The massive price reduction might have a bearing on interested parties coming forward.Taunton Iron Cider wrote: September 15th, 2023, 1:20 pm Isn’t it odd that when we all indicated about being in favour of a hybrid model, Foxhall and co said that there was no external interest. Now when the proverbial hits the fan the Trust can suddenly magic up, not one but two interested parties!
Re: How is this going to work?
32Fair point, but was that ridiculous price designed to deter interest and allow certain individuals to carry on playing football director and travelling on overseas jollies for EFL conferences?OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: September 15th, 2023, 1:25 pmThe massive price reduction might have a bearing on interested parties coming forward.Taunton Iron Cider wrote: September 15th, 2023, 1:20 pm Isn’t it odd that when we all indicated about being in favour of a hybrid model, Foxhall and co said that there was no external interest. Now when the proverbial hits the fan the Trust can suddenly magic up, not one but two interested parties!
Last edited by Taunton Iron Cider on September 15th, 2023, 1:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: How is this going to work?
33Or the realisation from the BOD that they are incapable of running a commercial business successfully may have a bearing too...OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: September 15th, 2023, 1:25 pmThe massive price reduction might have a bearing on interested parties coming forward.Taunton Iron Cider wrote: September 15th, 2023, 1:20 pm Isn’t it odd that when we all indicated about being in favour of a hybrid model, Foxhall and co said that there was no external interest. Now when the proverbial hits the fan the Trust can suddenly magic up, not one but two interested parties!
Re: How is this going to work?
34From memory the public desire for hybrid was overtaken by the Cup runs when the Trust used a process to overturn it because we had sufficient funds to last us 5 years. Had they not spent those funds in 12 months we would still be fine.
Re: How is this going to work?
35It is interesting to note that the two proposed resolutions for the special general meeting are classed as extraordinary resolutions by the BOD. To be passed, an extraordinary resolution requires 75% of votes cast at a general meeting. An ordinary resolution only requires 50%.
However, under Trust Rule 50.1, it is only necessary to have an extraordinary resolution in two cases:
50.1.1 Any amendment to the Society's Rules;
50.1.2 The decision to wind up the Society
All other proposals are subject to an ordinary resolution.
In my opinion, the Directors cannot arbitrarily decide to introduce an additional Rule or sub Rule. To my mind, what is set out in the proposed resolutions are not changes to the Society's Rules. Therefore, logically, it can only mean, that in the Directors minds, a decision to transfer the legal majority of the Trust's shares to a third party is equivalent to a decision to wind up the Society (i.e. the Trust).
Taking aside, the strict Trust Rules, I cannot understand why the Directors have set themselves this much higher hurdle, especially when presumably they are 100% behind the transfer.
I actually believe that a 75% plus vote in favour for both proposed resolutions will take place. But, unnecessarily, I think it will provide for a lively evening if only 74% vote in favour of the first proposal.
However, under Trust Rule 50.1, it is only necessary to have an extraordinary resolution in two cases:
50.1.1 Any amendment to the Society's Rules;
50.1.2 The decision to wind up the Society
All other proposals are subject to an ordinary resolution.
In my opinion, the Directors cannot arbitrarily decide to introduce an additional Rule or sub Rule. To my mind, what is set out in the proposed resolutions are not changes to the Society's Rules. Therefore, logically, it can only mean, that in the Directors minds, a decision to transfer the legal majority of the Trust's shares to a third party is equivalent to a decision to wind up the Society (i.e. the Trust).
Taking aside, the strict Trust Rules, I cannot understand why the Directors have set themselves this much higher hurdle, especially when presumably they are 100% behind the transfer.
I actually believe that a 75% plus vote in favour for both proposed resolutions will take place. But, unnecessarily, I think it will provide for a lively evening if only 74% vote in favour of the first proposal.
Last edited by Chris Davis on September 15th, 2023, 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: How is this going to work?
36To justify only putting one bid before supporter owners is one possibility. Another is that the rules are too complex for the directors of the Trust to understand.Chris Davis wrote: September 15th, 2023, 2:20 pm
Taking aside, the strict Trust Rules, I cannot understand why the Directors have set themselves this much higher hurdle, especially when presumably they are 100% behind the transfer.
With our board's record are they disingenuous or merely stupid. Know there's a conundrum that Solomon would have difficulty with.
Re: How is this going to work?
37Would Solomon know the difference between know and now, or would he have difficulty with that as well?Stan A. Einstein wrote: September 15th, 2023, 2:26 pmTo justify only putting one bid before supporter owners is one possibility. Another is that the rules are too complex for the directors of the Trust to understand.Chris Davis wrote: September 15th, 2023, 2:20 pm
Taking aside, the strict Trust Rules, I cannot understand why the Directors have set themselves this much higher hurdle, especially when presumably they are 100% behind the transfer.
With our board's record are they disingenuous or merely stupid. Know there's a conundrum that Solomon would have difficulty with.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Amberexile, big baz, Bonson&Hunt, Kairdiff Exile, neilcork68