Jump to content

Clyde FC 2015/16 Thread


Recommended Posts

Well.....i've said since the start of the EK clusterfuck that there are those who wanted and voted for it to happen. If they are still 'owners' i'd expect a few less-than-gruntled chaps bumping their gums about it. Even if they are p***ks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Well.....i've said since the start of the EK clusterfuck that there are those who wanted and voted for it to happen. If they are still 'owners' i'd expect a few less-than-gruntled chaps bumping their gums about it. Even if they are p***ks.

Surely there can't be many of these folk in favour of the whole EK move? I'll admit I fell for the whole move or we die stuff coming from the board at the time of the EK vote.

On the agenda for Monday is a formal vote to remove the EK name change and something to do with changing the dates the accounts are produced. Once that's out the way am sure the proposed move will take up the majority of the meeting.

To remove the name change requires a 50% turn out with a 75% majority. Just hoping we get enough turning out that we can remove the name change once and for all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To remove the name change requires a 50% turn out with a 75% majority. Just hoping we get enough turning out that we can remove the name change once and for all.

^^^^^^^

This worries me

Membership = 5pints and taxi home over a YEAR long before the EK thing was put on table,

Anyway Say what you want and all entitled to online but when it comes down tae it im feart the support amongst us who are members could decide the club should be happy to play in middle o nowwhere/Drive up/Drive home and this worries me...

Yes,Their entitled to their vote just wish some of the rest who dont agree,were with me,personally dont think we.ll get turn out or replies due to summer hols or not knowing not voting attitude,Egm reminder on OS perhaps says it on the night that counts.

Fux knws.Hope im wrong

Vote as you will. Cant take the horse tae water like i wish i could wae many on here,We all had our choice to pay a small fee for our rightful vote and when it comes down thats the price were gona pay...

Foreva n eva

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^^^^

This worries me

Agree completely, normally these type of meetings attract 50 or so owners. Even allowing for proxy votes I can't see us getting the 201 or so votes required to officially remove the name change.

The timing is not ideal, Monday night during the summer isn't likely to attract the required number. When we were initially voting on the name change it was a Saturday before a home game. I would have liked to have seen similar for this meeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely there can't be many of these folk in favour of the whole EK move? I'll admit I fell for the whole move or we die stuff coming from the board at the time of the EK vote.

On the agenda for Monday is a formal vote to remove the EK name change and something to do with changing the dates the accounts are produced. Once that's out the way am sure the proposed move will take up the majority of the meeting.

To remove the name change requires a 50% turn out with a 75% majority. Just hoping we get enough turning out that we can remove the name change once and for all.

To be fair, Jack, why shouldn't there be anyone who wishes for the outcome that was outlined prior to the vote.....there were plenty of fans who rushed to join up to have their say, but nowhere whatsoever does it say that any member HAS to be a Clyde supporter. Recall the Rangers fans' thinly veiled threats to become 'owners', vote vote and vote again on any resolution to shut the club down, all because of the club's stance on the re-introduction of that club to the league. There's no way the club, acting in a democratic fashion as outlined in the manifesto, could accept a stupid bloody 40 year old virgin from Vladikavkaz as a 'gimmick owner', then suddenly reject 500 pissed off Bears with as Ssb puts it, the Monday club's beer money going spare. Whether they are or not, they are considered more valuable to the club than those who fork out 300 zobs a year to watch the team, let alone the four-figure sum spent doing so. In any case, i genuinely hope there are those who did vote for it because they wanted it, expect it to be carried out, and are bloody furious with the motion to remove it. Not only would it show the whole thing up as an absolute abortionist's floor of a set-up, it would provide real, genuine 100% 42-carat democracy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has the vote been delayed to allow low response and allow another name change/Junior tie up hence reason we never moved in this pre season....

Call me paranoid if u want* but get feeling anything is possible when we have no assets or capital to call the shots..

Thinkin back really who said the name change had to be EK clyde when clearly thats dead but really is name change overall,Fuk knows Im oot if that the case but glad i at least had my say rightly/Wrongly vice versa or snap...

* Who you looking at it/You looking at me:D:blink:;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has the vote been delayed to allow low response and allow another name change/Junior tie up hence reason we never moved in this pre season....

