We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Brewdog Shares
Comments
-
As long as the offer was plastered in the requisite risk warnings I doubt it will be illegal. The banner on Crowdcube's homepage reads, "Don’t invest unless you’re prepared to lose all the money you invest. This is a high-risk investment and you are unlikely to be protected if something goes wrong." These are small, often loss making companies that are raising on sites like Crowdcube because they cannot raise equity elsewhere = very, very high risk.
The problem with the idea that retail investors should always be protected from investing in the shares of individual companies is that we'll reach the point where we won't be allowed to invest in anything and companies will complain that they cannot raise capital or debt: at least not in London. We've already seen this with the effective ban on mini-bonds and the death of the ORB market on the LSE (retail bonds) because the regulator decided on far too onerous prospectus provisions when retail investors are involved because it thinks we're all too stupid to understand the risks.
Companies can operate within the law and be shareholder friendly but in the case of Brewdog I remember reading a long time ago that the founders were extremely shareholder unfriendly. For me using the word, "punk" was a clue to their unfriendliness.
5 -
I think that is likely the risk in any investment. What I am mainly referring to is that people are investing and the shares they are actually getting are not real shares as such. Just to add Brewdog shares were not managed by Crowdcube, I know they were for Citymapper. Brewdog shares were managed on Computershare.
I don't think retail customers should be prevented from investing, it is their money to lose, just again I think that investing in hollow shares should be the part which is looked at.
The BBC article a post back just confirms further the investors were played by one founder in particular, I was not aware he had a rich father who helped him, goes against the tale he told everyone. Well he has to live with what he has done, although I doubt he cares. Nobody really believes in his attempts to buy back Brewdog with 10 million were serious, and it was simply a smoke screen to try to imply saving the business. He had far more money to use and did not do so.
2 -
Crowdcube or whichever funding platform was used is the route to offer the shares. Some companies use the LSE. Computershare is a share registrar so even if they were unlisted and you weren't able to trade them easily it sounds like you owned shares.
0 -
I am not sure you understand what I am saying. Of course we owned shares, it was more the type of share that we owned which is a problem.
0 -
I had a look at a couple of the prospectuses the other day and the risks were pretty clearly laid out. Key ones were that the holders of the 'A' shares would always be able to outvote the 'B' ones and (for the post 2017 prospectus) that the 'C' shares meant that the B share holders couldn't expect to get anything if the company failed.
2 -
I don’t think anyone has denied that. I am referring to future events and what the regulator could look at. Because it seems like many people are being sucked in. I think I have stated that three times now….
1 -
It was hyped and marketed into something closely resembling a cult. The real Brewdog fanboy types would absolutely not hear a word said against them - even when shown actual proof of poor behaviour. Cults are generally rather good at extracting money from their followers!
🎉 MORTGAGE FREE (First time!) 30/09/2016 🎉 And now we go again…New mortgage taken 01/09/23 🏡
Balance as at 01/09/23 = £115,000.00 Balance as at 31/12/23 = £112,000.00
Balance as at 31/08/24 = £105,400.00 Balance as at 31/12/24 = £102,500.00
£100k barrier broken 1/4/25
Balance as at 31/08/25 = £ 95,450.00. Balance as at 31/12/25 = £ 91,100.00
SOA CALCULATOR (for DFW newbies): SOA Calculatorshe/her4 -
Justification is a mechanism to avoid the truth of failure.
And so we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.2 -
Didn’t the prospectus/offer document explain?
"I don’t think anyone has denied that. I am referring to future events and what the regulator could look at. Because it seems like many people are being sucked in. I think I have stated that three times now…."
It's the nature of investing in relatively early stage, weak companies. It's often binary; it can work out brilliantly or you lose all of your money. You managed your risk correctly by only investing the minimum. You cannot worry about the mistakes that other people made.
1 -
I can’t really say the same thing again but I refer you back to my previous replies.
0
![[Deleted User]](https://us-noi.v-cdn.net/6031891/uploads/defaultavatar/nFA7H6UNOO0N5.jpg)
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards