'OW MUCH

ter get Brent ait the club for good?

30% stake left.

What value did he put on the amount Silent Si took over last week?

Is it feasible? Worthwhile?

I think it cost Hallett about £3.25m to get Brent's share down from 51-% to 30% although some of that could have been for some of the car park as well.

Hallett's £3.25m included an injection to get the "grand"stand downsize rolling, so not money to Brent for his stake, per se

I wonder if the the 20% for 1 million paind offer stands. It was over-egging the value of the club then, god knows how it stacks up now we've only got 3 sides of the ground

It would appear to be an own goal by the great business man to have completely fecked home park just before trying to con your way out for cash.

Mock Cuncher wrote:

Hallett's £3.25m included an injection to get the "grand"stand downsize rolling, so not money to Brent for his stake, per se

I wonder if the the 20% for 1 million paind offer stands. It was over-egging the value of the club then, god knows how it stacks up now we've only got 3 sides of the ground

Brent didn't give his shares away. Hallett said the other day that the £3.25m added liquidity to the club, must admit I was scratching my head to work out how Brent trousering money helps the club? Same for the HHP buy back Hallett paid X amount which went from his pocket to Brents pocket added any liquidity? Assets yes, liquidity no.
Maybe the guy that writes these things for the Trust (hi Sam) could ask some questions?

I read it that there was a bit to buy brent's stake out, and a bit to refurb the ground cos the thing had run out of money. However, I admittedly couldn't be arsed to scan the particulars.

You have to account separately for the safe money stash, also known as a PAFC mortgage. Apart from that, Hallett had already put in something like £1.5m. He has now offered an extra £3m plus. That extra cash will go into the resulting capital value of the club, so basically Hallett will end up paying £5m for his 70% stake.

Amongst the £3.25m cash injection was 'associated costs', what are they exactly? To my mind Brent shouldn't have received a single penny for this latest movement in shares, they'll just be valued higher, hence the £1 per share now valued at £1.44 per share?

DEAR JAMES,

OW MUCH FER UR SHARES?

WE CAN RUSTLE UP A ROOM FER YANN SONGO'O AND THIRTY QUID, WHICH IS ABOUT TWENNY QUID PLUS A ROOM FER YANN SONGO'O MORE THAN YOU'VE EVER PUT IN

Yours,

The Undersigned

ATD
AFT

beesrus wrote:

You have to account separately for the safe money stash, also known as a PAFC mortgage. Apart from that, Hallett had already put in something like £1.5m. He has now offered an extra £3m plus. That extra cash will go into the resulting capital value of the club, so basically Hallett will end up paying £5m for his 70% stake.

Yes I get that the club shares are valued north of £10m now but the last £3.25m has shorely gone to Brent in the form of cash. That value is shown in Hallets shares but the club still has had no cash injection so to speak? There has been mention that Hallett has put in extra funds so the refurb can be done but Im not sure where hat came from?

Earwegoagain wrote:

beesrus wrote:

You have to account separately for the safe money stash, also known as a PAFC mortgage. Apart from that, Hallett had already put in something like £1.5m. He has now offered an extra £3m plus. That extra cash will go into the resulting capital value of the club, so basically Hallett will end up paying £5m for his 70% stake.

Yes I get that the club shares are valued north of £10m now but the last £3.25m has shorely gone to Brent in the form of cash. That value is shown in Hallets shares but the club still has had no cash injection so to speak? There has been mention that Hallett has put in extra funds so the refurb can be done but Im not sure where hat came from?

As I understand it Hallett bought newly allotted shares which took his shareholding to 60+% and not shares owned by Brent?

The whole idea is no doubt to ensure Hallett could put in enough cash to do the mankover, but without giving him a 75% share holding which would give him special resolution rights and total control. Revaluing the shares was the obvious answer.  Wrathall must be happy, he's made a few grand out of it with his 3%.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

beesrus wrote:

You have to account separately for the safe money stash, also known as a PAFC mortgage. Apart from that, Hallett had already put in something like £1.5m. He has now offered an extra £3m plus. That extra cash will go into the resulting capital value of the club, so basically Hallett will end up paying £5m for his 70% stake.

