Rodger Cleveland and Cleveland Golf

[ava08]

Dumb Question

There is probably multiple threads up here, but I can't find them, but I have a couple of questions. He was the oringinal owner of the company and it was named for him correct? The reason I ask isn't that I am that frigg'n stupid, but I got to thinking: If he was the owner and namesake, does he still gain anything from the company, or did he totally sell out. I know he works for Callaway now, but it just seems weired to me. If you have any info I am interested. Too much time on my hands!

[silversurfer8189]

http://www.clevelandgolf.com/US_about_us.html

[Sidman]

Noting also that you can sell your name and buy it back!

I read about Bobby Grace. He sold his name sake of his putters to MacGregor and then when MacGregor went bust he bought back his name Bobby Grace Putters....

Brand names have value I guess!

How much would Bob Vokey or Scott Cameron be worth? we will soon find out!

[Mainlinegolfer]

[quote name='Sidman' timestamp='1298281665' post='2997083']
Noting also that you can sell your name and buy it back!

I read about Bobby Grace. He sold his name sake of his putters to MacGregor and then when MacGregor went bust he bought back his name Bobby Grace Putters....

[b]Brand names have value I guess![/b]
How much would Bob Vokey or Scott Cameron be worth? we will soon find out!
[/quote]
That guy, Coca Cola, has a really valuable name.

[hef63303]

Roger Cleveland sold the company to Rossignol. He was paid for the company in full at that time and does not receive any payment from Cleveland Golf or Srixon. He was president of the company for a few years after he sold it, under a management contract. Callaway hired him at the completion of that contract. Cleveland was approxmately a $28 million company when he left. It is now considerably bigger than that.

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='ava08' timestamp='1298259863' post='2996652']
There is probably multiple threads up here, but I can't find them, but I have a couple of questions. He was the oringinal owner of the company and it was named for him correct? The reason I ask isn't that I am that frigg'n stupid, but I got to thinking: If he was the owner and namesake, does he still gain anything from the company, or did he totally sell out. I know he works for Callaway now, but it just seems weired to me. If you have any info I am interested. Too much time on my hands!
[/quote]

For sure he sold off controlling interest, but I would NOT assume he let go of "ALL" his stock. Factors that play in this are how much stock is outstanding to sell or buy, and what types of stock certificates are held. When selling off a company, most founders sell what's commonly referred to as controlling interest of market value stock, but might hold on to blocks of said stock, positioning themselves as nothing more then an investor.

[PreppySlapCut]

[quote name='hef63303' timestamp='1298313973' post='2997909']
Roger Cleveland sold the company to Rossignol. He was paid for the company in full at that time and does not receive any payment from Cleveland Golf or Srixon. He was president of the company for a few years after he sold it, under a management contract. Callaway hired him at the completion of that contract. Cleveland was approxmately a $28 million company when he left. It is now considerably bigger than that.
[/quote]
I would be willing to bet that through his sale of the company and under his management contract after he sold the company, he was given stock in Rossignol. When they were purchased by Quicksilver, he likely got another nice pay day.

[Cooper]

reason 501 for Cleveland to drop the name and go with Srixon for everything

[DavePelz4]

[quote name='Cooper' timestamp='1298332347' post='2998566']
reason 501 for Cleveland to drop the name and go with Srixon for everything
[/quote]

Coop think I disagree and would go the exact opposite. The Cleveland name has some nice brand equity with it. Weekly on the tour you're seeing short game commercials for Callaway with Cleveland and Mickelson in it and it validates the Cleveland wedges.

[hef63303]

[quote name='PreppySlapCut' timestamp='1298317356' post='2998055']
[quote name='hef63303' timestamp='1298313973' post='2997909']
Roger Cleveland sold the company to Rossignol. He was paid for the company in full at that time and does not receive any payment from Cleveland Golf or Srixon. He was president of the company for a few years after he sold it, under a management contract. Callaway hired him at the completion of that contract. Cleveland was approxmately a $28 million company when he left. It is now considerably bigger than that.
[/quote]
I would be willing to bet that through his sale of the company and under his management contract after he sold the company, he was given stock in Rossignol. When they were purchased by Quicksilver, he likely got another nice pay day.
[/quote]
Could not be more wrong. Sorry.

[hef63303]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1298314457' post='2997927']
[quote name='ava08' timestamp='1298259863' post='2996652']
There is probably multiple threads up here, but I can't find them, but I have a couple of questions. He was the oringinal owner of the company and it was named for him correct? The reason I ask isn't that I am that frigg'n stupid, but I got to thinking: If he was the owner and namesake, does he still gain anything from the company, or did he totally sell out. I know he works for Callaway now, but it just seems weired to me. If you have any info I am interested. Too much time on my hands!
[/quote]

For sure he sold off controlling interest, but I would NOT assume he let go of "ALL" his stock. Factors that play in this are how much stock is outstanding to sell or buy, and what types of stock certificates are held. When selling off a company, most founders sell what's commonly referred to as controlling interest of market value stock, but might hold on to blocks of said stock, positioning themselves as nothing more then an investor.
[/quote]
Not in this case.

[Pepperturbo]

[quote name='hef63303' timestamp='1298336638' post='2998774']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1298314457' post='2997927']
[quote name='ava08' timestamp='1298259863' post='2996652']
There is probably multiple threads up here, but I can't find them, but I have a couple of questions. He was the oringinal owner of the company and it was named for him correct? The reason I ask isn't that I am that frigg'n stupid, but I got to thinking: If he was the owner and namesake, does he still gain anything from the company, or did he totally sell out. I know he works for Callaway now, but it just seems weired to me. If you have any info I am interested. Too much time on my hands!
[/quote]

For sure he sold off controlling interest, but I would NOT assume he let go of "ALL" his stock. Factors that play in this are how much stock is outstanding to sell or buy, and what types of stock certificates are held. When selling off a company, most founders sell what's commonly referred to as controlling interest of market value stock, but might hold on to blocks of said stock, positioning themselves as nothing more then an investor.
[/quote]
Not in this case.
[/quote]

If you can provide substantiation for your "not...", great, or at least why, then; but if all you got is imagination, then... and if you see an ad in WSJ for VP of Finance, don't bother. Not won't cut it in this case.

