Resolution 11 fails by <1%

[limeburner 0]

There is only one thing Ally cares about--------Ally.Why the surprise at this,it has always been thus.

Greed and self interest------lets hope the doubters can see this guy for what he is,finally.

What really grates with me is the fact he got the shares for pennies and is now using them against us.

[pete 2,499]

can someone explain for us dullards how exactly mccoist ends up "kingmaker" and then sides with thieving bastards?

 

what in detail does mccoist get out of doing this?

 

Last year the vote was lost by 1.3% I believe. sinds then club 1872 has increased its shareholding so that 1.3 would have been less probably under 1%. Ally has 1.25% of the shares which would have got Res.11 over the finish line. With Ally reneging it meant 1.25 less votes and res 11 fell about 1%short.

 

Why. His shareholding will not be diluted and if more shares come on the market he could increase his share-holding.

 

Why 2: This is pure supposition. Ally has now let everyone see how important his shares are. He can now say my shares are for sale but instead of paying a share value of 25p they will cost 29p per share. If he has a million shares for which he paid a penny then he has a nice little earner.

[forlanssister 3,066]

If the vote had passed without McCoists vote, would anyone have cared???

If the vote failed with a percentage greater than McCoists holding, would anyone have cared??

 

The fact that it appears to have failed with a percentage less than McCoists individual holding now seems to make him Enemy No.1. Why didn't he vote - who knows. He may have been planning on attending in person to cast his vote, but had to change his plans. He may have filled out the voting slip wrongly - we simply don't know.

 

What was the total percentage of votes cast??? If 20-30% of shareholders didn't vote, is it REALLY fair to single out one person???

 

He was canvassed and stated he would back the resolution, he then reneged because he didn't want his million penny shares (that cost him a whopping £10k or 4 1/4 days earnings when he was manager) diluted. His non vote was a calculated act not an error or something that slipped his mind.

 

When you're throwing around percentages of no votes bear in mind 10.4% weren't eligible to vote.

[der Berliner 3,357]

He was canvassed and stated he would back the resolution, he then reneged because he didn't want his million penny shares (that cost him a whopping £10k or 4 1/4 days earnings when he was manager) diluted. His non vote was a calculated act not an error or something that slipped his mind.

 

When you're throwing around percentages of no votes bear in mind 10.4% weren't eligible to vote.

 

How do YOU know? That was the simply question.

 

Jesus wept.

 

All votes have to be checked to ensure that they were legal.

 

I don't care whether Jesus wept or not, you simply fail to compute the simple question above. How do you know he was spoken to by the board this time and what his reply was. Likewise, do YOU have access to the results to be so sure about it? Simple questions.

Edited November 28, 2016 by der Berliner

[forlanssister 3,066]

How do YOU know? That was the simply question.

 

 

 

I don't care whether Jesus wept or not, you're simply fail to compute the simple question above. How do you know he was spoken to by the board this time and what his reply was. Likewise, do YOU have access to the results to be so sure about it. Simple questions.

 

Fkin wise up.

[rbr 1,247]

Guys there is no point us falling out over someone else's actions that we have no control over , we are all passionate about our club and care about what happens, please both of you go for a Cup of coffee lol

 

 

[der Berliner 3,357]

Fkin wise up.

 

So I assume you actually don't have access and know the votes ahead of anyone else in the public.

 

Aye, rbr. Waiting game is on now.

Edited November 28, 2016 by der Berliner

[Darthter 542]

He was canvassed and stated he would back the resolution, he then reneged because he didn't want his million penny shares (that cost him a whopping £10k or 4 1/4 days earnings when he was manager) diluted. His non vote was a calculated act not an error or something that slipped his mind..

 

...and you know that for a fact???

I am not say that isn't the case, but it is 100% guesswork & supposition.

 

I just think it's unfair to single out one single shareholder through the "benefit" of hindsight. As it turns out his vote could have swung the vote, but likewise if everyone else had voted, they may have swung the vote.

Remember....McCoist didn't vote against the motion - if that was the case then vilification would be justified.

[forlanssister 3,066]

So I assume you actually don't have access and know the votes ahead of anyone else in the public.

 

Aye, rbr. Waiting game is on now.

 

 

Have you learned nothing from this site over the last five years?

[forlanssister 3,066]

...and you know that for a fact???

I am not say that isn't the case, but it is 100% guesswork & supposition.

 

I just think it's unfair to single out one single shareholder through the "benefit" of hindsight. As it turns out his vote could have swung the vote, but likewise if everyone else had voted, they may have swung the vote.

Remember....McCoist didn't vote against the motion - if that was the case then vilification would be justified.

 

It is neither guesswork or supposition it is a fact, unpalatable perhaps but a fact nonetheless.