EGM received. Hood/Bennett to be removed. Couldby only to be appointed as a Director. Nothing about Caisley. Time for people to be honest about what is going on.

Well well well.

Perhaps explains Coulby's foray into the media via the YP the otehr week. But who will be grinding the organ?

Us? Or the only people in the world with any information at all?

The person wiht the most votes i suspect!!

Its not unusual for a Stalking Horse, to soon to be led to the Knackers Yard!

Thnkyou for that Julie, although it makes things not one iota clearer.

Just wondering. If CC, who I guess most would have expected to become chairman if Hood and Bennett are voted off, [iwere[/i to put himself forward how would that directorship affect his role as an accredited player agent? I suspect the agency business wouldn't be something he would actually want to give up, but suspect that it might be a bridge too far for the RFL, due to the obvious conflict of interest.

Could that be the reason Chris doesn't want the job?

What would it mean for the Bulls is Coulby is appointed a director? And who the heck is he?

Dunno that much about him to be honest but he's been a director before, quite a while before IIRC. He must be getting on a bit I would have thought.

Wouldn't that just leave Coulby and Ryan Duckett on the board (officially)???

Could it end up that hood and ducket stay on board (not enough votes to remove) but then coultby still ends up as a director?

Sounds like it. theoretically those two could put club into admin and Caisley could claim it was out of his control and buy us out of admin to remove other shareholders, although you'd expect the ones comprising his 50+% to be involved and emerge with a similar shareholding. Plus as others have said this way Caisley can retain his role as a player agent.

They would be the only Directors. The role of Caisley is not clear now. If anyone reads this site from either side perhaps they could consider putting us out of our misery and tell us what they are actually going to do!!

Stephen Coulby used to work for Barclays (not sure if he still does) somthing to do with the corporate side that was in 1997, thats when i met him.

Would the club constitution (or whatever its called) allow only for 2 board members? Surely it has to be an odd number?
What about Chairperson - if Hood is releaved of his duties who takes over this role?

The proposed EGM resolutions are to appoint Mr Coulby, and to ask for Messrs Hood & Bennet to resign. Another resolution is to fix the minimum number of directors to ONE. After this, two directors will then be in situ- Messrs Coulby and Duckett, but of course the companies Articles will now allow just one director, which might raise questions. My info is that Mr Coulby is in his 60's and was previously a Bulls director for about 15 years.
This EGM should made available to shareholders the current financial position of the Club, and the state of receipts of pledges. Whether this will happen remains to be seen.
Ciaou.

I can't help but think that the nomination of Coulby not Caisley is significant. As is the reduction in the minimum number of directors. I could speculate (several possibilities spring to mind), but I might keep my powder dry for now in the hope that something else relevant might manifest itself, to give a better pointer to what they are scheming.

Who is scheming, Adey?

Caisley or Hood? Who;s side is this guy or, is he neutral?

Im so confused.

I'd suggest that Mr. Coulby (I assume you mean him?), as a former director and current shareholder would have the cub at heart, but then I 'd guess that Chris, Andrew, Peter and Ryan [iall[/i have the club at heart and each would, no doubt, believe they were doing their best for the club. Let's be right about this, none of them went into rugby league to make their fortunes and none is the devil incarnate.

There are obviously differences in their opinions on what to do next; we wouldn't be in the current impasse if that were not so, but if they really do want the club to prosper, we need them to agree a formula to take the club forward and not indulge in Dallas type chicanery and board room games.

I don't know if anyone else has tried this, but to them all, I make a plea for them to put the future of the club first, put aside your obvious differences and work together for the common good. Despite all the rubbish which is getting in the way of an agreement, you and we, all want the same thing. Just do it.

And for Bulliac's next trick, having been nominated for the Nobel peace prize, he will set out to win the Nobel Prize for Physics for getting matter and antimatter to co-exhist without mutual anihilation...

Excellent post. Seconded.

Well, I'm not holding my breath....and generally I go along with the 17th chapter of the book of Jobe which (allegedly) says; "Blessed are those who do not expect....for they shall not be disappointed".

That said, if you don't ask you'll never know...

I suppose that, if you think about it, the one thing that actually stands out like a sore thumb is that instead of all the directors and main shreholders getting together behind locked doors and finding a way to work together to move the club forward, we seem to have two diametrically opposed camps, who will not speak, and even at the EGM in a month, seemingly all that's on the cards is to vote off Hood & co., appoint Coulby, and . . . er, that's seemingly it.

Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.

More like rearranging the shareholders...sorry the deckchairs, on the Titanic?

Its starting to make Glasgow Rangers look good.