|
|
Post by creaner on Apr 27, 2015 18:20:36 GMT
Why should Worcester City become a Community Owned Club?
At present the Club is a Private Limited Company Limited by Shares with protections written into the articles to prevent any one individual or group having a shareholding of more than 1%. This is a noble attempt to retain a distributed (community) ownership but it is now limited in its suitability and stops the Club benefiting from other opportunities.
The recommendation is for a motion to be put to shareholders to enable Worcester City Supporters Trust to increase its collective shareholding to 50%+1 and beyond.
The main reasons for this recommendation are as follows;
A legal entity more suited to what the Club is and wants to achieve
A community Benefit Society (CBS) exists to serve the benefit of the wider community, in this case Worcester City FC. Assets are protected and held collectively and money is reinvested back into the CBS as opposed to being lost to individual shareholders. It has community objectives written into the constitution and is recognised by public bodies and grant funders as a community body that exists to achieve shared interests, interests protected by The Financial Conduct Authority.
A private company is designed to bring wealth and return to individual shareholders. Although this is not the spirit of how the Club is run, that is how our legal structure is viewed by external bodies, and we always run the risk of the articles being changed to reflect this purpose.
Meaningful shares and an active shareholding
At present the Club has a long list of historic shareholders, many of which are not actively involved in the Club today. The shares they hold do not lend themselves to active participation. In contrast (member) shares in WCST are offered to the whole community on an annual subscription basis and provide an equal vote in its affairs. Membership is likely to grow significantly if the Club is majority controlled by the WCST, which can lead to more interest, more volunteers, and more investment in the Club.
A better chance to raise finance
Should WCST be able to acquire 90%+1 of the shares in the Company, the Company will be viewed as a wholly owned subsidiary. The importance is when we launch a community share offer to raise some of the finance for our new stadium; the offer should be able to qualify for the Enterprise Investment Scheme, a tax relief that enables individual investors to claim 30% of their investment back from their tax liability. This will significantly enhance any offer, enable it to appeal to more people, and ultimately increase the amount we raise.
Even if WCST can’t achieve a shareholding of 90%+1 if it achieves 50%+1 we can still use community shares as a means to raise money for the new stadium. This is the most cost effective and suitable method to raise finance from the community, as it doesn’t suffer from the regulatory barriers that a public offer to a Company would.
In addition a CBS opens itself up to more grant funding opportunities than a Private Company, in particular public funding bodies and charitable funds such as the Football Foundation. The Local Authority is much more likely to entertain an asset transfer of land to the Club if it is owned by a CBS, and again there is significant grant funding to support this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dodger on Apr 27, 2015 19:02:32 GMT
Many thanks for this creaner.  As I read it then, the first step is for the Supporters Trust to acquire enough shares from existing, albeit historic, shareholders so that the holding breaks the 50% barrier. Presumably this will be either purchasing the necessary numbers or the Trust being gifted them by generous shareholders. Does the Trust have 'sufficient' funds at present, or is there a requirement/request for contributions to the cause? I'm sure most would be supportive of the venture so what do we need to do, if anything, as yet? Dodger. |
|
jonnyred
Reserve Teamer
c'mon u bluuuues!
Posts: 112
|
Post by jonnyred on Apr 27, 2015 21:38:50 GMT
*holds hand up* Im a historic shareholder still...it was back in the early 90s when i received mine on behalf of an oldish gentleman, Ian his name was, he brought shares for a quite a few people as he wasnt allowed to have the amount he desired all to his name. I was about 13/14 at the time so wasnt fully aware of what they were all about or obviously that 20+ years on they could be crucial to WCFCs future. I receieved a 100 shares i think and had a certificate for them but unfortunately ive lost it even though i thought id put it somewhere safe for future documentation/reference. If i can be of any help with them then i will gladly transfer them over to be put to use in seeing the City come back home! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2015 8:02:07 GMT
I'm totally in support of Community ownership, but jonnyred's post does highlight a potential problem.I'm not sure where my proof of share ownership is either - probably torn up during the Hallmark debacle.The majority of shares will be difficult to track and many in the possession of the dead. This was something Boddy exploited at the Nunnery AGM. How do we get 51% of an unknown amount?
