Fans Worried Over Villa Future

[Brend'Watkins]

If that is an accurate account of events at the AGM then I too if I had been the questioner would have walked out.  

What is the point of an AGM if pertinent questions such as those raised are to be either dismissed or fudged over?  Those same questions could have been put forward by any share holder, the fact that it was Jonathen Fear or the VFC who may or may not have a personal vendetta against Ellis is irrelevant. The board have shown nothing but contempt for it's fellow share holders.

[Laughing Gravity]

Those same questions could have been put forward by any share holder,

Or even a Trust.

[dave.woodhall]

If that is an accurate account of events at the AGM then I too if I had been the questioner would have walked out.  

What is the point of an AGM if pertinent questions such as those raised are to be either dismissed or fudged over?  Those same questions could have been put forward by any share holder, the fact that it was Jonathen Fear or the VFC who may or may not have a personal vendetta against Ellis is irrelevant. The board have shown nothing but contempt for it's fellow share holders.

I've been to the last 20 (I think) AGMs, and at every one the board has either declined to answer, or given answers which the questioner has thought inadequate. I would imagine that most AGMs, whatever the company, are much the same. No-one has ever walked out of an AGM before because they didn't like what was being said, and to do so was, I believe, counter-productive. It was also highly discourteous to the Shareholders Association members whose interests their chairman is elected to represent, but as I've been informed I'm not welcome in their organisation, that doesn't overly bother me.

[pete bland]

Thanks for posting that up Pete, but I still think that the decision to walk out was at best ill judged..[etc]...

I can understand that, Chris. There are two ways of looking at it. One is that the walk-out will distract attention from the good questions asked.

Another is that the questions were unanswered, and that actually it's the answers that are the important thing. With the answers being largely unforthcoming, JF may have distracted from the impression that he asked some pertinent questions etc, but I think the point he wanted to make was that the questions were ducked and unanswered - the walk out was meant to underline this point. Perhaps it didn't work. Certainly it didn't in your eyes. Fair comment.

You learn by experience. I hope there's no "next time"

[BW]

You could pick various parts out. You really could.

He said we sold an England International for £2million, so you will obviously have put a sell on clause in.

Spot the deliberate error.

I don't know who raised that point - if he had said, "England U-21 with potential", then you couldn't disagree. But he lied.

And all effect is gone. What was the point in the question in that case?

Its like the VFC release saying we spent 900k on Dj-Dj when we clearly didn't. Why over-egg the pudding there?

I also don't get why they make the point with the "that will be overturned in the poll" as we know that it will. That's kind of how it works with one or two groups holding a large amount of the shares. ](*,)

Its all I've ever seen from this angle. 70, 80% of it works but the people doing the shouting have no idea how to take it the last step. Which is quite ironic for Villa fans, really.

[Oscar Goldman]

Does the ST represent Villa supporters?

It represents its members whose views it seeks on a regular basis and, yes, I would image that 100% of them are Villa fans.

[Oscar Goldman]

...but I think the point he wanted to make was that the questions were ducked and unanswered - the walk out was meant to underline this point.

That’s very odd because I read a quote directly from Fear saying that he walked as he had to be elsewhere.

[Brend'Watkins]

I've been to the last 20 (I think) AGMs, and at every one the board has either declined to answer, or given answers which the questioner has thought inadequate. I would imagine that most AGMs, whatever the company, are much the same. No-one has ever walked out of an AGM before because they didn't like what was being said, and to do so was, I believe, counter-productive. It was also highly discourteous to the Shareholders Association members whose interests their chairman is elected to represent, but as I've been informed I'm not welcome in their organisation, that doesn't overly bother me.

I'm thinking about since we've been a PLC.  So the last 8 years would concern me.  I'm not a share holder of AVFC PLC, but if you put the football aside and look at it as Aston Villa the company then the board of directors should be willing to answer questions regarding the running of the company, if I had invested in that company I'd like to be certain that my investment was being looked after.  If I was treated with contempt then I'd have to consider removing that investment as I would have little faith in those in charge of it.

[richardhubbard]

Can I ask one simple question, after 35 pages of threads
Villa is a business, that at its AGM's does not breach any companies act requirements. Why do the board need to respond to a small shareholder like Fear, he has no financial clout with the club?

[Oscar Goldman]

If I was treated with contempt then I'd have to consider removing that investment as I would have little faith in those in charge of it.

Maybe that’s partly a factor in the contempt.

Let’s face it, “answer my point Doug or I’m selling my shares” is hardly on a par with waking up with a thoroughbred’s head in your bed, is it?

[Dave Cooper please]

...but I think the point he wanted to make was that the questions were ducked and unanswered - the walk out was meant to underline this point.

That’s very odd because I read a quote directly from Fear saying that he walked as he had to be elsewhere.

He said on the mailing list that he has another meeting to attend.

[pete bland]

You could pick various parts out. You really could.

He said we sold an England International for £2million, so you will obviously have put a sell on clause in.

I don't know who raised that point

Nor me, but JF's report is of the whole AGM (or at least the 98% of it he witnessed) not just VFC's part in it.

Its like the VFC release saying we spent 900k on Dj-Dj when we clearly didn't. Why over-egg the pudding there?

That was me/my "fault". The reason I did that was because the statement to the stock market said that the fee was 950K in the Jan window, with other payments dependent upon appearances and so on.
Maybe I took the wrong approach. I know as recent example shows, that Ellis includes wages over the contract, bonuses, appearance fees, absolutely everything in the "I spent" figure.

I feel this is misleading, and that the spend at a given time is the money that's just gone out of the bank - ie the 900K or whatever it was, in Jan for E D-D.

Perhaps both ways are wrong, and I should have said, the club has just spent 900k with a further 250K in june, plus a further 250 after 25 appearances, plus a further 250 K after another..etc... which could potentially add up to 1.7 million (or whatever the figure was, I can't be arsed looking it up again). But the PRs were often criticised for being too long anyway.

Ellis wants to portray himself as very generous and a benefactor etc. VFC feels that the reality is the exact opposite.

I know some people said it was disingenuous, others felt it was good. Again, it's something where despite some claims to the opposite, the criticism was taken. I don't necessarily agree with it, but I understand it and we can learn from it.

I also don't get why they make the point with the "that will be overturned in the poll" as we know that it will. That's kind of how it works with one or two groups holding a large amount of the shares. ](*,)

You may know that BW, but not everyone reading JF's report will have done...

[Oscar Goldman]

...but I think the point he wanted to make was that the questions were ducked and unanswered - the walk out was meant to underline this point.

That’s very odd because I read a quote directly from Fear saying that he walked as he had to be elsewhere.

He said on the mailing list that he has another meeting to attend.

Somebody's telling fibs.

[Brend'Watkins]

If I was treated with contempt then I'd have to consider removing that investment as I would have little faith in those in charge of it.

Maybe that’s partly a factor in the contempt.

Let’s face it, “answer my point Doug or I’m selling my shares” is hardly on a par with waking up with a thoroughbred’s head in your bed, is it?

Don't get giving VFC ideas, you could be incited for Mu-der!

I'm aware there might be history with Mr Fear and the board.  Do you think that had these same questions come from another source ie, someone with a £250,000 invested there may have been answers?

[dave.woodhall]

Again, it's something where despite some claims to the opposite, the criticism was taken

http://listman.net/archives/villa/2005-October/061553.html

The last couple of sentences in the third paragraph of his reply was a particularly fine acceptance of criticism, I think.