www.altyfans.co.uk

Mark,
  Mark, my name is Bryan Ford( B. 4D)  I Won't hide behind a name, like a lot have too  (gutless) But being abused for supporting  my own team at Tamworth was a disgrace. They say they are the true .. supporters
 abuse the team then

 hug them WTAF!!!
MARK
I'm hurt what you have said there. Not my words..
Inner sanctum.
You know more than me
Work has to be done,  if you like what is going on or not.
Alty is a non league club as most of you know is run by volunteers.

Quote from: Jimmy Hill on June 01, 2017, 11:14:40 PM

What would be a ball park figure?

Despite the current situation, it could be a positive step if we could raise some funds to get this going.

I'm not sure people at the club realise how much people expect to be able to purchase anything online now.

In truth my answer was somewhat flippant Jimmy....in my defence it's been a hard day...week...year

It is a little like asking how long is a piece of string as there are many factors influencing the cost. However, I would have thought for a fairly basic ecommerce site (and I can't imagine we would require much more than that) built by a small agency or freelancer, you'd be looking at somewhere between £3K - £6K. If looking at something rather more sophisticated and built by a larger agency you could be looking at upwards of £15K.

They really are ballpark figures that I've just pulled out of my arse the air.....in an educated manner of course.

I put one together for an acquaintance over here for a few grand a few years back.

Quote from: Leonard Jeffrey Osbourne on June 01, 2017, 05:33:04 PM

How hard would it be to set up an auxiliary webpage for processing such transactions?

It would be relatively easy to do for individual ticketed games, but season tickets at those amounts would probably mean a fair whack of commission and subsequent loss of revenue.

We will never be able to sell directly from the official website in its current format. A transition to Wix or another drag and drop site builder would open a lot of doors for the club.

I hope I can add something to the debate which might alleviate som of the concerns which have been expressed in this thread.

Before I do, I will declare my interest. I am a long time supporter who regularly attends home and away matches and who owns 10 ordinary voting shares in the club. I am not related to, affiliated to or a personal friend of any board member or any other club representative.

I have some experience with company law but am not a qualified expert so stand to be corrected on any of the following.

The purpose of this initiative is to create the opportunity for significant investment into the club by making a large number of shares available. Furthermore, the intention seems to be to make a controlling interest available to a single individual or corporate investor.

There are currently 232,000 shares in the club. 117,000 of those shares are owned by John King. This would be a controlling share but for the fact that they are designated as non-voting shares. Ownership and control of the club therefore rests with the owners of the remaining 115,000 voting shares. There are some 250+ of these shareholders including board members (past &present), sponsors, fans like me, former Australian international cricketers etc.  The spread of ownership of the voting shares is such that no individual can exercise control of the club.

If the proposed course of action is to go ahead,the first thing which will happen is that the 117,000 non voting shares will be transferred from John King to Graham Rowley. This will be a private transaction between individuals, so is not something which can be voted on or affected by other shareholders.  This does not put control of the club in Graham Rowley's hands because they remain non-voting shares at this time. Graham Rowley is then willing to sell the 117,000 shares back to the club for £1.00. A buy-back of share capital like this requires the support of the voting shareholders, so we are asked to pass a resolution to make this happen.  If the buy back happens, the shares will no longer belong to Graham Rowley.

We the shareholders are then asked to pass a resolution to convert the 117,000 non-voting shares into voting shares. A crucial point to understand is that if the buy-back takes place, the 117,000 shares will be held by the club "in treasury". In simple terms, the club as a company cannot own shares in itself. Even if we accept to convert the 117,000 shares to voting shares, neither the board or the existing shareholders can utilise them as voting shares to exercise any control of the club. In effect these shares will be dormant until they are allocated to a new shareholder(s).

The next step will be pass a resolution to change the Articles of Association, basically the rules that govern how the club is run. The rules currently say that any issue of share capital by the club must first be offered proportionately to the existing shareholders. This would defeat the object which is to attract a new investor with the potential controlling stake of 117,000 voting shares.

Finally, we are asked to allow the directors to allocate the 117,000 shares as and when they see fit, to the benefit of the club. The goal appears to be to attract an investor to buy the controlling share. Whether a prospective buyer has been lined up, I know not. Whether this is a good idea or not is a matter of opinion. An investor with a controlling share would have the power determine the make up of the board including the chairman.

Sorry for the long post but hope it helps.

Quote from: Jimmy Hill on May 23, 2017, 06:38:31 PM

Quote from: York Alty - Mr. Rowley OUT. on May 23, 2017, 04:02:16 PM

Quote from: cornishrobin on May 23, 2017, 03:56:11 PM

How much money is the club going to pay for the shares,and how much profit is going to be made?. And another point is surely any shares bought by the club should be in the clubs name not GR's, !?

The letter says this will be a temporary measure, but I've posted ny NO vote back.  The man is totally honest in my view, it is has judgement that I have no faith in.

You do realise that voting 'No' makes it more likely Rowley will stay? Without the new shares he and his mates own a controlling stake in the club and no one can get rid of them unless they choose to sell their shares.

With the new share issue a new buyer can come in and get rid of him.

Is there a legal requirement for these to go into his name, as opposed into some form of solicitors account, similar to the process of escrow?

I am no legal eagle but I can't see PLCs putting the shares into the CEOs name when they are buying back shares. 

Quote from: cornishrobin on May 23, 2017, 03:56:11 PM

How much money is the club going to pay for the shares,and how much profit is going to be made?. And another point is surely any shares bought by the club should be in the clubs name not GR's, !?

The letter says this will be a temporary measure, but I've posted ny NO vote back.  The man is totally honest in my view, it is has judgement that I have no faith in.

They're sh*t quality photos... if only the club had maybe two club photographers...