Peter Miller joins the board

[Birdy]

I will recap where I think the confusion lies;

 

I don't think anyone has a problem with sole ownership or a proper fans run club as long as they are done properly, honestly, transparently and with that particular ethos in mind. The problem is we didn't have a proper fans run club and we don't have proper sole ownership, we have a bodge job at best and I am sure the clowns who put us in this position would still insist it is a fans owned club due to the 24.9% rule (which I predict will change now they have majority (or near majority) control).

 

For the club to go into sole ownership it needed the approval of the shareholders, it never did and they are doing it by the back door. The 'fans owned club' should have had the choice to decide whether it remained as it was or to go into sole ownership or a sole consortium which is what is happening now.

 

The supporter shareholders do not have a say in anything anymore, which is fine but at least have the honesty to state this. Everything is a formality now and they are pantamiming the situation to appear democratic, which IMO is nonsense. I also think that as we are headed for a new consortium rule, they should offer all shareholders a return on their shares.

 

Congratulations to Peter Miller and I hope you and the new 'owners' prove many of your critics wrong, me included.

[Andyregs]

Can't see how that vote can represent the majority of the fans views. When I arrived at the ground there was only one person taking votes. I was the second voter on the sheet and there were quite a few in the ground. Could have been a new sheet though.

Many of the supporters that sit around me didn't know a poll was being conducted so didn't have the chance to vote.

 

You could also email. What do you expect, individually addressed voting slips for everyone who may or may not attend a game!

[Andyregs]

I will recap where I think the confusion lies;

 

I don't think anyone has a problem with sole ownership or a proper fans run club as long as they are done properly, honestly, transparently and with that particular ethos in mind. The problem is we didn't have a proper fans run club and we don't have proper sole ownership, we have a bodge job at best and I am sure the clowns who put us in this position would still insist it is a fans owned club due to the 24.9% rule (which I predict will change now they have majority (or near majority) control).

 

For the club to go into sole ownership it needed the approval of the shareholders, it never did and they are doing it by the back door. The 'fans owned club' should have had the choice to decide whether it remained as it was or to go into sole ownership or a sole consortium which is what is happening now.

 

The supporter shareholders do not have a say in anything anymore, which is fine but at least have the honesty to state this. Everything is a formality now and they are pantamiming the situation to appear democratic, which IMO is nonsense. I also think that as we are headed for a new consortium rule, they should offer all shareholders a return on their shares.

 

Congratulations to Peter Miller and I hope you and the new 'owners' prove many of your critics wrong, me included.

 

It was always possible to do this, which was why the 24.9% rule was a farce. It was just that the board we had blocked any investment that threatened their position. For me the blame lies with them rather than those who are just doing what was always possible. Oh, and the idiots at the EGM like Jeff Kent who 'saved' the club! ********s!

[Samwelo]

There's an echo in here!

 

It's the VP acoustics!

[fairportnick]

It's the VP acoustics!

 

I think I've heard their CD.:D

[Jacko51]

I'm slightly confused. Some didn't want a fan owned club as it clearly wasn't working but the same people are now moaning we aren't a fan owned club. There's never going to be an end is there.

 

Do we know the outcome of the poll carried out on Saturday?

 

It wasn't a question of a fan owned club not working, it was the particular fans who "owned" it who were the problem!

 

I am quite happy to have the 24.9% rule removed because it was always a sham. What I don't like is that we now have NO Vale fans on the Board once Mr Oliver has resigned. We have the 24.9% supposedly still in place and a group of guys about whom we know very little in control of our club. The two recently appointed directors have, as far as we can ascertain, rather murky CVs and the current chairman is more changeable than the wind.

 

As I have said before, just because I didn't like Hitler doesn't mean I should vote for Stalin.

[PVTony]

Im quite happy to give them a chance, a chance to prove me wrong as I think they are all full of it :)

 

We have no chance but to give him a chance.

And if he's another B. Bratt?

We are stitched up within an undisposable bag and stuck with what we have now for good or for bad.

I just hope that the new board can put right the retrograde position that their predecessors have taken the club to during their reign over the last few years.

[tisdeano]

We have no chance but to give him a chance.

And if he's another B. Bratt?

We are stitched up within an undisposable bag and stuck with what we have now for good or for bad.

I just hope that the new board can put right the retrograde position that their predecessors have taken the club to during their reign over the last few years.

 

BB and GO and associated will be held responsible form a moral point of view if the new board do not deliver.

 

They as V2001 had chances to get out with an option that had local people, they chose not to.

 

Equally if the new board are great then we should recognise that as well.

[Andyregs]

BB and GO and associated will be held responsible form a moral point of view if the new board do not deliver.

 

They as V2001 had chances to get out with an option that had local people, they chose not to.

 

Equally if the new board are great then we should recognise that as well.

 

They will get no credit from me. They had a golden opportunity with Mo, but chose not to for their own selfish reasons ahead of the clubs and fans best interests. They didn't welcome the new investment with open arms either. B0ll0cks to the lot of them, and the fans who supported them!

[Caroline Oakes]

It wasn't a question of a fan owned club not working, it was the particular fans who "owned" it who were the problem!

 

I am quite happy to have the 24.9% rule removed because it was always a sham. What I don't like is that we now have NO Vale fans on the Board once Mr Oliver has resigned. We have the 24.9% supposedly still in place and a group of guys about whom we know very little in control of our club. The two recently appointed directors have, as far as we can ascertain, rather murky CVs and the current chairman is more changeable than the wind.

 

As I have said before, just because I didn't like Hitler doesn't mean I should vote for Stalin.

 

My thoughts exactly, however I could never explain as clearly as you manage to:yes:

[old sage]

Bratt, Oliver & Co should receive no plaudits only riddicule because they and they alone prevented two local businessmen one of whom is a die hard Vale fan and the other good at being successful from taking over our club and now we are left with a bunch of nomads who have very dodgy CV's. Time will tell if these leopards can change their spots. I fear that like the leopard they have just seized upon wounded prey.

[old sage]

He could be good ,could be bad but now we have absolutely no control of the club. The Port Vale fan owned ethos is now officially dead. We are now owned by a clutch of people and most appear to have a bad CV

I would suggest that some of you read my first post above. Where do I say I support the 'Fan owned' idea?. Anyone who knows me knows I said it couldn't work. I just commented that it is now officially 'dead in the water' and all the small shareholders have no say even with Robbies proxy vote. The only hope of a change is if and when these new guys fall out amongst themselves as will no doubt happen but lets hope they haven't inflicted too much damage by then because by then the likes of Mark Sims & the much maligned Mo Chaudry may not wish to pick up the pieces. Thank you Bratt & Co.

[fairportnick]

It wasn't a question of a fan owned club not working, it was the particular fans who "owned" it who were the problem!

 

I am quite happy to have the 24.9% rule removed because it was always a sham. What I don't like is that we now have NO Vale fans on the Board once Mr Oliver has resigned. We have the 24.9% supposedly still in place and a group of guys about whom we know very little in control of our club. The two recently appointed directors have, as far as we can ascertain, rather murky CVs and the current chairman is more changeable than the wind.

 

As I have said before, just because I didn't like Hitler doesn't mean I should vote for Stalin.

 

I would have preferred Ghengis Khan or even Temujin.:D

[Yukon]

Out of interest, does any one know if Peter Jackson was/ is a Vale fan?

[Mellor!]

He says he's a Vale fan.