Nor me

Piecing together half-truths and rumours to try and construct a picture of what might potentially be going on, I still cannot see a reason why we aren't being presented with a more complete picture. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree, but if the below is a rough approximation of what's happening, is there a good reason why the current Board can't publish a statement along these lines:

Fans will be aware of the recent co-option onto the Board of Jon Pratt, and fans will further remember that provisional interest was expressed at a previous Trust AGM to move towards a hybrid model of ownership should a suitable opportunity arise. Next week's meeting will allow Trust members and shareholders to be receive a presentation of such an opportunity, which would see the Trust retain a stake in the club alongside Mr Pratt, whose long-term vision for the club will be outlined.

As a Board, we reiterate that the final decision lies with you, our supporters, with all Trust members having a vote. As a preliminary measure, the Club is arranging an AGM for later in the month so that any decision can be legally ratified in line with the Club's articles of association - but this will only happen if there is provisional support at next Tuesday's meeting. Ultimately, we all want the best for our club so we urge as many Trust members and shareholders to come along and be part of the discussion and to ask as many questions as they wish so they can understand the proposals. We will also conduct a listening exercise with fans who are not members of the Trust so that they too can hear about and feed into the discussion.

As I say, I might be barking up the wrong tree - but even if I'm, only 50% right about what might be in the pipeline, what reason would there be to NOT put out a statement along those lines in the interests of transparency and openness?

I suppose they can kill two birds with one stone by sending an email of the agenda to all those who have stated an intention to attend.

I haven't had a reply acknowledging my intentions to attend. (Perhaps the club just want to gauge how many are likely to attend).
But agree no sign of an agenda yet.

excessbee wrote: June 8th, 2023, 9:12 am I suppose they can kill two birds with one stone by sending an email of the agenda to all those who have stated an intention to attend.

We already have an agenda -

financial update,
overview of our future plans,
an opportunity for attendees to ask questions.

Will they expanding much on that before the meeting?

Amberexile wrote: June 8th, 2023, 10:15 am

excessbee wrote: June 8th, 2023, 9:12 am I suppose they can kill two birds with one stone by sending an email of the agenda to all those who have stated an intention to attend.

We already have an agenda -

financial update,
overview of our future plans,
an opportunity for attendees to ask questions.

Will they expanding much on that before the meeting?

The problem is that the directors of Newport County know the facts. The supporters don't. We know that it is the intention of the directors of the Trust to change the Articles of Association of Newport AFC. We don't know what the articles being amended say. We don't know what the new articles say. We don't know why these changes are deemed necessary.

To ask relevant questions you need the facts beforehand. Not on the night.

Stan A. Einstein wrote: June 8th, 2023, 10:49 am

Amberexile wrote: June 8th, 2023, 10:15 am

excessbee wrote: June 8th, 2023, 9:12 am I suppose they can kill two birds with one stone by sending an email of the agenda to all those who have stated an intention to attend.

We already have an agenda -

financial update,
overview of our future plans,
an opportunity for attendees to ask questions.

Will they expanding much on that before the meeting?

The problem is that the directors of Newport County know the facts. The supporters don't. We know that it is the intention of the directors of the Trust to change the Articles of Association of Newport AFC. We don't know what the articles being amended say. We don't know what the new articles say. We don't know why these changes are deemed necessary.

To ask relevant questions you need the facts beforehand. Not on the night.

Dead easy to find the current articles of association. They're available from Companies House. But you're correct in saying we don't know what the proposed amendments are, and that should be available now in my opinion.

Jonesy3 wrote: June 8th, 2023, 12:02 pm Dead easy to find the current articles of association. They're available from Companies House.

So they are - start on p12. So the amendments would alter what's in there about shares (article 5), borrowing powers (article 15) and indemnity (article 16) - but as you go on to say, we don't know exactly HOW those articles might be altered.

Kairdiff Exile wrote: June 8th, 2023, 12:18 pm

Jonesy3 wrote: June 8th, 2023, 12:02 pm Dead easy to find the current articles of association. They're available from Companies House.

So they are - start on p12. So the amendments would alter what's in there about shares (article 5), borrowing powers (article 15) and indemnity (article 16) - but as you go on to say, we don't know exactly HOW those articles might be altered.

They talk about insertion of new articles 5, 15 and 16 and renumbering. A new article 5 would go between current 4 and 5 in the section on shares between the current article 4 about the liability of members and current article 5 about subdividing shares.
Subsequent articles would be renumbered so current article 13 ( about renumeration of Directors) would become new article 14 and new articles 15 and 16 would come between this and current article 14 about Gratuities and Pensions which would become the new article 17 with subsequent articles being renumbered.

Stan A. Einstein wrote: June 8th, 2023, 10:49 am

Amberexile wrote: June 8th, 2023, 10:15 am

excessbee wrote: June 8th, 2023, 9:12 am I suppose they can kill two birds with one stone by sending an email of the agenda to all those who have stated an intention to attend.

We already have an agenda -

financial update,
overview of our future plans,
an opportunity for attendees to ask questions.

Will they expanding much on that before the meeting?

The problem is that the directors of Newport County know the facts. The supporters don't. We know that it is the intention of the directors of the Trust to change the Articles of Association of Newport AFC. We don't know what the articles being amended say. We don't know what the new articles say. We don't know why these changes are deemed necessary.

To ask relevant questions you need the facts beforehand. Not on the night.

Part of communication is to explain things in a simplistic and readily understandable way, and then more complex questions that require more detailed answers will follow. I personally can't see a detailed agenda helpful to that process, as it will only raise detailed questions before the easily understandable concept has been delivered.

Bangitintrnet wrote: June 8th, 2023, 2:00 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: June 8th, 2023, 10:49 am

Amberexile wrote: June 8th, 2023, 10:15 am

excessbee wrote: June 8th, 2023, 9:12 am I suppose they can kill two birds with one stone by sending an email of the agenda to all those who have stated an intention to attend.

We already have an agenda -

financial update,
overview of our future plans,
an opportunity for attendees to ask questions.

Will they expanding much on that before the meeting?

The problem is that the directors of Newport County know the facts. The supporters don't. We know that it is the intention of the directors of the Trust to change the Articles of Association of Newport AFC. We don't know what the articles being amended say. We don't know what the new articles say. We don't know why these changes are deemed necessary.

To ask relevant questions you need the facts beforehand. Not on the night.

Part of communication is to explain things in a simplistic and readily understandable way, and then more complex questions that require more detailed answers will follow. I personally can't see a detailed agenda helpful to that process, as it will only raise detailed questions before the easily understandable concept has been delivered.

I am persuaded that you are right. Tuesday's meeting is not a meeting of the company and has no standing legally in company administration. The amended articles will be published before the company AGM. To publish them before Tuesday risks people going off half **** before they understand what the directors have in mind.

G Guest wrote: June 8th, 2023, 3:02 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: June 8th, 2023, 2:00 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: June 8th, 2023, 10:49 am

Amberexile wrote: June 8th, 2023, 10:15 am

excessbee wrote: June 8th, 2023, 9:12 am I suppose they can kill two birds with one stone by sending an email of the agenda to all those who have stated an intention to attend.

We already have an agenda -

financial update,
overview of our future plans,
an opportunity for attendees to ask questions.

Will they expanding much on that before the meeting?

The problem is that the directors of Newport County know the facts. The supporters don't. We know that it is the intention of the directors of the Trust to change the Articles of Association of Newport AFC. We don't know what the articles being amended say. We don't know what the new articles say. We don't know why these changes are deemed necessary.

To ask relevant questions you need the facts beforehand. Not on the night.

Part of communication is to explain things in a simplistic and readily understandable way, and then more complex questions that require more detailed answers will follow. I personally can't see a detailed agenda helpful to that process, as it will only raise detailed questions before the easily understandable concept has been delivered.

I am persuaded that you are right. Tuesday's meeting is not a meeting of the company and has no standing legally in company administration. The amended articles will be published before the company AGM. To publish them before Tuesday risks people going off half **** before they understand what the directors have in mind.

Some people will go off half **** regardless. They are best ignored as ****heads and then take the action that will best serve the majority of reasonable supporters

Amberexile wrote: June 8th, 2023, 3:21 pm

G Guest wrote: June 8th, 2023, 3:02 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: June 8th, 2023, 2:00 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: June 8th, 2023, 10:49 am

Amberexile wrote: June 8th, 2023, 10:15 am

excessbee wrote: June 8th, 2023, 9:12 am I suppose they can kill two birds with one stone by sending an email of the agenda to all those who have stated an intention to attend.

We already have an agenda -

financial update,
overview of our future plans,
an opportunity for attendees to ask questions.

Will they expanding much on that before the meeting?

The problem is that the directors of Newport County know the facts. The supporters don't. We know that it is the intention of the directors of the Trust to change the Articles of Association of Newport AFC. We don't know what the articles being amended say. We don't know what the new articles say. We don't know why these changes are deemed necessary.

To ask relevant questions you need the facts beforehand. Not on the night.

Part of communication is to explain things in a simplistic and readily understandable way, and then more complex questions that require more detailed answers will follow. I personally can't see a detailed agenda helpful to that process, as it will only raise detailed questions before the easily understandable concept has been delivered.

I am persuaded that you are right. Tuesday's meeting is not a meeting of the company and has no standing legally in company administration. The amended articles will be published before the company AGM. To publish them before Tuesday risks people going off half **** before they understand what the directors have in mind.

Some people will go off half **** regardless. They are best ignored as ****heads and then take the action that will best serve the majority of reasonable supporters

Or the final wording of articles may not as yet been finalised. Is it possible that may not be done until after next Tuesdays meeting?

Amberexile wrote: June 8th, 2023, 3:21 pm
Some people will go off half **** regardless. They are best ignored as ****heads and then take the action that will best serve the majority of reasonable supporters

If you're going to refer to people as ×+×+heads at least have the guts to name them. Tempting though it is to regard reasonable supporters as the ones who agree with you, I'm far from convinced that's right.