• Friday 1 August

    From Kosmo@krw@whitnet.uk to uk.media.radio.archers on Thu Aug 7 17:11:20 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.media.radio.archers

    I have just listened to the episode for last Friday.

    1. Brian does have a conflict of interest - so cannot vote on the
    proposal. Nor can he unilaterally tear up the contract because of the
    other partners in the Home Farm business (Jenny and the children). We
    were never told just who got Jenny's shares because they forgot to tell us.

    2. Justin's proposal should include all of the financial and
    environmental benefits properly assessed and identified. If these were
    not present then the Board MUST reject the proposal - not undertake a study.

    3. Justin as majority shareholder cannot force through the proposal
    without offering to buy out the other shareholders.

    4. The Board members are all shareholders (we were told this when Brian bought into BL originally). Whilst they hold shares they cannot resign.

    Alongside that if my children were to ever to take me out for a meal I
    would not be offering to share the bill.

    What an absolute load of round objects. How does this ever get allowed
    on air?
    --
    Kosmo Richard W
    www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
    https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.media.radio.archers on Thu Aug 7 18:56:27 2025
    From Newsgroup: uk.media.radio.archers

    On 2025/8/7 17:11:20, Kosmo wrote:
    I have just listened to the episode for last Friday.

    1. Brian does have a conflict of interest - so cannot vote on the
    proposal. Nor can he unilaterally tear up the contract because of the
    other partners in the Home Farm business (Jenny and the children). We
    were never told just who got Jenny's shares because they forgot to tell us.

    2. Justin's proposal should include all of the financial and
    environmental benefits properly assessed and identified. If these were
    not present then the Board MUST reject the proposal - not undertake a study.

    Well, presumably they could choose to do anything, but would be liable
    to a challenge from other shareholders that their interests hadn't been properly managed.>
    3. Justin as majority shareholder cannot force through the proposal
    without offering to buy out the other shareholders.

    Is he just the biggest shareholder, or does he own more than half? I
    thought if he does own more than half, he can force through anything,
    though again would be liable to claims from others that their interests
    hadn't been properly managed - though I suspect only financial interests
    would count here, and such a claim would only be raisable if his chosen
    course of action turns out not to be profitable.>
    4. The Board members are all shareholders (we were told this when Brian bought into BL originally). Whilst they hold shares they cannot resign.

    Are those two irrevocably tied together in some legal way (i. e. you
    can't be a board member and not hold shares, and you can't hold shares
    and not be a board member), or was that just the case at one point (that
    all board members _happened_ to hold shares and all shareholders
    _happened_ to be on the board)?>
    Alongside that if my children were to ever to take me out for a meal I
    would not be offering to share the bill.


    What an absolute load of round objects. How does this ever get allowed
    on air?


    Indeed. (Who is Round, and to what does he object? CGSM. - Yes Minister)
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2