|
|
|
|
Post by Siddle on Apr 28, 2015 12:13:36 GMT
I believe the Club hold a comprehensive Share Register which anyone should be able to view it by appointment, it will have a record of your shares.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2015 13:05:57 GMT
Thanks Siddle. I'm not so much worried about my shares - just the sheer number held by people no longer with us; moved away etc. I would think that these form a large part of the holding - and indeed may well be an indefinable number. How do we calculate 51% of an unknown quantity?
|
|
leon
Squad Member
Posts: 253
|
Post by leon on Apr 28, 2015 13:24:23 GMT
Afigure was quoted at the recent forum at the Cricket club and at my age I cannot remember the exact figure quoted but THINK it was in the region of 185 to 190k of shares issued.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dodger on Apr 28, 2015 17:07:38 GMT
I'm no expert but I suppose in theory, shares held on death would form part of the estate and be handled by the executor of that estate and passed to the beneficiary/ies. If there was no will then the administrator would handle things. The difficulty really is if the shares were not picked up by the executor or administrator as part of the deceased estate and so no-one would be aware of their existence. As I see it, the share registrar would need to contact all known holders on the share register to identify this type of situation? But, then again, maybe the plan is to attempt to contact everyone anyway? - living or dead Dodger. |
|
|
|
Post by downthelane on May 31, 2015 8:13:05 GMT
So if I currently own say for example £100 of shares in Worcester City Football Club, what would these be transferred into in the new set up?
|
|
|
|
Post by adycrean on Nov 20, 2015 7:56:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Woodenose on Nov 20, 2015 14:52:17 GMT
Very interesting and a great idea. Only problem is that at the moment we don't have a ground to play on.If the council give the club the go ahead then this could work |
|
|
|
Post by greenman on Nov 20, 2015 16:08:42 GMT
That is always supposing that the Board hold the EGM that was requested and the shareholders vote in favour of the proposed change to the constitution.
|
|
simon
Reserve Teamer
Posts: 83
|
Post by simon on Nov 22, 2015 19:44:34 GMT
Perhaps when the planning application for the new ground has been approved the Board will hold an EGM as the club will have something positive to aim for.
The Bradford P A idea looks a good one and will probably secure their future.I seriously think this is the best way forward and we need to be doing the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Nov 22, 2015 20:35:42 GMT
Perhaps when the planning application for the new ground has been approved IF |
|
|
|
Post by crosscountrymark on Nov 24, 2015 21:09:54 GMT
I did read on the Worcester City fc Twitter , that the Worcester City Trust were having a meeting on 26th November at Bishops Perowne School Merrimans Hill Worcester to discuss the trusts proposals, is this meeting still going ahead or has been cancelled. As the post on twitter has disappeared and no mention of it on the banter board and I didn't want a wasted journey from Kidderminster.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Verner on Nov 24, 2015 21:30:07 GMT
I did read on the Worcester City fc Twitter , that the Worcester City Trust were having a meeting on 26th November at Bishops Perowne School Merrimans Hill Worcester to discuss the trusts proposals, is this meeting still going ahead or has been cancelled. As the post on twitter has disappeared and no mention of it on the banter board and I didn't want a wasted journey from Kidderminster. This has been postponed. Jane mention it at last game but she referred to the meeting being after the match. This has been postponed |
|
|
|
Post by crosscountrymark on Nov 24, 2015 21:52:23 GMT
Thanks did hear Jane mention a forum after the match had been cancelled, but didn't realise the trust meeting was cancelled until your post .
|
|
|
|
Post by thatloudbloke on Nov 26, 2015 13:19:24 GMT
latest news on FB
Arrangements for AGM.
The Board has also agreed arrangements for an Annual General Meeting to be held in the New Year. The meeting will be held on Thursday 28th January 2016 at The Whitehouse Hotel in Foregate Street, Worcester commencing at 7.30pm.
Further details and papers will be circulated to shareholders in early January. Shareholders are, however, asked to note that admission to the meeting will be strictly on production of share certificates or some other form of identification which matches the details on the Company’s Share Register. Any shareholder who has moved house or whose personal details have changed must notify the Company Secretary of any such changes so that papers are delivered to the correct address and to ensure that there are no difficulties in gaining admission to the meeting.