Call me paranoid if u want* but get feeling anything is possible when we have no assets or capital to call the shots..

Thinkin back really who said the name change had to be EK clyde when clearly thats dead but really is name change overall,Fuk knows Im oot if that the case but glad i at least had my say rightly/Wrongly vice versa or snap...

* Who you looking at it/You looking at me:D:blink:;)

Well......if it has been, short of the obvious answer, ie voting, it's clear there is absolutely f**k all anyone can, or intends to, do about it. It's obviously not as much of a problem for the majority of 'owners' if it has been delayed, or pushed back tactically. As Burton called it, its something that, if vitally important matters were at stake, it deserved even an early-season date (seeing as pushing it back isn't a problem....some of us have more than fucking football going on in the summer) with all the information available, and preferably as many potential voters present. Seems like the only questions will be from anyone in support of an EK Clyde hybrid, such has been the handling and response from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the vote was supposed to be in the spring but is now at the start of the holidays I doubt we will get 200 members to vote the conspiracy theorist in me says it was done deliberately by the chairman and his EK Clyde cronies to keep it bubbling in the background for me he should have resigned due to the shambles of name change et al but the cic model we have means he only needs a small band of happy clappers to keep him in power

hope I'm wrong about the vote ????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but the cic model we have means he only needs a small band of happy clappers to keep him in power

Thanks to the CIC model you only need to have one more dissenter over the happy clappers to remove the chairman from his position. Look at the trouble other clubs have had getting rid of their boards because they have to rely on shareholders or the guy owns the club. Clyde have it easy.

I don't buy the argument that members are not fans. Who the hell signs up to something and puts up with attending EGMs etc just to vote for the board if they are not fans? The idea that the board are really so popular that they just fill the membership with their friends to allow them to keep up their wee hobby is farcical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can i ask why we are still talking about EK the move is to the east end or is it EE Clyde that worries you all ???????????

because at the moment the board can still change the name to EK Clyde at any time they like

Link to comment
Share on other sites

because at the moment the board can still change the name to EK Clyde at any time they like

Resolution 2 from the EGM at the time:

"Subject to the board being satisfied that all appropriate steps have been taken to enable the company to move to premises in or around East Kilbride, that the company's name be changed to EK Clyde Football Club Community Interest Company."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would they call you EK clyde if not going there think about it that was to tie in with East Kilbride wot would the point be if in east end ?????????
Seriously?? GTFO.
Thanks to the CIC model you only need to have one more dissenter over the happy clappers to remove the chairman from his position. Look at the trouble other clubs have had getting rid of their boards because they have to rely on shareholders or the guy owns the club. Clyde have it easy. I don't buy the argument that members are not fans. Who the hell signs up to something and puts up with attending EGMs etc just to vote for the board if they are not fans? The idea that the board are really so popular that they just fill the membership with their friends to allow them to keep up their wee hobby is farcical.
A sensible enough post. Yer right up to a point, Sally. On the face of it, i am probably bring ridiculous. But no One should take anything in Scottish football at face value. Thats why, to a degree, we're all in this fucking state. Clyde's is the only concern i have.....and i genuinely believe that there are Clyde supporters who, weighing up the options, and seeing how a aclub like us could easily flounder forever in the bottom league, want the club to atone for the errors at Broadwood and embrace the future as a franchise under a part-name. Its absolutely fine that they'd want that, and even get to vote for it. The opportunity is there for anyone to do the same, allow the club to exploit the rather shite state of affairs we've been in, gain peripheral support and ultimately find the club at the mercy of a bunch of largely disinterested nosey-b*****ds who will.complain that they didnt get much for their thirty quid. The idea we're all.in the same boat is the fantasy one, Sally. Sad but true.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people would have been thinking that before the first vote that it could be a good move but as nothing seems to have happened in the couple of years since that vote and the board have held talks with other groups about moving to other grounds then I am hopeful that the vote will be reversed tonight.

I wasn't a member before the first vote but I joined this year and I am voting to remove the name change. I am unable to make the meeting but I have retuned my proxy to be completed and it was very easy so hopefully all the members that don't go have done the same and maybe once this vote is overturned some fans that stopped going after the original vote will return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...