Fawlty Towers Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I thought that I would start a seperate topic for the other issues that would have come up at today's AGM so that the issue regarding Jim would not get mixed in with other issues. Can anyone who was there give a summary of what else took place or was discussed? Was there mention of a shares issue or the plans for the future in terms of dealing with the debt, etc? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shuggie Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I thought that I would start a seperate topic for the other issues that would have come up at today's AGM so that the issue regarding Jim would not get mixed in with other issues. Can anyone who was there give a summary of what else took place or was discussed? Was there mention of a shares issue or the plans for the future in terms of dealing with the debt, etc? Thanks. Wouldn't it be nice if a set of minutes was shared with the fan's forums?....or at least posted on the OF? It isn't secret is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jags365 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 Once I've had feeback from those from the JTB who attended we'll be getting something on the website. (Couldn't make it due to work) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fawlty Towers Posted January 31, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 Once I've had feeback from those from the JTB who attended we'll be getting something on the website. (Couldn't make it due to work) Thanks Donald. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fawlty Towers Posted February 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Was there actually anyone at the AGM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vom Itorium Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 No, cos it was at ten in the morning and people have such a thing as work to go to.. funny that eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin energy Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 I was there, the Bank of Scotland negotiated during the Save the Jags if we pay off the Debt we will have to pay an Extra £200.000 to the bank, the meeting was moved for Billy Allan but he could not make it, it was decided that the AGM it will be night time which it used to be. At the start there was a bit of debate with with voting individual directors, i dont remember having a full blown vote with each of them though this will need to happen every year now. I'm sure DB said that not 100% sure that Liam Buchanan forfieted a signing fee would have cost us money, and gettng him off the wage bill has saved us 30K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 (edited) I was there, the Bank of Scotland negotiated during the Save the Jags if we pay off the Debt we will have to pay an Extra £200.000 to the bank, the meeting was moved for Billy Allan but he could not make it, it was decided that the AGM it will be night time which it used to be. At the start there was a bit of debate with with voting individual directors, i dont remember having a full blown vote with each of them though this will need to happen every year now. I'm sure DB said that not 100% sure that Liam Buchanan forfieted a signing fee would have cost us money, and gettng him off the wage bill has saved us 30K. Bloody ridiculous that the timing of this meeting was arranged to suit a man that isn't a shareholder, to the clear detriment of what is probably the significant majority (in numerical terms) of our shareholders. AND THEN NOT TURNING UP! Equally ridiculous that there weren't seperate votes on all the directors individually. This should have been the norm in any event, I'm sure. The whole single resolution to nod the whole board through was highly dubious. Is it any wonder that people hate the banks when they charge you to pay of your debts. And then there's our very own merchant bankers Edited February 1, 2011 by Allan Heron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Equally ridiculous that there weren't seperate votes on all the directors individually. This should have been the norm in any event, I'm sure. The whole single resolution to nod the whole board through was highly dubious. I presume you're referring to the way they did it in preceding years? If Directors weren't voted for individually at this meeting then how was Jim thrown off the board? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 I presume you're referring to the way they did it in preceding years? If Directors weren't voted for individually at this meeting then how was Jim thrown off the board? Yes, it was the previous meetings I was referring to. Kevin seems to suggest that some but may be not all directors were voted on individually this time. I wonder if the shareholders were presented with the minutes of the special meeting which approved the PropCo deal? They weren't presented at the last AGM and Hughes agreed to have them circulated. Mmmm....... if the minute of that meeting hasn't been approved by the shareholders........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda-jag Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 If Directors weren't voted for individually at this meeting then how was Jim thrown off the board? Collusion and subterfuge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Collusion and subterfuge. Does Nash still sing with them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Yes, it was the previous meetings I was referring to. Kevin seems to suggest that some but may be not all directors were voted on individually this time. Which would be even more ridiculous. I wonder if the shareholders were presented with the minutes of the special meeting which approved the PropCo deal? They weren't presented at the last AGM and Hughes agreed to have them circulated. Mmmm....... if the minute of that meeting hasn't been approved by the shareholders........ Laugh or cry. Which is it to be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 There is so much about this that just seems wrong. 1) Why only have a vote on 1 director and a seperate vote for the rest together. 2) Why the trust was being lobbied before by a major shareholder to influence the "secret" ballot 3) Why was the ballot being counted by an employee or by the company ran by the same major shareholder that was lobbying the trust. 4) Why was the same major shareholder alledgedly mentioning where the votes were going before thay had been counted and declred in a "secret" ballot. 5) Why make the AGM in the morning for a member of the board with NO shares who still doesnt turn up. Conspiracy...... seems like it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda-jag Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Does Nash still sing with them Aye, currently singing Barrel Of Pain. I can see the writing on the wall I can hear the axe before it falls I can really feel it gettin' through to me I can see the sea begin to glow I can feel it leaking down below I can barely stand it what you're doing to me I can feel my skin begin to peel I can see the dollar and the deal I can see the companies that are on the make, yes they are I can see the writing on the wall I can hear the axe I can really feel it gettin' through to me and you, and you, and you I can see the sea begin to glow I can feel it leaking down below I can barely stand it what we're doing to us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 :clapping: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vom Itorium Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Yes, it was the previous meetings I was referring to. Kevin seems to suggest that some but may be not all directors were voted on individually this time. I wonder if the shareholders were presented with the minutes of the special meeting which approved the PropCo deal? They weren't presented at the last AGM and Hughes agreed to have them circulated. Mmmm....... if the minute of that meeting hasn't been approved by the shareholders........ I'm a shareholder and never seen such a document. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 As this thread started as any other issues can I ask the following.... Was any decision taken as to who would become chairman etc? Or... Was a reason given why no decision has yet been made? I realise asking these questions will effect cynical replies (in truth I'd be replying likewise) but I am interested nevertheless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 John Lambie Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 As this thread started as any other issues can I ask the following.... Was any decision taken as to who would become chairman etc? Or... Was a reason given why no decision has yet been made? I realise asking these questions will effect cynical replies (in truth I'd be replying likewise) but I am interested nevertheless. I noticed the other day that Bury appointed their 1st Chairman since 2003, so we may well go without one.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 apart from having someone to act as chair of the meetings I don't believe there is a requirement for a permanent person to hold that post. Who chairs the meetings can be decided on an ad-hoc basis. In any event, is it not rather academic. David Beattie is clearly the public voice of the club now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 In any event, is it not rather academic. David Beattie is clearly the public voice of Tom Hughes now. Corrected that for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Murray Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Corrected that for you. David Beattie is in a total different league of business man to Tom Hughes. If he is involved in this then it’s by his own choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Corrected that for you. Say it isn't so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Heron Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 David Beattie is in a total different league of business man to Tom Hughes. If he is involved in this then it’s by his own choice. I'd agree with that entirely. Whatever he may be, I don't think he's anyone's poodle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernsoul Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 David Beattie is in a total different league of business man to Tom Hughes. If he is involved in this then it’s by his own choice. They're all good pals, going by what I saw at hospitality not long ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.