I HAVE 2 STATEMENTS TO MAKE

Steve Borley assures me THERE WILL BE AN EGM IN FEBRUARY 2010, FOR CARDIFF CITY SHAREHOLDERS TO HAVE THEIR VOTE.
Steve also assures me that he has nothing to do with the CURRENT STATEMENT FROM OUR.

I BELIEVE HIM ON BOTH ISSUES.

Did he mention the tax issue?, and whether him and Guy are still paying it?

Steve Borley assures me THERE WILL BE AN EGM IN FEBRUARY 2010, FOR CARDIFF CITY SHAREHOLDERS TO HAVE THEIR VOTE.
Steve also assures me that he has nothing to do with the CURRENT STATEMENT FROM OUR.

I BELIEVE HIM ON BOTH ISSUES.

He knew the fans were being conned and lied to tho I bet.

Annis will Steve Borely go public ?

I would like to see figureheads like Borley, Dave Jones, Vince Alm, etc to go public with their thoughts.

February will be to late.

I fear now for our club. This could well be the end.

If we don't pay the tax bill there will be an EGM for a club that has ceased to exist having been wound up by HMRC.

Lot of good that would be - Borley starting to spin too it would seem Annis.

Annis will Steve Borely go public ?

I would like to see figureheads like Borley, Dave Jones, Vince Alm, etc to go public with their thoughts.

I agree I have called for Dave and Steve to do so already earlier today and I endorse that Vince should also come out and speak.

I absolutely fuming, words cannot describe. So many threads on same issue(i cant pick which one to reply) is clearly showing the anger withing our ranks.

Im sorry Peter, you have shafted other clubs before but now you have overstepped the line,

this is CARDIFF CITY FC. you will no longer wring our beloved club dry

Sorry but they knew exactly what they was doing, IMO there all as bad as eachother the lot can f**k off.

Steve Borley assures me THERE WILL BE AN EGM IN FEBRUARY 2010, FOR CARDIFF CITY SHAREHOLDERS TO HAVE THEIR VOTE.
Steve also assures me that he has nothing to do with the CURRENT STATEMENT FROM OUR.

I BELIEVE HIM ON BOTH ISSUES.

he must have known what is going on behind the scenes though, and what is happening with tax? i thought he said he was sorting it??

Annis, what will this achieve?
If Steve, and other board members, want an EGM, why can't they have it tomorrow? Or Friday? Or Monday?

Why is he waiting??

Steve Borley has nothing to do with the statement which says the Board back Peter Ridsdale ?? Well if Mr Borley doesn't back him then how may on the board do ?

Annis, what will this achieve?
If Steve, and other board members, want an EGM, why can't they have it tomorrow? Or Friday? Or Monday?

Why is he waiting??

I keep asking him that,I said WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH,But he just keeps saying please wait. I said its beyond my control.

it says the board and majority of shareholders- surely that says allthe board including borley back him ??

annis was steele a smoke screen or did he do a runner when he saw our debts. risdale has to be removed by any means possible

if steve borley does not agre with the statement from ccfc board or new nothing about it then he shud do wat that big nosed fat c**t does an refute the statement and demand a retraction or go public about how he feels but off his own back not other peoples

Steve Borley has nothing to do with the statement which says the Board back Peter Ridsdale ?? Well if Mr Borley doesn't back him then how many on the board do ?

Also , how does Mr Borley feel being qouted as giving his backing ? I'm not talking of a direct qoute , but by saying "PETER HAS THE FULL BACKING OF BOTH THE BOARD AND THE MAJORITY OF SHAREHOLDERS " in the clubs statement and then that leads me to believe that the full board back Peter Ridsdale.

I'm sure Mr Borley is cleverer than me , but do I let people tell lies about me ? No I don't ! So Mr Borley , in you we trust as I can't see anywhere else at the moment

Did he mention the tax issue?, and whether him and Guy are still paying it?

He repeated he will not let the Club go under.

Yes but he also promised an EGM in February when it may be too late - Borley is starting to spin the same as Ridsdale annis mate

Steve Borley has nothing to do with the statement which says the Board back Peter Ridsdale ?? Well if Mr Borley doesn't back him then how many on the board do ?

Also , how does Mr Borley feel being qouted as giving his backing ? I'm not talking of a direct qoute , but by saying "PETER HAS THE FULL BACKING OF BOTH THE BOARD AND THE MAJORITY OF SHAREHOLDERS " in the clubs statement and then that leads me to believe that the full board back Peter Ridsdale.

I'm sure Mr Borley is cleverer than me , but do I let people tell lies about me ? No I don't ! So Mr Borley , in you we trust as I can't see anywhere else at the moment

There is a difference between "The full backing of the Board" and "The backing of the full board". As I said in another thread most statements would have used the word Unanimous insuch circumstances. I believe that it is cleverly worded.

Annis, what will this achieve?
If Steve, and other board members, want an EGM, why can't they have it tomorrow? Or Friday? Or Monday?

Why is he waiting??

I keep asking him that,I said WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH,But he just keeps saying please wait. I said its beyond my control.

In all fairness mate, wait for what exactly? For the next scheme that the club can use to extract more money out of the fans under false pretences? because thats all the board seems to be doing for the fans at the moment is coming out with new methods of getting the supporters to fund the club, rather than investing anything themselves. Borley is complicate in all this, he cannot come out with the excuse again like he did when Sam was in charge, that he had no say or power as Sam was a dictator. Borley has backed Ridsdale to the hilt as a proper businessman to lead the club, yet the supporters are being taken for a bigger ride than Sam Hammam ever provided. Borley cannot play dumb, if he portrays himself as one of us, then he had better start speaking up or in my opinion he is as bad and should feck off with the Ridler and th rest of the PMG leaches.

