On what basis do you imagine the preferred bidder is being chosen?Bangitintrnet wrote: September 18th, 2023, 7:33 pmSurely Colin Everett is best placed in this particular area, and I can't imagine for one minute that the preferred bidder is on the basis of the toss of a coin.lowandhard wrote: September 18th, 2023, 4:31 pmThat’s right and it would satisfy most if not all, I would have thought. I remember that even when interviewing job applicants 30 years or more ago, I adopted a similar format to ensure all were asked the same questions and were fairly treated. It’s not a lot to ask and in any case is a good aid to select the best bid.Amberexile wrote: September 18th, 2023, 3:47 pmThe way to do it is simple, you prescribe the format of the response you want from the bidders. You tell them to give you their answers to a set number of specific topics in a specific format (e,g populate this spreadsheet), you explain to them how their responses will be marked and the weighting for each section. Then you mark each of their replies. While the marking will at times become subjective, the bid with the largest final score wins. You can publish the markings and share feedback with losing bidders on why their bid failed.Bangitintrnet wrote: September 18th, 2023, 3:23 pmI can't imagine for one second that the bids are simple, as in we are offering X they are offering YAmberexile wrote: September 18th, 2023, 2:57 pmI think the issue is that we will not be given the information to know what is in the best interests of NCAFC. It seems that we have 2 bidders one of whom presumably has eventually making a profit as the main objective while the other may well have a slightly different objective of providing long term sustainability for the club while a possible third option of the Trust managing the club effectively, while the default, is being ignored. There has been little, if any, proper discussion of what happens next if the 75% threshold is not reached. There are a number of options at that stage but again, unless members are told what those options are, it comes across as they are being coerced into voting based on blind faith.wattsville_boy wrote: September 18th, 2023, 2:45 pmYou may find it unfathomable but the Trust members are voting in the best interests of NCAFC. And they may think the preferred bidder may not represent that...excessbee wrote: September 17th, 2023, 4:48 pm It is also a major concern that some would possibly wish to vote for the 'non- preferred' bidder merely because it is the one NOT selected by Colin/the board as the better of the two. That sort of logic is unfathomable.
So comparing the bids is probably a complex process, and would involve indicating were both bidders have problems. The benefits might be easy to get across to an audience, but I can see all sorts of issues with we think this bit is a problem, while not pissing off possible investor's.
To me sustainability is key, but how do you show that in a bid? To others it will be something else that's important, but how do you assess the priorities that both bids are making on a whole range of key issue's?
How can you say this one is better for this, but that one is better for that, and then hope to reach a 75% majority?
Money wise they have probably been guided by supporters direct, as we didn't pay for the shares, it could be an issue that the trust recieves funds, that the club should have etc etc.
This is a very standard approach.
There should be an Invitation To Tender (ITT) document that was issued to prospective bidders where all of this was laid out accompanied by a clarifications process. There is no reason whatsoever why this document can't be shared with Trust members. as most ITTs are openly published. That document will show members what the Trust was looking for from a bidder, how the Trust intended to judge bids, what was important to the Trust and how they weighted sections of the document.
I can't believe we would be so amateurish to just allow adhoc bids to be submitted. It is always possible for a losing bidder to challenge the decision so you have to be able to make a like for like comparison to avoid the possibility of challenge, court cases, judicial review etc.
When run properly a bid is a simple process, I have faith in Colin running this well.
I can understand why the Board want to put a single bid to the vote as that gives them the best chance of reaching the 75% threshold but they do need to explain how they got there in the first place.