Caboosegg wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2024 8:09 pm
Warrington Wolves: Matt Dufty, Josh Thewlis, Toby King, Rodrick Tai, Matty Ashton, George Williams, Josh Drinkwater, James Harrison, Danny Walker, Paul Vaughan, Matty Nicholson, Lachlan Fitzgibbon, Ben Currie.
Interchange: Zane Musgrove, Joe Bullock, Jordy Crowther, Sam Powell.
Who are the 12 who haven't played in a final?
I'm just curious because from Burgess comments it's sounds likes he had 12 inexperienced players out.
yeah im not sure on this either
Powell, Williams, King, drinkwater, Currie and Bullock have all played in finals
Vaughan may not have played in a final of a comp but has played in a prelim final and 6 SOO matches
Nearly all of them have played in knock out matches either in the superleague or NRL playoffs which are like mini finals
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure
Exiled Wiganer wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2024 9:12 pm
Only a small point, but I don’t think that Danson is 100% owner, as our family have some shares. I am sure others on here will have as well. No idea where they came from but they have been in the family a long time. Whelan offered to buy them all if I recall correctly. We declined of course.
He is 100% owner. That doesn't mean he has to be 100% shareholder.
As I say, it doesn’t matter. But, if you don’t own 100% of the shares of a company, you are not 100% shareholder of that company. You can certainly have control with far less than that, it’s purely the 100% that seems unnecessary and inaccurate.
Exiled Wiganer wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2024 9:12 pm
Only a small point, but I don’t think that Danson is 100% owner, as our family have some shares. I am sure others on here will have as well. No idea where they came from but they have been in the family a long time. Whelan offered to buy them all if I recall correctly. We declined of course.
He is 100% owner. That doesn't mean he has to be 100% shareholder.
As I say, it doesn’t matter. But, if you don’t own 100% of the shares of a company, you are not 100% shareholder of that company. You can certainly have control with far less than that, it’s purely the 100% that seems unnecessary and inaccurate.
Yes you are right on that point it clearly states he is 100% shareholder.
He is 100% owner. That doesn't mean he has to be 100% shareholder.
Firstly depends on what "type" of shares are held by your family. Controlling or non controlling.
If they are controlling then technically MD is a "part" owner.
If he has over 50% then he has "control" which is the key (only) thing.
You answered your own question they have to be normal shares . Control shareholders have to have over 50 % of shares. You can buy shares in many sports clubs even city have share holders but dont own any part of it and not accountable for any financial shortfall your share price just alters and in some instances become worthless whereas controlling shareholders are. Mr danson had shares in the club. But more importantly bought lenegans 51% so impossible for anyone else to have 50% or more.
But it doesn't stop there he also bought the club and latics with all there debts and assets.
I didn't pose any question. I just laid out the options for the poster.
Back on some of the rugby related points… I think it’s canny of Burgess to point to a lack of experience. However, I think that is a red herring. They made errors because they were under pressure and were being so dominated that they cracked. It had far less to do with the occasion than our play. I was on a call with an occasional Wire fan this morning, who watched it with mates and he simply said that from 10 minutes in, Wigan were in control. We have them no where to go.
Firstly depends on what "type" of shares are held by your family. Controlling or non controlling.
If they are controlling then technically MD is a "part" owner.
If he has over 50% then he has "control" which is the key (only) thing.
You answered your own question they have to be normal shares . Control shareholders have to have over 50 % of shares. You can buy shares in many sports clubs even city have share holders but dont own any part of it and not accountable for any financial shortfall your share price just alters and in some instances become worthless whereas controlling shareholders are. Mr danson had shares in the club. But more importantly bought lenegans 51% so impossible for anyone else to have 50% or more.
But it doesn't stop there he also bought the club and latics with all there debts and assets.
I didn't pose any question. I just laid out the options for the poster.
Yes sorry realised that wasn't best choice of words
