The Real Battle Begins?

By

Some numbers from Rangers Media about their share offer. (not …

Comment on The Real Battle Begins? by easyJambo.

Some numbers from Rangers Media about their share offer. (not the placing for institutional investors)
(disclaimer ….. this is Rangers Media, so sources cannot be trusted) 😀

If true, it puts the response of Hearts fans in a good light. (3,200 individual contributions + collectives)

Date………..Web App..Web Amt..Paper Apps.. Paper Amt..Total Apps..Total Amt
08/12/2012.. 236……. £211,000………. 0 ……………£0…………… 236……. £211,000
09/12/2012.. 143……. £115,800………. 0 ……………£0 ……………143…… £115,800
10/12/2012.. 311……. £270,400………. 0 ……………£0 ……………311…… £270,400
11/12/2012.. 335……. £292,600………. 0 ……………£0 ……………335…… £292,600
12/12/2012.. 278……. £219,700………. 6 ……..£4,600 ……………284…… £224,300
13/12/2012.. 306……. £296,300………. 8 ……..£5,500 ……………314…… £301,800
14/12/2012.. 191……. £162,300…….. 27 ……£14,100 ……………218…… £176,400

Totals …….1,800….. £1,568,100……. 41 ……£24,200 ………….1,841… £1,592,300

easyJambo Also Commented

The Real Battle Begins?
wottpi says: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 at 10:30

However do we know for certain that the new names (marked * on the list below) have actually parted with their cash?
======================
The prospectus only states that:

Cenkos Securities has received firm placing letters from placees in respect of the Placing Shares.

I guess that means that they weren’t 100% confirmed, but a strong indication that the investment would be forthcoming.


The Real Battle Begins?
torrejohnbhoy says:Saturday, December 15, 2012 at 11:48

So if the figures reported are correct,then there’s around another £300k only.
That’s a total somewhere around £1.75m.That’s not enough to cover the costs of the issue(£2.5m I think).
how does this impact on Chuckles “Stadium Upgrade” and “Working Capital” projections?.
===================================
The £2.5M was the total cost of the placing for institutional investors (£2M out of £17M) and the offer for the punters (£500k out of £10M).

The truth is that we don’t know for certain what the take up will be from the Bears and I’m sure that Chuckles will have his excuses ready for next week should the offer realise less than expected.

Much of the prospectus was actually based on a zero uptake of the offer to punters, so at least the initial plans for the upgrade should be unaffected. I think that the money raised from the offer was intended for further improvement work on the stadium and the ability to explore other investment opportunities.


The Real Battle Begins?
torrejohnbhoy says: Saturday, December 15, 2012 at 09:39

Morning all.
Just wondering if anyone knows how share issues normally work.
Do most applications come in during the first few days or is there normally a rush at the end?.
If the former,can we assume that the reported figure of £1.25m raised up to now is not good?.
Add the £90k pledged through the RST and there’s probably not even enough to pay the costs of the issue.
Would there normally be a rush before closing date?.
When does trading start?.
===============================
There is a current example with Hearts although the situation and the appeal for funds is a bit different. Hearts share offer opened on 27th Oct and will end on 19th Dec, a period of 7.5 weeks.

Hearst reported that they had raised £500K in the first three weeks. The last report was that the total had reached £800K after 7 weeks, so there is a clear drop off after the initial surge.

I said that the circumstances are a bit different. By that I meant that there have been a number of fund raising events which took a week or two to organise, thus there was a substantial amount raised between two and three weeks into the offer.

Will a straight share offer like RIFC, I’d expect the take-up to fall off more rapidly, with maybe a little peak in the last couple of days. As a rule of thumb, I’d adopt the 80/20 rule. i.e. they will receive 80% of the funds in the first 20% of the offer period.


Recent Comments by easyJambo

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Allyjambo January 2, 2018 at 14:38
————————
My one overriding memory of the Ibrox disaster was that of the five schoolkids aged between 13 and 15, all from the village of Markinch in Fife, who lost their lives.  I lived just a few miles away and was only 15 myself, at the time.

I remember those losses having a huge impact on the local Fife schools and communities.   


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
HOMUNCULUS DECEMBER 28, 2017 at 15:38
It doesn’t matter if it is paid to a trust or your aunt Agatha, you still have to pay the tax. I have no idea why they use the name Agatha, but they do. 
========================
“Aunt Agatha” was used by the RFC QC Andrew Thornhill during the appeals process when discussing the redirection of earnings to a third party.

On a separate point about the share price.  The sale of Ashley’s shares to Club 1872 and Julian Wolhardt was used by King’s QC at the CoS, as an example of shares trading above the 20p price.

The TOP’s QC, however, countered that by claiming that Ashley wasn’t interested in the share price, but was insistent that he received £2m for his shares. To that end, it was pointed out that the price per share paid wasn’t 27p, 27.5p or 28p, but something to the second or third decimal place that ensured that the sum received was not £1,999,999 but a fraction over the £2m figure.  I can’t recall the exact fraction used, but the counter argument put forward seemed entirely plausible.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Homunculus December 27, 2017 at 22:39
EASYJAMBO DECEMBER 27, 2017 at 22:32
================================
Cheers.
Is there a way of calculating how the issue of new shares reduces the value of the existing ones, or is it not as simple as that. I don’t imagine for a second it is. 
I cannot believe that the sale of new shares does not effect the value of those held by existing shareholders. That would surely be market capitalisation gone mad. 
================================
It’s not as simple as the share price being reduced inversely proportionate to the number of additional shares issued.

The capital value (no of shares x share price) of the club is presently around £16m at 20p a share (80m x 20p), but given that the club also has £16m of debts, you could argue that a debt free club would be worth £32m (or 40p a share).

The value of the shares going forward would depend of the amount of debt written off and the number of shares issued in order to achieve that. e.g. if they double the number of shares to 160m in exchange for writing off half the debt.  The capital value of the club might go up to £24m, as it only has £8m debt, but the value of each shares would probably fall to 15p. (160m x 15p = £24m)

If however, they manage to double the share numbers, write off half the debt, but also raise £4m in new money, then the capital value of the club should go up by £4m (the new money). So you could see the capital value rise to £28m, but still with £8m debt. The share price might then be 17.5p (160m x 17.5p = £28m)

I hope that makes sense. It does to me, but the nuances of share numbers, to debt, to capital raised can easily be lost, if you don’t have an appreciation of where they are at just now, and where they might end up.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
shug December 27, 2017 at 22:05
Great hard fought match tonight.
======================
Sadly, that was two hours of my life I won’t get back.  There was nothing great about it and it was more of a borefest akin to many derbies of yesteryear.  Tom English described it perfectly as “Thud and Blunder”


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Homunculus December 27, 2017 at 18:21
I take it all that has happened is that they passed the resolution allowing them to issue new shares. Those new shares have now been created.
This is them simply notifying Companies House that they have done that, Companies House records show how many shares have been issued.
That has to be done before they can actually sell them to anyone.
Purely a procedural matter I would have though. 
=========================
It’s not got as far as creating the shares. It’s merely confirmation that the Board has the authority to issue shares up to the specified limit.  That authority expires on the date of the next AGM.

The allotment of up to a nominal value of £1,086,376.01, means that new shares equivalent to 1.333 times those currently available can now be issued.  I’m sure that there will be a good reason for the number of new shares being set at that specific level, but I can’t think of one. 


About the author