Black & Gold Suspend Protests

[cheeky]

So let me just get this straight, you are actually willing the club to go into admin before Christmas and are actively trying to acheive this?

 

I have a lot of respect for the SEO folks, i think it's definitely had an impact in bringing change, however, I am struggling to understand the seeming overwhelming motivation to continue this by many posters. The last 12 months has seen massive change - we now have commitment that every memebr of the original board except for Mike Lloyd will be gone by Christmas. I know however that the board have not always been 100% honest, but can they really go back on such clear resignations as this without being lynched? No.

 

Whilst I am also sceptical about this mystery 'major investment' I think in the light of Mo's statement this week, that is the best you can hope for. I think Vale is no longer flavour of the month for Mo and you won't see him back again, whatever happens. Therefore, what exactly will be acheived by continuing SEO? As many posters have already stated, further damage to the club and potentially admin.

 

I prepare to be shot down but I really think now is the time for everyone to unite INSIDE Vale park. And if the AGM comes and GO and BB try to wriggle out or the mystery investment fails to materialise then by all means, at that point the board room should be stormed after the match. Personally, I think it's time to get back to the football until the AGM comes around....

 

I will not set foot inside Vale Park until cast iron, legally binding guarantees are in place the Oliver and Bratt are leaving the board.

 

With regards to this new "investment", Mo's bid was for £1.2m of new shares, a restructuring of the Council loan, a board that consists of professional business men with contacts, experience and ability, and the cumulative total of the offer was £5m.

 

Now if the new "investment" that Deakin and Lloyd are on about surpases this, then hats off to them. If it is anything less than Mo's offer, then how can it be considered acceptable? Why choose a lesser offer, other than it suits their own agenda and self serving principals? This is the key for me. A viable and forward thinking proposal was on the table, that subsequently also added Mark Sims (a life-long Vale fan lest we forget) to the equation. If this was rejected for a lesser proposal, then the justification in doing so, will need to be good.

[i vale]

I will not set foot inside Vale Park until cast iron, legally binding guarantees are in place the Oliver and Bratt are leaving the board.

 

With regards to this new "investment", Mo's bid was for £1.2m of new shares, a restructuring of the Council loan, a board that consists of professional business men with contacts, experience and ability, and the cumulative total of the offer was £5m.

 

Now if the new "investment" that Deakin and Lloyd are on about surpases this, then hats off to them. If it is anything less than Mo's offer, then how can it be considered acceptable? Why choose a lesser offer, other than it suits their own agenda and self serving principals? This is the key for me. A viable and forward thinking proposal was on the table, that subsequently also added Mark Sims (a life-long Vale fan lest we forget) to the equation. If this was rejected for a lesser proposal, then the justification in doing so, will need to be good.

 

Top post ===

[Nottingham Valiant]

I will not set foot inside Vale Park until cast iron, legally binding guarantees are in place the Oliver and Bratt are leaving the board.

 

With regards to this new "investment", Mo's bid was for £1.2m of new shares, a restructuring of the Council loan, a board that consists of professional business men with contacts, experience and ability, and the cumulative total of the offer was £5m.

 

Now if the new "investment" that Deakin and Lloyd are on about surpases this, then hats off to them. If it is anything less than Mo's offer, then how can it be considered acceptable? Why choose a lesser offer, other than it suits their own agenda and self serving principals? This is the key for me. A viable and forward thinking proposal was on the table, that subsequently also added Mark Sims (a life-long Vale fan lest we forget) to the equation. If this was rejected for a lesser proposal, then the justification in doing so, will need to be good.

 

Cheeky, I 100% agree with your post - I think the board have been almost criminal in not accepting Mo's offer. My point is that we now have to look at the current situation - presuming Mo has now gone never to return, what will SEO achieve given that there is no real alternative? If Mo comes back and changes his statement of this week then great, I hope he is the new chairman by Christmas. However, the tone of his statement was of a beaten man and I don't think he has the same urge to get involved now, I hope I am wrong.

[Guest thecharlatans]

I will not set foot inside Vale Park until cast iron, legally binding guarantees are in place the Oliver and Bratt are leaving the board.

 

With regards to this new "investment", Mo's bid was for £1.2m of new shares, a restructuring of the Council loan, a board that consists of professional business men with contacts, experience and ability, and the cumulative total of the offer was £5m.

 

Now if the new "investment" that Deakin and Lloyd are on about surpases this, then hats off to them. If it is anything less than Mo's offer, then how can it be considered acceptable? Why choose a lesser offer, other than it suits their own agenda and self serving principals? This is the key for me. A viable and forward thinking proposal was on the table, that subsequently also added Mark Sims (a life-long Vale fan lest we forget) to the equation. If this was rejected for a lesser proposal, then the justification in doing so, will need to be good.

