Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2023 18:51:10 GMT
a brief resume...the initial notification by e mail concerning mercurys proposals was only released on account of others getting hold of the story and at that point the spin merchants released the e mail as a sort of damage limitations exercise if others hadnt got hold of the story would the spin merchants have bothered to notify the fans and owners getting real tired of getting fobbed off with spin about consultation..i understand that if there is to be a vote on these proposals whether its to be a yes or no that such a vote wont be binding could it be that the boardroom spin merchants fear the answer to these proposals being no and raining on there parade if this is the case its hardly democratic and has the potential to alienate a fair proportion of owners and fans
|
|
|
Post by stuartnoel on Sept 10, 2023 20:41:27 GMT
Loved the headline referring to it as a farce. What did you take away from the owners Town Hall meeting last week? The ongoing consultation process which will involve working groups with owners taking part, the confirmation there will be an owners vote, or that Mercury 13 will be on the next Town Hall call?
We had always planned to use the September Town Hall to update owners on the discussions. As we have explained a few times, but will do so again here, when we drafted the email to owners it was still confidential, hence why it was worded in the way it was. We can’t control who or how leaked the discussions (but it wasn’t from within the club) which led to stories suggesting a deal had been done (it hasn’t) and it’s a takeover (it’s not).
I won’t tire of answering the same questions so keep them coming if you are unsure of anything.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2023 21:16:53 GMT
Loved the headline referring to it as a farce. What did you take away from the owners Town Hall meeting last week? The ongoing consultation process which will involve working groups with owners taking part, the confirmation there will be an owners vote, or that Mercury 13 will be on the next Town Hall call? We had always planned to use the September Town Hall to update owners on the discussions. As we have explained a few times, but will do so again here, when we drafted the email to owners it was still confidential, hence why it was worded in the way it was. We can’t control who or how leaked the discussions (but it wasn’t from within the club) which led to stories suggesting a deal had been done (it hasn’t) and it’s a takeover (it’s not). I won’t tire of answering the same questions so keep them coming if you are unsure of anything. sarcasm stuart mmm
|
|
|
Post by stuartnoel on Sept 10, 2023 22:08:00 GMT
Loved the headline referring to it as a farce. What did you take away from the owners Town Hall meeting last week? The ongoing consultation process which will involve working groups with owners taking part, the confirmation there will be an owners vote, or that Mercury 13 will be on the next Town Hall call? We had always planned to use the September Town Hall to update owners on the discussions. As we have explained a few times, but will do so again here, when we drafted the email to owners it was still confidential, hence why it was worded in the way it was. We can’t control who or how leaked the discussions (but it wasn’t from within the club) which led to stories suggesting a deal had been done (it hasn’t) and it’s a takeover (it’s not). I won’t tire of answering the same questions so keep them coming if you are unsure of anything. sarcasm stuart mmm Not at all. I’m just trying to provide some facts behind the misinformation and hyperbole
|
|
dicksmith
Sussex County Division One
COYR
Posts: 298
|
Post by dicksmith on Sept 10, 2023 23:45:52 GMT
a brief resume...the initial notification by e mail concerning mercurys proposals was only released on account of others getting hold of the story and at that point the spin merchants released the e mail as a sort of damage limitations exercise if others hadnt got hold of the story would the spin merchants have bothered to notify the fans and owners getting real tired of getting fobbed off with spin about consultation..i understand that if there is to be a vote on these proposals whether its to be a yes or no that such a vote wont be binding could it be that the boardroom spin merchants fear the answer to these proposals being no and raining on there parade if this is the case its hardly democratic and has the potential to alienate a fair proportion of owners and fans It's very democratic. By the rules (By-Laws) the owners elect a board of Directors. The Directors decide how the club is run and make the decisions. If they had chosen to do so, the Board could have completed the deal and then told you about it. Instead, they have brought the information to the owners for discussion and consideration. What they refer to as collaboration with working groups. In the end......it's still the board who casts the deciding votes. That's how it's set up and that IS democratic. Did you run for the Board? Did you even vote at the last AGM? IF you did vote, then you upheld your end of the democratic process. If you didn't vote, then you wasted your opportunity to be part of the democratic process.
