With everyone in attendance?
I attend Board meetings on a regular basis, and they will often start with "appologies" on behalf of those who cannot attend.
I do agree with what you're saying, BUT, I just don't want to get too excited. Maybe we ARE in discussions with somebody, but that doesn't mean it'll all happen.
Not sure it's a very expensive thing to do, it's only submitting a Board Resolution to Companies House, but perhas it is difficult to get all the board together at short notice, so why not do it when they are.
It's obviously something we are seriously looking to do, but how immediate it is...
For what it's worth, I disagree with that. Until the loan notes are purchased by someone, it doesn't plug any hole whatsoever. I think it's merely a case of putting in place all the options for a new investor, should that time arrive.
If they want to buy shares, we could either sell them...
That's the number of shares we are allowed to issue. But of course as you issue more shares this dilutes the current holdings.
We can therefore issue a total of 50m, £1 shares. At present we have issued 9.5m. So, Dick Knight currently owns 1,602,500 shares, which as a % of 9.5m is 16.87%...
If and when it happens, there is no reason why they would do it anonomously. No-one has bought them yet (and may never do) which is why we don't have a name today.
That could happen, but in all reality if someone is prepared to pump that much in, they will not foreclose. They will instead convert it into new loan notes with a date further in advance.
No, it's happened, alright. I'm looking at the form now, that we issued to Companies House, signed by RF Comer, to formally create these loan notes. Dated 10th March 2009.
Well, presumably the person the £20m was created for a year ago, hasn't yet put that money in. So, don't hold your breath, it could just be a case of us covering our bases should someone come forward. If a benefactor comes forward prepared to put money in, we can now issue loan notes to the...
But that's just the risk the likes of Bloom have to take with the money they pump in, because what little we have (Falmer) to offer as security on a loan, we'll have used.
Therefore, there's nothing left inthe way of security for the lkes of Blooms et al. It's not optimism, it's generosity.
Not being simple at all, it's a complex thing, which as a qualified accountant I may still have missed one of the ways that we are planning to use them, but my understanding is .....
that it's a formal way of creating a directors loan. Rather than just having a loan account on the Balance...
Yep. So that is why they would be "bought" by a director who is pumping money into the club rather than a bank who would want it secured against something. Which is why I'm wondering who we are creating them for.