Board Supporters Why??

[Timothius]

Heyup one of the shopkeepers has appeared!

[Timothius]

and gone again!

 

Sums these board stogges up. What's up Vale9t9, couldn't you think of an arguement or viewpoint that would be valid?

 

Coward.

[Jinkin John Jeffers]

Not really many board supporters posting on this thread yet, feel free to if you have a valid, fact based reason for supporting the board.

[banbell]

Out of interest, why is a Notts Forest fan posting in support of the board?

 

Its Nottingham Forest mate, Notts is that shower of ***** from the other side of the Trent.

[Twitters]

Its Nottingham Forest mate, Notts is that shower of ***** from the other side of the Trent.

 

That doesn't answer my question.

[Jimmy]

Its Nottingham Forest mate, Notts is that shower of ***** from the other side of the Trent.

 

You mean the original side from the City side of the trent......Your Notts Forest live with it.......And stop sticking your red nose in Vale stuff.

[Timothius]

That doesn't answer my question.

 

And once again ignores all mine!! Is that because they have now real answers? Vale9t9 was on here last night, he commented on quite a few posts with his usual rubbish, but on this thread where he had the opportunity to put across a rational alternative viewpoint he couldn't or wouldn't, why?

[Valiant62]

For me there are two issues about V2001, the ideals and the practice.

The Ideals;

Regarding the ideals of a broad based, supporter owned and led club, protected by the 24.9% rule – I subscribe to those rather in the way that I would feel more affection to FC United of Manchester than to Man Utd. Continuing with that analogy, clearly Man Utd are always going to be significantly better resourced but there are more grounded qualities that FC have that I like. Translating that to Vale and considering the choice of one entity going in either of those two directions, my view would be perjoratively characterised as the “Lil Port Vale” mentality.

Added to that, if a democratic majority vote to get rid of a democratic constitution, paradoxically, I'd have to go with that.

 

The Practice;

The paradox above is a Catch 22 for the board.

There have been governance issues and V2001 communication is a mess.

The “Mo” campaign has been well conducted by Mo and L.B. - both in how they've handled / marketed themselves and in terms of other people firing a whole load of bullets for them. I draw a distinction between an effective campaign and being right and frankly it has become a war – the first casualty of which is truth. Editorial has started to trump objectivity on this site (which is Rob & Mods' privilege, by the way) and the claims and counter claims re Mudie leave me not knowing what to believe. That doubt extends to both sides' analysis of the financial circumstances and I'm surprised at an academic's apparent ratification of the NLV poll which was, I believe flawed.

Was it Marx said “all property is theft”? I guess my view of Mo would be that he's done some ruthless things in the past which have made him wealthy enough now to be benevolent. I wouldn't assume the same is not true of members of the current regime, by the way.

I kind of like the idea of structures which keep the playing field level rather than having to rely on wealthy benefactors, that's not the environment Vale find themselves in, but I would like to see structural changes in football as a wider industry that facilitated that.

I also note that (justified) criticism of the board's record on “democracy” by many on here seems to be delivered in an atmosphere that values the democratic ideal. I'd point out that the Mo option is basically a vote to ditch that ideal in running the club. Whether that's a bad thing or not, we should at least have our eyes open to that fact.

 

WRT the notion that Mo is seeking to buy the club on the cheap, I appreciate the argument about giving face value for each share and understand the shares are unlikely to exceed that. However, in terms of success on the field, there is an argument that (whether through specific purposeful actions by the board or because we're hitting an upward curve in the natural cycle) our “success in the field” stock is low with signs of improvement and that makes it a good time to buy – not for financial gain but in order to benefit from the kudos of success.

As regards valuation of assets, I suspect it's pretty common that football clubs work the system and sail close to the wind much of the time. Campaigners are trying to undermine that, which is all very correct from a governance point of view, but I can't help wondering if V2001 had been allowed to tough it out on the QT and Gannon come good in terms of success on the field and generating income from the playing side whether they'd get to calmer waters.

[For Us All]

I think the current board are doing a good job in exceptionally difficult circumstances during a dire financial climate – looks like we'll make a profit this season, hopefully promotion on the cards, an appointment of a CEO to freshen up the current structure and bring some fresh idea's to the table and actively looking for new investment into the club.

 

I think it's only right that they scrutinize any potential bids/offers properly and if for whatever reason Mo doesn’t tick all the boxes then it is totally correct for them to reject such an offer – after all I don't think theirs any disputing that they only have the interests of Vale at heart.

 

:rollonthefloor:

 

Sorry but you can't be serious?

It must be those recent defeats Forest had against Hull and Sheff.Utd thats done it?

[saintvaliant]

I think the current board are doing a good job in exceptionally difficult circumstances during a dire financial climate – looks like we'll make a profit this season, hopefully promotion on the cards, an appointment of a CEO to freshen up the current structure and bring some fresh idea's to the table and actively looking for new investment into the club.

 

I think it's only right that they scrutinize any potential bids/offers properly and if for whatever reason Mo doesn’t tick all the boxes then it is totally correct for them to reject such an offer – after all I don't think theirs any disputing that they only have the interests of Vale at heart.

 

Are you a Forest fan? If so, it's not we'll make a profit at all. Unless you are referring to Forest.

 

Even the board have now down graded it to break even. Don't be surprised if when we actually get to the year end if that has also magically turned into a loss.

 

Of course, I use we in the sense of Port Vale. Not Notts Forest.

[Fosse69]

Valiant 62.

There is a saying in politics, that governments can never win elections, but only lose them. This is the same for the board, they had the chance to consult the shareholders on investments, they had the offer to argue thier case on here similar to TLG, they promised a business plan and an EGM. What have they done? Nothing, so now they must take the consequencies. MC ? which other investor would have the patience?

[Valiant62]

It's also a lot easier being in opposition than in power.

[saintvaliant]

 

 

I also note that (justified) criticism of the board's record on “democracy” by many on here seems to be delivered in an atmosphere that values the democratic ideal. I'd point out that the Mo option is basically a vote to ditch that ideal in running the club. Whether that's a bad thing or not, we should at least have our eyes open to that fact.

 

 

A sound post, however your argument here is exposed by one crucial flaw when talking about corporate democracy.

 

At present, those running the club are a minority. They have no right to run the club in the manner in which they do by ignoring the majority.

 

If Mo bought 51% at least he would have earned his right to do that by holding sufficient shares to do so. That of course isn't to say he would run the club in that manner.

 

As for abandoning the principle of a fans run club. I actually think a Mo and fan owned club represents the best of both worlds.

 

The finance and acumen of a wealthy owner, with the option for fans to continue to invest and therefore to continue having a very real say in the club. If fans continued to invest, Mo would have to do so in order to protect his majority position - I see that as win, win.