Yes I get that the club shares are valued north of £10m now but the last £3.25m has shorely gone to Brent in the form of cash. That value is shown in Hallets shares but the club still has had no cash injection so to speak? There has been mention that Hallett has put in extra funds so the refurb can be done but Im not sure where hat came from?

As I understand it Hallett bought newly allotted shares which took his shareholding to 60+% and not shares owned by Brent?

Yes you're right hence the share offer thingy that got flagged the other day, so that did give the club an extra £3.25m I stand corrected.
We really should get the last couple of months happenings on the story so far, just the facts for future reference.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

beesrus wrote:

You have to account separately for the safe money stash, also known as a PAFC mortgage. Apart from that, Hallett had already put in something like £1.5m. He has now offered an extra £3m plus. That extra cash will go into the resulting capital value of the club, so basically Hallett will end up paying £5m for his 70% stake.

Yes I get that the club shares are valued north of £10m now but the last £3.25m has shorely gone to Brent in the form of cash. That value is shown in Hallets shares but the club still has had no cash injection so to speak? There has been mention that Hallett has put in extra funds so the refurb can be done but Im not sure where hat came from?

As I understand it Hallett bought newly allotted shares which took his shareholding to 60+% and not shares owned by Brent?

I thought it was a mixture of both with Brent selling some and others being newly created. Factor in the land buyback, too.

5 mins with a pocket calculator will probably soon tell.

2233057 shares were newly issued bringing the total up to 8918534 so there was previously 6685477 issued.

30% of 8918534 is 2675560 so some shares changed hands because 2675560 is less than 50.1% of 6685477 ( = 3349424).

So Brent must have sold 673864 shares to Hallett.

The new shares were valued at 1.4455404 each.

1.4455404 x 673864 = 974098.

So Hallett basically bunged Brent £1m for his shares and whether this includes the land transfer or not is currently unknown.

If I have read the docs in the Big Big Shit thread right.

The new share issue was valued at £3.25m. Take Brent's £1m out and there's an extra £2.25m cash (without allowing for the land transfer) in the club coffers.

So Hallett hasn't injected £3.25m into the club and we're being misinformed or deliberately misled once again?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

The new share issue was valued at £3.25m. Take Brent's £1m out and there's an extra £2.25m cash (without allowing for the land transfer) in the club coffers.

Unless the £1m was a parallel private transaction which thinking on a bit it must have been because Hallett now owns those shares and if any of the £3.25m went that way they be under whole club ownership.

So Hallett must have stumped up £4.25m in total and some of the £3.25m went towards buying the land back for the club.

Coxside_Green wrote:

So Hallett hasn't injected £3.25m into the club and we're being misinformed or deliberately misled once again?

No. The £3.25m has definitely gone into the club.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

So Hallett hasn't injected £3.25m into the club and we're being misinformed or deliberately misled once again?

No. The £3.25m has definitely gone into the club.

But circa £1m according to your figures hasn't benefitted the club one iota. Hallett buying Brent's shares should be kept separate from the club so we don't get stung with 'associated costs'?

Yes. As I said it has to have been a parallel transaction between the two.

The money for the shares would not have come out of the club but the money for the land would have.

Only the other day we had this...

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I could be wrong but it looks like Brent has actually bunged the club £500k (or near as dammit).

Anybody who believes SFD actually knows what is happening needs their head examined.

I'm confuddled (nowt new) full stop.

Who's got wot ?

So by 'reluctantly' saving us, Jim makes a bundle of cash?

PatDunne wrote:

So by 'reluctantly' saving us, Jim makes a bundle of cash?

Bit like getting the pavilions for a £1 and trousering 2 large for flogging the car park.
He's very adept at staying within the law and realises his MO to property squat works time after time

Brents problem is when hes obliged to engage his brain and "direct" all his business "enterprises" which time after time end in admin and bankruptcy.
Hes incapable and history is littered with successful employed people who become complete car crashes when faced with self empoyment
Brent fits that to the letter (albeit citibank might not agree)