Ticket Refunds

[johnthegriff]

That question was discussed on a recent online Forum and a reply given and reasons given why it is not a practical solution at this time. I actually posed the question and was satisfied with the answer I received.

[sk 88]

They want the fans to donate and I am more than happy to do so. Why aren't they?

How do you now that they aren't?

We are being given the choice of what to do and, as has been said before throughout this thread, it's an entirely personal decision. But we don't have to publicise our decision. I made my mind up weeks ago because I was expecting something like this, I discussed it with friends and we are all of a mind, and as someone else here said, it sits well with me. But I don't feel any desperate urge to tell the world about it.

The major share-holders have a vested interest in the club, obviously. Therefore, I would expect they are doing plenty behind the scenes to help get us through this, financially or otherwise. Or maybe they're not? Either way, I don't expect to read all about.

Well I can only go on what is in the public domain, so suggested a way to get that information into the public domain and some positive publicity for them. The recent transparency has been fantastic, so no idea why encouraging more is deemed bad by some people.

For some reason this suggestion to help the club and generate positive headlines has triggered a deluge of responses asking why the shareholders should put money in. Which inevitably causes the reply along the lines of "well they are asking me to", following the thread the point was to turn around the "why should they" question posed by others to "Why not"?

I'm assured by people I trust to tell the truth there is support going on from these people, so getting it out there to convince the doubters seems a no-brainer to me.

[Mark62]

Regarding the wealth of the major shareholders.

Peter Tom is worth £85m
The Murphy bros and family are worth £650m
David Abell £66m
David Wilson £540m
John Bloor £1.2bn

All figures from the Leicester Mercury richlist
I can't find a recent figure for Tom Scott, in 2003 I can see his father valued at £120m, but let's put it this way: He wanted £27m for his stake in Tigers less than a year ago. Along with John Wallace, who I can find out hardly anything at all, they are the top 7 shareholders in the club.

I think a combined donation to match what the normal supporters combined donation ends up being, probably around the £600k mark in total, is a perfectly reasonable idea.

So by the maxim that all members are shareholders you’re argument is that any member with millions in their account should match any donations.
Don’t you look at the clubs financial records, do you think these gentlemen actually make any money out of the club or that they just invest time and money in their passion.
A lot of wealthy men are self made and have worked far harder than the rest of us could possibly imagine.

Green eyed monster peeking its head up here.

The major shareholders are different to members though. It is literally their company.

I look at the finances very closely. I cannot see where I have even suggested they have taken any wage or anything out? Which is why I think them matching the fans generosity would be a great move for them. They can easily afford it and after all, they are the ones with the assets in the game not us.

They want the fans to donate and I am more than happy to do so. Why aren't they?

I think it is fair to say you have the wrong end of the stick and know nothing about me.

No I don’t much as you know nothing about me. The point I’m making which seems obvious to most but not you, who choose to put your own slant on things, is that these wealthy individuals already invest heavily in the club and get no return either in wages, I think you got that point, or in dividends or profits from their shares.
Therefore it doesn’t take a genius to see that they are already donating a lot of money to the club with no return, as there is no profit.
You obviously have blinkers where wealthy people are concerned, but as others have said it is up to each individual whether they , donate, credit or refund, just as it is up to these gentlemen how they use there wealth, and they don’t need to pump more money in to help season ticket holders who really haven’t got that difficult a choice. It’s either 1, 2 or 3

[Tiglon]

Do the the major shareholders invest a lot of money in the club? Genuine question.

They may not take money out in wages or dividends, but they were very keen to make a tidy profit by selling the club for a lot more than they paid for it. It's also worth noting that, as Mark62 points out, they are investing in their passion. They do it because they get something out of it, even if that something may not be money (although, in the long term it may be). Equally, those supporters who choose not to take a refund will be getting something out of it too and that's why they make that choice.

We can all choose what we want to do, major shareholders included. No judgement is deserved on either them or fellow fans. That said, sk88's question is a fair one. I don't think it's unreasonable, if we are being invited to put our hands in our pockets, to enquire as to whether those asking are doing the same.

[Mark62]

Do the the major shareholders invest a lot of money in the club? Genuine question.

They may not take money out in wages or dividends, but they were very keen to make a tidy profit by selling the club for a lot more than they paid for it. It's also worth noting that, as Mark62 points out, they are investing in their passion. They do it because they get something out of it, even if that something may not be money (although, in the long term it may be). Equally, those supporters who choose not to take a refund will be getting something out of it too and that's why they make that choice.

We can all choose what we want to do, major shareholders included. No judgement is deserved on either them or fellow fans. That said, sk88's question is a fair one. I don't think it's unreasonable, if we are being invited to put our hands in our pockets, to enquire as to whether those asking are doing the same.

We’ve probably taken this as far as we can and everyone has made valid points in my opinion, but Tiglon asks why shouldn’t we be asking the people who are asking the question to do the same thing. To the best of my knowledge the only one on Sk88 list who is involved in running the club is Peter Tom, it is the club who have made this decision, and therefore I doubt that shareholders would have been consulted. At the end of the day there is a difference between owners, and therefore decision makers, and shareholders

[Tiglon]

Do the the major shareholders invest a lot of money in the club? Genuine question.

They may not take money out in wages or dividends, but they were very keen to make a tidy profit by selling the club for a lot more than they paid for it. It's also worth noting that, as Mark62 points out, they are investing in their passion. They do it because they get something out of it, even if that something may not be money (although, in the long term it may be). Equally, those supporters who choose not to take a refund will be getting something out of it too and that's why they make that choice.

We can all choose what we want to do, major shareholders included. No judgement is deserved on either them or fellow fans. That said, sk88's question is a fair one. I don't think it's unreasonable, if we are being invited to put our hands in our pockets, to enquire as to whether those asking are doing the same.

We’ve probably taken this as far as we can and everyone has made valid points in my opinion, but Tiglon asks why shouldn’t we be asking the people who are asking the question to do the same thing. To the best of my knowledge the only one on Sk88 list who is involved in running the club is Peter Tom, it is the club who have made this decision, and therefore I doubt that shareholders would have been consulted. At the end of the day there is a difference between owners, and therefore decision makers, and shareholders

Here we go again. No, mark62, I did not "ask why shouldn’t we be asking the people who are asking the question to do the same thing". There's no point me saying more on the subject because, as usual, you're arguing with something that was not even said in the first place.

[Mark62]

That said, sk88's question is a fair one. I don't think it's unreasonable, if we are being invited to put our hands in our pockets, to enquire as to whether those asking are doing the same.

Well with the greatest of respect Tiglon what are the above, your words not mine. As far as I can see you are being picky about the word ask rather than invite

[sk 88]

Do the the major shareholders invest a lot of money in the club? Genuine question.

They may not take money out in wages or dividends, but they were very keen to make a tidy profit by selling the club for a lot more than they paid for it. It's also worth noting that, as Mark62 points out, they are investing in their passion. They do it because they get something out of it, even if that something may not be money (although, in the long term it may be). Equally, those supporters who choose not to take a refund will be getting something out of it too and that's why they make that choice.

We can all choose what we want to do, major shareholders included. No judgement is deserved on either them or fellow fans. That said, sk88's question is a fair one. I don't think it's unreasonable, if we are being invited to put our hands in our pockets, to enquire as to whether those asking are doing the same.

Indeed Tiglon, there are currently no director loans on the books or capital contributions. The whole point of not having a sugar daddy is that our owners neither put capital in, nor take it out. I'd guess in the current circumstances that has either already changed or will have to change soon.