THE SHAREHOLDERS ASSOCIATION AGM 04:
COME TO THE CABARET
By
Mickey Blue Eyes.

“You cannot look away from something you don’t know. If you looked away, then you knew.”
GITTA SERENY – BBC2 “Reputations”, 2nd May 1996.

You have to larf. It’s part of the human condition. Either that or you settle for a life of conditioned reflexes. Laugh away, people, laugh away, it’s good for you. Apply your own reasoning and common sense.

This years Annual General Meeting of the Shareholders Association was a cabaret of much unintentional humour and wildly unlikely events. Had you written the script the BBC would never have accepted it, not unless your name was Spike Milligan. And he’s dead. As the evening unfolded I closed my eyes for a moment and wondered what he would have made of it all. It was that, well, surreal.

In the end the election was every bit as farcical as last years odd jamboree, perhaps worse given the lessons supposedly learned. Incredibly, the very election process many members had complained about for years – the block method that safely returned incumbents – was used yet again. Even members who had voted solidly for change last year were baffled, and some outright furious. It was appalling. Me, I wasn’t really surprised. It has been on the cards since John Sinnott’s resignation last March.

Funnily enough the evening made a good start when Tom Cannon made a short announcement in which he apologised for his part in last years election débacle. Later, he appealed for and got support for a quite understandable and very necessary Extraordinary General Meeting of the company in which the directors will be asked to explain themselves. The irony was unintentional but distinctly Milliganesque given other events during the evening. I kid you not, as matters developed I found myself struggling to prevent a paroxysm of mirth. Thank gawd the puppet show wasn’t attended by the new CEO or the new chairman. Figuratively speaking it would have been the only time in history Judy battered the living daylights out of Punch. Eventually the notion of dear old Spike was replaced with thoughts of dear old Brian Rix. Somehow I can’t see the Goodison Corridors of Power reverberating with fear after this. To an outsider it must have borne a strong resemblance to the immortal custard pie fight scene in “The Great Race.” It was an organisational own goal of Sandy Brown proportions.

Yet it did yield a few good things and these should not be denied. Also, at least it had none of the chintzy quiet cheerfulness of other AGMs prior to 2003. Probably the best way of looking at it is to regard it as an evolutionary step to better things. Either that or you are reduced to indefatigable Paul Wharton’s post meeting glum, “Call me Frankenstein. I helped create a monster.” Well, it isn’t that bad. At least now we have a constitution and that will help curtail some of the absurdities and breaches of trust felt by a hefty proportion of the membership. Of course this assumes no attempt to ignore the constitution along the lines of some elements of the US establishment. We live in wary hope.

Before the meeting I had the expected line, this time from Mark Denny. He asked, “Are you going to stand for election or shout from the sidelines?” It came back to haunt him later. It’s an odd definition of democracy, this. Like most readers of this piece I have neither the time nor the inclination to stand for any office, be it the SA, local councillor, MP, Euro MP or Prime Minister. My life is full enough as it is. But I am a member of the Association and I will have my say and I will be heard. That is the straightforward precept of democracy which seems such an intellectual challenge to some. So far so humdrum. Expecting the standard tactic in these matters I had telephoned and e-mailed secretary Nick Williams in advance and declined any nomination from any source. In any case, outside the SA we have an average gate of 38,800 shouting from the sidelines at every match. They are entitled. They pay their entrance money and their emotional dues at least as much as any shareholder does. Quite rightly one isn’t inclined to listen to someone who doesn’t attend games.

Initially the meeting wound its way stoically through the agenda with scarcely an interruption. The items dropped off one by one: Apologies, Minutes of Last AGM, Matters Arising, Chairman’s Annual Report and Treasurer’s Annual Report, each of them well delivered. Discussion then took place on raising subscription fees. Then came the item I was most interested in, playing fortunes of the team and boardroom shenanigans aside. It was the proposal to adopt a constitution.

Given the previous years events I wanted to make my contribution to ensure we had no repeat of the administrative disasters that had helped marginalize the SA from the club. So I suggested three additional articles covering, (a) Writing of media releases and authority to issue them, (b) Definition of conflict of interests incorporating Seven Principles of Public Life defined by the government’s Nolan Committee [the basic principles are Selflessness, Integrity, Objectivity, Accountability, Openness, Honesty and Leadership], and (c) Definition of restricted financial activities by any member of the committee or officers during their tenure. There’s nothing new or unusual in any of this, in fact most elements of it are covered by criminal law to prevent “insider dealing” in the Stock Exchange. John Sinnott also insists it is covered by consideration of the precepts of “natural justice.” Whatever, there won’t be many who wouldn’t promote transparency in the Association’s affairs. And so it proved. Tom Cannon offered to write the relevant articles, including the suggestion that any case be finally resolved by the Life Presidents.

