Egm

[Timothius]

Yes but wouldnt any replacement have to be voted on by shareholders?

 

Yes but if the egm had been held the day before the current board would be gone. This way they get the chance to vote on new directors who we then can't remove at the same meeting unless resolutions are worded very well. Guess we have to trust the SC solicitors on this.

[Caroline Oakes]

My view on this, is that the reason for the deadline being extended ro call the meeting was to iron out any confusion regarding the agenda. In my opinion the agenda wont be the problem, it will be the number of votes we need, whether the EGM was combined with the AGM or not, this was always going to be the main issue for me. It all depends now on whether people like Stan Meigh keep to their word and whether PD and PM have managed to offload their and HJ's shares onto people who will vote in their favour.

 

I think that is already a done deal! Voted on at the AGM, vote to save at the EGM:(

[The Wonder of You]

I am sure the SC along with the Solicitors have all angles covered. If any of you think of some nightmare scenario then bring it up tomorrow or at least bring it up on here so SC can see it. The more this is discussed the more we can go in there armed.

 

This board dont have all the answers, it is a matter of thinking like you're enemy.

 

At least I hope the end is now in sight.

 

Even if by some miracle they cling on through sculduggery or whatever, who the hell is going to buy a ST for next year.

 

Its voted out at EGM or Admin, either way I will be over the piggin moon when they turn the lights out on this woeful episode in Vale's history.

[Trentham Lakes Valiant]

This is the worse case scenario IMHO, confusion will reign and underhand tactics will prevail. I can't see the club entering the agm with no replacements for Deakin and Oliver for example. Very worried and disappointed.

 

Tend to agree. The SC need to handle this flawlessly or it will end up as complete pig's breakfast==n==

[Regal Beagle]

Surely it is irrelevent that the EGM and AGM are the same time?

 

If we have enough votes to remove them we have enough votes to decline the new members.

 

If we don't then we can't remove them in the first place.

[cheeky]

An example of the agendas (again my opinion only):

 

AGM (clubs) Agenda - nominate 2 replacements for Deakin and Oliver.

 

EGM (SC's) Agenda - Remove all four directors from the board. And vote for the 6 nominees for the interim board (of which 4 will be elected).

 

So the voting slip could look like:

 

Appt MrX

Appt MrY

 

Remove GO

Remove ML

Remove PM

Remove PD

Appt MT

Appt PH

Appt MS

Appt PW

Appt LR

Appt NR

 

Regardless of whether GO/PD step down, the boards replacements still have to be voted on by the shareholders. Now if the SC have the majority of the shares behind them, I can't see this happening, if they don't, then how will we remove PM or ML in any event. In the circumstances, I can't see us ending this EGM with a board that is not quorate. It will be interesting to see the make up of the board though, as there are a lot of permutations there, depending on the voting.

[Rudgie's Flat Cap]

Would Bratt be eligible to stand as he is now longer a shareholder, assuming that he actually sold all of his shares to Lloyd in the first place and didn't retain some or he has not purchased any recently?

[WEMBLEY OF THE NORTH]

I wish it had been called for 12th March. I will be on a boat on it's way to Norway on 13th with dodgy internet access:ohmy:

[Fosse69]

I am confused, what will be first the AGM or the EGM as surely the AGM will affect the EGM?

 

WTF are they (the club) up to?

Does it matter? Most votes are proxies which are usually cast a few days before, in EGM vote off all directors and elect Interim Board, in AGM vote against all board sponsored candidates. We must get a clean sweep in both meetings, unless board do not sponsor any candidates.=========

[Trentham Lakes Valiant]

Would Bratt be eligible to stand as he is now longer a shareholder' date=' assuming that he actually sold all of his shares to Lloyd in the first place and didn't retain some or he has not purchased any recently?[/quote']

 

One word - proxy. The SC are relying on proxies so there's nothing to stop the Board using them

[Fosse69]

Yes but if the egm had been held the day before the current board would be gone. This way they get the chance to vote on new directors who we then can't remove at the same meeting unless resolutions are worded very well. Guess we have to trust the SC solicitors on this.

But the new directors cannot be elected if enough votes go against them.======

[zaza123]

Would Bratt be eligible to stand as he is now longer a shareholder' date=' assuming that he actually sold all of his shares to Lloyd in the first place and didn't retain some or he has not purchased any recently?[/quote']

 

That's an interesting question. Does he actually need any shares? Weren't the standing directors immune from the 50k rule at the time it was instigated thus giving them another railing to chain themselves too?

[Howjy04]

But the new directors cannot be elected if enough votes go against them.======

 

What if the new directors buy enough shares to make sure they get voted on?

[ArtyTheValiant]

Any new directors would have to invest £50,000 for the qualifying purchase of shares.

 

Who would invest that amount of money in a club that is so riddled with debt and facing possible administration?

 

And also, i don't think any NEW shares can be issued now until after the AGM/EGM??

[melv]

What if the new directors buy enough shares to make sure they get voted on?

 

When is the cut off date for buying shares?