Anyone wishing to check their details or notify the Company of any change of details can email the Company Secretary
|
|
|
|
Post by thatloudbloke on Nov 26, 2015 13:20:37 GMT
also this has happened
News from the Boardroom
New Appointments to the Board of Directors
The Board of Directors has recently agreed to strengthen the Board with the addition of five new Directors to complement the existing Board,
In order to work more closely with the Supporters’ Trust the Board has agreed a request from the Trust that Rob Crean, Jeremy Pitt and Julian Pugh join the Board. To further strengthen the Board Carl Heeley and Martin Pinches have also accepted invitations to join the Board.
Bringing Worcester City Football Club back to the City of Worcester is fundamental to the longer term aims and future prosperity of the Football Club. This is a vision shared by everyone connected with the Football Club. All of the new appointments bring with them skills and expertise which will be vital to helping to deliver this vision for the future.
The Board believes that these appointments are an extremely positive step forward and will be of great benefit to the Football Club.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Nov 26, 2015 13:44:10 GMT
Well, well, well an AGM planned at last.
It will be interesting to see the agenda as I would imagine a vast amount of time will be spent voting on the new five directors & any that have been co opted since the last AGM. We can only hope that this part of the AGM runs smoothly unlike the last time.
It is interesting to note that there will be a large representation from The Trust if everyone is voted on.
Some positivity at last ?
|
|
|
|
Post by thesecondjack on Nov 26, 2015 16:37:40 GMT
Thanks for the information, it certainly sounds positive! 5 new directors sounds like an awful lot, but I think we know that they all have the club at heart, so can only be for the club. I'd like to think it is a move towards a community ownership model, by having such people on the board for a gradual transitional phase.
You lot had better dust off those share certificates!
|
|
stamoo
First Teamer
Posts: 349
|
Post by stamoo on Nov 26, 2015 19:18:07 GMT
Wow, surprising! Potentially very good news, looks like the current Board and Trust intend to put aside recent 'local difficulties' and march forward together. All credit to the current Board for inviting these new Board members to join - all good City people through and through. Great to see Carl on board (unintentional pun alert) Mr Worcester City. The talk elsewhere on this banter board (too many boards in this post - people may get bored) about Warriors and their healthy situation only makes me ache even more for the Club to get back into Worester. At least with all parties now pulling together in the same direction that must be a little more likely?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2015 17:24:25 GMT
The new appointments sound very positive. Hopefully any differences between the Trust and board can be negotiated. All have City in their hearts. Will Mr Pitt wear his fedora to board meetings?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Verner on Nov 28, 2015 20:21:25 GMT
The new appointments sound very positive. Hopefully any differences between the Trust and board can be negotiated. All have City in their hearts. Will Mr Pitt wear his fedora to board meetings? He very rarely takes it off ;-) |
|
rob
Reserve Teamer
Posts: 79
|
Post by rob on Nov 30, 2015 22:34:11 GMT
If you are interested, Companies House do now allow a free search of company account records. Just search Worcester City football club. Search 'filing history' for the last available accounts and at the end a full list of shareholders. beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/ |
|
|
|
Post by thesecondjack on Dec 1, 2015 18:43:21 GMT
According to the shareholders list, a certain Bob Marley has 1,000 shares. Wouldn't be shocked if it's not a hoax, but it certainly gave me a chuckle!
Interesting to also see how Carl Heeley has 50 shares, Andy Preece has 1,000.
|
|
|
|
Post by cloud on Dec 2, 2015 8:16:21 GMT
Bob was a director - & did a lot of good work for the club, especially in the community / youth area.
|
|
|
|
Post by miserablesod on Dec 2, 2015 13:12:35 GMT
According to the shareholders list, a certain Bob Marley has 1,000 shares. Wouldn't be shocked if it's not a hoax, but it certainly gave me a chuckle! Interesting to also see how Carl Heeley has 50 shares, Andy Preece has 1,000. He played up front for us in the 80s. He never scored but shot the sherrif... |
|
|
|
Post by Dodger on Dec 2, 2015 13:30:32 GMT
According to the shareholders list, a certain Bob Marley has 1,000 shares. Wouldn't be shocked if it's not a hoax, but it certainly gave me a chuckle! Interesting to also see how Carl Heeley has 50 shares, Andy Preece has 1,000. He played up front for us in the 80s. He never scored but shot the sherrif... But he did not shoot the deputy! Dodger. |
|
|
|
Post by thesecondjack on Dec 2, 2015 16:55:11 GMT
Glad he's a real person, perhaps a bit before my time.
As for the jokes, Get up, Stand up... and don't come back! (I'm sorry, that was terrible)
|
|
