NLV Resolution Amendment

[NLVMalc]

To All Shareholders and Fans:

 

The letter to the board of directors asking them to convene a General Meeting will be delivered to the club today at 2.00pm. An important part of the process has been to gain as much support from the wider shareholder base as possible. However, following comments from shareholders and on advice from our solicitors, the requisition presented to the board today will be slightly different from the one sent to all shareholders last week.

 

The reasons for this are two-fold.

 

Firstly, in response to shareholder comments two issues were raised:

i) a desire to have a vote of no confidence in the board, symbolic, but it would be a powerful statement in the event we do not achieve the desired aim at the General Meeting

ii) a desire to vote the current board off even if the special resolutions fail.

 

The special resolutions must be carried by 75% of those voting at the General Meeting. Ordinary resolutions, e.g the vote to remove board members requires only a 50% + 1 majority.

 

Secondly, and pragmatically, if the board fails to call the General Meeting we require 50% of the original shareholders from this requisition exercise to respond once again in order for the shareholders to call the meeting. Thus, we need to contact all 383 who are supporting the call for the General Meeting, and gain replies back from at least 192 before we could call the meeting ourselves.

 

The slight change of plan will be to use a few larger shareholders to register the call for the General Meeting, and in the covering letter identify the number of shareholders supporting the calling of the General Meeting. Also, it means that the board do not have a ready made database of people to contact in an effort to persuade them to change their minds, unlikely I know but…

 

The small, but significant amendment is as follows:

 

The removal of the sentence:

 

Proposing the following as ordinary resolutions, subject to the passing of the special resolutions above:

 

The addition of a vote of no confidence in the board that will come just before the vote to remove the directors, the wording is below:

 

THAT the shareholders have no confidence in the current Board of Directors of the company;

 

Fundamentally the resolutions remain the same, but this small amendment will strengthen our position as shareholders.

 

We have been delight at the response from Mo Chaudry and Mark Sims to the invitation by the board to buy 24.9% of shares. The offer of a Port Vale Consortium, should be welcomed by them and the process of due diligence started immediately.

 

I will try and answer any questions about the above but please be assured that our sole intention is represent the shareholders as best we can, and we believe we have listened to the concerns expressed to us and responded appropriately.

 

I will be traveling most of the day London-Vale Park-Torquay, but will try and get on OVF as 3G access allows.

 

Malcolm Hirst

NLV

[newchapel valiant]

Keep up the good work Malcolm, NLV are doing a fantastic job and for this i thank you.

[valetillidye]

its like watching a game of chess this !

 

fortunately for us both the NLV and the new takeover consortium of messrs Chaudry and Simms appear to be about 3 moves in front of the board

 

keep up the good work guys !

[points-with-bone]

Pawn to Queen's Bishop four.

 

Your move.......

 

Points-with-Bone

[Sonny]

its like watching a game of chess this !

 

fortunately for us both the NLV and the new takeover consortium of messrs Chaudry and Simms appear to be about 3 moves in front of the board

 

keep up the good work guys !

 

The problem with this board is that they are always reactive not proactive ===

[valetillidye]

The problem with this board is that they are always reactive not proactive ===

 

Bratt and Jacko are more suited to snakes and ladders in my opinion !

 

Jacko being the snake and Bratty having a bit of a thing for ladders

 

:D:D

[newchapel valiant]

Bratt and Jacko are more suited to snakes and ladders in my opinion !

 

Jacko being the snake and Bratty having a bit of a thing for ladders

 

:D:D

 

That made me laugh :laugh:

[geosname]

That made me laugh :laugh:

 

Me too ===

[Tone]

You say "The slight change of plan will be to use a few larger shareholders to register the call for the General Meeting".

 

Will those shareholders be told personally that their names will be given in support?

[paulsuwb]

Very wise moves, keep chipping away rather than trying to build rome in a day. Good work NLV.

[Edge81]

To All Shareholders and Fans:

 

The letter to the board of directors asking them to convene a General Meeting will be delivered to the club today at 2.00pm. An important part of the process has been to gain as much support from the wider shareholder base as possible. However, following comments from shareholders and on advice from our solicitors, the requisition presented to the board today will be slightly different from the one sent to all shareholders last week.

 

The reasons for this are two-fold.

 

Firstly, in response to shareholder comments two issues were raised:

i) a desire to have a vote of no confidence in the board, symbolic, but it would be a powerful statement in the event we do not achieve the desired aim at the General Meeting

ii) a desire to vote the current board off even if the special resolutions fail.

 

The special resolutions must be carried by 75% of those voting at the General Meeting. Ordinary resolutions, e.g the vote to remove board members requires only a 50% + 1 majority.

 

Secondly, and pragmatically, if the board fails to call the General Meeting we require 50% of the original shareholders from this requisition exercise to respond once again in order for the shareholders to call the meeting. Thus, we need to contact all 383 who are supporting the call for the General Meeting, and gain replies back from at least 192 before we could call the meeting ourselves.

 

The slight change of plan will be to use a few larger shareholders to register the call for the General Meeting, and in the covering letter identify the number of shareholders supporting the calling of the General Meeting. Also, it means that the board do not have a ready made database of people to contact in an effort to persuade them to change their minds, unlikely I know but…

 

The small, but significant amendment is as follows:

 

The removal of the sentence:

 

Proposing the following as ordinary resolutions, subject to the passing of the special resolutions above:

 

The addition of a vote of no confidence in the board that will come just before the vote to remove the directors, the wording is below:

 

THAT the shareholders have no confidence in the current Board of Directors of the company;

 

Fundamentally the resolutions remain the same, but this small amendment will strengthen our position as shareholders.

 

We have been delight at the response from Mo Chaudry and Mark Sims to the invitation by the board to buy 24.9% of shares. The offer of a Port Vale Consortium, should be welcomed by them and the process of due diligence started immediately.

 

I will try and answer any questions about the above but please be assured that our sole intention is represent the shareholders as best we can, and we believe we have listened to the concerns expressed to us and responded appropriately.

 

I will be traveling most of the day London-Vale Park-Torquay, but will try and get on OVF as 3G access allows.

 

Malcolm Hirst

NLV

 

 

 

Malcolm,

 

you have been doing brilliant work. I and many more Vale fans are in debt to you!

[ArtyTheValiant]

I can still see it all being "accidentally" put in the shredder, and then blaming someone because they had to go away from the stadium until the end of the season :D===

[NLVMalc]

You say "The slight change of plan will be to use a few larger shareholders to register the call for the General Meeting".

 

Will those shareholders be told personally that their names will be given in support?

 

Tone

 

all the shareholders have signed a new requistion.

[Tone]

Tone

 

all the shareholders have signed a new requistion.

 

Maybe I am being stupid, or I am missing something.

 

You say at the beginning of this thread that "the requisition presented to the board today will be slightly different from the one sent to all shareholders last week".

 

So how can we all have signed it?

[paulsuwb]

presumably he means all the "big" shareholders who's name it's being put in under.