel

 

 

Edited September 9, 2021 by TeemuVanBasten

[TIL 1010 4,722]

21 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

I think that is likely to be the case, but without Dylan coming back with more information one cannot be certain.

Exactly and it isn't as if he has not been around since his last post on this thread.

[GMF 736]

23 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

I think that is likely to be the case, but without Dylan coming back with more information one cannot be certain.

There’s absolutely no evidence, either from the accounts, or in share transfers to support that the takeover code (which, in its current form actually dates from 2006) applied at the time. In fact, I’m sure that we can conclude with near 100% certainty that it did not.

One other observation, Chase actually owned just over 48,000 ordinary shares in December 1995. Back then, the Club had allocated just over 141,000 ordinary shares in total, so Chase’s holding of 34% was of a much smaller figure.

[essex canary 492]

14 minutes ago, GMF said:

There’s absolutely no evidence, either from the accounts, or in share transfers to support that the takeover code (which, in its current form actually dates from 2006) applied at the time. In fact, I’m sure that we can conclude with near 100% certainty that it did not.

One other observation, Chase actually owned just over 48,000 ordinary shares in December 1995. Back then, the Club had allocated just over 141,000 ordinary shares in total, so Chase’s holding of 34% was of a much smaller figure.

...and 18 months later by June 1997 there were still 141,000 ordinary shares in total of which at that time S&J owed 200 plus had introduced £1 million in the Club in loan capital. Perhaps they paid a large price for 200 shares in a private transaction? Hard to believe though that that would be material when evaluating their overall input now which appears to be around £7.6 million according to the last set of accounts plus whatever value could reasonably be assigned to the sizeable loan now paid back between 2009 and 2016 plus other small gifts and benefits.

[essex canary 492]

...Just looking at the 1997-98 Accounts. S&J acquired approx 165.,000 shares in that year. Other information contained therein suggests that nearly 48,000 of these were acquired by loan conversion from the original £1 million and that around 59,000 were acquired by transfer from Geoffry Watling leaving another 58,000 or so newly acquired at the then purchase price of £18.50. 

The unknown is then whether the 59,000 acquiredvfrom Geoffrey Watling traded at a somewhat higher price than £18.50 due to whatever had been paid previously to Robert Chase to acquire his holdings.

[GMF 736]

4 hours ago, essex canary said:

...and 18 months later by June 1997 there were still 141,000 ordinary shares in total of which at that time S&J owed 200 plus had introduced £1 million in the Club in loan capital. Perhaps they paid a large price for 200 shares in a private transaction? Hard to believe though that that would be material when evaluating their overall input now which appears to be around £7.6 million according to the last set of accounts plus whatever value could reasonably be assigned to the sizeable loan now paid back between 2009 and 2016 plus other small gifts and benefits.

I suspect that you already know how much D&M paid for their 100 ordinary shares, given the Club's long established practice, stretching back over many years, for new directors to acquire the minimum 100 ordinary share holding at notional value. 

[GMF 736]

14 minutes ago, essex canary said:

The unknown is then whether the 59,000 acquired from Geoffrey Watling traded at a somewhat higher price than £18.50 due to whatever had been paid previously to Robert Chase to acquire his holdings.

I'm not sure why this is such a big deal, given the passage of time?

In the year to 31 December 1995, the Club was buying back its ordinary shares at £12.00 each and, by 1997, new shares were being allocated at £18.50 each.

If Geoffrey Watling did acquire Chase's shares at a relatively low price and turn them on to D&M at a higher price (and there's absolutely no evidence to suggest that he did) fair play to him, given all he'd done for the Club over the years.

In the same context, ditto for D&M if they subsequently acquired them from Geoffrey for less than £18.50, especially given the state the Club was in at the time. 

[essex canary 492]

49 minutes ago, GMF said:

I'm not sure why this is such a big deal, given the passage of time?

In the year to 31 December 1995, the Club was buying back its ordinary shares at £12.00 each and, by 1997, new shares were being allocated at £18.50 each.

If Geoffrey Watling did acquire Chase's shares at a relatively low price and turn them on to D&M at a higher price (and there's absolutely no evidence to suggest that he did) fair play to him, given all he'd done for the Club over the years.

In the same context, ditto for D&M if they subsequently acquired them from Geoffrey for less than £18.50, especially given the state the Club was in at the time. 

Agreed that it doesn't really seem to be a big deal. The debate earlier on in this thread was how much D&M had actually invested in the Club in hard cash. There was a suggestion of £12 million. I have subsequently suggested that it looks like £7.6 million. Then there were 2 other issues that have been raised concerning the loan between 2009 and 2016 and this one suggesting that perhaps there was a higher transaction price to shares initially acquired. Maybe these could possibly be deemed to add a little to the £7.6 million figure but I doubt by much. To the extent that the question is relevant we look to be in the ballpark.

 

[TIL 1010 4,722]

2 hours ago, essex canary said:

 

The unknown is then whether the 59,000 acquiredvfrom Geoffrey Watling traded at a somewhat higher price than £18.50 due to whatever had been paid previously to Robert Chase to acquire his holdings.

Several million in total if dylan is to be believed. 😜

[GMF 736]

3 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Several million in total if dylan is to be believed. 😜

Just for a bit of fun, of course, £1,000,000 divided by 48,000 shares is just over £20.00 each! 😜

[TIL 1010 4,722]

45 minutes ago, GMF said:

Just for a bit of fun, of course, £1,000,000 divided by 48,000 shares is just over £20.00 each! 😜

£1,000,000 is not ' several million ' as was the claim. 😂

[cornish sam 944]

3 hours ago, essex canary said:

Agreed that it doesn't really seem to be a big deal. The debate earlier on in this thread was how much D&M had actually invested in the Club in hard cash. There was a suggestion of £12 million. I have subsequently suggested that it looks like £7.6 million. Then there were 2 other issues that have been raised concerning the loan between 2009 and 2016 and this one suggesting that perhaps there was a higher transaction price to shares initially acquired. Maybe these could possibly be deemed to add a little to the £7.6 million figure but I doubt by much. To the extent that the question is relevant we look to be in the ballpark.

 

With my suggestion of £12m I did caveat that with a from memory, which was obviously flawed, so ignore that (could it have been £12m including the loans they have had back?).

One thing I did mean to ask though, is didn't the turner's have shares whilst they were here? If so what happened to those? Not that it actually matters any...

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

23 minutes ago, cornish sam said:

With my suggestion of £12m I did caveat that with a from memory, which was obviously flawed, so ignore that (could it have been £12m including the loans they have had back?).

One thing I did mean to ask though, is didn't the turner's have shares whilst they were here? If so what happened to those? Not that it actually matters any...

The Turners had 100 shares each plus 5,000 jointly. I am not sure your rough £12m figure is that flawed. My memory is that Delia has said it comes to that kind of figure, within  a million or so.

[BigFish 1,986]

I think I may have started this instance of the S&J debate with a curt post aimed at @Kenny Foggo for which I apologise unreservedly. Their paper profit holding in NCFC, whatever the details, looks like that very rare thing-an owner growing the value of their investment in a football club. That no further examples cropped up in the debate indicates what a rare example this is, in partcular in there being no propect of them seeking to cash in their chips on this a release the cash.