[roll - gybe]

Quicksilver is publically traded. Why don't you guys read the docs rather than bickering.

[jmck]

[quote name='Sidman' timestamp='1298281665' post='2997083']
Noting also that you can sell your name and buy it back!

I read about Bobby Grace. He sold his name sake of his putters to MacGregor and then when MacGregor went bust he bought back his name Bobby Grace Putters....

Brand names have value I guess!

How much would Bob Vokey or [b]Scott Cameron[/b] be worth? we will soon find out!
[/quote]

It's Scotty to you bub. The first five letters are free, but that "y" at the end will cost you 25 mil.

Anyhow, slightly more on topic, an individual with a certain name and a company with a certain name are two different things, even if they happen to share the same name. AFAIK, Roger Cleveland has not had anything to do with Cleveland Golf since it was sold. And vise versa.

[dansrixon]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1298386246' post='2999988']
[quote name='hef63303' timestamp='1298336638' post='2998774']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1298314457' post='2997927']
[quote name='ava08' timestamp='1298259863' post='2996652']
There is probably multiple threads up here, but I can't find them, but I have a couple of questions. He was the oringinal owner of the company and it was named for him correct? The reason I ask isn't that I am that frigg'n stupid, but I got to thinking: If he was the owner and namesake, does he still gain anything from the company, or did he totally sell out. I know he works for Callaway now, but it just seems weired to me. If you have any info I am interested. Too much time on my hands!
[/quote]

For sure he sold off controlling interest, but I would NOT assume he let go of "ALL" his stock. Factors that play in this are how much stock is outstanding to sell or buy, and what types of stock certificates are held. When selling off a company, most founders sell what's commonly referred to as controlling interest of market value stock, but might hold on to blocks of said stock, positioning themselves as nothing more then an investor.
[/quote]
Not in this case.
[/quote]

If you can provide substantiation for your "not...", great, or at least why, then; but if all you got is imagination, then... and if you see an ad in WSJ for VP of Finance, don't bother. Not won't cut it in this case.
[/quote]

I'll vouch for the fact that you can take hef63303's word as gospel on this topic.

[roll - gybe]

[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1298386246' post='2999988']
[quote name='hef63303' timestamp='1298336638' post='2998774']
[quote name='Pepperturbo' timestamp='1298314457' post='2997927']
[quote name='ava08' timestamp='1298259863' post='2996652']
There is probably multiple threads up here, but I can't find them, but I have a couple of questions. He was the oringinal owner of the company and it was named for him correct? The reason I ask isn't that I am that frigg'n stupid, but I got to thinking: If he was the owner and namesake, does he still gain anything from the company, or did he totally sell out. I know he works for Callaway now, but it just seems weired to me. If you have any info I am interested. Too much time on my hands!
[/quote]

For sure he sold off controlling interest, but I would NOT assume he let go of "ALL" his stock. Factors that play in this are how much stock is outstanding to sell or buy, and what types of stock certificates are held. When selling off a company, most founders sell what's commonly referred to as controlling interest of market value stock, but might hold on to blocks of said stock, positioning themselves as nothing more then an investor.
[/quote]
Not in this case.
[/quote]

If you can provide substantiation for your "not...", great, or at least why, then; but if all you got is imagination, then... and if you see an ad in WSJ for VP of Finance, don't bother. Not won't cut it in this case.
[/quote]


Pepper, that's a lot of tough talk - especially since anyone with the internet (you clearly have the internet) could have found the correct answer in less time than it took you to write that haughty drivel.

www.sec.gov

[carrera]

My experience in situations like this is as follows. If a founder is selling a business, often it could be to his benefit (and the benefit of other shareholders) to roll over a small portion of his position into the acquiror (the company that they will form to make the purchase). This signals to the buyer, in general terms, that the founder is optimistic about the prospects for the business and is not selling because he thinks the business is heading toward a cliff. This is most often the case if the founder owns a very large share of the business pre-transaction...not someone in the range of 10-20%.

The founder will often sign a management contract or consulting agreement to connect himself with the business for some length of time if there is some goodwill attributed to the founder's involvement with the company.

An acquiror would [u]not[/u] want a founder as a stockholder if the founder was working for a competitor. That would be covered in the founder's post-deal agreement.

I've been in this business a long time and I'll admit I've never heard the expression "controlling interest of market value stock". Perhaps that is a non-US concept or terminology.

I think in the US at least the name "Cleveland" has better brand equity than Srixon, so there is value in keeping the name alive. Despite the fact that the average Joe probably thinks that it refers to the city and not the man.

[hef63303]

Sorry if I came off as glib on this topic. It's just that I am pretty informed on this topic. Unfortunately, that is about as much as I can say in this type of forum.

[hef63303]

[quote name='roll - gybe' timestamp='1298407988' post='3000865']
Quicksilver is publically traded. Why don't you guys read the docs rather than bickering.
[/quote]
Unfortunately, Quiksilver had nothing to do with Roger Cleveland. Their involvement was in 2005-2007 and Roger was long gone.

[roll - gybe]

Correct. Take a look at the ZQK docs with respect to the Rossignol deal. You can trace it all back.