Display posts from previous
Sort by

Re: What has happened to us?

257 by Taunton Iron Cider
OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: March 7th, 2023, 7:59 am
Bangitintrnet wrote: March 7th, 2023, 7:35 am What is stopping the 75% marker being reduced if need be?

Surely the trust/club would only attract chancers just trying their luck if it was set low?
The 75% mark is set by Supporters Direct ,the umbrella organisation of community owned sports clubs, and therefore is not within the scope of individual trusts to reduce.
Surely that can’t be right, the rules are entitled ‘model’ and therefore a guide that can be adopted in full or varied to suit particular circumstances?

Re: What has happened to us?

258 by Bangitintrnet
Taunton Iron Cider wrote: March 7th, 2023, 8:48 am
OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: March 7th, 2023, 7:59 am
Bangitintrnet wrote: March 7th, 2023, 7:35 am What is stopping the 75% marker being reduced if need be?

Surely the trust/club would only attract chancers just trying their luck if it was set low?
The 75% mark is set by Supporters Direct ,the umbrella organisation of community owned sports clubs, and therefore is not within the scope of individual trusts to reduce.
Surely that can’t be right, the rules are entitled ‘model’ and therefore a guide that can be adopted in full or varied to suit particular circumstances?
Thinking about this IMO it would be logical if any vote to change the 75% rule, were it self subject to a 75% vote.

*IF* that is the case, then voting to change it, before voting on any proposal for governance change, might not achieve much. It could be easier to just vote on any proposal at the 75% rate.

The other question that comes to mind, is if the trust own 85% of shares in NCAFC, and a EGM of the NCAFC shareholders was called instead, would the vote need to be an even higher percentage?

Re: What has happened to us?

259 by OLDCROMWELLIAN
Don't profess to be an expert in these matters, but my understanding is the 75% ruling cannot be amended.
Again I'm only surmising, but the last figure I saw was that the Trust had 78.8% of the clubs ordinary shares. Of course I do not know what has since happened with regard the late David Hando's shares? Were they passed on to the trust, or someone else?

Re: What has happened to us?

261 by excessbee
OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: March 7th, 2023, 12:55 pm Don't profess to be an expert in these matters, but my understanding is the 75% ruling cannot be amended.
Again I'm only surmising, but the last figure I saw was that the Trust had 78.8% of the clubs ordinary shares. Of course I do not know what has since happened with regard the late David Hando's shares? Were they passed on to the trust, or someone else?
i assume you are just musing on that question, rather than expecting information. :wink:

Re: What has happened to us?

262 by pembsexile
OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: March 7th, 2023, 12:55 pm Don't profess to be an expert in these matters, but my understanding is the 75% ruling cannot be amended.
Again I'm only surmising, but the last figure I saw was that the Trust had 78.8% of the clubs ordinary shares. Of course I do not know what has since happened with regard the late David Hando's shares? Were they passed on to the trust, or someone else?
Again, like you mate I am not an expert in these matters. I suspect that the Trust officials are pondering this question (75%) at the moment. What happens if there is an item on the agenda at the next AGM? Or is it more complicated than that. More likely in my opinion is the possibility of the Trust calling an EGM to put the motion on the table.

Re: What has happened to us?

263 by OLDCROMWELLIAN
excessbee wrote: March 7th, 2023, 1:14 pm
OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: March 7th, 2023, 12:55 pm Don't profess to be an expert in these matters, but my understanding is the 75% ruling cannot be amended.
Again I'm only surmising, but the last figure I saw was that the Trust had 78.8% of the clubs ordinary shares. Of course I do not know what has since happened with regard the late David Hando's shares? Were they passed on to the trust, or someone else?
i assume you are just musing on that question, rather than expecting information. :wink:
Just musing. Although if someone is able to provide information?

Re: What has happened to us?

264 by OLDCROMWELLIAN
pembsexile wrote: March 7th, 2023, 1:48 pm
OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: March 7th, 2023, 12:55 pm Don't profess to be an expert in these matters, but my understanding is the 75% ruling cannot be amended.
Again I'm only surmising, but the last figure I saw was that the Trust had 78.8% of the clubs ordinary shares. Of course I do not know what has since happened with regard the late David Hando's shares? Were they passed on to the trust, or someone

Again, like you mate I am not an expert in these matters. I suspect that the Trust officials are pondering this question (75%) at the moment. What happens if there is an item on the agenda at the next AGM? Or is it more complicated than that. More likely in my opinion is the possibility of the Trust calling an EGM to put the motion on the table.
Agree with your opinion. My understanding that if there is an item on the agenda regarding a change of ownership model it can only be for imparting information/debate. Believe any concrete proposal/motion requires it's own EGM. How any vote on such a motion can be conducted, I have no idea.

P.s. I now note that indeed Wrexham's takeover was conducted by a week long postal vote requiring the approval of over 75% of the Trust membership.

Re: What has happened to us?

266 by pembsexile
OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: March 7th, 2023, 2:07 pm
pembsexile wrote: March 7th, 2023, 1:48 pm
OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: March 7th, 2023, 12:55 pm Don't profess to be an expert in these matters, but my understanding is the 75% ruling cannot be amended.
Again I'm only surmising, but the last figure I saw was that the Trust had 78.8% of the clubs ordinary shares. Of course I do not know what has since happened with regard the late David Hando's shares? Were they passed on to the trust, or someone

Again, like you mate I am not an expert in these matters. I suspect that the Trust officials are pondering this question (75%) at the moment. What happens if there is an item on the agenda at the next AGM? Or is it more complicated than that. More likely in my opinion is the possibility of the Trust calling an EGM to put the motion on the table.
Agree with your opinion. My understanding that if there is an item on the agenda regarding a change of ownership model it can only be for imparting information/debate. Believe any concrete proposal/motion requires it's own EGM. How any vote on such a motion can be conducted, I have no idea.

P.s. I now note that indeed Wrexham's takeover was conducted by a week long postal vote requiring the approval of over 75% of the Trust membership.
That’s interesting re Wrexham. Other than the fact that they are now owned by the Yanks I don’t know how it all happened. If as you say, it was a week long postal vote that is very interesting.

I wonder if the new owners became co opted Trust members first or if they pitched their ideas to the Directors and took it from there. Either way, with their money on board I suppose it was relatively easy to get the Trust approval. If I remember correctly it was all played out in the media at the time. I didn’t pay much interest.

Re: What has happened to us?

269 by Stan A. Einstein
OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: March 8th, 2023, 12:42 pm
My reading of that is more than 75% of votes cast were required rather than more than 75% of total trust members, to approve the takeover.
I would hope you are right. Getting 75% of a total electorate is pretty much impossible unless you're in North Korea.

However Amberexile is usually good on detail. It is the type of thing over which there should be no ambiguity.

Re: What has happened to us?

270 by Bangitintrnet
Stan A. Einstein wrote: March 8th, 2023, 12:53 pm
OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: March 8th, 2023, 12:42 pm
My reading of that is more than 75% of votes cast were required rather than more than 75% of total trust members, to approve the takeover.
I would hope you are right. Getting 75% of a total electorate is pretty much impossible unless you're in North Korea.

However Amberexile is usually good on detail. It is the type of thing over which there should be no ambiguity.
Which is probably why there were two votes in North Wales
Post Reply

Return to “Newport County Football Talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: flat4, Stan A. Einstein, Stow Hill Sid