|
|
|
Post by gonefishing046 on Sept 11, 2023 8:31:19 GMT
I think panenka probably took everything in. Consultation, mercury 13 appearing at Oct town hall. And announcement of owners vote(which needs non binding added) in your reply.The democratic process is clear but if there was a massive vote against could directors in all certainty over rule it. I personally do not think it will be an issue. I don't see enough owners being personally bothered by it either way unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by stuartnoel on Sept 11, 2023 9:45:57 GMT
I think panenka probably took everything in. Consultation, mercury 13 appearing at Oct town hall. And announcement of owners vote(which needs non binding added) in your reply.The democratic process is clear but if there was a massive vote against could directors in all certainty over rule it. I personally do not think it will be an issue. I don't see enough owners being personally bothered by it either way unfortunately. That’s what I’m checking and trying to understand what is farcical about the process we have and continue to take….if we (the club) have missed a step in the process here, then I would like to know so I can feed that back and try to correct it. Naturally, if the farce is the decision to entertain the proposal in the first place, that’s completely different and a personal opinion. We have and will continue to provide the detail and if anyone feels it’s a farce (or other synonyms) that’s perfectly acceptable.
|
|
doc
Sussex County Division Three
Posts: 60
|
Post by doc on Sept 11, 2023 10:48:41 GMT
By the rules (By-Laws) the owners elect a board of Directors. The Directors decide how the club is run and make the decisions. If they had chosen to do so, the Board could have completed the deal and then told you about it. I hope the board are getting good legal advice, because I think that's wrong. The Directors can decide how the club is run and make the decisions, but only if that is in accord with their terms of reference. It might be argued that being elected by owners of a club with a fan ownership model and then unilaterally ending that model by agreeing to a 51% takeover (because that legally is what this is despite all the linguistic gymnastics) of the womens' team is unlawful. I am not necessarily against the proposal, but think that the consultation is legally required and that the directors need to tread very carefully if they ignore a vote against.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2023 18:21:19 GMT
By the rules (By-Laws) the owners elect a board of Directors. The Directors decide how the club is run and make the decisions. If they had chosen to do so, the Board could have completed the deal and then told you about it. I hope the board are getting good legal advice, because I think that's wrong. The Directors can decide how the club is run and make the decisions, but only if that is in accord with their terms of reference. It might be argued that being elected by owners of a club with a fan ownership model and then unilaterally ending that model by agreeing to a 51% takeover (because that legally is what this is despite all the linguistic gymnastics) of the womens' team is unlawful. I am not necessarily against the proposal, but think that the consultation is legally required and that the directors need to tread very carefully if they ignore a vote against.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2023 18:22:41 GMT
exactly doc well said
|
|
joem
Sussex County Division Two
Posts: 131
|
Post by joem on Sept 11, 2023 19:37:52 GMT
takeover /ˈteɪkˌəʊvə/ noun an act of assuming control of something, especially the buying out of one company by another. "they sought a controlling interest rather than a takeover"
Love the example you get if you give it a google
|
|
joem
Sussex County Division Two
Posts: 131
|
Post by joem on Sept 11, 2023 19:48:20 GMT
I find it odd how anyone can be simultaneously concerned that it’s already a done deal and that it can’t be done because the board aren’t allowed to do that.
Because there should be a consultation.
Because it isn’t a done deal.
Or that anyone can choose to believe the Chinese whispers of the media, off the back of the new party’s accidental press release, who we also don’t trust, over what the club have directly told supporters exclusively. In a structured consultation meeting. Which isn’t real though. Because it’s a done deal. Supposedly.
“Facts are meaningless, you can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true” - Homer Simpson
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2023 20:49:27 GMT
why the reluctance to agree that a binding vote on these proposals is the correct thing to do a constant refusal to agree to such a vote will tell its own story
|
|
|
Post by stuartnoel on Sept 11, 2023 21:08:49 GMT
why the reluctance to agree that a binding vote on these proposals is the correct thing to do a constant refusal to agree to such a vote will tell its own story Nobody said the vote wouldn’t be binding. At the Town Hall what was said was that the club rules do not require us to have a vote or that a vote is automatically accepted. That’s a very different situation to saying there won’t be a vote.
|
|
joem
Sussex County Division Two
Posts: 131
|
Post by joem on Sept 11, 2023 21:11:09 GMT
The only thing that has even slightly suggested otherwise was Trevor’s Freudian slip. This has already since been acknowledged several times in this forum by stuartnoel, who has then reassured that this will be passed on to the directors.
The directors who are compiling answers to upwards of 300 questions, which are due to be shared during the consultation period we find ourselves in.
Echo chamber is the probably the greatest ever phrase
|
|