Don't shoot the Messenger..................

[melv]

What was Glenns answer when asked to step down straight away and use his share's to sponsor someone to keep the board size to a min of 4?

 

(Assuming that he was asked as was promised)

[Howjy04]

Thanks for the reply Dave.I didn't attend the meeting but saw it on You Tube,won't go into details why I wasn't there.My question then is the same as Jean's, why not?Within 2 weeks they have gone back on what they promised,no meeting or presentation to the shareholders or SC.

[marie]

The question is, have any of the non-Board shareholders been made privy to this deal? If the answer to that is yes, then why has Dave, who holds the proxy for our largest shareholder, not been given the same courtesy?

 

Very true Jean,only they know this as per usual!

[Mr Carter]

The question is, have any of the non-Board shareholders been made privy to this deal? If the answer to that is yes, then why has Dave, who holds the proxy for our largest shareholder, not been given the same courtesy?

 

Maybe that's a question that Jimmy could ask Lloyd

[Edge81]

why are you always the messenger and aren't your messages usually wrong?

 

why are you always the ***??

[andy jones]

I have not spoken to Mark Sims since he came back from hols and I left for ireland.

 

Will no doubt catch up when back next week. It is my understanding that Mark wants a meeting and Mike lloyd does too.

 

Regarding consulting with me as the Supporters Club proxy holder I have not been made aware of the contents of the investment. What Mike lloyd has made clear to me is that the Board, not the shareholders, will vote on this and any other investment. As he states that is what a Board of Directors are elected to do.

[cplowe1]

I once called Jean Jackson Janet Jackson by mistake but nobody noticed. Mr Lloyd's argument at BGWMC seemed to be that the shareholders would not be consulted because it is not a practical way to run a business. So, Tesco would not consult its shareholders if it was thinking of opening a new shop. But V2001 as a fan (shareholder) based take over should be different shouldn't it? I'm not dissing the investment because I don't know anything about it (except that the deal is signed). But I agree that under the original ethos it should be put to shareholders. I don't know so, but I would guess Mr Oliver would say so too.

[andy jones]

cplowe1

 

The current Board have chosen not to put it to the shareholders.

 

If the investment is clearly within the 24.9% shareholding agreement and does not involve two or more people working together to gain ownership of the club then it is quite right that the investment should be voted on by the Board only IMHO.

 

However, if it is not as above and they choose to ignore the shareholders then they will be facing a general meeting of shareholders PDQ I would suspect.

[Howjy04]

I once called Jean Jackson Janet Jackson by mistake but nobody noticed. Mr Lloyd's argument at BGWMC seemed to be that the shareholders would not be consulted because it is not a practical way to run a business. So, Tesco would not consult its shareholders if it was thinking of opening a new shop. But V2001 as a fan (shareholder) based take over should be different shouldn't it? I'm not dissing the investment because I don't know anything about it (except that the deal is signed). But I agree that under the original ethos it should be put to shareholders. I don't know so, but I would guess Mr Oliver would say so too.

 

You've been watching Jean/ Janet dancing when Vale score.

[Regal Beagle]

I once called Jean Jackson Janet Jackson by mistake but nobody noticed. Mr Lloyd's argument at BGWMC seemed to be that the shareholders would not be consulted because it is not a practical way to run a business. So, Tesco would not consult its shareholders if it was thinking of opening a new shop. But V2001 as a fan (shareholder) based take over should be different shouldn't it? I'm not dissing the investment because I don't know anything about it (except that the deal is signed). But I agree that under the original ethos it should be put to shareholders. I don't know so, but I would guess Mr Oliver would say so too.

 

I agree with that. The board are there ro represent shareholders. That doesn't mean that shareholders should be privy to all information, it's just not practical. The problem occurs when the huge majority of shareholders (not shares) feel like they're not been represented.

 

I don't know if there is any way back for Lloyd. I feel there was no way back for Bratt and Oliver. And I also feel like we're in a world of trouble if the ex board members are still pulling strings behind the scenes.

[Trentham Lakes Valiant]

I agree with that. The board are there ro represent shareholders.

 

But they don't

[Jacko51]

I once called Jean Jackson Janet Jackson by mistake but nobody noticed.

 

I noticed but I didn't realise you were talking to me. :D

[Regal Beagle]

But they don't

 

As I said in my post yeah.

[pete vale]

Whatever happens now I firmly believe that the current board, previous board, Deakin et al have inflicted the death knell on Vale as we know it. the only question is when, not if.

 

I attended the last game and to be honest with everything that has happened in the last 10/11 months I found myself lacking in belief and enthusiasm for the Team. How many others have either walked never to return or are so close to leaving vale behind forever?.

 

These men have a lot to answer for and I say again that they should hang their heads in shame

[the old bycars tea bar]

Jean - sorry Miss! freudian slip?

 

Howjy04 - not spoken to Perry Deakin but on behalf of the Supporters Club have had emails and chat with Mike lloyd about enabling the fans to question the Board on the new nvestment.

 

If you were at BGWMC you will know that there was a promise from Mike lloyd (who was the only Board member present) to meet with the fans at another Open Meeting to answer questions about the investment.

 

I can confirm that the Board have chosen to turn down our (the Supporters Club) invite and instead we are currently considering an offer whereby the SC compiles a list of questions and I then meet with Mike lloyd to obtain the answers and publicise them.

 

The SC committee are currently considering this and how we would implement it so that all fans are able to log questions to us (Rob Fielding has already emailed me to say the former OVF Supporters Club email is activated if needed) additionally Gary Benson who is the SC's webmaster is in the proces of setting up email, twitter and Facebook facilities for questions to be logged. May i say here and now i would not be comfortable with the arrangement without a third party being present to record and minute the conversation and answers given.

 

All the above will be formally announced (if the majority of the SC committee vote in favour of us doing it - which is likely as otherwise I wouldn't be even raising it here) before Tuesday.

 

BTW I have absolutely no idea what the outcome of the American visit is or who they saw.

 

the bit in bold tells me everthing i need to know, so can we discount all that was said at the meeting as being lies and a sham

 

we will find out on tuesday