Dylanisabaddog's Shareholder poll

[littleyellowbirdie 3,148]

Here you go, @dylanisabaddog. You have the floor. 🙂

Edit: Excuse the errant full stop from sloppy copy and pasting.

Edited September 15, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[GMF 1,044]

If I have more than one share, can I vote more than once? (Asking for an inheritor…) 

[Greavsy 2,661]

3 minutes ago, GMF said:

If I have more than one share, can I vote more than once? (Asking for an inheritor…) 

Can the kids vote.......

[GMF 1,044]

4 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Can the kids vote.......

Only if over 18….

[essex canary 631]

12 minutes ago, GMF said:

Only if over 18….

You could be a minor when they were first purchased then find them transferred to you when an adult on unfavourable terms. No democracy there.

Edited September 15, 2023 by essex canary

[essex canary 631]

Unhappy with S&J regime attitude. Wish to see Norfolk Groups proposals for shareholder based fan engagement.

[GMF 1,044]

3 minutes ago, essex canary said:

You could be a minor when they were first purchased then find them transferred to you when an adult on unfavourable terms. No democracy there.

*Unfavourable, as in exactly the same terms as on offer to the other 6,800 plus shareholders? 

[TIL 1010 5,303]

Get your money on at least two pages by this evening.

[GMF 1,044]

9 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Get your money on at least two pages by this evening.

I’m going to go and play with the grown-ups on the Attanasio thread (winks) 

[Indy 3,499]

16 minutes ago, GMF said:

I’m going to go and play with the grown-ups on the Attanasio thread (winks) 

Who you calling a grown up? I’m a mid 50’s in years but a child in mind and attitude! Grown up indeed, I have toys (collectibles I call them everyone’s else toys) and everything in my man shed!

Edited September 15, 2023 by Indy

[Pyro Pete 2,395]

I don't have any shares. But voted anyway because I like clicking on things.

[essex canary 631]

1 hour ago, GMF said:

*Unfavourable, as in exactly the same terms as on offer to the other 6,800 plus shareholders? 

Correct then again no others face a change based on tragic circumstances that ought to be nothing to do with the Club other than to update databases.

All easily resolvable with a modest cost scheme similar to bond holder vouchers that in itself would generate more enthusiasm for sshareholding and help address the somewhat age biased demographic.

[Capt. Pants 5,152]

Not sure this gives clarity to anything.

[Greavsy 2,661]

55 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Correct then again no others face a change based on tragic circumstances that ought to be nothing to do with the Club other than to update databases.

All easily resolvable with a modest cost scheme similar to bond holder vouchers that in itself would generate more enthusiasm for sshareholding and help address the somewhat age biased demographic.

for the love of God - can you give it a rest. 

We get it - and aren't interested. No matter how many times you post about it it wont change.  

[essex canary 631]

2 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

Get your money on at least two pages by this evening.

No reason why there should be as the real issue is MA's attitude to minority shareholding going forward. As we don't know it, not much to write about.

[TIL 1010 5,303]

1 minute ago, essex canary said:

No reason why there should be as the real issue is MA's attitude to minority shareholding going forward. As we don't know it, not much to write about.

Not much to write about but however you are trying your hardest.

[Peregrine Shorts 554]

i would really like to sell my shares at top prices, perhaps we could use Burnley's valuation to set a price..............but i think it only fair that I retain voting rights and other perks such as free membership, seaon ticket and access to dividends....Obviously those rights should be transferred to my descendants and their descendants

[essex canary 631]

46 minutes ago, Peregrine Shorts said:

i would really like to sell my shares at top prices, perhaps we could use Burnley's valuation to set a price..............but i think it only fair that I retain voting rights and other perks such as free membership, seaon ticket and access to dividends....Obviously those rights should be transferred to my descendants and their descendants

That doesn't reach a pass mark. If MA isn't committed to constructive fan involvement (as presumably the new American Burnley owners weren't) then best have some capitalised bunce before he takes more than his fair share.

[dylanisabaddog 6,196]

37 may be a very small sample but it looks like the club will get this through easily

[yellowrider120 933]

2 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

37 may be a very small sample but it looks like the club will get this through easily

Of course they will. Saint Delia has made a pronouncement and the sheep will meekly trudge through the gate she has opened for them.

 

[essex canary 631]

2 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

37 may be a very small sample but it looks like the club will get this through easily

Not a sample that reflects the actual process to take place. In that process 30 parties (out of a total of 6,800 plus) will have 37% of the Poll if everybody votes. As larger holders are more likely to vote - certainly on the Rule 9 aspect at least- they will have a larger proportion than that on the declared result.

On the face of it this is not a vote about the future of the Club as such because realistically MA is not going to walk away even if this is lost.

At the end of the day I won't be opting for any of my money back at the purchase rate of 21 years ago. Nonetheless 96% of that money was in the form of a Share Premium which has not been paid (apart from on 4 of Tom's 104 shares) by the 2 advocates of this vote described as 'Independent Directors'. 

You should be able to work out how I will be voting together with lodging an objection to the attempt to direct voters on an issue which should be presented as neutral.

[Badger 2,750]

5 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

37 may be a very small sample but it looks like the club will get this through easily

I want to keep my shares but feel  uncomfortable  about voting for the overall deal, as I understand it. 

[Badger 2,750]

3 hours ago, yellowrider120 said:

Of course they will. Saint Delia has made a pronouncement and the sheep will meekly trudge through the gate she has opened for them.

 

This is either a sharply ironic statement, or a profoundly silly one.

[dylanisabaddog 6,196]

25 minutes ago, Badger said:

I want to keep my shares but feel  uncomfortable  about voting for the overall deal, as I understand it. 

Ditto. Mainly because of the complete lack of transparency regarding the current financial situation and the long term arrangements. What will happen long term has obviously been agreed but not disclosed. 

[dylanisabaddog 6,196]

2 hours ago, essex canary said:

Not a sample that reflects the actual process to take place. In that process 30 parties (out of a total of 6,800 plus) will have 37% of the Poll if everybody votes. As larger holders are more likely to vote - certainly on the Rule 9 aspect at least- they will have a larger proportion than that on the declared result.

On the face of it this is not a vote about the future of the Club as such because realistically MA is not going to walk away even if this is lost.

At the end of the day I won't be opting for any of my money back at the purchase rate of 21 years ago. Nonetheless 96% of that money was in the form of a Share Premium which has not been paid (apart from on 4 of Tom's 104 shares) by the 2 advocates of this vote described as 'Independent Directors'. 

You should be able to work out how I will be voting together with lodging an objection to the attempt to direct voters on an issue which should be presented as neutral.

Sorry but I laughed out loud when I read this. 

I wouldn't worry too much about MA walking away if he loses. He's going to win. 

[TIL 1010 5,303]

3 hours ago, essex canary said:

Not a sample that reflects the actual process to take place. In that process 30 parties (out of a total of 6,800 plus) will have 37% of the Poll if everybody votes. As larger holders are more likely to vote - certainly on the Rule 9 aspect at least- they will have a larger proportion than that on the declared result.

On the face of it this is not a vote about the future of the Club as such because realistically MA is not going to walk away even if this is lost.

At the end of the day I won't be opting for any of my money back at the purchase rate of 21 years ago. Nonetheless 96% of that money was in the form of a Share Premium which has not been paid (apart from on 4 of Tom's 104 shares) by the 2 advocates of this vote described as 'Independent Directors'.

You should be able to work out how I will be voting together with lodging an objection to the attempt to direct voters on an issue which should be presented as neutral.

If you fail in lodging your objection what will be your next move because you sure as hell won't accept it ?

[Badger 2,750]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Ditto. Mainly because of the complete lack of transparency regarding the current financial situation and the long term arrangements. What will happen long term has obviously been agreed but not disclosed. 

I feel the same.

[essex canary 631]

2 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Ditto. Mainly because of the complete lack of transparency regarding the current financial situation and the long term arrangements. What will happen long term has obviously been agreed but not disclosed. 

So you will be voting against then? Seemingly for other equally valid reasons of lack of professionalism.

[dylanisabaddog 6,196]

44 minutes ago, essex canary said:

So you will be voting against then? Seemingly for other equally valid reasons of lack of professionalism.

No. I will somewhat reluctantly be voting in favour. 

[essex canary 631]

4 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

No. I will somewhat reluctantly be voting in favour. 

Pity. My view is that NCFC supporters should show more steel. The exchange between myself and @canarydan23 on the Leeds match thread clearly demonstrates why.

By the way survey questions need to be framed in a mutually exclusive way. I would recommend the following:

'Regardless of personal preference, do you believe in the circumstances that MA should reasonably offer a share settlement to ordinary supporters with a Yes/No option.'

Such an enquiry maybe informative up to a point but would still not resolve the weighting issue.