Skip to content


  1. David Brown
    26th May 2024 @ 10:14 am

    Scammers and scoundrels are words that come to mind after reading this cautionary tale of deception and dishonesty. The club was lucky to survive, and in comparison the current owners verge on sainthood.

  2. Paul McCann
    26th May 2024 @ 12:16 pm

    And some still think Bratt did a good job! Unbelievable

  3. T. Barr-Boyce
    26th May 2024 @ 11:23 pm

    The following comment is disputed as factually correct by this website. Our reply to these accusations is below

    “Port Vale fans who, as shareholders, lost money”
    Weren’t these shares non negotiable and therefore had nil value? Didn’t they give those who bought “shares” in Valiant 2001 only voting rights?
    What about the way the protest groups took over the supporters club so that they could use the voting rights of Robbie Williams’s shares – for free. Nil paid shares?
    Who sent the families of the directors animal body parts in the post after OVF published their home addresses and refused to apologise for it?
    All these carpet baggers who came and trashed the club were at first welcomed by the mob after an online hate campaign by OVF had hounded the old directors out.
    I’m on nobody’s side but there’s selective memory going on here.
    What is not open to debate is that, after all the fan groups attempts to put Vale out of business with the Starve ’em Out campaign (as if there was no risk to going into administration), it was the City Council writing off something like 95% of Vale’s debts to creditors that saved the club. A stroke of pure good fortune.
    I see the current owners are referred to as “saints” Still howling at the moon for a free lunch? Some fans never learn.

  4. Rob Fielding
    27th May 2024 @ 9:56 am

    @T Barr-Boyce – You are factually incorrect on so many levels.

    1) Robbie Williams shares were paid for. Once PAID FOR he had the right to pass them on to anyone he liked. The supporters club didn’t “take over” his shares, he willingly passed them on to the SC. This isn’t nil-paid shares where Deakin and Miller simply issued some shares, DIDN’T PAY for them and used them to give themselves roles on the board, one of which had a £100,000 salary.

    2) The value of fans shares isn’t the issue – the issue is that fans paid for them – Deakin and Miller did not. This is what a law firm agreed to pursue them to produce payment of their shares. That law firm isn’t doing the same to fans because their shares were paid for.

    3) Finally…

    a) I don’t know if you are confusing this site with another but OVF never published the home addresses of board members and never refused to apologise for is (I couldn’t have refused to apologise as I was i) never asked to remove any addresses because ii) they weren’t published on here.

    b) If you want to try and throw accusations around then get your facts right.

    c) If you disagree, please show me any screenshots (or any other proof) of OVF “publishing” addresses? Show me any communications asking to remove them? Show me any communications of OVF refusing to do so? There won’t be any because we never published the addresses and we were therefore never asked to take them down.

    I take the reputation of my website very seriously and what you have posted is both wrong and defamatory. I politely ask you to withdraw those false accusations.

    Rob founder

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *