If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Heritage Railway and Locomotive share holdings

Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by Flying Phil, Oct 19, 2020.

  1. Flying Phil

    Flying Phil Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2018
    Messages:
    2,696
    Likes Received:
    5,503
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Leicestershire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Many heritage lines have issued shares to raise money for purchase and infrastructure additions/enhancements. Similarly many locomotive restorations and new builds have share issues. We have been told, or have understood, these to be essentially donations with no "real value". This is also, I believe, the case when they become part of the estate on the owners death.
    However is there not - or should there be, a market place for such shares now that the heritage movement is relatively mature?
     
  2. flying scotsman123

    flying scotsman123 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    10,440
    Likes Received:
    17,941
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cheltenham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Why would there be a market for shares that give no return - who'd want to buy them?
     
  3. mdewell

    mdewell Well-Known Member Friend

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,653
    Likes Received:
    2,564
    Occupation:
    UK & Ireland Heritage Railways Webmaster
    Location:
    Ruabon, Wrexham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Perhaps someone who would like to have control of any voting rights associated with the shares. . .
     
  4. Lplus

    Lplus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    991
    Location:
    Waiting it out.
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    If they have no value except for conferring voting rights they should be either extinguished on the death of the owner or sold on for a donation to the item concerned. All these old "lost" shares do nothing but dilute the control of the shareholders over the organisation.
     
    johnofwessex likes this.
  5. Flying Phil

    Flying Phil Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2018
    Messages:
    2,696
    Likes Received:
    5,503
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Leicestershire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    There is also the asset value.... We know a new build pacific will cost approx £4m, what is the value of a restored Bulleid Pacific with 10 years on the boiler ticket?
     
  6. Flying Phil

    Flying Phil Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2018
    Messages:
    2,696
    Likes Received:
    5,503
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Leicestershire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    ....So "sold on" would imply they do have a value to some one or to some charity? Should, or could that charity offer a percentage of the nominal share cost?
     
  7. Lplus

    Lplus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    991
    Location:
    Waiting it out.
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    They could, so when the shares were handed to new donors in return for new donations the organisation issuing the shares gained some further income. Personally I'd suggest they should be extinguished. They were a gift to a donor in return for his gift and should be treated as nothing more. In that way the organisation could issue new shares for the full value of a donation.
     
  8. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,495
    Likes Received:
    23,734
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The catch there is that the current rights in the shares are those that the shareholder signed up to at the time they bought the shares, and that to change the rights, the company will have to go through whatever legal processes are required to change shareholders' statuses.
     
  9. Lplus

    Lplus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    991
    Location:
    Waiting it out.
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Accepted - but this thread is about suggestions for the future, so such changes could be brought in. Of course, as has been seen elsewhere dilution of the voting rights of the shareholders can be seen as a benefit to the more autocratic trustees...
     
  10. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,105
    Likes Received:
    57,436
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Many lines have done that in the past; I wonder though how many will do it in the future. Technically, if you are a plc and you offer shares, they are treated as an investment by those prospective buyers; that comes with a whole world of regulatory pain from the Financial Conduct Authorities. So a share issue is an expensive way to raise capital, and that is before you get to the ongoing costs of maintaining details of a shareholder long after any money they invested is used up. Look at the WSR shareholder list; it has hundreds of people on it whose investment was £5. How many times more than that has been spent over the years dutifully complying with maintaining them on the register? The madness in some set ups is that a person who donated £5 forty years ago is somehow considered to have greater rights than someone who has paid an annual membership fee perhaps five times higher this year.

    As for selling a shareholding on the open market: how does that benefit the host railway? Once a share is sold, any ability of the host railway to raise further money from that share is lost, but they potentially still have the admin involved in changing a name on a share register if it is sold privately.

    My own view is that private investment in a railway company or locomotive is a poor way to structure things. If what you want to do is make a donation, then make one: the defining point of a donation being that it is made with no thought of return benefit. If what you want to do is have some measure of control, then that is best achieved by joining a society, for which you get voting rights all the time you remain a member. Structuring as a company with shares when what you are really doing is soliciting donations is a very inefficient way to go about raising capital in this sector.

    Tom
     
    jnc, Andy Williams and johnofwessex like this.
  11. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,495
    Likes Received:
    23,734
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Am I right in thinking that the available company structures have changed since many preservation organisations were set up, and therefore that options exist that weren't available 50-odd years ago?
     
  12. D1039

    D1039 Guest

    We go over this ground with suggestions of ‘donation appeals good, share issues bad’.

    SVR (Holdings) plc 2016 share offer raised £2,548,595 gross, £2,427,348 net. The initial cost was 4.75%. There was an additional £83,000 in donations. The previous share offer also cleared £2m gross. (Even without share offers, ad hoc purchases have averaged approximately £145,000 per year.)

    For comparison, the SVR’s two most recent grand appeals are Falling Sands Viaduct £397,000 and its Fight Back Fund (FBF) £900,000 (including some share sales).

    Its share offers – ‘the chance to own part of the Railway’ and travel benefits - raise much more than appeals. Taking the most recent the SVR’s share issue outperforms its FBF donation appeal by around 2.5:1. The annual cost of keeping in touch (some advantage there) doesn't bridge that 2.5:1 gap.

    IMO it’s what works for each line, without a ‘good’ or ‘bad’.

    Yes: Community Benefit Societies, Charitable Incorporated Organisations et al.

    I can think of some groups whose shares are non-transferrable, others where there's a vote per shareholding. Anything that is a plc has conditions attached. It's difficult enough to get a stockbroker to trade the shares.

    (For the SVR plc it is an unlisted company and its shares are not currently quoted on any trading platform, nor are there any matched bargain facility arrangements. There is currently no secondary market in the shares and shareholders may only sell their shares by way of private bargain if they can themselves find a buyer. I’ve bought shares for my daughters and they’ll inherit our minor shareholding too.)

    Patrick
     
    35B likes this.
  13. Pete Thornhill

    Pete Thornhill Resident of Nat Pres Staff Member Administrator Moderator Friend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    7,498
    Likes Received:
    5,455
    Indeed Patrick.

    Also, don’t forget that if you are offering travel incentives you can recoup some of the costs via secondary spend. I am a SVR shareholder, I never did it to see a return, however, the free travel it provides actually encourages me to spend the money saved in other places on the railway. These are visits I wouldn’t necessarily make but the free travel is the deal breaker.
     
    D1039 and Matt37401 like this.
  14. Lplus

    Lplus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    991
    Location:
    Waiting it out.
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Membership of a society can be subject to censure, particularly if a person is intending to vote against the incumbents. Ownership of shares is much more difficult to remove.
     
    jnc likes this.
  15. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,105
    Likes Received:
    57,436
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Maybe we'll have to agree to disagree. Though it would be interesting to know whether the amount of money raised would have been significantly different had the SVR chosen to base its appeals primarily through a charitable route rather than a shareholding one.

    On travel perks: I get those on the Bluebell as a life member (free first class travel) and I think over the years I have done fairly well if you measured it strictly in cash terms. Though increasingly, and specifically this year, I choose to forego the privilege and pay a fare.

    I'm lucky to be well enough off (not rich, but not poor) to find I get more enjoyment from donating money to causes I believe in and seeing the impact, rather than buying things for myself. The railway is one such cause, though not the only one. No doubt economists might find an interesting study in why many people choose to volunteer their labour and undergo expense, when on the face of it they might be wealthier if they used such time to work for their own material gain.

    Tom
     
    Paul42, 35B and 2392 like this.
  16. Flying Phil

    Flying Phil Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2018
    Messages:
    2,696
    Likes Received:
    5,503
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Leicestershire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Tom
    It would be good to get not only an economists view, but also a sociologist and a medical/psychological view on our hobbies/obsessions!
     
  17. flying scotsman123

    flying scotsman123 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    10,440
    Likes Received:
    17,941
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cheltenham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Or not as the case may be! :eek:
     
  18. D1039

    D1039 Guest

    The £397k Falling Sands one was through the CT. The Fight Back Fund mostly wasn't. I believe (note: this is not official) the railway needed the flexibility to pay bills such as salaries and a charity's objects may not allow them to fund the plc to pay them. I feel pretty certain though that a difference between £0.9m to £2.4m wouldn't be bridged by a charity appeal and gift aid in any case.

    Patrick
     
  19. D1039

    D1039 Guest

    Here's a question, what are the largest non-share appeals across heritage railways (excluding grants and bequests)? My gut feeling is most top out around a quarter to half a million and only one of the Covid ones has gone past that point. The Bluebell extension, GWSR, Great Central and NYMR bridges though come to mind as possibles.

    Other than the SVR, have there been there any share issues of the same magnitude?

    (Sorry if this goes a bit O/T)

    Patrick
     
  20. Pete Thornhill

    Pete Thornhill Resident of Nat Pres Staff Member Administrator Moderator Friend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    7,498
    Likes Received:
    5,455
    The SVR flood damage appeal in 2007 topped out at around £500k so I’d say you are probably right to say that is the general ceiling.

    The GWSR share appeal raised a fair bit but not the level of the SVR.
     

Share This Page