+ Visit Carlisle United FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: CUSG: Minutes from 13 December meeting

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,525

    CUSG: Minutes from 13 December meeting

    https://www.carlisleunited.co.uk/new...ember-meeting/

    Am I missing something or does this suggest that Billy Atkinson and Jim Mitchell had agreed to dilute the Trust's shareholding from 25.3% to 10% or less without actually consulting their members?

    Bearing in mind how far up the Directors arses they are this seems incredible.

    Surely any honest/honourable prospective owner would allow CUOSC to consult its members over a takeover, particularly if the prospective owner knew that without consultation he/she could not gain outright control.

    I get the impression that Billy Atkinson thinks he is CUOSC, as opposed to simply a representative.

    The relevant extract from the Minutes:-

    "Billy Atkinson made it clear the first deal put to CUOSC and referred to in other updates was accepted. It reduced its voting rights but still was accepted by CUOSC. It wasn’t easy to get approval from the CUOSC board, but a full change of control and a takeover would have happened. This was a desired outcome, so CUOSC backed it. He also made it clear that ‘CUOSC did not hold the deal up’ in any way."

    "Billy Atkinson wouldn’t be drawn on whether CUOSC would agree a future dilution without member consultation. It would always depend on the deal being offered. The recent member survey was very helpful in confirming views on how it would approach any future deals.

    Simon Clarkson suggested that this would be a ‘good opportunity to sound out members on whether a dilution would be acceptable with or without direct consultation’.

    Nigel D stated that CUOSC would take [the dilution issue] very seriously next time, as they did on this occasion. For any future investment they’d be looking to work with parties that would want public member approval for a deal and would work ‘with’ CUOSC as outlined in the Fan Led Review, and the recent CUOSC Questionnaire.

    Nigel C said that some people interested in clubs don’t want to operate or deal in public at all, and make offers subject to conditions accordingly. The requirement for members to vote on any deal first, may lead to a potential buyer pulling out. Fans may well see that as a good filter of who may be suitable owners."

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,601
    People who know people who know the brother of the bloke who is the dog walker of Philip Day's dog say that he (Philip Day, not the dog) has never expressed any interest in taking over Carlisle United. In the first forum this year John Nixon frequently referred to Philip Day / EWM > Purepay as an investor which they certainly are not.

    Philip Day / EWM > Purepay have simply been a creditor and CUFC 1921 a debtor. There is evidence / proof of this. There is f­uck all evidence / proof of any other relationship between the respective parties.

    Of course I know nowt of these alleged macinations but deciding who is the most honourable, truthful and open of Philip Day, the Holdings directors and CUOSC is extremely difficult. The quality of the participants in this game is utterly abysmal.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,525
    Quote Originally Posted by _Stefan_Kuntz View Post
    The quality of the participants in this game is utterly abysmal.
    Agreed.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    767
    Quote Originally Posted by howoldboy View Post
    Agreed.
    What does membership of the trust get you, that not being a member doesn’t!!

    They don’t inform you of meetings.
    Don’t tell you what’s going on.
    And can dilute without asking members.

    In short - nothing!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,525
    Quote Originally Posted by mullen103 View Post
    What does membership of the trust get you, that not being a member doesn’t!!

    They don’t inform you of meetings.
    Don’t tell you what’s going on.
    And can dilute without asking members.

    In short - nothing!
    If Atkinson and Mitchell have overstepped the mark here they really should stand down.

    Based on what Simon Clarkson said it seems that CUOSC know this.

    As you say what is the point of being a member if you don't get a say on something as fundamentally important as this.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    20,207
    The only true Supporters’ Club left is the London Branch who have put more money into the football club in the last 10 years than the Trust. Calling themselves CUOSC only proves the fact that they stole the ‘Supporters Club’ bit even though they don’t represent the fans.

Forum Info

Footymad Forums offer you the chance to interact and discuss all things football with fellow fans from around the world, and share your views on footballing issues from the latest, breaking transfer rumours to the state of the game at international level and everything in between.

Whether your team is battling it out for the Premier League title or struggling for League survival, there's a forum for you!

Gooners, Mackems, Tractor Boys - you're all welcome, please just remember to respect the opinions of others.

Click here for a full list of the hundreds of forums available to you

The forums are free to join, although you must play fair and abide by the rules explained here, otherwise your ability to post may be temporarily or permanently revoked.

So what are you waiting for? Register now and join the debate!

(these forums are not actively moderated, so if you wish to report any comment made by another member please report it.)



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •