BigFish 1,988 Posted September 20, 2023 I know that @dylanisabaddog tried a similar poll, but this was on whether S/H intended to keep their shares. So just for fun and accepting that as it is a poll with 1 share 1 vote, and it is self selecting it doesn't work on the forum as a controlled piece of sampling how are the shareholders going to vote? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Branston Pickle 3,698 Posted September 20, 2023 Not voting - the changes all make sense and will happen no matter what I do. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TIL 1010 4,801 Posted September 20, 2023 Now you have gone and done it. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wcorkcanary 4,347 Posted September 20, 2023 15 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said: Now you have gone and done it. might you be referring to this fella? found an early photo of 'kev' which shows that at a very early age , he was somewhat keen on the folding green stuff. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dylanisabaddog 5,020 Posted September 20, 2023 Mine is a reluctant yes! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Peregrine Shorts 332 Posted September 20, 2023 not overly happy with the way it has been handled and the information given out but it's a yes from me. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A Load of Squit 5,223 Posted September 20, 2023 I didn't really understand any of it so I voted the opposite of Essex Canary. Â 1 1 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
essex canary 508 Posted September 20, 2023 1 hour ago, wcorkcanary said: might you be referring to this fella? found an early photo of 'kev' which shows that at a very early age , he was somewhat keen on the folding green stuff. I must be owed lots of royalties for that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
essex canary 508 Posted September 20, 2023 The masses of abstentions aren't on here. If there were any sensible Quorum rules the vote won't reach the threshold. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
essex canary 508 Posted September 20, 2023 3 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said: I didn't really understand any of it so I voted the opposite of Essex Canary. Â That is why most will abstain. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wings of a Sparrow 1,442 Posted September 20, 2023 3 hours ago, Branston Pickle said: Not voting - the changes all make sense and will happen no matter what I do. Yep. I'm trusting everyone else to make the right decision. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capt. Pants 4,298 Posted September 20, 2023 6 minutes ago, Wings of a Sparrow said: Yep. I'm trusting everyone else to make the right decision. Quite. Which is exactly why you should vote. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TIL 1010 4,801 Posted September 20, 2023 2 hours ago, essex canary said: The masses of abstentions aren't on here. If there were any sensible Quorum rules the vote won't reach the threshold. What makes you think there are ' masses of abstentions ' ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Greavsy 2,450 Posted September 20, 2023 44 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said: What makes you think there are ' masses of abstentions ' ? Suits his agenda. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
essex canary 508 Posted September 20, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, TIL 1010 said: What makes you think there are ' masses of abstentions ' ? The last effort on show of hands and postal votes had around 500 votes and 6,300Â abstentions or 'can't be bothered' or "didn't receive papers'. Edited September 20, 2023 by essex canary Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Greavsy 2,450 Posted September 20, 2023 19 minutes ago, essex canary said: The last effort on show of hands and postal votes had around 500 votes and 6,300 abstentions or 'can't be bothered' or "didn't receive papers'. Maybe you've scared them off..... Do your children get to vote? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wcorkcanary 4,347 Posted September 20, 2023 3 hours ago, essex canary said: I must be owed lots of royalties for that. get a good bite on the note in the piccy, thats what you deserve . see how i managed to post an actual image , rather than a photo of one, its not hard to grasp , just like the expression...for life.  Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wcorkcanary 4,347 Posted September 20, 2023 29 minutes ago, Greavsy said: Maybe you've scared them off..... Do your children get to vote? maybe he's scared his children off !!...either that, or , god forbid, a bunch of ' little ethicses ', all trotting around, snuffling. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canarydan23 4,060 Posted September 20, 2023 7 hours ago, essex canary said: I must be owed lots of royalties for that. Funnily enough, last year that baby tried to sue claiming child sexual abuse, filed against Dave Grohl, Krist Novoselic and Kurt Cobain's estate. He didn't win. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewNestCarrow 203 Posted September 21, 2023 21 hours ago, essex canary said: The last effort on show of hands and postal votes had around 500 votes and 6,300 abstentions or 'can't be bothered' or "didn't receive papers'. The last time the shareholders was published at least 3% of Ordinary holders were listed as "mvd", so presumably out of contact. I would be amazed if this % has not increased, in the four years since. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
essex canary 508 Posted September 21, 2023 22 hours ago, Greavsy said:  Do your children get to vote? If I adopted the same approach as @nutty nigelthey would be able to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
essex canary 508 Posted September 21, 2023 1 hour ago, NewNestCarrow said: The last time the shareholders was published at least 3% of Ordinary holders were listed as "mvd", so presumably out of contact. I would be amazed if this % has not increased, in the four years since. And presumably the 3% then was merely the confirmed untraceables rather than the suspected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A Load of Squit 5,223 Posted September 21, 2023 Every changes but you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,648 Posted September 21, 2023 2 hours ago, essex canary said: If I adopted the same approach as @nutty nigelthey would be able to. Indeed. But I wanted to share my small part of Norwich City with my inheritors before I died. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
essex canary 508 Posted September 21, 2023 5 hours ago, nutty nigel said: Indeed. But I wanted to share my small part of Norwich City with my inheritors before I died. In relation to the vote we can nominate as many proxies as we want providing they are allocated 1 share each so we can spread that much wider. Could be fun. Delia could do it too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy 3,323 Posted September 21, 2023 8 minutes ago, essex canary said: In relation to the vote we can nominate as many proxies as we want providing they are allocated 1 share each so we can spread that much wider. Could be fun. Delia could do it too. Depends on your motive! If it’s self serving and detrimental to the good of the club then no thanks! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
essex canary 508 Posted September 21, 2023 4 minutes ago, Indy said: Depends on your motive! If it’s self serving and detrimental to the good of the club then no thanks! How could it be self serving to spread the vote wider? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,648 Posted September 21, 2023 You’ve had 20 years to share your shareholding if you really wanted to. But they’ve been ‘all yours’. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Feedthewolf 4,894 Posted September 22, 2023 I'm not a shareholder myself, but I'm a member of the Canaries Trust and they have canvassed the opinion of their members on how to vote in the resolutions (I hope I'm allowed to say that, as I'm not sharing any specifics). As I understand it, the problem with Resolution 1 is that existing shareholders will not have the opportunity to sell their shares to Attanasio (Norfolk Group) as, due to the waiver, he will not be obligated to make an offer for them. While that may be a shame, presumably anyone wishing to sell their shares could still do so, and the Trust would then be in pole position to potentially buy them and increase its own shareholding? If Attanasio eventually becomes sole proprietor then none of the shares will matter any longer, but for now I think it makes sense for a fan-owned group (CT) to continue to increase its holding wherever possible to hold the (potential) new ownership to account... therefore I would personally be inclined to vote in favour of Resolution 1, as the club clearly needs the capital investment that Norfolk Group can offer. I'm sure there's a lot more to it than that, but these matters are a long way out of my comfort zone; I was wondering whether @GMF or any others well-versed in the process could set me straight? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shefcanary 2,468 Posted September 22, 2023 32 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said: I'm not a shareholder myself, but I'm a member of the Canaries Trust and they have canvassed the opinion of their members on how to vote in the resolutions (I hope I'm allowed to say that, as I'm not sharing any specifics). As I understand it, the problem with Resolution 1 is that existing shareholders will not have the opportunity to sell their shares to Attanasio (Norfolk Group) as, due to the waiver, he will not be obligated to make an offer for them. While that may be a shame, presumably anyone wishing to sell their shares could still do so, and the Trust would then be in pole position to potentially buy them and increase its own shareholding? If Attanasio eventually becomes sole proprietor then none of the shares will matter any longer, but for now I think it makes sense for a fan-owned group (CT) to continue to increase its holding wherever possible to hold the (potential) new ownership to account... therefore I would personally be inclined to vote in favour of Resolution 1, as the club clearly needs the capital investment that Norfolk Group can offer. I'm sure there's a lot more to it than that, but these matters are a long way out of my comfort zone; I was wondering whether @GMF or any others well-versed in the process could set me straight? FTW, it is right to say that during the period of the Shareholder Agreement (it ends in January 2026) Attanasio will not be looking to increase his holding, although it is only that agreement with Smith & Jones that I believe legally would prevent him from buying from minorities directly after a period of grace. If that agreement came to an end then all bets are off as to what the next steps would be. I have long held the view that ultimately Smith & Jones will sell a large proportion of their shares to Attanasio to allow him to become overall solely in charge of the club, but I expect them to retain a small block of shares and transfer them to a trust (just over 10%) for much the same reason that the CT exists really - to act as a block to one person having "absolute" control of the club. There's no guarantee of that, but it would make sense to me that the CT and Smith & Jones at some point enter serious conversation pool about the pooling of resources to this effect. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites