good point.

Why would that make any difference?

Why would it not?

Exactly, it's irrelevant.

Is it or is it not?

do you know?

The manufacturers wouldn,t allow pies to be eaten in a Rolls Royce.

Don't mistake bitterness for apathy.

Just to return to the original topic, my sauces tell me there were ego related issues involved.

Red or brown?

Weeee'll - bee - tooo - gether again............

Didn't McManus once say he would step down once the stadium is delivered?

I very much doubt that - Especially as he has so much money invested in us.

Perhaps that was Tony Colquitt?

If any rugby league club is ripe for takeover, it is Saints. Most successful super league side, best youth set up, fantastic ground, great attendances, established side, top new coach appointed, no debt but still considerable potential for future growth. I would say McManus has got the club in a peefect position if he did want to sell.

IIRC, yes. Although I think it was more a when the stadium is done and the club is running itself rather than needing his money. So we may have a year or two.

Wrong, I remember the very moment at about 1am in Perpignan outside the irish bar Chatting to Eamonn and he said exactly "Once the new stadium is complete i'm handing over the reigns", I told him don't be so daft and that bringing in the stadium was just the beginning of the fun times.

I hope he stays around for a long time yet.

Also, I'm pretty sure McManus isn't the biggest shareholder in the club too.

True; Coleman's holding company (Crowther Street Holdings Ltd) is the biggest single share holder (45,000 out of 275,835) although the McManus family together hold about 79,000.

The two directors who have quit both have substantial shareholdings (Bell - 35,667 and Lyons 17,850). I would guess at one of two reasons for their quitting; either 1) they were co-opted onto the board to provide developemnt expertise during the delivery of the stadium project; or 2) they are going to cash in on their shares as they now have a value with the stadium asset and will look to sell them to McManus or Coleman (similar thing happened at Warrington at completion of their stadium project).

If you consider that between them they have enough shares to make somebody the biggest shareholder, although some way short of a majority shareholding, it'll be interesting if somebody fancied a punt at owning a stadium. Saints' company structure with many, many small shareholders is a throw back to the days of clubs being run by the local butcher, baker and candlestick-maker. Whether this is good or not for the club going forward I'm not sure. You can understand why McManus and Coleman converted debt into shares though as now between them they have more than a 50% holding and effectively protection from a "hostile" profit seeking take over of the club.

Bell was issued with some extra 15,000 shares as recently as Dec 1st 2011 taking his shares upto 50,667 taking his share up to 15.2% of the total. Similarly Lyons took 10,000 more shares on the same date (now 8.3% of the total). The share capital is now 332,502 not the figure you state (sorry for being a pedant).
The extra shares were issues by way of conversion of their share of the £850,000 of total directors loans which were converted to shares; which makes their resignations all the more strange given that it all happened within two months of the close season.
Clearly something happened in those two months - the problem is that what happened is anything but clearly!

Obviously since resigning they may have sold the shares but in a closed company like this, it is not straight forward.

Sir Mac's (& family)stake is now down slightly to 23.7%. Coleman has 83,333 (25.0%) shares, so they control under 50% between them. However, Coleman has a large convertable loanstock which if fully converted would give him approx 39% of the total, which IMO is fair enough given the amount he has invested.

With it being a "closed company" I presume that share transactions are private transactions between individuals rather than purchasing vis a stock exchange?

All the way through writing my post I was meaning to qualify that it was based upon the share register as at March 2011 and then forgot to. I was wondering whether the latest loans to shares conversion were pre or post that date.

If I had to put money on anything relating to this I'd back that they are probably too busy with other things to continue as active directors.

You do have to wonder whether the likes of these will one day want to see a return on their investment or whether it is just "written-off" cash for the good of a team they support.

'want' to see a return??

you don't buy into RL clubs to see a return.

You can "hope" you get your money back.... at best...... lol

Is it possible to estimate a price of one share from that? I know you can't go in and just buy a share, but I'm just curious.

The price of a share is the amount you find someone willing to pay for it, you have to buy 20 minimum I think now.

There is no specific set price. I guess in theory you could take the assets of the club negating the debts owed and divide that amount by the amount of shares there are to get a ball park of what you will need to pay, but really..................

back in the day when there were 15000 shares and it only took 100 to be a director (not sure if that has changed) My mum was offered £1000 for each one of what are now my 100 shares!

Yes I think it's still true, but its all co-opting now, totally out of reach of the people with less than 5 figures of shares and 7 figures in the bank.

It is possible that you are actually related to me.



I think I have a relation with 101 shares.