Future EGM

[Jacko51]

It can be whatever it likes it will still hold no legal value whatsoever.

 

You vote individual directors onto or off the board? Where are the required extra votes coming from to remove them and who's going to take over in their place? You can't have a company with no directors and MS and NLV obviously don't fancy the job given the responsibilities the roles bring.

 

Have you got 4 50k shareholders willing to take the roles up immediately without leaving us in limbo while they decide if they want the job or not?

 

We have at least 3 ex directors who would be eligible together with Mark Sims with RW sponsorship.

[Jacko51]

Because they were 'connected parties' which was a contradiction to the articles of association.

 

That is a debateable point. If you look at the relevant clauses in the Act referred to in the Articles, it is actually difficult to work out exactly how it was decided that Mark Sims and Mo Chaudry were connected. The are not related. As far I'm aware they are not married. They were not attempting to buy more than 50% of the equity so they did not actually meet the criteria of being "connected".

 

This time Sims would be using RW's proxy if he chose to accept the directors position while if Chaudry invested he would put his own money in. It would not be a 'joint' bid so to speak

 

See above - it would be no difference - the Board would still reject it.

[Burslem Academicals]

We have at least 3 ex directors who would be eligible together with Mark Sims with RW sponsorship.

 

Not to forget Adams is always willing to be a Director for "footballing reasons".

[JB78]

Mo WILL get involved once the selfish 3 are gone but not whilst they remain.

 

Mark Sims will go onto the board and invest but only if the 3 step down, he will not do it with them.

 

Phil Taylor, Robbie Williams, NLV etc along with many other would be willing to be part of a new board and 'consortium' of investors or helpers as pw regime.

 

Lots of wealthy and knowledgable people will get involved if the 3 step down but NONE of them will do anything in partnership with them.

[1517sharps]

No they haven't

No they don't

If we have to

 

totally agree

[South West Valiant]

Would there be any merit in SEO people using the leftover money to buy shares to use at a future EGM? It was very close last time so it could make all the difference.

 

If the board refuse to sanction it then no one has lost any money and it could be used as a nice PR tool, that the board are refusing to sell shares to ordinary fans, in an attempt to cling on to power. This in itself could provide a further swing against the board in a future vote.

[Jacko51]

Would there be any merit in SEO people using the leftover money to buy shares to use at a future EGM? It was very close last time so it could make all the difference.

 

If the board refuse to sanction it then no one has lost any money and it could be used as a nice PR tool, that the board are refusing to sell shares to ordinary fans, in an attempt to cling on to power. This in itself could provide a further swing against the board in a future vote.

 

I see where you're coming from but it does rather defeat the object of SEO if folk just give them the money anyway. Unless everyone went and asked for their money back after the EGM life Melv did!!

[Stone Valiant]

Would there be any merit in SEO people using the leftover money to buy shares to use at a future EGM? It was very close last time so it could make all the difference.

 

If the board refuse to sanction it then no one has lost any money and it could be used as a nice PR tool, that the board are refusing to sell shares to ordinary fans, in an attempt to cling on to power. This in itself could provide a further swing against the board in a future vote.

 

There are 2 considerations with this.

 

The money is spent on new shares and the club go into admin which means it is wasted money.

 

Would the current board sanction the purchase of new shares to anyone other than those they trust now since they have the power of veto

[South West Valiant]

I see where you're coming from but it does rather defeat the object of SEO if folk just give them the money anyway. Unless everyone went and asked for their money back after the EGM life Melv did!!

 

It's definitely a gamble, but so is SEO. I'm not saying people should recklessly abandon SEO and rush to buy shares, but it'd be interesting to work out how many new shares would be needed to swing the results of the last EGM.

 

SEO is fine at the moment as there doesn't appear to be too many alternatives on the table. I just think it's important to look into the possibility of other options, even if it means abandoning SEO principals. It needs to remain about removing the board and not ideologies.

[Howjy04]

I see where you're coming from but it does rather defeat the object of SEO if folk just give them the money anyway. Unless everyone went and asked for their money back after the EGM life Melv did!!

 

In both cases Jean it would cost them.Money to find to match any new share purchases to keep themselves in situ or as you said sell your shares back to them.If they refuse to do either what a PR disaster that would be for them(Do they care?)Remember also,another 1000 shares approx owned by anti board people would have got rid of Oliver and had Clough appointed in June.It would be interesting if there was a sudden surge of share buying to see what they would do.

[South West Valiant]

There are 2 considerations with this.

 

The money is spent on new shares and the club go into admin which means it is wasted money.

 

Would the current board sanction the purchase of new shares to anyone other than those they trust now since they have the power of veto

 

On the first point - that is a potential risk but I think if we went into admin the current board would be liable to legal action from shareholders?

 

Secondly - As I said, there'd be know harm in trying if the figures added up. If the purchase is allowed there'd hopefully be enough to remove the board. If they're vetoed no one loses any money and would potentially make more people angry with the board because they're turing down small share purchases as a self preservation tool.

 

Perhaps Mo, or whoever it may be that gets in next, could agree to transfer any new shares purchased for a season ticket?

[South West Valiant]

In both cases Jean it would cost them.Money to find to match any new share purchases to keep themselves in situ or as you said sell your shares back to them.If they refuse to do either what a PR disaster that would be for them(Do they care?)Remember also,another 1000 shares approx owned by anti board people would have got rid of Oliver and had Clough appointed in June.It would be interesting if there was a sudden surge of share buying to see what they would do.

 

Thats a very good point actually - it won't have a detrimental effect on SEO either way, as if enough people buy the board will have to stump up the money to match them if they want to survive.

[werstayinup]

Sadly as i said at the last EGM,i think that was our one and only best chance to get rid of them,i am certain they wont allow it to be that close again,so for me it's a bit pointless.

 

I really do think we are stuck with them now for a very long time,still it's ok as we have never had it so good.

[Fosse69]

Sadly as i said at the last EGM,i think that was our one and only best chance to get rid of them,i am certain they wont allow it to be that close again,so for me it's a bit pointless.

 

I really do think we are stuck with them now for a very long time,still it's ok as we have never had it so good.

The element of surprise has gone, can we come up with something else. Maybe the M Sims decision will throw something up.

[Pete T]

Mo WILL get involved once the selfish 3 are gone but not whilst they remain.

 

Mark Sims will go onto the board and invest but only if the 3 step down, he will not do it with them.

 

Phil Taylor, Robbie Williams, NLV etc along with many other would be willing to be part of a new board and 'consortium' of investors or helpers as pw regime.

 

Lots of wealthy and knowledgable people will get involved if the 3 step down but NONE of them will do anything in partnership with them.

 

If the pro-change buy no shares, or are not allowed to buy shares then we're stuffed. The 3 on the board know this and know that v few new "small scale supporter's" shares will be bought whilst they are in charge. Meanwhile they are safe in their priveliged positions as " Port Vale fans " and we watch and wait to see if they can muddle through until the next (scheduled) egm to pass the accounts.

 

It's a stand off. As long as the board just do nowt (Deak is workin hard on short payment in, long obligation deals) they are OK for now.

 

Then what? Will the SEO come back? Will Vale fly up to no.1 in the table and make everything all right?

 

It's personal now. A matter of principle. It will be fascinating to see how it all unfolds. I, for one, regret my charity donation now. I wish I'd spent it on booze beer ladies n bikes as usual.

 

I am out of love with Vale now. Cheers V2001.