You didnt go back this far then? Oh and BTW those who call EGMs are liable for the costs.
Thats not democratic for a supposed Socialist like Kenwright.
Everton Fans Conference 2012 Tonight Recap - Elstone, Jags, Baines, Sharp
- Thread starter BoysInBlue
- Start date
- Status
You didnt go back this far then? Oh and BTW those who call EGMs are liable for the costs.
Thats not democratic for a supposed Socialist like Kenwright.
Coach
Player Valuation: £30m
Of course it is - one share = one vote. That is why it is called a share - it represents one share of the control of the club. That is how all businesses around the world operate and what you are advocating instead is totally against the real world.
Chang Elephant
Forum God
Glad they did mate, that sounds like communism. **** me I never knew that say 50 shareholders with say £2000 worth of shares could take over a business against the wishes of say two shareholders owning £2M of shares ( say 98% of the overall shareholding).
And they just have to call an EGM ?
Have you called the DTI about this loophole in company law ?
keverton
Player Valuation: £10m
thebluefox
Player Valuation: £50m
Coach
Player Valuation: £30m
Yep. See regulation 54 of Table A of the Companies Act. In particular see section 284
Grayson and Bennett were calling a show of hands vote according to the wording of their 2nd EGM petition. They wanted to change the way of voting from the normal way (one vote for one share) to one vote per person present which is frankly ridiculous.
Threading water overall isnt it, not great but not bad.
The non debt reduction is what i feared, though a large portion of the debt cant be touched anyway, seems like we just moved finance about and restructured debt, which is all well and good if it didnt mean we had to sell close to 20mill worth of talent to get exactly where we started from financially anyway. That said money went into new players, whether this was strategy or luck is debatable, underlines how utterly dependent we are on Moyes spotting bargains.
The non debt reduction is what i feared, though a large portion of the debt cant be touched anyway, seems like we just moved finance about and restructured debt, which is all well and good if it didnt mean we had to sell close to 20mill worth of talent to get exactly where we started from financially anyway. That said money went into new players, whether this was strategy or luck is debatable, underlines how utterly dependent we are on Moyes spotting bargains.
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
The founding fathers of the club must have been 'ridiculous' too then, because the original articles of association maintained pretty much that principle (one vote, extending to 2 votes per person only if you had 20 or more shares - a rule of governance changed much later). It was there to ensure no fat cats (as per Houlding when he tried to weild his financial power) could dictate club affairs.
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
Good to see you now accept how utterly devoid of ideas and credibility the current owners are. Welcome aboard.
Btw, it's nice also to see that (two years after KEIOC revealed the info) Elstone has gotten around to 'revealing' that the Park End annexe was scuppered by the Pru's attitude to extending the Goodison footprint...after having first peddled the line it was down to 'IT problems'.
We live and learn....again.
Coach
Player Valuation: £30m
I think you will find no fat cats wil be interested in being involved if they cannot dictate club affairs. It is commonsense.
Chang Elephant
Forum God
But....regulation 54 also clarifies that on a poll every member shall have one vote for every share of which he is the holder.
And regulation 46 includes:
"A resolution put to the vote of a meeting shall be decided on a show of hands unless before, or on the declaration of the result of, the show of hands a poll is duly demanded. Subject to the provisions of the Act, a poll may be demanded—
(a)
by the chairman; or
(b)
by at least two members having the right to vote at the meeting; or
(c)
by a member or members representing not less than one-tenth of the total voting rights of all the members having the right to vote at the meeting"
Anything Bill, Earl or Green didn't like from a vote could be squashed with by a poll (one vote per share).
Bad bad bull**** Bill scare story lad....
As always mate, im on the side of honest analysis. Picking the bones of what was said: the debt remaining static and serviced was the most significant thing for me in application and context. Rather then ranting.
Hands up, i didn't believe KEIOC/BU on the annexe - or whatever their calling themselves these days, but they were right on this it seems, still massive Teds though. Apologies though as im sure i prob gave you some heat at the time.
TBF, if true what was said - (no debt reduction) - seems we have refinanced and invested back into the squad - it doesn't indicate a financial meltdown either, just bad plannin and naivity. The worry in that scenario was how much the club was caught on the hop in 2011 when the banks closed ranks. I guess you could argue now whether the team is stronger pre or post the selling of Arteta, Yak et al - but the fact it appeared a necessity rather then a strategy at the time, is scary and massively naive by the club. Financially it good be argued its just threading water really. Though whether we have a better team now is a different debate, thankfully it went well. But for Moyes it could have went badly wrong. It scares me how unprepared the board was in the summer of 2011, despite a "good relationship" with the bank.
I suppose if your looking at contemporary context, if the debt is static and emphasis in on servicing it and hasn't increased, then we are 10- 15mill better of in terms of turnover per annum with the new TV deal. Not organic growth admittedly but worse then a kick up the backside, while the squad looks healthy.
- Status