Steve Borley has nothing to do with the statement which says the Board back Peter Ridsdale ?? Well if Mr Borley doesn't back him then how many on the board do ?

Also , how does Mr Borley feel being qouted as giving his backing ? I'm not talking of a direct qoute , but by saying "PETER HAS THE FULL BACKING OF BOTH THE BOARD AND THE MAJORITY OF SHAREHOLDERS " in the clubs statement and then that leads me to believe that the full board back Peter Ridsdale.

I'm sure Mr Borley is cleverer than me , but do I let people tell lies about me ? No I don't ! So Mr Borley , in you we trust as I can't see anywhere else at the moment

There is a difference between "The full backing of the Board" and "The backing of the full board". As I said in another thread most statements would have used the word Unanimous insuch circumstances. I believe that it is cleverly worded.

Surely the "full backing of the board" means unanimous backing ?

Steve Borley has nothing to do with the statement which says the Board back Peter Ridsdale ?? Well if Mr Borley doesn't back him then how many on the board do ?

Also , how does Mr Borley feel being qouted as giving his backing ? I'm not talking of a direct qoute , but by saying "PETER HAS THE FULL BACKING OF BOTH THE BOARD AND THE MAJORITY OF SHAREHOLDERS " in the clubs statement and then that leads me to believe that the full board back Peter Ridsdale.

I'm sure Mr Borley is cleverer than me , but do I let people tell lies about me ? No I don't ! So Mr Borley , in you we trust as I can't see anywhere else at the moment

There is a difference between "The full backing of the Board" and "The backing of the full board". As I said in another thread most statements would have used the word Unanimous insuch circumstances. I believe that it is cleverly worded.

Surely the "full backing of the board" means unanimous backing ?

No it doesn't! Say you have 5 Board Members. A resolution is put forward stating " The Board fully backs PR" The resolution is carried on a simple majority 3-2. Therefore a statement is issued that " The Board fully backs PR". I will guarantee you that if all Board members had backed PR then the statement would have used "unanaimous" as it adds power to the statement.

There is a difference between "The full backing of the Board" and "The backing of the full board". As I said in another thread most statements would have used the word Unanimous insuch circumstances. I believe that it is cleverly worded.

Surely the "full backing of the board" means unanimous backing ?

No it doesn't! Say you have 5 Board Members. A resolution is put forward stating " The Board fully backs PR" The resolution is carried on a simple majority 3-2. Therefore a statement is issued that " The Board fully backs PR". I will guarantee you that if all Board members had backed PR then the statement would have used "unanaimous" as it adds power to the statement.

A 3-2 vote would be a majority vote in favour resulting in the 'backing of the board'

Full backing can't be given on a majority vote only on unanimous vote.

Full backing can't be given on a majority vote only on unanimous vote.[/quote]
Well we are not dealing with a PLC here making a statement to the City of London. It will depend on what number of Directors constitute a quorum of the Board and more importantly who it was who drafted the press release after the vote was taken. Don't want to get to heavy into this but my reading is that there is a power struggle going on here of which we, the fans,are mere bystanders.

Full backing can't be given on a majority vote only on unanimous vote.

Well we are not dealing with a PLC here making a statement to the City of London. It will depend on what number of Directors constitute a quorum of the Board and more importantly who it was who drafted the press release after the vote was taken. Don't want to get to heavy into this but my reading is that there is a power struggle going on here of which we, the fans,are mere bystanders.[/quote]

Full backing can't be given on a majority vote only on unanimous vote.

Well we are not dealing with a PLC here making a statement to the City of London. It will depend on what number of Directors constitute a quorum of the Board and more importantly who it was who drafted the press release after the vote was taken. Don't want to get to heavy into this but my reading is that there is a power struggle going on here of which we, the fans,are mere bystanders.

[/quote]


I don't know that much about company law, but i'm pretty sure the Chairman can be voted off by a majority of board members. That they haven't done it at any time in the past 4 years [possibly over 100 board meetings], says a lot for how happy they are for Ridsdale to take the flack for the rest of them.

Remember that most clubs where they are run into the ground, it's the major shareholder/owner/proprietor, who has had absolute control to do as he wishes. Ridsdale is a MINORITY shareholder, and as Chairman can be ousted at any time.

Full backing can't be given on a majority vote only on unanimous vote.

Well we are not dealing with a PLC here making a statement to the City of London. It will depend on what number of Directors constitute a quorum of the Board and more importantly who it was who drafted the press release after the vote was taken. Don't want to get to heavy into this but my reading is that there is a power struggle going on here of which we, the fans,are mere bystanders.

[/quote]

On a 3 - 2 result, any ideas who cast what votes?

Full backing can't be given on a majority vote only on unanimous vote.

Well we are not dealing with a PLC here making a statement to the City of London. It will depend on what number of Directors constitute a quorum of the Board and more importantly who it was who drafted the press release after the vote was taken. Don't want to get to heavy into this but my reading is that there is a power struggle going on here of which we, the fans,are mere bystanders.

I don't know that much about company law, but i'm pretty sure the Chairman can be voted off by a majority of board members. That they haven't done it at any time in the past 4 years [possibly over 100 board meetings], says a lot for how happy they are for Ridsdale to take the flack for the rest of them.

Remember that most clubs where they are run into the ground, it's the major shareholder/owner/proprietor, who has had absolute control to do as he wishes. Ridsdale is a MINORITY shareholder, and as Chairman can be ousted at any time.[/quote]

it would have to be the agm or egm to get the prick out