 

mo ran a mile as soon as he found out about the council loan.

 

If the new investors are willing to not try and barter over £10k when negotiating the future of the club then i will be happy

[fairportnick]

I will not set foot inside Vale Park until cast iron, legally binding guarantees are in place the Oliver and Bratt are leaving the board.

 

With regards to this new "investment", Mo's bid was for £1.2m of new shares, a restructuring of the Council loan, a board that consists of professional business men with contacts, experience and ability, and the cumulative total of the offer was £5m.

 

Now if the new "investment" that Deakin and Lloyd are on about surpases this, then hats off to them. If it is anything less than Mo's offer, then how can it be considered acceptable? Why choose a lesser offer, other than it suits their own agenda and self serving principals? This is the key for me. A viable and forward thinking proposal was on the table, that subsequently also added Mark Sims (a life-long Vale fan lest we forget) to the equation. If this was rejected for a lesser proposal, then the justification in doing so, will need to be good.

 

 

As Mo's offer was for £1.2M how can the new offer surpass it and stay within the 24.9% which (New) LLoyd(our) wants to keep.

 

Starve the *******s out.

[cheeky]

Cheeky, I 100% agree with your post - I think the board have been almost criminal in not accepting Mo's offer. My point is that we now have to look at the current situation - presuming Mo has now gone never to return, what will SEO achieve given that there is no real alternative? If Mo comes back and changes his statement of this week then great, I hope he is the new chairman by Christmas. However, the tone of his statement was of a beaten man and I don't think he has the same urge to get involved now, I hope I am wrong.

 

I appreciate what you are saying, and maybe I am more militant/stubborn (delete where appropriate) than some, but if Lloyd and Deakin are to stay as a form of compromise, then I expect any investment to at least be of the equal of Mo's bid. Now if it isn't I would abandon SEO, if Lloyd and Deakin were also to leave. As you say, Mo may never come back now, and that is something to take into consideration with regards to my stance, but for me to come back, it was always a clean sweep of the current heirachy. Should I compromise on that (Deakin and Lloyd staying) then I certainly am not going to compromise on an investment proposal, if it only serves the purpose of re-affirming Lloyd and Deakins positions.

[Andyregs]

mo ran a mile as soon as he found out about the council loan.

 

If the new investors are willing to not try and barter over £10k when negotiating the future of the club then i will be happy

 

He only pulled out this week?

[X-Valiant]

As Mo's offer was for £1.2M how can the new offer surpass it and stay within the 24.9% which (New) LLoyd(our) wants to keep.

 

Starve the *******s out.

 

2 lots of 24.9% being brought maybe?

[the old bycars tea bar]

the red and white give up the fight campaign group endorse this move by it's rival movement and so does mike lloyd and the fellow boardmembers so much so this afternoon perry deakin has led an impromptu version of the dying fly on the lorne street car park whilst giggling and shouting suckers

[Bede]

Bit disrespectful, Steve.

 

There's a hell of a lot of effort gone into this. We're not about to throw it all away without knowing what we're doing.

[Fosse69]

mo ran a mile as soon as he found out about the council loan.

 

If the new investors are willing to not try and barter over £10k when negotiating the future of the club then i will be happy

I have had enough of your rubbish. IGNORE LIST

[marie]

If Mo comes back and changes his statement of this week then great, I hope he is the new chairman by Christmas. However, the tone of his statement was of a beaten man and I don't think he has the same urge to get involved now, I hope I am wrong.

 

'Mo a beaten man'no way,hes not a multi millionaire for nothing,he's probably finding the whole thing a challenge which keeps him going.

[Warren]

As a supporter, with a supporter's level of knowledge, I am much more pleased with the direction of the club commercially, at boardroom level and on the pitch than a few months ago. The direction of travel now feels right. Go back to January and the idiot Gannon bringing Ex G with 10 minutes to go at 0-0 v Barnet and looking round a forlorn unsponsored stadium, it is easy to see how protest escalated, but its now time to give it a rest.

[FRITTER]

I look forward to seeing you guys IN Vale Park 2moro

 

Why,have they gone?

[Fosse69]

As a supporter, with a supporter's level of knowledge, I am much more pleased with the direction of the club commercially, at boardroom level and on the pitch than a few months ago. The direction of travel now feels right. Go back to January and the idiot Gannon bringing Ex G with 10 minutes to go at 0-0 v Barnet and looking round a forlorn unsponsored stadium, it is easy to see how protest escalated, but its now time to give it a rest.

The job is not yet done, the board is still there, they have moved the hat around, but only words upto now. I will go back when they have gone or M Sims is on the board.