EGM leaves more questions than answers

Anyone who attended last week’s EGM at the Vale will probably, like me, still be sitting here wondering ‘how did that happen?’
I made a point of looking in the polling booths to try to gauge how the shareholders were voting.
I can tell you that there were pages and pages of people voting for change – voting for the board to be booted out – and only one or two people voting with the directors.
We all know it was the Broxap betrayal which swung the result and allowed three directors to slip the noose.
As I feared, a small number of people won the day – rather than the vast majority of shareholders.
For Us All is the motto on club literature. It should be changed to ‘For A Privileged Few’.
The three directors who narrowly escaped eviction courtesy of their own block vote are in denial.
In the absence of the exact figures I will take a stab and say that, even as a conservative estimate, three quarters of the 980-odd shareholders wanted change at Port Vale.
Certainly the vast majority of the 350-odd who were at the EGM wanted rid of the current board.
They lost a vote of no confidence, for heaven’s sake.
Yet for some reason they cling on…
As a result of their selfishness I reckon somewhere approaching 1,000 Vale fans won’t be buying season tickets.
That’s 1,000 proper Vale fans denied the chance to watch their team because of three blokes who think they are more important than the club.
With that in mind, I hope Mark Sims does take a seat on the board. My view is that it is better to have a man on the inside at this crucial juncture.
I wonder, however, how the North London Valiants will be able to take up the board’s kind offer of a seat given that they have no sponsor with £50,000 worth of shares.
Unless, of course, ousted director Peter Jackson is going to back them. (Stifles laughter).
Or is this offer simply another hallow gesture to try to pacify disgruntled supporters?
Rumours abound at underhand tactics with regard to last week’s EGM and I’ll be looking in to any suggestions of impropriety.
Certainly last Wednesday left more questions than answers and an awful lot of ill-feeling.
Vale supporters deserve better.


2 thoughts on “EGM leaves more questions than answers

  1. Malcolm Hirst says:

    Great piece Martin.
    I have asked the club for details of individual shareholder voting but I ahve not heard anything.
    My own estimate is 70-75% of individual shareholders voted against the board.

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