Micky Announces Candidacy To Become A Director

[Spunk Trumpet]

It's a big ask. All I'd say is if Blackpool, Wigan, Bradford the Swanns etc can do it why can't we? You have to aim for the top. In principle why not? We're just a self distructive lot. This attitude goes way way back.

 

We also have had no decent business plan for over a decade and no money!

 

Your examples all did.

[CharlieHarper]

One thing is for certain.

If the vote last week had gone few % round the other way and it was say MC who had bought about Adams joining the board, most of you would be so far over the moon you would be heading off the Venus...

 

We haven't been shafted by Mo for the last few years have we? Try and have a balanced view on the situation, the board are trying everything to maintain power, even though 90% of fans and shareholders want them gone. What business operates where the 90% of the client base hates the supplier?

[Howjy04]

Whats all this about not being able to offer contracts, i thought Perry said he had the power to offer contracts?

 

He did say that on RS .He said he would be discussing things with Micky when Micky got back from holiday.Normal business can be dealt with according to Pezza including contracts .I think the exception is shares transactions .

[1]

The only reason Micky would do this is out of greed. The board could make Micky's job difficult if he refused, but if he really cared about the club he would hold out until the three man board increases. It is nothing to do with him, just stay out of it f f s.

[Phil.j.B]

One thing is for certain.

If the vote last week had gone few % round the other way and it was say MC who had bought about Adams joining the board, most of you would be so far over the moon you would be heading off the Venus...

 

It wouldn't have happened though, because a decent budget would have been made available enabling Mr. Adams to do the job he was employed for.

[Koop]

Not according to the official statement Rich.

 

Usually requires to go to a meeting but it may say different in the articles. Paul, I know there have been cases where appointment of directors have been blocked by the courts as they have been "ulterior motive" and not exercised for the benefit of the company, possible?

[cplowe1]

We also have had no decent business plan for over a decade and no money!

 

Your examples all did.

 

Wouldn't argue with that. We're in the biggest hole ever. It was an in principle question. If we could get some decent leadership, if we could get a decent manager, if we could get united support behind the team, it would be possible. Won't happen though.

[Santa]

It's like a resolution at a General Meeting but all done by post. Allowed by the Companies Act.

[Howjy04]

Usually requires to go to a meeting but it may say different in the articles. articles, I know there have been cases where appointment of directors have been blocked by the courts as they have been "ulterior motive" and not exercised for the benefit of the company, possible?

 

A certain recently departed 'director' springs to mind.

[Chopper Harris]

A manager shouldn't be on the board end of mate. The board just consist of people with the requisite skills in certain areas, Law/finance/commercial etc. Not any man and his (lap) dog.

 

Mate in an ideal world i would agree with you. But nobody knows what Mickey is going to do yet. If he goes against the supporters then yes you are right. However if he puts in 50k and is part of this regime change then he may surprise a lot of people. I will let you know mate when i m next in castle it will be a few weeks unfortunately.

[1]

We dont know yet what his motives or his intentions are though. Mickey is a football man but I cant seem him going against the supporters. With NLV, Mark Sims and Mickey on the board surely things are better than just Bratt, Oliver and Lloyd.

 

I disagree. If Micky joins the board then Bratt and co will have the power to strengthen their own position whilst pushing the others into the background. This scenario could make the evil one's position on the board impossible to surmount whilst also guaranteeing Micky's long term future regardless of results. This is terrible news.

[TheLegalBeagle]

Mate in an ideal world i would agree with you. But nobody knows what Mickey is going to do yet. If he goes against the supporters then yes you are right. However if he puts in 50k and is part of this regime change then he may surprise a lot of people. I will let you know mate when i m next in castle it will be a few weeks unfortunately.

 

Hi CH,

 

I agree. Micky's motives may be genuinely football related but the consequences of his actions are profound and that is why fans and shareholders are in uproar - and herein lies the devilish plan of the remaining 3 directors:

 

4 directors = quorum. MA may be doing this for players etc but he is not going to vote against his employers and even if he did he would be outvoted 3-1.

 

4 directors = Ameriturf.

 

Ameriturf = 24.9% plus 2 board positions.

 

Existing board (including SM and PJ) 28% + Ameriturf 24.9% = 52.9% control (cartel). Board of 6 - all acting in their own self interest.

 

V2001 and prospects of ever bringing about change = gone forever.

 

Your club is indeed falling apart but not as much as if the above occurs.

 

Kind regards.

[1]

A manager shouldn't be on the board end of mate. The board just consist of people with the requisite skills in certain areas, Law/finance/commercial etc. Not any man and his (lap) dog.

 

Exactly. This is purely a move to make the numbers up. Essentially anyone could be the fourth member, as Micky will have no realistic authority in the board room and none of the expertise required to navigate the club financially. Obviously I can't state categorically that he hasn't got relevant business skills, but those responsibilities are outside his role at the club. Micky must be power-hungry, solely money-driven or idiotic to even consider this proposal.

[Vale]

That w@nk3r Paul Bennet (I think - Vale Solicitor) is certainly earning his money coming up with ways of denying shareholders a say or ignoring what they've already said - we don't want Meigh on the board nor his puppet

 

These really are the lowest of the low, I'm convinced we will get rid of them, just that we may have to resort to similar underhand tactics as they have because its clear this lot will stoop to anything to keep them in power

 

They may have fooled a few with this but its clear they've made the vast majority of us even more peed off and more determined than ever to get them out of our club - even if we have to drag them out kicking and screaming

[1]

Maybe Micky is thinking only of this season's signings and simply does not understand / hasn't listened to / hasn't researched / doesn't care about the profound implications this decision may have for PVFC. LB's summary is clear to anyone who reads it. However, Micky may decide to bury his head in the sand regarding long-term impediments.