Shareholders’ poll a step forward

I’D like to applaud the North London Valiants (NLV) fans’ group for canvassing shareholders regarding the Mo Chaudry takeover proposals and the competency, or otherwise of the current board.
In fact, the directors’ subsequent decision to poll shareholders on Chaudry’s bid now smacks a little of “after the horse has bolted”.
The results of the NLV poll are fairly conclusive – with 77 per cent of the respondents saying they had no confidence in the board to make the right decisions about future investment in the club.
These results were based on responses from 40.5 per cent – or 339 – of Vale’s shareholders.
This means that even if there has been some jiggery-pokery lately, and those figures have been influenced by people buying up £50 worth of shares here and there, it’s still a pretty damning indictment of the board.
Having said that, I’m still pleased all shareholders are to be given the opportunity to say “yes” or “no” to Chaudry’s vision for the Vale.
For months now anti-board protesters have vented their anger over the fact the directors don’t seem to be listening to the supporters.
They couldn’t understand why none of the potential investors in the club were seen as worthy of pursuing.
The campaigners want an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) so that  regular shareholders with just a few hundred quid invested in the club could have a say.
Well they haven’t got an EGM just yet, but this poll at least gives us all a voice and, if conducted with transparency and openness, may deliver a level of accountability that has been lacking for some time.
It will be interesting to see the figures – in terms of the split between individual shareholders as opposed to the percentages of shares.
We could have a situation where, as with votes at the annual meeting, the majority of people vote for something, but because they own a relatively small number of shares they ultimately lose.
Which brings us back to the crux of the debate.
The remaining six directors in this war of attrition are likely to ultimately decide the fate of Chaudry’s proposals – something which flies in the face of the original Valiant 2001 ethos of For Us All and one-man, one-vote.
Many claim this is inherently unfair, but if you had sunk tens of thousands of pounds into the Vale, wouldn’t you want more of a say than Joe Bloggs with his £50 stake?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s