Dave King to Sell Shares to Club 1872

[Stevie - 4lads Blog 922]

1 minute ago, Bluedell said:

You said "I'm not sure what the issue is with him" and that what you had been told tells us everything. That suggests you didn't understand the conflict of interest (at best) which was backed up by the fact you didn't ask Laura why C1872 refused to take part in the club share issues, particularly when she emphasised that buying shares was their core aim.

You make a lot of assumptions on a simple reply

[rbr 1,266]

16 minutes ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

 

Not sure where I said I didn’t see the the potential issues with that? Can you show me 

 

I gave a polite response in conversation 
 

I said - I didn’t see the issue with him and admitted freely, in the post you quoted, I wasn’t aware why there is an apparent depth of feeling against him (as a person). 
 

Hence why I wasn’t questioning someone who wasn’t on the podcast 

 

Will send you a DM 

 

Edited December 11, 2020 by rbr

[Stevie - 4lads Blog 922]

8 minutes ago, rbr said:

 

 

 

DM replied too 

Edited December 11, 2020 by Stevie - 4lads Blog

[the gunslinger 3,366]

we always end up going full life of Brian on this issue. 

[Stevie - 4lads Blog 922]

Just now, the gunslinger said:

we always end up going full life of Brian on this issue. 

Passive aggression the order of the day and repeat 

 

Think I’ll pass from here on in bud 

 

Interview has been done, People can dissect it how they wish 

 

 

[Bluedell 5,679]

14 minutes ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

Passive aggression the order of the day and repeat 

 

 

That's an big assumption. 

[stewarty 2,060]

The biggest argument I've seen as a reason for members lapsing or potential members being put off from signing up, is the perceived lack of transparency.  And from a quick look at the C1872 website and a trawl of my email inbox, there are good reasons for this.

Firstly, I can't see any Board meeting summaries since September 2018 published.  Its not clear why this has stopped, but I noted comments from @plgsarmyelsewhere that suggest this is deliberate.  Regardless, this needs to change and quickly.  Furthermore, the last projects update I received was an email in October 2019.  Given that was 14 months ago, members should be updated on project progress given that many will have opted for some or all of their contributions to go towards them.  I for one was very supportive of the defribillator purchase in memory of Peter Derrick from the Viceroy and given the challenges thrown up by the Pandemic, I would hope there may be other project opportunities that we as a support would love to hear more about and indeed support further in terms of our time.  There have been various news articles in the last year or so, but a clearer description of how member resources have been spent, is needed asap.

 

Secondly, a lot of the noise around this scheme could be easily cleared up by holding some sort of virtual AGM to review the accounts and overall CIC progress as well as for the Board to make themselves available for questions from members.  Yes there may be some costs involved to ensure they have the tech to make this work, and they'd need to think about how they can reach non-tech savvy members, but the argument for not having an AGM seems weak when many companies have had to adapt and do things in different ways due to the pandemic.

 

With regards to Chris Graham, the nature of his involvement should be disclosed to members so that we have time to examine the benefits of this prior to any future Board elections.  I've enjoyed Chris' contribution over the years and he seems like a capable guy, so I've no problem with him being involved in principle, but the nature of this relationship needs to be understood.

 

Some other comments I've seen are that members were not consulted in relation to the purchase of shares, or rather, that we knocked back the chance.  Personally, I'm open minded about this as we need to have the cash ready to go in order to take part, but we should be made aware of the circumstances.  Having looked back over my emails, there was an email  also in October 2019 regarding a proposed major share purchase of £500k.  I may have deleted the outcome of this vote from my Inbox but I think this does somewhat contradict the suggestion that members have not been consulted.  Nonetheless, the principle of a £13m share purchase must surely be something that requires more consultation before we go full steam ahead regardless of the need for confidentiality.

 

Transparency is one of the hallmarks of good governance.  And like conflicts of interest, it is essential that the appearance of transparency is protected vigorously.  Otherwise it leads to rumour, innuendo and conspiracy.
 

Many/all of these comments have already been said by  others already.  I say all of them as a committed member who has already signed up to make legacy contributions.  I am open minded and ready to hear more about what is going on.  However, to borrow a phrase from the past, we deserve better.

[Bluedell 5,679]

25 minutes ago, Stevie - 4lads Blog said:

You make a lot of assumptions on a simple reply

Or your reply implied things that you didn't mean to or was unclear? It would be easy enough to clarify but you don't seem willing for whatever reason, which is your prerogative, but it's a forum and when you say that you don't see what the issue is, I'm not sure why you get upset when it's explained to you.

 

I know it's not easy doing interviews and presumably the questions were all pre-screened, but there's certainly a lot of unanswered questions.  

[ranger_syntax 4,422]

1 hour ago, rbr said:

Titter , what age are you 14 , grow up.

Yes, you're right. It is immature of me to be so rude.

 

It's just that I found it so difficult to believe that you can't tell the difference between a question mark and other punctuation.

 

I'll adjust my expectations for the sake of this thread.

[Stevie - 4lads Blog 922]

1 minute ago, Bluedell said:

Or your reply implied things that you didn't mean to or was unclear? It would be easy enough to clarify but you don't seem willing for whatever reason, which is your prerogative, but it's a forum and when you say that you don't see what the issue is, I'm not sure why you get upset when it's explained to you.

 

I know it's not easy doing interviews and presumably the questions were all pre-screened, but there's certainly a lot of unanswered questions.  

My reply was perfectly fine and I don’t need to clarify it. It was a polite reply to another poster, we have spoken, job done 
 

That’s not correct. Nothing was pre screened - Chris & I choose them and we choose to stick to them, be neutral and not waver from that. Which we did and both are happy with how it went 

Now, as I said, I am out of this. I have no desire to go back and forward or bicker with folk. 
 

Cheers ??