Brewdog Shares

Enzo_L

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81919158#Comment_81919158

Yes you have lashed out.

You made libellous comments about one of the founders, which the moderators removed.

You have called a contributor to this thread a troll.

To a perfectly reasoned and relevant posting you replied "once again, a deliberate obtuse reply".

[Deleted User]

I dispute your claim. No further comment. Everyone is able to read the posts and come to their own conclusions.

Enzo_L

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81919367#Comment_81919367

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81918771#Comment_81918771

Your libellous comment was quoted by @Nebulous2 on page 4 of this thread and is still visible on this site.

Your comment "Once again, a deliberate obtuse reply" quoted above is on page 11 of this thread.

Your comment "You must be a troll. Honestly." was quoted by @wmb194 on Page 10 of this thread and is still visible on this site.

[Deleted User]

I dispute your claim. No further comment. Everyone is able to read the posts and come to their own conclusions.

masonic

I may be in a minority on this point, but I think if you have investments for sale in your shop window or on your bar, you should be subject to FCA regulation. Especially around the marketing of financial promotions. If not, then your shares should only be seen in venues that are.

Dead_keen

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81919455#Comment_81919455

I think that you are completely in line with what successive governments have said. These are the first words in the first document when I searched for "brewdog offer document"

IMPORTANT NOTICE & RISK FACTORS

IMPORTANT NOTICE

This document constitutes a securities note dated 9 September 2020 (the“Securities Note”) issued by BrewDog plc (the “Company”, “BrewDog”, “we”or “us”), prepared in accordance with the Prospectus Regulation Rules made under section 73A and in accordance with Section 84 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (“FSMA”) and has been approved by the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) in accordance with FSMA as competent authority under Regulation (EU) 2017/1129. The FCA only approves this Securities Notes as meeting the standards of completeness, comprehensibility and consistency imposed by Regulation (EU) 2017/1129 and such approval shall not be considered as an endorsement of the quality of the securities that are the subject of this Securities Note. Investors should make their own assessment as to the suitability of investing in the securities.

boingy

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81918763#Comment_81918763

In this case he's very finance-savvy. He simply did not consider this an investment, more a show of support for a company that he liked. He only put in a hundred quid or so - a bit of fun.

It's clear that the Brewdog founders got out of their depth and grew too quickly but in the earlier years they really were a breath of fresh air in a very stale brewing industry. They knew how to court publicity, good or bad, but they also brewed some truly great beers. I wouldn't be surprised to see them go back to those roots and brew on a smaller scale.

I feel for those who have lost significant money on the shares but, to be brutal, that's investing for ya.

Nebulous2

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81919699#Comment_81919699

As I said upthread, I came to them quite late, because of the lunch club as much as anything else, and having time during the day after partially retiring. The beer offering changed regularly, with guest beers on all the time, and regular collaborations with other brewers. In one of the London pubs I visited they had a microbrewery producing local small batch beers.

I've been taken aback at the scale of the project on reading about it since they went into administration. Apparently the Ellon brewery is state of the art and has installed capacity for 2.4 million litres a year. Despite them having some offerings in pretty much every supermarket they have only been producing 800,000 litres a year. It sounds as though the £33million sale price may have been a good deal.

The new owner has said they intend to double output. They have also said they intend to continue offering discounts to the equity for punks - previous shareholders, although the issue would be finding a pub to get your discount.

I'm still seeing a lot of philosophical comments from people saying it was good while it lasted and they got their money's worth. I still hold to the opinion I stated earlier that substantial numbers of the people who bought shares regarded it as a beer club. Especially those who got in earlier, with more modest sums of money.

masonic

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81919681#Comment_81919681

Then the question then becomes, did the employees within those venues in which the scheme was being promoted comply with all relevant regulations in any discussions they may have had with prospective investors? Will the buyer of the company now be liable to any Financial Ombudsman Service decisions to the extent their company or staff acted inappropriately in the course of marketing the financial promotion to punters?

I rather suspect the answer to both questions is no. Brewdog had no FCA authorisations and punters have no regulatory protection relating to financial discussions taking place within Brewdog premises.

TheTelltaleChart

Seriously though, why not ban selling shares in unlisted and barely regulated companies to retail investors? Or alternatively just ban promoting them* in any way to retail investors, but not ban selling the shares, if people manage to hear about it and apply on their own initiative?

This would not prevent a company such a Brewdog from running a fundraising exercise in which punters pay a one-off fee to help the business develop, in return for discounts-for-life. Which is apparently what many "investors" in Brewdog were after anyway. But this way, it would avoid misleading people who thought they were getting something more than that.

The argument that there would be no money to develop new businesses doesn't hold water, because retail investment money is tiny compared to institutional money. And this would not stop collective vehicles (such as investment trusts) which themselves invest in unquoted shares from being sold to retail investors. If a company can only raise money from retail investors directly, that is almost certainly a sign that there is something wrong with it, as an investment.

(*especially in drinking establishments 😉)