All of which led to a discussion on Steve Allinson’s shares dealings and the margin of profit, if any. He maintained he had no profit motive but didn’t confirm whether he made profit or not, or how much if he did. Despite asking, we got no figures this time either. The straightforward questions remain. Here they are again:

1. How many shares has he bought and sold during, say, the last four years?

2. Who were they bought from and sold to?

3. What was the price of purchase and the price of subsequent sale of each?

4. What costs were incurred during purchase and sale of each?

Providing the answers would enable everyone to make their own judgement of what motive was in play. In fact the new Constitution should bar any further activity by any chairman or committee member unless declared in detail.

From the floor, three people within my hearing said they bought their shares from the acting chairman and they were grateful. One-of-the-three committee member Colm Kavanagh basically appeared to say he didn’t care how much money was made since it made him the only shareholder in Ireland and he wouldn’t have bought a share otherwise. The only “argument” anybody put up against proposed transparency and declaration of details was to say it was a private matter, and What Was Wrong With Making A Few Bob? All of which negates, for instance, the reason for the laws controlling insider trading, and also Steve Allinson’s statement to me and others that he made no money from sales.

While all this was going on I watched Joe Beardwood’s apparently astonished visage and heard his logical statement that, (not verbatim) “You can’t be chairman and sell shares too.” Of course you don’t have to be an academic or even a professional to see why not. Even quick research on the internet will prove fruitful.

The discussion got nowhere, nor did I expect it to. However, the constitution provides for further action at an appropriate moment. I only hope it isn’t necessary.

In the meantime I had better deal with a somewhat odd charge levelled against me. In bringing this subject into the light of debate I have been accused ludicrously of “character assassination.” This accusation is hypocritical muck of the worst kind. I have no idea of or interest in Steve Allinson’s character. That is none of my business. I have proposed serious questions concerning his shares dealings which have received no answer. These followed the grave doubts raised after John Sinnott’s stated reasons for resignation in March. If the answers are satisfactorily provided the subject dies a natural death. We have been waiting four months for said answers and still there’s no sign of them appearing. Some people even seem to think I should actually be grateful to Steve Allinson for selling me a share. Remind me next time I’m in a shop to thank the shop management for allowing me to spend my own money there. In fact I only bought my single share from him after another self-suggested vendor didn’t deliver after six months of dithering. I owe him nothing and he owes me nothing. That’s the way business is done.

Moreover the whole point of this tawdry episode is that it has left the Association open to ridicule by factional opposition within the club. How can we POSSIBLY argue from a position of strength when even the Association chairman simply refuses to answer straightforward questions about his shares dealings? Additionally, how can we POSSIBLY argue about bad public relations by the club with the absurd example of the wretched and unauthorised press release and its frankly stupid claims last December? What signals does this send out? Why should ANYONE take us seriously when the originators of the press release couldn’t even co-ordinate a simple message to the rest of the committee?

By comparison, any improvement in day-to-day administration has been overwhelmed by these two major policy catastrophes. Mark Edwards’ superb organisation and hard work for the hugely successful Annual Dinner was undermined by it. So was Nick Williams’ excellent admin input. So too were the other matters, though I have my own views on – for instance – how important it is where Association guests sit in the Directors Box. I won’t be taking up any offer to sit there since I am quite happy as a fan in the Lower Street End. Nor will it have escaped the attention of true ironists that previous incumbents were dislodged precisely for too much cozying up to the board of directors. Spike Milligan, where are you when you’re needed?!

And so the meeting moved on to the election of committee members and officers. If you thought it was funny before, I promise you you have never seen anything like the ensuing slapstick. Mark Edwards resigned for family reasons and went with all our thanks for a sterling job. Five committee members stood down. This left the positions of chairman, vice chairman, secretary and five committee seats.

With me so far? Agree with me all you have to do is work through the positions one by one, nominating candidates for each and take a vote? Right?

Wrong.

Instead, the chairman proposed and proceeded with a block vote for himself, the vice chairman, the secretary and the remaining committee members. Oh well. Pity that was one of the reasons we got rid of the previous lot and thought we had seen the last of that method. In fact all that was needed was a prior executive order to make the election a sensible and straightforward vote for each position. Instead we got the same politburo approach. Needless to say it infuriated some members who weren’t prepared to be voting fodder. Even allowing for obvious inexperience the whole process quickly fell into farce. It was as embarrassingly as bad as most of our on-field performances last season. Understandably, people were bewildered and angry. Eventually Mark Denny (sat behind me) refused a nomination and I was unable to resist the grinning cheap shot, “You shouting from the sidelines too now, Mark?” Out on the floor, nominee after nominee declined including Tom Cannon and Joe Beardwood. The process struggled over the line by about ten thirty.

There was just time for John Sinnott to once again ask the now chairman to consider his credibility with the club in the light of events during the previous year. This was rejected after a fractious exchange.

And then it was time to go. Still, the constitution is in place and ready for use. Democracy is a lousy form of government but all the rest are so much worse.

Looking back on it with the benefit of twenty four hours hindsight I only wish I had videotaped the entire show. Comedy? You had to larf. (03/06/04)

What Do You Think? e-mail bluekipper.com