Re: Richard Wright : Sat Jun 16, 2012 9:05 am  

Tigerade wrote:

Love is blind.

It is.

Re: Richard Wright : Sat Jun 16, 2012 2:04 pm  

Tigerade wrote:

Shares can be bought at £40 each with a minimun spend of £200. So, RW share is valued at just under a quarter of a million.

I would imagine that selling something worth 10p for £40 or something worth £600 for a quarter of a million, should be classed as overselling by the OFT or FSA.
Still it keeps him in power!!

Re: Richard Wright : Sat Jun 16, 2012 2:05 pm  

Dead Man Walking wrote:

You naughty devil

What does that make Mr Wright???

Re: Richard Wright : Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:25 pm  

kinleycat wrote:

So for just over £600 you could become the major share holder at CT?
Sounds like a laugh!!!

Not sure it works like that.

When a company is created they have to set up a share capital and is incorporated with any number of shares with any value, in this instance 10p shares.

But ultimately in Ltd companies it is between buyer and seller as to come up with an appropriate price based on assets, etc. They don't always remain at 10p.

My understanding of this is just done from internet reading but a shareholder or some other boffin in this regard, feel free to correct me.

Re: Richard Wright : Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:35 pm  

Fully wrote:

Not sure it works like that.

When a company is created they have to set up a share capital and is incorporated with any number of shares with any value, in this instance 10p shares.

But ultimately in Ltd companies it is between buyer and seller as to come up with an appropriate price based on assets, etc. They don't always remain at 10p.

My understanding of this is just done from internet reading but a shareholder or some other boffin in this regard, feel free to correct me.

It's pretty much how I understand it, which is like you, barely!
The share value, values the business at what it is (almost worthless in this case). RW clearly values it at 400 times more than its market valuation.
Finding someone who values it the same is going to be difficult I would imagine.
Anyone who professes to love the club and is willing to step aside for "the good of the club" if someone is willing to buy them out on this premise is frankly taking the mick out of the club and the fans.
In reality he is hanging for all he can, we had a bloke a bit like that a couple of years back and he ended up with nowt!!

Re: Richard Wright : Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:44 pm  

I think the price stated there is something completely different to be honest.

I suppose the value of the share is increased by the fact that in effect the company has its own asset in the ground and although it does have some sort of debt, these are mainly attributed to another company Director and Chairman and not outside creditors.

Re: Richard Wright : Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:58 pm  

If each share is worth £40 and RW and JF have about 11-12,000 of them plus other shareholders, what does that value the club at, and do you think that is a fare reflection of the club?

Re: Richard Wright : Sat Jun 16, 2012 4:04 pm  

kinleycat wrote:

If each share is worth £40 and RW and JF have about 11-12,000 of them plus other shareholders, what does that value the club at, and do you think that is a fare reflection of the club?

That's only £440,000.

Wheldon Road for housing in the economic peak was worth about £8m-£10m.

Therefore, I think that if there were a total of 25,000 shares* (not sure how many shares have been issued/remain unissued in Cas) that £1m would be accurate.

Re: Richard Wright : Sat Jun 16, 2012 4:11 pm  

Fully wrote:

That's only £440,000.

Wheldon Road for housing in the economic peak was worth about £8m-£10m.

Therefore, I think that if there were a total of 25,000 shares* (not sure how many shares have been issued/remain unissued in Cas) that £1m would be accurate.

It's only worth (or was worth) £8-10M if you sell it, that then makes you homeless. To build a new ground it will take double that, so really the ground (WR) is a red herring, although I take 100% what you are saying.
It's only worth the money if you aren't worried about Cas being homeless or you can share/rent a ground? In laymens terms.

Re: Richard Wright : Sat Jun 16, 2012 4:22 pm  

In reality, though, an asset is part of a valuation. If you own 10 properties each worth £100,000 you don't say you're worth less do you?

The value of WR is now about £5m I believe. What the new ground costs is not relevant but I would guess that the delivery of a new stadium is taken into consideration too when the value of the club will significantly increase with a new facility. Equally, do the players have values that can be taken into consideration (realistically they can be sold).

I guess the true valuation of a club is its financial situation+assets minus debts. It probably is simple but I'm guessing to establish an accurate valuation there are a number of factors to take into consideration.